Bitcoin currency of the future?

CerebralKnievel said:
They keep posting articles like that, but I suppose they're referring to a calendar year and not simply 2018, because it is definitely down from its $6-7 high.
Click to expand...

I believe they’re only measuring YTD performance. On December 31st it closed at 2.28 and opened on Jan 1st at $2.30. I got in at roughly a $1 with my REQ earinings. I’m still slowly buying when I can, but I have other projects I’m investing in as well. QASH is still my dark horse, but I’ve been thinking about picking up a little DigiByte to see where it takes me.

Interesting takeaway from the article:

Early bitcoin investor Tim Draper has backed the company, VeChain announced in a tweet.

Draper, who has also invested in Skype and Tesla, bought roughly 30,000 bitcoins in 2014, which he told CNBC in December he is still holding. At Wednesday's prices, those are worth roughly $237 million.

The founding partner of leading venture capital firms Draper Associates and DFJ told CNBC in March this "is the most excited I've ever been as an investor, and I was right there at the beginning of the internet."
Click to expand...

Right now I’m keeping an eye on ADA. It was around $.11 in Mid-March and seems to bounce up to $.20’s. Might try to swing it here if it gets down there again.
 
SwamiLeoni said:
I believe they’re only measuring YTD performance. On December 31st it closed at 2.28 and opened on Jan 1st at $2.30. I got in at roughly a $1 with my REQ earinings. I’m still slowly buying when I can, but I have other projects I’m investing in as well. QASH is still my dark horse, but I’ve been thinking about picking up a little DigiByte to see where it takes me.

Interesting takeaway from the article:



Right now I’m keeping an eye on ADA. It was around $.11 in Mid-March and seems to bounce up to $.20’s. Might try to swing it here if it gets down there again.
Click to expand...

Ah.. I was just speaking from memory. I thought it was still around $5-6 after December.
 


Some really good points are made here. I have the same feelings as the OP while mixing in my own tin-hat market manipulation that I feel has a play in what’s going on.

I’m not going to pretend I have any idea of what I’m actually doing. I’m lucky I’m in the green overall but like the majority here my portfolio is down 60-70%. From an average joe investors perspective (mine mainly) I feel like consumer confidence is down. I also feel like the currency part of the equation has a long time to go before it’s going to be used. People aren’t buying these coins to be used to puchase items. I’m certainly not. Why would I buy BTC with a 1.5% fee to buy something that I’m still going to be taxed on? It would be like exchanging the USD for the GBP just to purchase something online. It’s makes zero sense. Can the exchange rate between fiat and crypto ever reach 0? If it ever does, I’ll be glad to use crypto, I feel much safer using it online than I do my debit card. But I’m not going to essentially buy something to buy something else and neither would anyone I know.
 
The actual use case of crypto as a currency is its weakest value proposition in relation to the underlying potential of distributed ledger technology. The primary value of most pertinent projects is either through infrastructure or utility.
 
Nik123 said:
The actual use case of crypto as a currency is its weakest value proposition in relation to the underlying potential of distributed ledger technology. The primary value of most pertinent projects is either through infrastructure or utility.
Click to expand...

Sure, it may be it’s weakest but it’s a main part of its utility. It’s in the name. It’s why transaction speeds are a main focus in the space. Why call it a currency if 100% of the people hold it to keep the chain decentralized? Using crypto to purchase things is something I’m really looking forward to but at the moment it’s too expensive to do so.
 
SwamiLeoni said:
Sure, it may be it’s weakest but it’s a main part of its utility. It’s in the name. It’s why transaction speeds are a main focus in the space. Why call it a currency if 100% of the people hold it to keep the chain decentralized? Using crypto to purchase things is something I’m really looking forward to but at the moment it’s too expensive to do so.
Click to expand...

It was the main part of its utility before Ethereum came along - it’s not anymore (though it’s still a focus area).

Let’s break it down. Currencies need to be:

1. A store of value
2. A medium of exchange

While the long term potential is still there, in the short term crypto projects focused on use as a currency don’t satisfy either criteria. They are far too volatile to be a store of value for the masses.

And transaction speeds have not been proven to be scalable for large scale adoption yet. Therefore none of the currency projects can truly function as a medium of exchange on a global scale with millions of transactions per second (some claim they can, but it is far from demonstrable).

So per my orIginal point, in the mid term, utility and infrastructure projects have FAR more potent use cases - ie they will be ready to deliver large parts of their promise within the next 6-8 months.

Most experts in the field agree the term crypto-currency is a misnomer from the old bitcoin days. Crypto-assets would be a far more accurate term to describe the core value proposition.
 
Nik123 said:
It was the main part of its utility before Ethereum came along - it’s not anymore (though it’s still a focus area).

Let’s break it down. Currencies need to be:

1. A store of value
2. A medium of exchange

While the long term potential is still there, in the short term crypto projects focused on use as a currency don’t satisfy either criteria. They are far too volatile to be a store of value for the masses.

And transaction speeds have not been proven to be scalable for large scale adoption yet. Therefore none of the currency projects can truly function as a medium of exchange on a global scale with millions of transactions per second (some claim they can, but it is far from demonstrable).

So per my orIginal point, in the mid term, utility and infrastructure projects have FAR more potent use cases - ie they will be ready to deliver large parts of their promise within the next 6-8 months.

Most experts in the field agree the term crypto-currency is a misnomer from the old bitcoin days. Crypto-assets would be a far more accurate term to describe the core value proposition.
Click to expand...

I’m not talking about an overnight change. The main crux of my argument was the cost it takes to exchange fiat for crypto to purchase items. I agree that it’s going to take a while to implement, but if that issue isn’t solved it will be hard to see adoption. People freak out over a $.10 increase for a product they buy regularly. Also, people look at crypto as a future currency because it’s in the name. Cryptocurrency is a perfectly adequate name for cryptos whose sole utility is to be exchanged for goods and services. Removing the word ‘currency’ from utility tokens is a start, but what if those same utility tokens can start being used as a currency (I.e. VEN in BitOcean ATMs). Is it a crypto-asset or a cryptocurrency? It provides a utility but is also a store of value that merchants accept for their products.

On a side note, how to you figure BTC doesn’t satisfy the criteria as a store of value? Aside from its volitie position in the market, it’s limited supply and increase in value seems to me to be a great store of value. The scarcity of BTC’s somewhat force it to be.
 
SwamiLeoni said:
I’m not talking about an overnight change. The main crux of my argument was the cost it takes to exchange fiat for crypto to purchase items. I agree that it’s going to take a while to implement, but if that issue isn’t solved it will be hard to see adoption. People freak out over a $.10 increase for a product they buy regularly. Also, people look at crypto as a future currency because it’s in the name. Cryptocurrency is a perfectly adequate name for cryptos whose sole utility is to be exchanged for goods and services. Removing the word ‘currency’ from utility tokens is a start, but what if those same utility tokens can start being used as a currency (I.e. VEN in BitOcean ATMs). Is it a crypto-asset or a cryptocurrency? It provides a utility but is also a store of value that merchants accept for their products.

On a side note, how to you figure BTC doesn’t satisfy the criteria as a store of value? Aside from its volitie position in the market, it’s limited supply and increase in value seems to me to be a great store of value. The scarcity of BTC’s somewhat force it to be.
Click to expand...

In terms of the term, I disagree. The SEC, CFTC, and the European regulators are in agreement that we are collectively witnessing the birth of a new asset class, not a new class of currency. The fact that crypto projects go across multiple categories and use cases - from currency, to platforms, to infrastructure, to utility means that if we are being as accurate as possible then a wider classification is needed - and calling crypto ‘assets’ fits the bill much better than calling all of them ‘currencies’. In fact, the latter is flat out inaccurate - because currencies only serve as...currencies, not as infrastructure smart contract platforms or utility tokens. The actual question the regulators are focused on is what kind of asset cryptos are - a security, a commodity, or a utility. Nobody is seriously talking about them as currencies yet, or anytime soon.

In terms of BTC (or other currency projects) not satisfying a store of value criteria, no asset that has frequent 50-80% of total value swings can be be seen as a ‘store of value’. Most major currencies do not fluctuate like that - if they did they would not serve their purpose. You can’t buy something for 1 dollar when that dollar could be worth 10 dollars (pegged against a consistent store of value like gold or another global currency backed by a strong economy) one month and 50 cents another month. That kind of volatility precludes bitcoin from being a store of value - as the term is used in relation to currencies.

And in terms of timescale, I didn’t in any way imply or state you are talking about overnight change. My original point stands, and allow me to reiterate- in the mid term (6-12 months), I see utility and infrastructure projects having more potent mass adoption use cases. The currency projects will need longer to be able to scale (satisfying the medium of exchange criteria) and actually work effectively as intended. If entire countries started transacting in bitcoin (even with lightning implemented) - it’s almost a guarantee that the processing time and cost will sky rocket. This may not be the case over the long run - which is why I keep reiterating my point about the short to medium term.
 
Last edited:
Nik123 said:
In terms of the term, I disagree. The SEC, CFTC, and the European regulators are in agreement that we are collectively witnessing the birth of a new asset class, not a new class of currency. The fact that crypto projects go across multiple categories and use cases - from currency, to platforms, to infrastructure, to utility means that if we are being as accurate as possible then a wider classification is needed - and calling crypto ‘assets’ fits the bill much better than calling all of them ‘currencies’. In fact, the latter is flat out inaccurate - because currencies only serve as...currencies, not as infrastructure smart contract platforms or utility tokens. The actual question the regulators are focused on is what kind of asset cryptos are - a security, a commodity, or a utility. Nobody is seriously talking about them as currencies yet, or anytime soon.

In terms of BTC not satisfying a store of value criteria, no asset that has frequent 80-90% of total value swings can be be seen as a ‘store of value’. Currencies do not fluctuate like that - if they did they would not serve their purpose. You can’t buy something for 1 dollar when that dollar could be worth 10 dollars (pegged against a consistent store of value like gold or another global currency backed by a strong economy) one month and 50 cents another month. That kind of volatility precludes bitcoin from being a store of value - as the term is used in relation to currencies.

And in terms of timescale, I didn’t in any way imply or state you are talking about overnight change. My original point stands, and allow me to reiterate- in the mid term (6-12 months), I see utility and infrastructure projects having more potent mass adoption use cases. The currency projects will need longer to be able to scale (satisfying the medium of exchange criteria) and actually work effectively as intended. If entire countries started transacting in bitcoin (even with lightning implemented) - it’s almost a guarantee that the processing time and cost will sky rocket. This may not be the case over the long run - which is why I keep reiterating my point about the short to medium term.
Click to expand...

Good points. I have mixed feelings about using the term ‘assets’ as a broad category. Probably because I can’t fully picture trading assets for goods and services. We may get different categories in the future as cryptos mature into their respective roles. Should the market ever stabilize, I feel that BTC right now has the best odds of becoming that elusive crypto store of value. However, 3-5-10 years can see a lot of change. The brand name and first mover can only take you so far before the market has a chance to catch up.

Again though, if a cryptos sole purpose is to facilitate a peer-to-peer transaction and it costs a fee to purchase that crypto, I don’t see many people using it when they can use their native currency free from added fees.
 
SwamiLeoni said:
Good points. I have mixed feelings about using the term ‘assets’ as a broad category. Probably because I can’t fully picture trading assets for goods and services. We may get different categories in the future as cryptos mature into their respective roles. Should the market ever stabilize, I feel that BTC right now has the best odds of becoming that elusive crypto store of value. However, 3-5-10 years can see a lot of change. The brand name and first mover can only take you so far before the market has a chance to catch up.

Again though, if a cryptos sole purpose is to facilitate a peer-to-peer transaction and it costs a fee to purchase that crypto, I don’t see many people using it when they can use their native currency free from added fees.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I definitely foresee a ‘cross-asset class’ type investment offering once this market really matures.

Yes, agree that the BTC ‘brand name’ will only take it so far. For real world mass adoption, it will come down to transaction speed and cost.
In the currency sphere there is lots of competition for BTC. And long term a lot can and will change for sure.
 
Nik123 said:
Thanks. I definitely foresee a ‘cross-asset class’ type investment offering once this market really matures.

Yes, agree that the BTC ‘brand name’ will only take it so far. For real world mass adoption, it will come down to transaction speed and cost.
In the currency sphere there is lots of competition for BTC. And long term a lot can and will change for sure.
Click to expand...

It’ll be interesting to see how convoluted this space will be with new currencies in the future. REQ has a plan to help by changing and exchanging cryptos on the spot. Last thing we need are merchants with ‘we accept’ signs that have 15 crypto coin pictures. It will also be interesting to see if some 3rd world countries adopt a single crypto as their nations currency.
 
This shit totally crash yet? I like everyone else not invested is waiting and hoping for it to tank.
 
SwamiLeoni said:
It’ll be interesting to see how convoluted this space will be with new currencies in the future. REQ has a plan to help by changing and exchanging cryptos on the spot. Last thing we need are merchants with ‘we accept’ signs that have 15 crypto coin pictures. It will also be interesting to see if some 3rd world countries adopt a single crypto as their nations currency.
Click to expand...

Indeed. At the risk of shilling, I actually believe Ethos is going to have a material impact in this space - by bridging traditional investments with crypto investments via a single app (and exchange). Add to that ‘one click’ instantly diversified portfolios, will be a big deal for your average retail investors.

In terms of institutional investment, there have been some huge moves in this space, and I get the feeling the powers that be are paving way the way for the big money to come in.
 
SwamiLeoni said:


Some really good points are made here. I have the same feelings as the OP while mixing in my own tin-hat market manipulation that I feel has a play in what’s going on.

I’m not going to pretend I have any idea of what I’m actually doing. I’m lucky I’m in the green overall but like the majority here my portfolio is down 60-70%. From an average joe investors perspective (mine mainly) I feel like consumer confidence is down. I also feel like the currency part of the equation has a long time to go before it’s going to be used. People aren’t buying these coins to be used to puchase items. I’m certainly not. Why would I buy BTC with a 1.5% fee to buy something that I’m still going to be taxed on? It would be like exchanging the USD for the GBP just to purchase something online. It’s makes zero sense. Can the exchange rate between fiat and crypto ever reach 0? If it ever does, I’ll be glad to use crypto, I feel much safer using it online than I do my debit card. But I’m not going to essentially buy something to buy something else and neither would anyone I know.
Click to expand...

That post is 100% cringeworthy.

The issues are pretty simple: this is an incredibly underdeveloped market with practically no working products and it's ripe with fraud, greed, and ignorance. Add in a severe lack of regulation or ethics from exchanges and the market is extremely manipulated as well.

I'm not too concerned about the long term though. The technology is getting better by the day. Plasma and sharding will be game changers, as well as any major scaling update bitcoin can manage to do.
 
mr.bigglesworth said:
That post is 100% cringeworthy.

The issues are pretty simple: this is an incredibly underdeveloped market with practically no working products and it's ripe with fraud, greed, and ignorance. Add in a severe lack of regulation or ethics from exchanges and the market is extremely manipulated as well.

I'm not too concerned about the long term though. The technology is getting better by the day. Plasma and sharding will be game changers, as well as any major scaling update bitcoin can manage to do.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I think the OP does as well. Just from my group of friends, 95% of them had no idea what they were invested in. They just looked at CMC and tossed in their cash hoping for a 10x’s. Now that the market crashed they could care less about it. I tend to agree that the market is currently dropping because no new money has entered (compared to Dec/Jan) and people are selling. Not only that but people are forgetting. Take this thread for example. This thing was blowing up during the bull run and tailed off as the bear market grew. I’m sure there is some market manipulation going on but it’s also the bears selling and confidence moving away.
 
LMAO, not really pro or anti-bitcoin but damn thats some funny shit, bitcoin explained in 3 mins

 
looks like it’s going to keep falling

half the value is gone since January
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,467
Messages
58,287,104
Members
175,994
Latest member
Doomer

Share this page

Back
Top