3 ms·
It’s quite specifically not money printing, because it’s backed by something. It could be bad sure but it’s not money printing
by john-h-k 1y ago
It’s quite specifically not money printing, because it’s backed by something.
It could be bad sure but it’s not money printing
- theli0nheart 1y agoBacked by what?
- kaptainscarlet 1y agoCompute resources.
- w3ll_w3ll_w3ll 1y agoSo like Bitcoin?
- denismenace 1y agoNot the same, since if you buy Bitcoin, you don't have partial ownership of the machines used to mine and also these machines being used for a singular purpose which you cannot change.
- vel0city 1y agoAnd high end networking gear will always have a buyer, right Nortel?
- dsr_ 1y agoLucent agrees: even used, the product will retain 90% of list price because the market has an infinite number of VC-backed buyers.
- rvba 1y agoIt is backed by AMD stockholders, whose stock just got diluted. It's like in that movie "Social network"
- aurareturn 1y agoOwnership in a company.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- SecretDreams 1y ago> because it’s backed by something If I finance a car backed by hopes and dreams, I'd be driving real good.
- fauigerzigerk 1y agoYou're right. It's not really money printing, at least not directly. Only banks can print money. What these recent deals do is inflate asset prices by making (future) revenues appear higher or perhaps just more certain than they really are. Assets can be used as collateral for loans. If someone were to use their AMD shares as collateral for a loan at a commercial bank (not a margin loan), that would be money printing and you could print more of it today than before the deal was announced.