> Clearly, the coins have value because someone out there feels like paying money for them.
That's not a great definition of worth. Is the correct value for a Ponzi scheme really determined by the most recent dollar they took in? I'd say not.
That's not a great definition of worth. Is the correct value for a Ponzi scheme really determined by the most recent dollar they took in? I'd say not.
I wouldn't say a Ponzi scheme should be valued by this dollar. It should be valued by the next dollar that someone is willing to put into it as the whole point of the Ponzi scheme is to gather the next dollar.
Indeed, pretending they're equivalent is a great way to lose a lot of money. I used to work for financial traders and I got some very fat bonus checks paid for by people who confused the two during high-volatility events while our traders stayed more flexible.
Perhaps “worth is what people will pay for something for the sake of having it, rather than out of expectation that they can re-sell it for more”?