I think the idea is that bonds at higher rates are a better alternative ("better deal") compared to cashflow from an asset. But if you actually buy that bond,

I think the idea is that bonds at higher rates are a better alternative ("better deal") compared to cashflow from an asset. But if you actually buy that bond, and the rates keep going up, then new bonds will be an even better deal than the bond that you bought, and so to sell it you'd need to sell at a discount ("wrecked"). I feel like this misses a sense of scale. Sure, everyone loses, but some choices must be superior to others in a rising-rates environment.