Topic: 10 good reasons to buy bitcoin now (2018 edition) - page 11. (Read 3019 times)

good article. completely agree with your opinion and support it. I hope in the future there will be even more from you similar information

It will be a big buy signal for anyone already in the game, so the first wave of money comes from the ones already standing in the sidelines. The money coming through an ETF itself is only a part of this and it will come in later on. And once more and more people start to think "the bottom is in", the craze will build itself again. I think there is a decent chance the ETF could be the spark in this. It's important to think of it as a spark.

And how o you know that the demand will be overwhelming once ETF is approved. I think it it was just approved and we're only waiting for the launch, but it doesn't mean that suddenly everybody will want it. There's plenty of people waiting for an opportunity to sell with a profit and the market isn't ready to go crazy yet.

Decent article. I concur that bitcoin will scale, however it will set aside the opportunity to construct the Lightning Network. A lot of institutional cash anticipates bitcoin also. Once a bitcoin ETF is permitted, the interest for bitcoin will overpower, and it will be another stamp of authenticity

The economic tensions between USA & China and between USA & EU can bring about more serious currency wars which in my opinion is quite positive for Bitcoin.


This is quite a pessimistic view, I see this almost certainly as only a matter of time. Now that CBOE has also filed for a Bitcoin ETF I see the odds of an ETF approval happening this year at approximately 50 %. In the next 3 years I'd put ETF approval odds at over 95 %.


Indeed and this mainly supports my position. The trend in the long term, and the valuation, is going up. Here is a long term graph: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2011-03-01%202018-07-15&q=bitcoin

Now we have dropped to healthy trend levels as well, which is generally the time to make investments and buy in. If the trend is way up, the price has already spiked to much higher levels. This does not mean the price doesn't drop lower still, but it means we're close to the bottom at least, and generally we're at a good buy-in zone. Timing the exact bottom is hard but then again it's easy to miss a lot of upside if you're only buying in when it is clear to everyone that we're going to the moon.

After reading this article, I also plan to buy several bitcoins. Maybe it's a good time now.

Are you suggesting in your blog post that the economic tensions between America and China will contribute to the Bitcoin adoption? Because I don't see how it can, personally.
5. I have no hope to see ETF approved soon or later
4. The craze about Bitcoin (or cryptocurrencies generally speaking) faded since the BTC price crashed in January. A good indicator showing it is
https://trends.google.fr/trends/explore?q=bitcoin

Good article. Bravo to the author! You didn't discover anything new in your article, but you were able to organize all the information and put the accents correctly.

If I have enough money would be investing into this Bitcoin, but don't have at the moment. Iam looking to invest in Ethereum or Litecoin but they too dont have good future.
Do you really think Bitcoin will boom again in the market.

Really good article, fully agree with it. Good times are ahead of us.

Wow that's really great article to read about . In India people are very panic because of RBI (Reserve Bank of India) ban fiat Transcations with Cryptocurrency exchanges. In your article you explained almost every aspect of bitcoin and indicate the future value of bitcoin . I love to share your article in my community. People should be aware about that, this is really great time to be with bitcoin besides panic selling and this article explained very well why? Thanks for sharing this one..

Why I buy bitcoin 1. The cost of Bitcoin is now more stable than ever before 2. The world economy is unstable 3. The speed of creating new btc is halved 4 .. In the historical perspective, the btc graph looks very attractive

Interesting article it was a good read, thank you for making and sharing it!

I appreciate the feedback franky, let me comment on some of your points.


Good point about the miner profitability. Indeed I have seen that hash power is rising significantly even though the price has been on a downtrend, I would consider this a good sign.


I'd say this is very much a subjective matter. Objectively speaking 40% of the transactions in the network ARE in fact SegWit transactions. You can't dispute this. What inputs they may have and how this affects your subjective view of what is effective SegWit utility, is another matter. I personally think the metric I used is much more useful - many SegWit upgraded wallets still have funds in legacy addresses (unless they have deliberately consolidated everything to a SegWit address) and at this stage it is quite expected to see many legacy inputs. But those will be reduced as time goes on.


Rest assured I have researched lightning quite a bit, but had to keep it fairly simple in the article due to the intended audience (general).

- First of all, I clearly said in the article that LN's impact on congestion right now is negligible, however I do believe that the potential impact of LN is absolutely massive.

- LN is not only for Bitcoin, true, but arguably one of the only real reasons to even own any other coins would be if it became difficult to transfer bitcoins. If BTC is, as I strongly believe, the most reliable, stable, secure and most used cryptocurrency, it will be the one that people want to *own*. Owning, or hodling, is all that matters. Why would someone hodl something else? Well, I mentioned privacy problems in the article. Another one is if you can't move BTC quickly/cheaply and need other means to do it. LN helps with this. The fact that it can be used with other coins is not very relevant in my opinion, everything that enables BTC is a negative for all other coins as it reduces the reasons to hodl any other coins in the first place.

- With other points about LN you're going completely off the rails. LN does not change the ideology of Bitcoin one bit, and let me explain that. First I will debunk the whole notion that mainnet transactions are direct p2p transactions: THEY ARE NOT. You push a transaction to the network, yes, but you will likely need other nodes to route the transaction. To whom? The miners. Then the miners will record the transaction to the blockchain (hopefully). In a normal confirmed transaction use case you will need other nodes AND miners to be able to complete a transaction, which is very far from direct p2p. These parties do not have the means to steal your funds though, as only you hold the private key and the ability to sign the transactions in a valid way. LN is not really different, arguably it is simpler. You simply need other nodes and their channels to route the payment, but once again none of them have the ability to steal your funds as only you hold the key.


As LN usage grows, the settlement cost will not be a very significant factor eventually. The way I see it, most small payment hot wallets will have a channel up all the time, almost permanently (unless a need arises for some reason to close it). Currently as LN is mostly there for testing purposes, channels are short lived, but eventually they will be very long lived. Thus you'll be making a huge amount of LN transactions with the cost of 2 settlements and thus the cost of the settlement is divided to a large amount of tx, making it less relevant. Although I must remind that at times recently BTC has actually been cheaper than BCH, and a lot cheaper than ETH.


I do agree with this critique, I don't think the market share / market cap is a good indicator. It's just something people generally use a lot, and look at, and that's why I wanted to add my perspective on it.


This is not true at all. Most funds will need to actually buy BTC either from the exchanges or OTC to match whatever is happening at fund level. Our company is actually launching a fund of our own soon. Regardless of if the purchasing is happening at exchanges or OTC it will affect the price. Futures securities are a bit different though, and may not have a direct effect.


This is missing the point of Bitcoin, which is 1) fixed money supply and 2) censorship resistant ownership and payments. Neither of these two can be replicated by any central bank / government based currency, regular or blockchain based. Bitcoin will have value over them regardless.


In LN only the sender and the recipient knows exactly what is going on. The ones routing the transaction will know something, but not everything (as in, they know the amounts). Nodes not part of the routing of the specific transaction, or any outside observers, can't know anything about the specific LN transaction! So it has some quite significant privacy enhancements.


I'm sorry, but this is just plain stupid. The divisibility of the asset has nothing to do with the actual scarcity of the asset. Divisibility helps in using it and a good money must have sufficient divisibility. It is a fundamentally (very) good thing to come up with "microsatoshis", if they are required. As LN is about micropayments, it can indeed be useful to be able to send smaller units. This does not change the fact that there are max 21 million BTC. Simply makes it more usable for the whole world economy if we have even smaller units, to potentially become a universal currency.


The Mayer Multiple has been around for many years (Trace Mayer is an early adopter and has used this method for years). The number doesn't just suddenly change, as that makes no sense. I have always looked at 200DMA specifically. Obviously can't explain why it is specifically better than 250DMA but one needs to pick a certain number and then track it historically. In anycase looking at a longer term average price is quite useful, regardless of if the number is 200 or 300. 20 day average would make no sense in this context.

Your reason for buying bitcoin is very good and precise, because I also believe that bitcoin price every year will improve and we can get a very fast profit.

#1 agree, mayor multiple. but i would also add the miner multiple too.. the cost of creating new coins via mining is also at a low profit margin which indicats price is not at a bubble, but also at a close to the real underlying value. thus furthr strengthns the concept that the price is at a good low/buying oppertunity

#2 reliable yes. but that should be standard for blockchain if they are to follow consensus.. but i agree worthy of mentioning
but here is where certain things start to sound too utopian washed over details to garner optimism and adoption..
segwit utility is NOT at 40%
take a tx of inputs
in
1Legacyaddress
bc1qsegwitaddress
1Legacyaddress
1Legacyaddress

this tx is only 25% segwit yet on the stats YOU view shows as 100% segwit.
based on number of inputs on the mainnet that are signed(witnessd) by segwit protocol are FAR less that actually use segwit. .. once the real data is calculated rather than rounded up..
try not to over exaggurate (over promise under deliver)


#3 again try not to over exaggurate (over promise under deliver)

lightning is a separate network but its impact is negligable. plus LN is not a network solely to be used for bitcoin. thus advertising it as bitcoins solution is the same as advertising an exchanges internal 'send to member offchain' of any crypto.. your over selling its stats and over selling its benefits for bitcoin alone to dominate due to it. LN is not a feature solely for bitcoin. and should not be advertised as something that makes bitcoin better than other coins because LN will be used by many coins.
try not to over exaggurate (over promise under deliver)

.. also. lightning LOSES bitcoins ideology. research channels and routing a little more(multisig). realise the multiple parties ARE needed to authorise payments. and that unlike bitcoin mainnet which is a PUSH payment. LN is a handshake payment. yep evn the recipient has to be online AND sign a TX to agree to receive payment aswell as all users along the route have to sign a tx to agree to act as a route. so becareful how you overpromise and under deliver the features description

#4 agree with many points about bitcoins dominance. but parts of this long chapter of reasons are oversold.
you mention the scaling debate of 2017 was decentralised. and yet. consensus was actually bypassed. by doing a mandatory bilateral split using a 3 card hustle manauver
also again LN is not a scaling solution purely set up for bitcoin alone to keep dominance. LN will be a 'scaling' bypass SERVICE for MANY coins. so LN could actually be the knife in bitcoins back that maks people move over to other coins due to the headache of settling tx's being more costly/slower on btc compared to other blockchains.
and lastly try not to use the "market share" as that number actually has no real meaning. there are not hundreds of billions of dollars locked up with bitcoins name on it. its just a math multiple of the price of 1 coin multiplied by coins in circulation.. someone tomorrow could make a blockchain of 1 trillion coins, sell just 1 coin for $5 and bam. $5trillion markt cap, and take over the market share. so again dont ovrsell/over promise using stats that are flimsy and not accurate to real monetary value

#5 securities and ETF are not going to affect real bitcoin trades. they are just hoarders of coins that then separatly OFFMARKET sell SHARES of their company. thus thee dollars and valuation of the company increase without those funds actually even touching bitcoin exchanges.
try not to over exaggurate (over promise under deliver). you kinda explained it. but worded it a bit too utopian dream of hope about the ETF and underplayd how ETF can actually take funds out of direct bitcoin exchanges and instad where that fiat could justend up into company shares, thus negatively affecting the bitcoin market

#6
i agree fiat is in trouble. but all the stuff like LN and blockchains can be used by govrnment to make their own crypto. i envision. governments shift over to a crypto of their making. and then hyper inflate the old traditional paper fiat so that their trillions of papr debt become the value of a loaf of bread so that they become debt free for a loaf of bread(trillions of zimbabwe dollar only buys 1 loaf of bread). but then bitcoin will (imagining this months value as 6000loaves of bread) will end up being measured as 6000 loaves of bread of a governments crypto.
so dont get too excited about hyper inflation making btc look like one coin is a trillion paper dollars.. where the real value is only still a few thousand loaves of bread goods purchase value

#7 you mentioned about rgulations and securities entring the blockchain ecosphere a few points back. which is actually making bitcoin less like privacy money. this also includes LN. which REQUIRES multiparty authorisation. so again try not to over exaggurate (over promise under deliver)

#8 be cautious when talking about monetary supply. economists are learning quickly that although bitcoin WAS limited to 2.1quadrillion sharable units, developers are actually envisioning moving to there being 2.1 Quintillion sharable units. they have already implemented it within LN and propose to add it to bitcoins mainnet too(sats vs millisats). thus more people will get to own parts of a bitcoin without struggle/limitation.
EG imagine a fight for gold if there were only 175,000 sharable units of gold in the world... then imagine suddenly markets split that and now 14mil sharable units of gold. and then split that again to 6.17billion sharable units of gold. now all a sudden people realise everyone could have a piece of gold instead of just 175,000 rich guys.. gold loses its elitist 'i own gold'' appeal mindset. and people have it in their house and not care/realise they have it. which is the current mindset.

#9 you do have the answer. you made it clear in #1. the $19500 was not a ground level price that everyone stood at and everyone had time to take advantage of and get used to. no one should stand at a peak of a mountain that only exists for minutes and call it home. and then scream collapse minutes later. instead they should stand at the real ground level and see a tsunami incoming. where shorters would scream devistation and long's get a nice "yee haa lets surf this massive wave' of excitement.. and then minutes later when the waterline corrects go back to living at ground level waiting for the next wave or climate change increase of natural water levels
.. but i would say dont oversell/over promise price predictions.. the events of 2013 are not the same events occuring this year. try to avoid being a trend anal to shout out a price. unless you have a technical analist reason.. yep trends and technical are different. take october 2013.. that rise was due to ASICs and the cost of mining increase, which caused the price increase... (which is why in point #1 i mentioned that mining cost sit beside the mayor multiple when considering what is 'value'/low price)
.. again your over embelishing features that are not really causing big enough impact to bitcoin and are ultimatly not features solely to be usd by bitcoin to keep bitcoin as a tool that offers something no othr crypto will offer.

#10
you have mentioned the mayoral multiple a few times. but anyon can select a number and make it look good. for instance if we took a 200 day average.. like you did.. but then if you take a 250 day average.. you will see a major difference. so this week you might b screaming 20day avrage.. but then when a 200 day average does not fit a positive narrative. you may scream a new number of 150 or 250 day that does fit a narative. so be careful of just doing trend anals.. instead of explaining technical analysis

......
in summary i would give you a 6 out of 10 as is,
with a flimsy 9 of 10 if you were less utopian overselling under promising.

i too have been involved havily in bitcoin since 2012 and no im not a BCH fanboy. but i am not afraid to admit btc's flaws and issues so that people can be truly informed and then reap the benefits. rather than sold a over promise and get disapointed and end up thinking they got fooled into a gimmick, even when btc is not a gimmick.

EG
advertise LN as a side service for a niche of users who desire to spend frequently.... but not a sole solution purely for bitcoin that all bitcoin users will need/want/benefit from using. (even LN devs have warnings up, and that LN is not a usecase for everyone all the time).. and its not a feature only bitcoiners get to use

Well, at least for me, a good idea for buying bitcoin would be quite likely (in my opinion) that this closer to the end of this year will cost quite a lot of money. Well, I would very much like to believe in this, since the last rise of the market was a long time ago ... and I want to believe that although by the end of the year it will be possible to earn some money

Hi Henry! nice article!

Bitcoin surely is becoming mainstream and not only tech giant companies are becoming interested to it but different countries as well.

Nice article. I agree that bitcoin will scale, though it will take time to build the Lightning Network. Plenty of institutional money awaits bitcoin as well. Once a bitcoin ETF is allowed, the demand for bitcoin will be overwhelming, and it will be another stamp of legitimacy.

In 2016 I wrote an article laying out 10 good reasons to buy bitcoin then. Now I have published an updated version.

https://medium.com/@Technomage/10-good-reasons-to-buy-bitcoin-now-2018-edition-8e990a50a9e1