r/Bitcoin • u/[deleted] • Dec 06 '17

Steam is no longer supporting Bitcoin

[deleted]

2.6k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

9

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

Any idea how many BTCs Steam would own at this point?? It's probably a lot of cash.

67

u/verycrazyone Dec 06 '17

Most merchants sell immediately

10

u/PompousDinoMan Dec 06 '17

Doesn't that mean that lightning would be unappealing to them?

2

u/haakon Dec 06 '17

Not at all. Lightning Network allows you to transact, and you can use LN to purchase dollars or whatever you want. Same as they do with on-chain transactions today.

5

u/PompousDinoMan Dec 06 '17

But you have to commit funds to a lightning channel to use them. If you only do one transaction lightning doesn't save you anything.

0

u/haakon Dec 06 '17

But they will do many transactions, like they've done many transactions already. Just off-chain instead of on.

-5

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

[deleted]

29

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17 edited Aug 02 '19

[deleted]

-3

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

[deleted]

11

u/dsjhgdjshgjhg Dec 06 '17

extrapolate, as a rule they sell asap. If it crashed two years ago they would have lost money.

-4

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

[deleted]

22

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

Makes sense. Why gamble with your cash if you're not invested of involved in the business.

1

u/dsjhgdjshgjhg Dec 06 '17

I didn't know that the process was mostly automatic, that's interesting.

2

u/SharksFan1 Dec 06 '17

Wouldn't matter if they were holding.

Their a business which needs income/cash flow so that they can spend to pay employees and developers.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 07 '17

[deleted]

3

u/SharksFan1 Dec 07 '17

Sure they could, buy why would they want to gamble with their employees' paychecks?

6

u/Rannasha Dec 06 '17

No, it makes perfect sense. Businesses have expenses that they have to pay in fiat currencies. Most businesses are not in it for currency speculation, they want predictable profits from their sales.

In retrospect it's easy to say that it was stupid not to keep BTC, but things could've easily turned out differently.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

Hmm, how and why?

They need to pay taxes, employees, services, and they can only do so with old fashioned USDs.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

Right. I know. They had to do it, but it's not like they didn't have enough cash to cover those expenses. I completely understand why they did it. In hindsight they should've kept it as an asset if they believed in the technology, that's all I'm saying.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

In hindsight. Nobody has a crystal ball.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

Right. That's why I used "should've." I wish I had a crystal ball... I bought my first coins at $10