# Central Bank warns on cryptoassets



## Brendan Burgess (22 Mar 2022)

*Central Bank warning on investing in crypto-assets*

· Europe-wide warning highlights risky and speculative nature of crypto-assets.

· People should be alert to misleading ads, especially on social media.

· Central Bank of Ireland explainer and warning for consumers on virtual currencies.



The Central Bank has today (22 March 2022) issued a fresh warning on the risks of investing in crypto assets, as part of  a European-wide campaign by the European Supervisory Authorities.



The Central Bank again emphasised that crypto assets are highly risky and speculative, and may not be suitable for retail customers. In particular people need to be alert to the risks of misleading advertisements, particularly on social media, where influencers are being paid to advertise crypto assets.



Derville Rowland, Director General Financial Conduct said: “In Ireland and across the EU we are seeing increasing levels of advertising and aggressive promotion of crypto asset investments.



“While people may be attracted to these investments by the high returns advertised, the reality is that they carry significant risk.



“Before you buy crypto assets, you need to think about whether you can afford to lose all the money you invest. Do the promised fast or high returns seem too good to be true?



“People should also be aware that if things go wrong, you do not have the protections you would have if you invested in a regulated product.”



The Central Bank has published a plain English explainer for consumers on cryptocurrencies.



*ENDS*



*Notes to Editor*

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) is an independent EU Authority that contributes to safeguarding the stability of the EU's financial system by enhancing the protection of investors and promoting stable and orderly financial markets.



Derville Rowland has served as Chair of ESMA’s Investment Management Standing Committee since 1 July 2021. Standing committees are expert groups drawn from ESMA staff and Member States’ National Competent Authorities. The Investment Management Standing Committee works on issues relating to the investment funds sector and is responsible for the development of policy and supervisory convergence activities.



ESMA Statement on Investment Recommendations on Social Media (October 2021)


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (23 Mar 2022)

Can't complain about the damning comments on bitcoin but maybe @tecate would have something to say about this


			
				Central Bank of Ireland said:
			
		

> Official currencies are centralised and guaranteed by a central bank that controls their supply. So for example, the European Central Bank guarantees the euro and controls its supply in the euro area.


The ECB guarantees that the euro will be a euro but then we can also be guaranteed that a bitcoin will be a bitcoin. Neither can guarantee me what a pint of Guinness will cost me next week.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (23 Mar 2022)

> So for example, the European Central Bank guarantees the euro and controls its supply in the euro area.



But that is the problem. They have lost control of the supply. 

Brendan


----------



## DublinHead54 (23 Mar 2022)

This should be become a pinned / locked topic to avoid it going off topic.

I think that is a good bipartisan statement that sticks to facts of the risks associated for retail investors. This is a consumer protection forum first and foremost.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (23 Mar 2022)

Brendan Burgess said:


> But that is the problem. They have lost control of the supply.
> 
> Brendan


It is more a case of that they have lost self control.  Like a driver of a car.  She remains in control but she sees the only way out of some danger is to slam the foot down on the accelerator.
The Central Bank are taking these cryptos for what they are in practice - a highly speculative asset - they use the word "asset".  They point out that it fails the 3 main tests of a currency, Store of Value, Unit of Account and Medium of Exchange.
But as a speculative asset  it still leaves it as a potentially viable part of a portfolio especially in these very uncertain times.  I prefer the BOHA argument of the Nobels and Roubini.


----------



## tecate (23 Mar 2022)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Can't complain about the damning comments on bitcoin but maybe @tecate would have something to say about this
> The ECB guarantees that the euro will be a euro but then we can also be guaranteed that a bitcoin will be a bitcoin. Neither can guarantee me what a pint of Guinness will cost me next week.


I wasn't going to bother posting on this thread at all - as I thought Brendan's initial post was a very reasonable point to put across - with no further commentary necessary. There are a whole host of wayward projects and out and out scams in the crypto space. I don't want to see bad actors in the space so I welcome the suggestion of a need for an abundance of caution. 

If we're talking about 'crypto' rather than 'bitcoin', then there are all manner of risks (inclusive of rug pulls and out and out scams that capitalise on latent greed and ignorance). I'm not sure what you found 'damning' in its commentary relative to bitcoin though, Duke.

What Milton Friedman can instruct you re. the price of yer pint is that inflation has a significant part to play and inflation is 'always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon'. By implication, expand the € supply and your pint will be costing you more. You brought that up so I'm addressing it - but I guess we can stick to the subject of risk relative to crypto.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (30 Mar 2022)

The Governor was asked about this just now at the Oireachtas Finance Committee 

Jim O’Callaghan :Should crypto currency be banned?

Governor : I don’t add the word currency to crypto

Some crypto is a gamble – like playing a fruit machine

There is no need to ban it.

Jim O’Callaghan: Should it be regulated

There may be a case. The most important thing is to make sure that people understand it.

There are other cryptos which are backed, or alleged to be backed, by currency.

Europe is introducing a new regulatory system.

There are no financial stability risks now, but there could be

Pearse Doherty : Is it your view that Crypto is being used here to avoid sanctions?

Governor: We have seen no evidence of it . But there are things happening which are not obvious to us using technology.

Deputy Governor: They might be moving Roubles into crypto


----------



## tecate (30 Mar 2022)

Brendan Burgess said:


> The Governor was asked about this just now at the Oireachtas Finance Committee


I wouldn't be taking my cues from a central bank on crypto but notwithstanding that, I don't think there's anything unreasonable about that exchange. At a minimum, we can all agree on this ->



> The most important thing is to make sure that people understand it.


----------



## Rasputin (31 Mar 2022)

Brendan Burgess said:


> The most important thing is to make sure that people understand it.


How can anyone truly understand bitcoin when we don't even know who invented it, or what the true motivations for its invention might really be. Lots of people are putting a hell of a lot of faith in incredibly complex code and encryption keys that they can't possibly ever hope to understand fully.  How can you even begin to understand the technology behind bitcoin and what would happen if the technology was compromised, attacked or suddenly crashed ?  

I think people are fooling themselves if they believe they understand enough about bitcoin to invest in it without having serious concerns.


----------



## tecate (31 Mar 2022)

Rasputin said:


> How can anyone truly understand bitcoin when we don't even know who invented it, or what the true motivations for its invention might really be. Lots of people are putting a hell of a lot of faith in incredibly complex code and encryption keys that they can't possibly ever hope to understand fully.  How can you even begin to understand the technology behind bitcoin and what would happen if the technology was compromised, attacked or suddenly crashed ?
> 
> I think people are fooling themselves if they believe they understand enough about bitcoin to invest in it without having serious concerns.


The code is open-source. You can examine it, interrogate it, etc. The bitcoin network has been subject to various types of attack repeatedly over the course of more than a decade and has never been hacked. There's a multi billion dollar honeypot (and what was a trillion dollar honeypot on occasion last year) there to incentivize such attacks since many years already.

Otherwise it's a decentralized network and whilst I'd be open to it's creator(s) having a different motivation to the one presented, nobody can assume full control over the network itself.


----------



## Nordkapp (31 Mar 2022)

One of the issues is that crypto is tradable 24-7, that means market volatility impacts may not be manageable.


----------



## tecate (31 Mar 2022)

Nordkapp said:


> One of the issues is that crypto is tradable 24-7, that means market volatility impacts may not be manageable.


In the same way as the London Metal Exchange's nickel market was managed recently in it being shut down to save Asian based entities?

There's plenty of volatility in bitcoin but it's a real market in that respect. Nobody has the power to manipulate it by pausing trading. If it's flushed out to the up or downside, that's quite the movement but it's real and unadulterated.


----------



## Rasputin (31 Mar 2022)

I'm not sure about you, but I know that my examination or interrogation of an open-source network would be about as futile as me trying to solve the jack the ripper murders. I would have thought that would also be the case for the lay person, so I would say most people investing in it do not really understand it in any shape or form.


----------



## tecate (31 Mar 2022)

Rasputin said:


> I'm not sure about you, but I know that my examination or interrogation of an open-source network would be about as futile as me trying to solve the jack the ripper murders. I would have thought that would also be the case for the lay person, so I would say most people investing in it do not really understand it in any shape or form.


We're talking about the brightest of minds on a global basis attacking a trillion dollar honeypot over 12 years. You can be certain that throngs of them have already tried, and it's for this reason that the bitcoin codebase is deliberately limited and conservative - unlike other blockchains.

As regards ordinary people not understanding it, ordinary people don't understand technology that underlies other financial systems and still use them.


----------



## sonandheir (31 Mar 2022)

tecate said:


> As regards ordinary people not understanding it, ordinary people don't understand technology that underlies other financial systems and still use them.



Most people don't know how their phones /cars/fridge/mortgages actually work, doesn't stop them using them. 
And for that matter very few have asked the question what the euro in their pocket actually is. 

The more I've investigated bitcoin the more it has shown me the gapping holes in our current monetary system. 99% of people spend their life chasing the € and never actually ask what it is and why it has value.


----------



## Horatio (31 Mar 2022)

tecate said:


> I wouldn't be taking my cues from a central bank on crypto but notwithstanding that, I don't think there's anything unreasonable about that exchange. At a minimum, we can all agree on this ->



Yep, it's hardly in their centralised interest to advocate for a decentralised swathe of potential competitors.


----------



## tecate (31 Mar 2022)

Horatio said:


> Yep, it's hardly in their centralised interest to advocate for a decentralised swathe of potential competitors.


For sure albeit in the case of bitcoin, whilst they don't like it, it seems they're prepared to put up with it for the most part. They tolerated gold so btc isn't too much different. There are still battles ongoing to try and control it rather than ban it.
It doesn't have to compete with fiat per se, unless fiat currency is mismanaged - and that's within the control of whomever runs a centralized fiat currency.
Fiat = current a/c
BTC = savings (and no, I'm not in any way saying that anyone puts all savings or anything more than a couple of % in btc right now... not for some time until it settles and matures into that role).


----------



## Rasputin (1 Apr 2022)

sonandheir said:


> Most people don't know how their phones /cars/fridge/mortgages actually work, doesn't stop them using them.
> And for that matter very few have asked the question what the euro in their pocket actually is.
> 
> The more I've investigated bitcoin the more it has shown me the gapping holes in our current monetary system. 99% of people spend their life chasing the € and never actually ask what it is and why it has value.


I really don't know where to start with this - I forgot rule number one - never get into an argument about Bitcoin with someone who has money invested in Bitcoin. I'm confident that I do actually know how our current monetary system works, and why, and while its not perfect, I'm happy to stick with it for the time being. 

You're right, most people don't take the time to investigate how their fridge works, but it actually provides them real utility and won't swallow all their wealth


----------



## MugsGame (1 Apr 2022)

I don't hold Bitcoin, but my training and profession means I do understand a lot of the implementation details (Merkel trees, one-way functions, hash puzzles, Nakamoto consensus/proof of work, etc.).

I'm sceptical about industry adoption of 'crypto', even in the fintech domain - apart from pure crypto plays, most seem to involve centralized gatekeepers stamping out blocks or tokenizing assets. If you trust those centralized players, why do you need blockchain? And if you don't trust anyone, bootstrapping real trust is hard; there have been a lot of initial coin offerings where the founders vanished with the loot.


----------



## Peanuts20 (1 Apr 2022)

I do wonder when the bubble bursts and people lose tens and hundreds of thousands of Euros, how long will it take before the moaning starts?.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (1 Apr 2022)

sonandheir said:


> Most people don't know how their phones /cars/fridge/mortgages actually work, doesn't stop them using them.


True.  And take those flying machines.  Apparently they work because of Bernoulli's law - the pressure in a fluid is inversely proportional to its speed.  Personally I have more confidence in Newton - what goes up must come down.  That's why I have a fear of flying.
Anybody who would have an inkling of how bitcoin works wouldn't touch it with a barge pole, except for a cult few who actually worship at how it works.


----------



## tecate (1 Apr 2022)

Rasputin said:


> I really don't know where to start with this - I forgot rule number one - never get into an argument about Bitcoin with someone who has money invested in Bitcoin.


On rule No.1, I don't think you've broken it - as I'm not aware of you being in an argument but a discussion - unless you've decided otherwise 
On the money invested, maybe some have or some havent. Over the course of 5 years of discussion here, I've both held a not immodest amount of btc and not held any at all. According to that logic - I would have been talking it down when I held none - but you won't find posts to that effect. Bias works both ways - and the polarised views this subject drives means that talking it down can be motivated by having gotten this wrong from the get go and missing out.



Rasputin said:


> I'm confident that I do actually know how our current monetary system works, and why, and while its not perfect, I'm happy to stick with it for the time being.


I haven't seen anyone suggest that you'd have to choose. This is a common misunderstanding.



Rasputin said:


> You're right, most people don't take the time to investigate how their fridge works, but it actually provides them real utility and won't swallow all their wealth


He seems to have addressed the point you made but you've moved on to another. If gold can exist as a monetary asset, so can bitcoin - whilst also being digital and having the ability to be transacted easily. It's going to do just fine in the real utility stakes.
As regards swallowing all their wealth, it depends on how they position size, etc.


MugsGame said:


> I don't hold Bitcoin, but my training and profession means I do understand a lot of the implementation details (Merkel trees, one-way functions, hash puzzles, Nakamoto consensus/proof of work, etc.).
> 
> I'm sceptical about industry adoption of 'crypto', even in the fintech domain - apart from pure crypto plays, most seem to involve centralized gatekeepers stamping out blocks or tokenizing assets. If you trust those centralized players, why do you need blockchain? And if you don't trust anyone, bootstrapping real trust is hard; there have been a lot of initial coin offerings where the founders vanished with the loot.


I agree with most of this. Bitcoin to me is confirmed - because it has been battle tested and it has been setup with a narrow focus. The rest is much more difficult and it's far too early to see how it pans out.  I'd imagine a handful of projects will eventually achieve real world use/utility. As regards centralisation, I agree - albeit that there is no such thing as perfect decentralisation. That said, it also depends on use case - some use cases may need a higher level of decentralisation than others.


Peanuts20 said:


> I do wonder when the bubble bursts and people lose tens and hundreds of thousands of Euros, how long will it take before the moaning starts?.


Which bubble would that be? The one in 2011 or 2013 or 2017 or 2021?


----------



## tecate (1 Apr 2022)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Anybody who would have an inkling of how bitcoin works wouldn't touch it with a barge pole, except for a cult few who actually worship at how it works.


Says the guy who is not open to being wrong - and won't acknowledge that there's a conceivable chance that bitcoin continues to expand, grow and mature.


----------



## Peanuts20 (1 Apr 2022)

tecate said:


> Which bubble would that be? The one in 2011 or 2013 or 2017 or 2021?


And in that simple statement, you quite eloquently summarise why Bitcoin is ultimately a glorified chancers paradise. I can't help but think of the guy down the pub boasting how he won a grand in the bookies today, but never says anything when he's lost €200 a day for the past week


----------



## tecate (1 Apr 2022)

Peanuts20 said:


> And in that simple statement, you quite eloquently summarise why Bitcoin is ultimately a glorified chancers paradise. I can't help but think of the guy down the pub boasting how he won a grand in the bookies today, but never says anything when he's lost €200 a day for the past week


All it shows is that there are hype cycles when it comes to tech, that this coming of age for bitcoin has been entirely retail driven up until very recently. Are there speculators, sure... but they're not all acting like speculators. Furthermore your point doesn't prove bitcoin's offering to lack substance.


----------



## Peanuts20 (3 Apr 2022)

tecate said:


> All it shows is that there are hype cycles when it comes to tech, that this coming of age for bitcoin has been entirely retail driven up until very recently. Are there speculators, sure... but they're not all acting like speculators. Furthermore your point doesn't prove bitcoin's offering to lack substance.





tecate said:


> All it shows is that there are hype cycles when it comes to tech, that this coming of age for bitcoin has been entirely retail driven up until very recently. Are there speculators, sure... but they're not all acting like speculators. Furthermore your point doesn't prove bitcoin's offering to lack substance.





tecate said:


> All it shows is that there are hype cycles when it comes to tech, that this coming of age for bitcoin has been entirely retail driven up until very recently. Are there speculators, sure... but they're not all acting like speculators. Furthermore your point doesn't prove bitcoin's offering to lack substance.


Glad you admit it's tech and not finance. I don't need to prove bitcoin is lacking substance, the onus should be on the promotors to prove that it has some substance and I've yet to meet one who has even half vaguely articulated a semi decent arguement on "substance". 

Interestingly, I saw the 19 millionth bitcoin was recently mined so only 2m to go. I wonder what happens with the 21 millionth is mined?. Will another 5 million suddenly be "discovered"?. Will people move to other coins?


----------



## tecate (3 Apr 2022)

Peanuts20 said:


> Glad you admit it's tech and not finance.


An admission?  You'll have to explain the distinction in context as I'm not sure where you're going with that. Bitcoin at its core is software - and software can be used as a tool. And that tool in this instance can be used as (or fulfil the role of ) digital money/gold and a store of value. In the same way as gold is a metal and yet it can be used as money, store of value, etc.



Peanuts20 said:


> The onus should be on the promotors to prove that it has some substance and I've yet to meet one who has even half vaguely articulated a semi decent arguement on "substance".


What 'promotors'? There are folks that see value in it and see a use case for it. However, they are not its 'promotors'. There is no Bitcoin, Inc. - no HQ, no CEO. There was no pre-mine. It's open to anyone to use as they see fit. As Satoshi put it:
_"If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try and convince you, sorry."_



Peanuts20 said:


> Interestingly, I saw the 19 millionth bitcoin was recently mined so only 2m to go. I wonder what happens with the 21 millionth is mined?. Will another 5 million suddenly be "discovered"?. Will people move to other coins?



You're speculating as to what happens in 2140 when the last bitcoin is mined? I think that this speculation as to whether it has or has not utility will be long since settled at that point. As regards the notion of there being 5 million more bitcoin discovered, why do you think that would be necessary? To serve who's interests? From the point of view of those that hold and utilise bitcoin, what advantage would this bring for them? Quite the contrary - it would be totally against their interests. We have already seen in 2017 that miners as a stakeholder group tried to act in their own interest - and with that hard fork, it's the users ultimately that decided they were'nt having this.  So whilst technically it's possible that the hard cap can be changed, in reality it would be akin to every participant in this discussion deciding to cut off their left hand - it is technically possible but incredibly unlikely.

Why would anyone need to move to another coin in the way you describe? What would that bring?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Apr 2022)

"Miners"  (I hate the term, "mindless trial and error merchants" is better) currently earn $30k per minute from "mining" new coins.  Assuming constant prices, this will fall to €15k in 3 years time, €7.5k in 7 years time €3.75k in 11 years time etc.  
Now there must grow a temptation for the miners to  go back to the good old days by increasing the amount of coin released each minute.
I am not sure how consensus works but it would definitely be in the miners' interests to change the rules.


----------



## tecate (3 Apr 2022)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> "Miners"  (I hate the term)


That's incredibly unfortunate for you Duke - I like the term myself.


Duke of Marmalade said:


> Now there must grow a temptation for the miners to  go back to the good old days by increasing the amount of coin released each minute.
> I am not sure how consensus works but it would definitely be in the miners' interests to change the rules.


We've already seen what happens when miners as a stakeholder group act in their own interests rather than that of the network as a whole. The ultimate say goes to network users in any hardfork scenario. The hard cap is sacrosanct to network users - lifting it would be akin to a group of people all agreeing to cut off their left hands....so, yes it's possible but highly unlikely.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Apr 2022)

tecate said:


> We've already seen what happens when miners as a stakeholder group act in their own interests rather than that of the network as a whole. The ultimate say goes to network users in any hardfork scenario. The hard cap is sacrosant to network users - lifting it would be akin to a group of people all agreeing to cut off their left hands....so, yes it's possible but highly unlikely.


Okay, I'll take your word for it.  If miners do not have a majority say in the consensus, then the consensus will not agree to give them preferential treatment.
On a related point, what is this "air drop" thing that cropped up recently?

In general, I take it as given that the supply is capped and any possible "air drops" or whatever are as theoretical as mass self amputation of limbs or ears.  If there were any serious question marks on that, it wouldn't have survived till now.


----------



## tecate (3 Apr 2022)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Okay, I'll take your word for it.  If miners do not have a majority say in the consensus, then the consensus will not agree to give them preferential treatment.


The beauty about a public discussion board is that if there is any question on this, someone or other will chime in.  Well, so long as they're not censored from doing so at least. 


Duke of Marmalade said:


> On a related point, what is this "air drop" thing that cropped up recently?


So you could spin up the long over due and long awaited Marmalade Coin tomorrow as a competitor to bitcoin. You could hold 20% of tokens back for the 'community' in a nod towards the power of network effect. You'd be starting from ground zero with just the 'charisma' of the Duke as the only thing to pimp the token.  If you put tokens in the hands of all AAM members, you might stand some chance of building a community - and getting some form of network effect going. That's where airdrops come into this. Bitcoin never employed that tactic and it couldn't be utilised from this point onwards either as there are no such coins available. Furthermore, I can't see that such a move would achieve anything for the network at this point - if anything it would damage it - as the hard cap is now a cornerstone of what bitcoin brings to the table.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Apr 2022)

Somewhat off topic but Investopedia lists the following as one of the dangers of a Central Bank Digital Currency.


			
				Investopedia said:
			
		

> The effects a switch to CBDC would have on a financial system's stability are unknown. For example, there may not be enough central bank liquidity to facilitate withdrawals during a financial crisis.



How could a Central Bank not have enough liquidity to facilitate withdrawals?  In fact what does withdrawing your CBDC mean?  I mean withdrawing your €50 euro note is meaningless and all CBDC is are digital €50 notes.


----------



## tecate (3 Apr 2022)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> al Bank not have enough liquidity to facilitate withdrawals? In fact what does withdrawing your CBDC mean? I mean withdrawing your €50 euro note is meaningless and all CBDC is are digital €50 notes.


I'm not sure if I have a proper understanding of this as it relates to a FedCoin or CBDC and the Fed itself. Surely if we're talking about the Fed itself, it can just magic up more USD CBDC. Maybe they're referring to banks with Fed account access?  The traditional banking system works on the basis of leverage. There's settlement risk as TradFi is accustomed to settlement time of 1 day or greater. Digital currency settles more or less immediately. If leverage is a key practice in TradFi and settlement time gets cut down, there could be risk in that respect. Perhaps that's what Investopedia is referring to??


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Apr 2022)

tecate said:


> Surely if we're talking about the Fed itself, it can just magic up more USD CBDC.


It doesn't even require any magic.  If I go to a Central Bank counter and hand in my €50 note saying I want to withdraw it.  They would say "no problem, and give me my €50 back"


tecate said:


> Maybe they're referring to banks with Fed account access?


But that is just no different from the current situation where a commercial bank must provide Fiat currency on demand, which it may run out of.


tecate said:


> Perhaps that's what Investopedia is referring to??


I think they may simply have it wrong, not the first time.  But maybe some other contributor can make sense of the point.


----------



## tecate (3 Apr 2022)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> But that is just no different from the current situation where a commercial bank must provide Fiat currency on demand, which it may run out of.


My understanding is that the difference would be that TradFi banks are more likely to get caught with their trousers down as settlement time is considerably faster than what they're used of - and with a system that depends on leverage, that's a recipe for disaster.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Apr 2022)

tecate said:


> My understanding is that the difference would be that TradFi banks are more likely to get caught with their trousers down as settlement time is considerably faster than what they're used of - and with a system that depends on leverage, that's a recipe for disaster.


Okay, maybe, so they are not referring to the CB having a liquidity problem, which is impossible.  Let's leave it at that.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Apr 2022)

For avoidance of doubt I must state that I accept all the technical claims that @tecate makes for bitcoin.
It’s supply is capped.
It is not centralised.
It is censorship free.
It can be transmitted rapidly across borders.
Its transactions are anonymous (maybe).
Its blockchain security is rock solid.

But the Central Bank are right.
It is not a store of value.
It is not a unit of account.
It is not a medium of exchange.
It is not digital gold.
It is not a currency.
It has no intrinsic value.
It is a speculative bauble.


----------



## tecate (3 Apr 2022)

No harm to have the recap from you Duke. Just for clarity, I don't think its transactions are anonymous per se...it's pseudo-anonymous at best. Not going to push back on your CB list as it's been done to death. We can follow events to see how it pans out.


----------

