It was an interesting read. I hate to say it, because I would LOVE to believe in his final valuation tally, but I can't really get on board with it at this point for a couple of reasons:
1) I believe his calculations on velocity are incorrect. He seems to be counting too many transactions in his measure of velocity. I can't get at it for certain, but it looks as though he would count mining activity as a transaction. It is not the case that the printing of fiat counts as a transaction of that dollar value, so his calculation of velocity is not an apples-to-apples comparison.
2) The author took some fairly wild leaps in assuming that Bitcoin would account for 10% of the global remittance market, 10% of all internet transactions, and even 10% of black market transactions. That is a LOT of adoption almost all completely betting on the come.
3) Not sure how the M2 piece is somehow additive to other elements of price/value. In my humble opinion, and I recognize that I could be completely wrong, analyzing as M2 is a separate analysis, not additive to other elements. In my view, M2 is actually probably the best tool for estimating price/value for Bitcoin, but I don't think you can do that analysis and then add it to the other elements of value. I'd also add that he flat out plucked that $27.2 billion out of thin air. There really isn't any rational analysis for why one might use the M2 of a medium country as opposed to a small one or even as opposed to the US M2.
So...good read, lots of thought-provoking elements, but I think he's shooting pretty high with the analysis.
