An Objective Look At Bitcoin; What No One Is Giving

As global markets have been caught up in a whirlwind of activity over the past week, Bitcoin (BTC) unsurprisingly proved to be a popular topic of conversation in the midst of it all. During the mayhem, the digital currency saw its price drop as low as $6,000, shredding as much as 70% of its nearly $20,000 valuation from back in December. At the time of writing, its price stands around $9,680 according to emerging cryptocurrency data tracking platform

But a major problem with the general conversation regarding Bitcoin and all that’s associated with it is the lack of agnosticism within the dialogue. Too frequently people choose to play the binary game by either determining the leading cryptocurrency to be the financial messiah and flawless in design or dead on arrival and bereft of even potentially bearing any value to society.

Berkshire Hathaway Vice Chairman Charlie Munger, for example, just yesterday said, “I never considered for one second having anything to do with [bitcoin]. I detested it the minute it had been raised. The more popular it got, the more I hated it…Bitcoin is noxious poison.” A bit extreme, no? Denying consideration is also a great way to not know much about what you’re discussing.

In another instance, Bert Ely of the Hill published a piece called “Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme, and it will collapse like one”, yet it simply cannot be a Ponzi scheme.

On the flip side, Evander Smart’s CoinTelegraph articleHow Bitcoin Blockchain and Ripple May Help Kill U.S. Dollar” is shortsighted in many ways too. And flip to Twitter, where cybersecurity expert John McAfee is betting big on Bitcoin hitting $1 million and other users are romanticizing about the imminent demise of central banks.

The issue here is that both extremes are typically spoken about as blanket statements with such heavy conviction that it leaves little room to actually dissect the unique and very separate elements of the technological asset which deserve much deeper scrutiny on an individual basis.

It is for this reason that I hope to offer a more objective take on Bitcoin as it stands today. It is not an inherent evil nor the manifestation of financial perfection. It’s a fintech development that took the world by storm, offering the globe fresh perspective on everything from money to data storage to human ideals. Condensing Bitcoin into being either simply “good” or “bad” or destined for “failure” or “success” serves its brief, yet fascinating history little justice. So, let’s explore its strengths and societal contributions, as well as its shortcomings and undesirable traits. By doing so, we paint a much more detailed picture of what Bitcoin is, and where it might be headed in the future.

As a Protocol

Back in November, I wrote about the “dramatic Bitcoin family” that the original Bitcoin protocol (now referred to as Bitcoin Core) and all its forks had collectively constructed. The issues touched on in that piece, namely the lack of consensus within the Bitcoin development team and scalability concerns, have only reinforced themselves since then, highlighted by the vicious Bitcoin Core vs. Bitcoin Cash (BCH) battle that has emerged with ardent supporters on either side and the promise of the Lightning Network’s ability to fix Bitcoin Core’s limitations.

It’s therefore difficult to pinpoint the future trajectory for Bitcoin a protocol because nobody really knows, or agrees on, its true identity. Is Bitcoin Cash as what Satoshi Nakamoto had in mind? Or is Bitcoin Gold (BTG) more in line with the project’s objectives? What about Bitcoin Diamond (BCD) or the recently hyped Bitcoin Private (BTCP)? Each fork is nuanced in its own way, varying in block size, transaction capacity, mining algorithms, and privacy initiatives. As all of these are critical matters for the cryptocurrency aiming to achieve extensive adoption, it’s too soon to say how the dust will settle. Until it does, though, Bitcoin Core is the protocol globally recognized as Bitcoin.

This point might be very telling in how it relates to Bitcoin’s future potential. Is the lack of consensus within the development of the asset a sign that it will eventually spread itself too thin? Or is its anonymous founder and lack of explicit direction what will prove to be the ultimate display of decentralization that will shine when one or multiple protocols prevail? Of course, only time can tell.

As a Currency

Referencing the previous point, depending on which Bitcoin protocol you believe to be its true identity, the digital asset’s ability to perform as a currency will differ significantly. Bitcoin Cash settles payments much quicker than Bitcoin Core, and Bitcoin Gold better eliminates miner manipulation, for example. But moving forward, we’ll stick to scrutinizing Bitcoin Core, as it’s the protocol most commonly accepted and discussed.

As a means of payment and potential adoption as a currency, Bitcoin certainly has a long way to go. The Bitcoin network settles a measly 5-7 transactions per second. For comparison’s sake, “rival” cryptocurrency Ripple does 1,500 and Visa can do up to 24,000. Should Bitcoin be able to become a legitimate currency, how will it address this issue? As it stands, it currently couldn’t even come close to handling Amazon’s hundreds of purchases per second. Further, Bitcoin transactions can take anywhere from 10 minutes to 5+ hours to settle at times, and transaction fees for even nominal amounts of money have been as high as $30. These fees are largely affected by the congestion of the network at any given time, which no one has control over.

Even though other forks of Bitcoin can handle more transactions per second than Bitcoin Core, loyalists to the original protocol feel that forks aren’t true to what Bitcoin’s anonymous creator originally intended. The answer for this cohort is to build upon Bitcoin Core’s code and find ways to make it more functional, such as Segregated Witness (SegWit) and now the Lightning Network, which takes much of the cumbersome transaction processing off the blockchain.

Before many of these issues surfaced, many progressive merchants started accepting Bitcoin as a means of payment. Most recently and notably, the Arizona Senate passed a bill allowing tax payments to be made in Bitcoin. However, some merchants have also reversed this business decision due to the nature of the digital asset’s somewhat crippled viability as a currency.

As of now, proponents of Bitcoin as a currency have an overall unimpressive track record to defend, so their contention of viability can come off as rather comical to anyone who has used the technology for such a purpose as of late. Effective payments need to be swift and cheap to make, but Bitcoin is a new technology, so growing pains are certainly expected. Now that we’ve seen them, how will Bitcoin respond?

As an Investment Vehicle

Bitcoin is scarce in nature with only 21 million tokens ever to be in circulation. The limited supply creates the immediate comparison to gold, which has, in turn, generated a basis for market value. While Bitcoin has historically rewarded patience, the recent sell-off have some worried. But should they be? Anyone who is shocked by the recent plunge of Bitcoin’s price likely hasn’t done much research on the digital currency’s past. In fact, what we’re currently witnessing with regards to Bitcoin’s price action is not all that surprising by Bitcoin’s standards when you consider its historical data.

A traditional market correction is constituted by a 10% recession in market cap. A bear market occurs when that figure hits 20%. Bitcoin has historically scoffed at these minor dips, crashing countless times since its inception. Perhaps in its worst crash, Bitcoin plummeted some 94% in 2011 from $32 to just $2 following the first Mt. Gox security breach and increased bubble talk. It has continually punished investors over time, dropping from $266 to $54 in 2013 for a 79% loss and then again from $1,200 later that year to under $200 in 2015 for an 85% drop-off. Here’s a more comprehensive look at Bitcoin’s volatility since it was introduced to the world. Amazingly, it has rebounded from every crash to hit new all-time-highs at some point the future. We’re waiting to see if it will happen again and eclipse the $20,000 mark.

Talk of advanced tech development, pushback against “broken” traditional financial institutions, and optimistic PR have contributed positively to Bitcoin’s price over time. Association with the Dark web, security breaches, and natural opposition to innovation that threatens existing systems have had the inverse affect over the same period. The age of social media where news spreads so quickly, the fact that the market is largely deregulated and a boatload of other reasons have likely contributed to the volatility in both directions. Again, Bitcoin has historically rewarded investors who demonstrate patience, so a sharp resurgence upwards shouldn’t come as a shock to anybody either. It’s already back up 61% from last week’s low to almost $10,000 again.

Finally, it must be noted that those calling the Bitcoin’s recent activity a “crash” must contextualize what a brief setback to a staggering price $6,000 really says about the picture at large.

As an Environmental Factor

Opponents to Bitcoin are quick to call out the cryptocurrency for the energy-intensive mining process that confirms Bitcoin transactions on the blockchain. It’s so exhaustive, in fact, that China recently banned it, and the hardware used in the process is now causing major issues in Iceland. The cost of mining one transaction could power some homes for over a week.

Those more optimistic about the future of mining contend that new technology will emerge to make mining more energy efficient, as the Bitcoin website explains, “mining hardware may become so energy efficient over the next century that transaction fees prove to be plenty to keep miners in business.”

For Bitcoin to take the next step in the relatively environmentally conscious world we live in, its community will likely have to address this issue head-on and find more conservative ways of supporting blockchain transactions.

As a Market Leader

Cryptocurrency exploded onto the main stage in the recent years essentially through Bitcoin exclusively. But ever since, the “altcoin” index of the industry has had its own boom and even overtaken Bitcoin’s dominance over the cryptocurrency sector. Altcoins (i.e. “alternative coins”) refer to all other cryptocurrencies not named Bitcoin and range drastically in their product design and intention.

But for as far as altcoins have come, they have proven to almost always follow Bitcoin’s movement in the market, unable to make autonomous changes. They effectively mirror Bitcoin’s price action, regardless of direction, but in exaggerated fashion. So, when Bitcoin is in the green, altcoins can grow more than 100% in a single day as their market caps have more room to expand. Conversely, a bear market for Bitcoin can mean altcoins write off the majority of their value in equally as short of a period of time, as these periods often lead to consolidation of smaller coins back into the larger players (i.e. Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc.).

This correlation means a variety of things. For cryptocurrency investors, the high correlation can strongly impact strategy and allocation decisions, especially in times of volatility. For government agencies, it gives the industry a unique landscape to regulate. And for the common spectator, Bitcoin’s ability to remain the single most influential digital currency makes it a powerful asset to keep focus on.

As a Technological Development

Here is where the conversation begins to shift. Where market value and potential as a payment solution are up for contentious for debate, it’s difficult to refute the technological breakthrough that Bitcoin stands as. The housing product of sophisticated mathematics, cryptography, and advanced programming fused into a living network that is transforming everything from information sharing to computing systems cannot be overlooked. Responsible for bringing blockchain to the forefront, Bitcoin, from a tech standpoint, should be celebrated as a breakthrough, and one we don’t take for granted. We likely won’t; it’s already spurring a new wave of tech that will change infrastructure systems and information exchange for the foreseeable future. Distributed ledgers and various forms of chained databases are reforming more than just finance, but also business, medicine, entertainment, communal issues, and more. Bitcoin is by no means perfect technology (after all, it is the first blockchain protocol), but it has opened up a gateway that we could be exploring for a long time.

As an Innovation

Virtual money that can be sent to my friend across the world in minutes? A trustworthy network that doesn’t have a central point of control? Is there really need for those middlemen and intermediaries? Bitcoin has been such a compelling conversation starter because of its revolutionary and innovative nature. It is forcing society to reassess how we share with each other and how we trust each other. Bitcoin’s novel approach to finance and restoring much of the power back to the individual is proving enough to shake up the world’s largest banking CEOs and trigger a half trillion dollar crypto-asset market.

The Need for Objectivity

For every bit of optimism that Bitcoin has received, it has earned at least as much legitimate criticism. And that is perfectly okay. In fact, it’s what is making it one of the biggest anomalies in years. Bitcoin owns some undesirable characteristics and operational issues, yet it has simultaneously created wealth for many and is an undeniable breakthrough. So, when people say Bitcoin will succeed or fail, it's important to ask: "as what?", because so many of its constructive elements are mutually exclusive. Completely overlooking the technological innovation Bitcoin has delivered because of its current shortcomings as a currency, for example, is essentially meaningless and asinine.

So, will Bitcoin go to $1 million and replace the current financial infrastructure as some predict? Could it equally as easily go to $0 and be looked back on as a fad that resulted in history’s largest popped bubble? Will the next three decades be full of blockchain integration and overhaul of current systems? Will cryptocurrency mining cause countries to lose control of their power supply? Will one of these crashes be too big to overcome, or will Bitcoin defy all odds and keep rebounding stronger each time? It’s all unclear at this point, but legitimate arguments can be made in almost any direction on any given aspect. It’s important to investigate the data, strive to understand positions beyond our own, and most importantly maintain an objective assessment of Bitcoin, as that is the only way to substantiate the conversation at hand.

Read TalkMarkets' latest news on crytocurrencies here.

Disclaimer: The ideas expressed in this writing are my ...

How did you like this article? Let us know so we can better customize your reading experience.


Gary Anderson 6 years ago Contributor's comment

This is the first bitcoin article I have ever read. It is proof the thing is pure speculation. That is very dangerous. If you can't afford to lose, don't play this. I think I lost brain cells trying to grasp the certainty of it when the author ends on an uncertain note. Bitcoin has more heads than Scientology. Like that many headed snake, Bitcoin is certainly massive speculation. And I still have no idea what it is. I know 21 million coins can't be a currency, that much I am certain of. Forbes says in many articles that it is an asset. Assets cannot replace central banks.

Gary Anderson 6 years ago Contributor's comment

I want to add that money determines value. Gold is determined by money. The price of Bitcoin is determined by money. So, money is money and Bitcoin is more like gold, or maybe fools gold.

Kevin Richards 6 years ago Member's comment

Demand determines the value. Nothing else.

Michele Grant 6 years ago Member's comment

@[Gary Anderson](user:4798), I agree with you on #bitcoin, but I would disagree slightly. Something has value if people deem it to have value. Sometimes an irrational craze surrounds some item. Just like people once spent a fortune on Ty beanie babies or garbage pail kids, or countless other worthless items, that same craze now surrounds bitcoin.

If people became crazed about fools gold, that would become valuable too.

Kirk Sheffield 6 years ago Member's comment

That reminds me about a story I once read about #3M. They invented this glue that was "worthless" since it only had a bit of sticking power. Then someone got the idea to make Post-It notes out of them - tiny slips of paper with "worthless" glue on the back. Companies and individuals spend a fortune on those ever year. $MMM

Gary Anderson 6 years ago Contributor's comment

You aren't comparing Bitcoin to Post-it Notes are you? Bitcoin is most likely a simple scam, a bubble like Beanie Babies. I don't know if the creators of Beanie Babies created the scam. They created scarcity by numbering them. I doubt if they knew what the result would be, but I think Bitcoin creators probably knew exactly what would happen if they would just label it currency. Lol. Maybe one Bitcoin would be worth more than another one based on the numbers? Like the first Bitcoin is a collector's item? And who says you can't use Beanie Babies as money? Somewhere, at least. But at least a Beanie Baby is a tangible product.

Kirk Sheffield 6 years ago Member's comment

I am not comparing #bitcoin to post-its per-se. I'm just pointing that things have value if people are willing to pay for it. What was originally dismissed as worthless, went on to be worth a fortune. Many thought bitcoins would be worthless, but those who bought early and kept them this long could also make a fortune.

On the otherhand, should there be a major hack, or a government crackdown, or proof of an intentional scam as you fear, bitcoin could instantly become worthless.

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

You're very right about Bitcoin being in its speculative stage right now. The coming years will be decisive for it. Notable questions include: how will the regulation conversation progress? Can mining become more energy sensitive? Can consumers' funds be stored more securely? We are still in the process of reaching definitive answers.

Based on the latter portion of your comment, I thought I would clarify the following. Even though there will only ever be 21 million Bitcoins minted, Bitcoin can be owned in fractional shares up to 8 decimal points, allowing for its ecosystem to accommodate for much wider adoption. In fact, the majority of Bitcoin-owners own far less than one Bitcoin. This was clearly understood from the outset and was considered carefully in the code.

Gary Anderson 6 years ago Contributor's comment

My question, author, is this: Since most currency is backed by a tangible collateral, what collateral backs bitcoin? If you take a loan out to buy a house, your house is the collateral for the loan. Money may be fiat but it is generally backed by some collateral. Money created is backed by collateral, whether base mony or broad money. I don't see the creation of bitcoin being backed by any real collateral at all. So how can it be money?

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

As stated in my article, Bitcoin is viewed as an asset/investment vehicle, piece of technology, etc. in addition to its role as a currency/money. I will respond in line with its role as a currency/money as it pertains to your question.

Bitcoin is a disruptive technology and is, by nature, doing things differently. It is so unconventional in comparison to the traditional financial system we're accustomed to that people have been predicting its demise year and year over. It's still here and essentially as strong as ever. While none of us know what the future holds, Bitcoin has been around for almost a decade now, and its demand has only increased. Standing the test of time, even if the reasons why are difficult to comprehend, must be respected.

There are a variety of reasons why Bitcoin could have intrinsic value as a currency. Here are some, in no particular order:

1. Decentralization; protects against frozen accounts, transactions, and manipulated records

2. Scarcity; finite amount of revolutionary tech project, protects against inflation

3. Increased privacy for payments

4. Borderless; better for global payments, FX

5. No physical backing; why do we even need physical cash in an ideal situation?

6. Can't be duplicated; protects against counterfeit money

7. Most recently in Arizona - ability to pay taxes with BTC

Again, Bitcoin certainly has its shortcomings too, but the case can certainly be made for it as a a currency.

Joe Black 6 years ago Member's comment

You make a good point. Everyone keeps judging bitcoin my traditional standards. But #bitcoin IS distruptive. New rules should come with the new game.

Beating Buffett 6 years ago Member's comment

@[Nathan Feifel](user:56139), Arizona is now letting people pay their taxes with #bitcoin???

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

Yes, the state senate passed a bill to accept tax payments in BTC.

Now the bill is on to the house.


Per the following CoinDesk article, "This bill would, if approved, require Arizona's Department of Revenue to convert the cryptocurrencies into U.S. dollars within a day of receiving them as payment." (

BreakingBad News 6 years ago Member's comment

I suspect most people are hoarding their bitcoins right now in hopes they continue to increase, rather than looking for ways to spend it.

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

No question about it. The spending/payment use case is a lot less practical right now, not to mention lucrative. Also, there’s a lot of FOMO buying without real intent beyond making returns.

BreakingBad News 6 years ago Member's comment

FOMO? What is that?

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

It stands for “fear of missing out.” FOMO trading happens when someone observes others making a particular investment decision, and decides to make the same investment solely on the basis of fearing that they will miss out on future prosperity. In this context, many people are buying Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies simply because they see many others doing so and profiting, so they don’t want to miss out on the action.

Gary Anderson 6 years ago Contributor's comment

With all due respect to you as a fellow contributor to Talkmarkets, that answer did not answer my question. It contained widely disseminated talking points. I also would like to know your association with Bitcoin. That includes with Bitcoin creators.

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

Bitcoin isn't backed by anything beyond its unique characteristics (some of which I listed above) and demand from the public. It might sound crazy, but it's the disruptive nature of the technology that is driving most of the banking world mad. I have no association with Bitcoin outside of researching and writing about the topic independently. I am fascinated by its history and enjoy following its activity. I am always completely objective about it.

Harry Goldstein 6 years ago Member's comment

Was #bitcoin the first ever #cryptocurrency? How many #cryptocurrencies are there now? And what is the difference (if any) between digital currency and cryptocurrency?

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

Great questions.

Bitcoin was the first ever cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrencies use cryptography to facilitate and secure transactions, and use blockchain networks to operate in a decentralized fashion.

A cryptocurrency is a type of digital currency, yet not all digital currencies are cryptocurrencies. Think of digital currencies simply as "electronic money" that lacks physical form, but don't necessarily bear that qualities listed above.

At the time of this post, leading cryptocurrency data site maintains that there are just under 1550 cryptocurrencies currently out there. This figure varies slightly by the day, but has been trending up over the past few years.

Harry Goldstein 6 years ago Member's comment

Thanks. I'm sure this is all second nature to you but it's harder to grasp for us older folk trying to make sense of it all. So if digital currencies are simply "electronics money" would $PYPL be considered a digital currency?

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

It's a good question!

It all goes according to the nuance of definitions. I believe that technically speaking, a digital currency must be bereft of any physical equivalent. So, the the figure of U.S. dollars you see digitally in your banking app, or PayPal account as you said, would not constitute a "digital currency." Rather, this would be referred to as ""Digital money."" From what I understand, an example of a truly digital, non-cryptographic currency would be "Ven":, which has centralized oversight and lacks a physical underpinning.

Michele Grant 6 years ago Member's comment

I would take issue with some of the issues in the "DecentralizeToday" article you linked to which states that "absolutely nothing about Bitcoin is a secret." but there is so much about bitcoin we don't know. We don't even know who really created it. Not with certainty.

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

I agree that the referenced article is one-sided and perhaps slightly biased in certain respects.

That being said, I linked the article for the sole purpose of debunking the notion that Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme, which I firmly believe, and which the article does a really nice job articulating. The author raises very legitimate points, uses fact-driven analysis and breaks down definitions to prove his point. He even highlights the logical backing of the other position on the issue, which is responsible and admirable.

While we certainly don’t know everything about Bitcoin, we certainly know a lot. Besides the anonymous creator aspect, which is causing all of these Bitcoin forks, is there another issue you find noteworthy in this regard?

Michele Grant 6 years ago Member's comment

I don't think bitcoin is a ponzi scheme necessarily. But I do think it would be the greatest scam of all if the inventor has some backdoor in or knowable way to hack the system. But even if it really was created for altruistic reasons, there are a number of reasons I am against bitcoin:

1. No regulation

2. Uncertain legal future (countries could deem it illegal at any point

3. Exchanges have already been hacked, costing investors billions

4. Exchanged could go under taking bitcoin owner's money with them (as already happened with Mt. Gox)

5. It helps to fund the drugs, the sex trade, child pornography, murder for hire, and all the worst that this planet has to offer - it empowers and emboldends not only cirminals, but every day people to do their worst.

6. No FDIC insurance or any other protection from a hacker or simply losing your "key."

7. It is way too volatile and speculative. I don't think the tulip analagy that is used so frequently is off the mark. But due to the technical nature, too many investors are getting caught up in the fad and jumping in, without understanding the risks.

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

These are very important and noteworthy points, many of which are standing directly in the way of larger adoption. Here are some comments of mine on them:

1. No regulation is a major issue as it delegitimizes Bitcoin, and is keeping so many people on the sidelines. (By the same token, it is probably what's keeping many in on it). While there are currently productive conversations happening in the Fed (, things always move slowly there. I do think we will have a more clear picture by the end of 2018. South Korea has been a leader in crypto regulation until now ( I believe regulation would ultimately be a good thing, and I believe we will see more waves of it continuing to come.

2. This is very true, and any news even hinting at such a situation has created an instant bear market for cryptocurrencies in the recent past. With the right regulative measures, though, countries would likely feel more comfortable and be less likely to ban the market from operating. But no one really knows if China will ever change its mind, but it could. For what it's worth, though, governments can ban but never eliminate Bitcoin. People can move to more appealing places to use BTC and other cryptocurrencies if they felt like it was worth it.

3-4. This MUST improve if the industry wants to thrive. Major positive strides have been made since Mt. Gox, but there are still ways to go in building secure exchange and trading platforms in the space so people can feel comfortable.

5. From an association standpoint, this is a major argument against the whole crypto market, especially "privacy coins" (harder to track), and creates ethical dilemmas as well. The counterargument is obvious as well, though (i.e. should we ban cars because criminals use them in bank robberies, should we ban the internet because criminals communicate over it?). The point can be argued both ways with legitimacy. While this conversation is mainly about Bitcoin and not really about other cryptocurrencies, it's important to note that Bitcoin is actually dropping in popularity on the Dark Web and Monero (XMR)

is replacing it (

6. This is where USD is way more appealing than BTC. FDIC insurance is such a valuable aspect of banking when matched up against personal accountability with securing your wealth. From a Bitcoin investment standpoint, however, it's a non factor. Non-deposit investments, like stocks, mutual funds, bonds, etc. are not FDIC ensured.

7. Is this not new with any breakthrough technology? There is no doubt a ton of speculation as well as "dumb money" ( coming into the market, but does BTC emerging as a money making opportunity delegitimize it at its core? I would say strong parallels could be made to the internet in this regard. If you don't like volatility, though, it makes sense to stay away.

David P. Goldsmith 6 years ago Member's comment

These are good points Michele. @[Nathan Feifel](user:56139), what's your take on it?

Cannabis Stock Buyer 6 years ago Member's comment

I read some "mystery investor" just bought up $400 million bitcoin!

Dan Jackson 6 years ago Member's comment

Bitcoins can't be a ponzi scheme. By definition, a ponzi scheme is always supposed to bring in new money to support those in at the earliest. But bitcoin mining was designed to run dry sometime in the next 20 years.

Azi Feifel 6 years ago Member's comment

Very well stated. Thorough and useful review.

Nathan Feifel 6 years ago Contributor's comment

Thanks, Azi!