Cont...

[Anonymous No.8583788]

Cont from >>8573998

Tl;dr:
With a high price, the amount of fiat money needed to sustain the selling pressure rises accordingly. A pressure, which BTC cannot get rid of for the next couple of decades.

[Anonymous No.8583847]

>b-b-but institutional buyers will save us!

[Anonymous No.8583863]

[Anonymous No.8583865]

>>8583847
>>b-b-but institutional buyers will save us!
See >>8575341

>If we consider the economy as a whole, okay - it might be slightly thinkable, to pump so much money into the market, if we enter the level of corporations, banks, states and large parts of the population.


>Corporations have no incentive to buy BTC.
>Neither do banks.
>States are the same: no incentive.

>Population?
>Why should my old elementary school teacher Ms. Miller buy BTC?
>She cannot buy anything with it, as the fee makes it less usable than just using the dollar she has in her pocket.
>She will not hold it for future gains, if she does not want to speculate.
>She does not want to change the primary currency of her country from USD to BTC, as her pension is in USD and she would lose, if BTC would become the main currency.

[Anonymous No.8583891]

>>8583865
Better sell then.

[Anonymous No.8583906]

>>8583863

[Anonymous No.8583914]

>>8583891
Exit in December at about 15k, I am more than comfy

[Anonymous No.8583929]

>>8583914
That's worth about six months of wage fucking at a shit tier job. I exited at $16k and have been swinging and catching pumps this whole time. Why aren't you making money with your money?

[Anonymous No.8583936]

>>8583906
according to your graph there was no reason to buy bitcoin last january

are you sure about that?

[Anonymous No.8583954]

>>8583929
Show some proof.

[Anonymous No.8583963]

>>8583929
Exit when BTC was at 15k, you fucking bellend.

[Anonymous No.8583972]

>>8583936
>are you sure about that?
See the old thread to elaborate this question.

[Anonymous No.8584031]

>>8583847
There won't be any by the end of the summer.

[Anonymous No.8584061]

Bitcoin is going to be the global currency, how can it fail?

[Anonymous No.8584147]

crypto is sitting on a 300 BI market cap, thats dust

this is only the beginning, ppl can´t even use their crypto yet ffs, way to hard for the average joe, theres a lot of room for growth, you are the same ppl that said bitcoin will never reach 1k again after it crashed to $ 200, only difference those guys were 100% more convincing

[Anonymous No.8584187]

>>8583972
don't need to you're literally retarded as fuck

>only buy crypto when normies are fomoing in

sounds great fag

[Anonymous No.8584244]

>>8584147
It is not about mcap.
It is about the increased need of capital to shield the price levels from miners, who have a high incentive to cash out, the higher the price is.

[Anonymous No.8584256]

>>8584187
Bought sub $1k, sold at $15k.
Sounds great, yeah.

[Anonymous No.8584260]

>December bullrun happened because of Chad and Stacy buying BTC from Coinbase
You never fail to amaze me, /biz/.

[Anonymous No.8584318]

>>8584260
>constructing a strawman and missing the point
You threw in the revenue of coinbase. Of course the revenue of a company, that gets its revenue from its users, corellates with the amount of users.

[Anonymous No.8584511]

>>8583788
We get it - you opened a short.

Go fuck yourself gambler.

[Anonymous No.8584529]

>>8584511
Ad hominem and actually wrong - never touched margin trading, be it short or long.

[Anonymous No.8584594]

>>8584061
this. I was convinced to go all in when I saw the who wants to be a millionaire price image after it hit $2k last year and I've been buying all the way up and all the way down. There's literally no way bitcoin doesn't go up again. Even if it takes three years like last time fuck it, the returns beat literally any other investment over time.

I'm not even a bitcoin maximalist. It's just inevitable. If you can't see it you have brain damage.

[Anonymous No.8584915]

>>8584244
do you believe proof of stake would remove or at least largely reduce the incentive to cash out immediately/when in a decent amount of profit?

[Anonymous No.8584948]

>>8584915
BTC won't even be a top 2 cryptocurrency mid 2019

[Anonymous No.8585113]

>>8584948
that's why i'm asking OP's opinion about PoS because i think it ties into BTC's inevitable irrelevance, i.e. no more PoW, top coins are most likely going to be either premined or PoS.

[Anonymous No.8585140]

>>8584061
how can something that takes 8 hours to process and idiotic high fees ever be a global currency for anything other than underground shit

[Anonymous No.8585156]

>>8584915
>do you believe proof of stake would remove or at least largely reduce the incentive to cash out immediately/when in a decent amount of profit?

Yes, it would lower the incentive to sell, as the costs incurring with regular PoW-mining would be gone.
But other problems would arise, such as e.g. a stronger incentive to centralize even more than today with PoW.

[Anonymous No.8585209]

>>8585140
you know, since the network isn't congested anymore, that the fees are pennies again and the process time is almost instant, right?

[Anonymous No.8585323]

>>8585156
i don't agree with the "stronger incentive" to centralize, i think there are lots of things to consider. the first thing that comes to mind is the high barrier to entry. for example, capital to have mining farm, cheap electricity, etc. those who are more familiar in mining would get it. i only have a surface-level understanding of it. with PoS you'd only need money to buy the thing you are staking. it doesn't have much costs after that (how much would a raspberry pi cost anyway? compared to electricity when mining, maintenance of mining equipment) so there'd be more, um, retail stakers i guess. at the very least it would reduce centralization from places with cheap electricity/land for mining farms. i don't think it's even necessary to discuss profit margins of large mining pools vs small mining pools (which would, at least at first glance, be negligible with PoS). i'm not all too familiar with the centralization situation with miners so i don't really know if it would reduce centralization but i disagree with the stronger incentive to centralize.

[Anonymous No.8585366]

>>8584948
1. Link
2. Ven

[Anonymous No.8585549]

>>8585209
For adaption, BTC needs to become better than the systems right now in all aspects.
Atm, a wire transaction from my account to the account of my wife goes through in less than two minutes.
With no fee.
And if something goes wrong, I can sue the bank.

As long as BTC wants me to pay pennies (deters cheap persons from using it), needs longer transaction times (deters merchants from accepting it) and I lose everything if something goes wrong and sends it to another adress (regardless whose fault it is, it deters tech-averse people from using it), BTC will not get good traction or even become a currency.
It will remain a speculative asset.

[Anonymous No.8585764]

>>8585323

The problem with PoS and centralization is not the electricity, but economy of scale. It is debatable how it exactly will play out, as we lack the practical example. But I fail to see convincing arguments, why PoS should not lead to an at least similar centralization as we see with BTC today. ETH with its change to PoS will either prove this or not, until then we can only speculate.

[Anonymous No.8586191]

>>8583788
I’ll toss you a 9/10, had a good laugh.
thanks for that

[Anonymous No.8586256]

>>8585764
>It is debatable how it exactly will play out, as we lack the practical example
that's the only thing holding me back from making judgments (and going all-in on ETH because i am bullish on smart contracts but agree with the PoW problem).

[Anonymous No.8586505]

>>8584256
why would you buy when the google trends are down though?

[Anonymous No.8587218]

>>8585549
It is still better. You don’t need banks.

>t. boomer who bought at 19k