Your theory is suddenly looking like a simplistic tautology and doesn't help us predict the value of DASH in fiat in the future.
There's nothing "sudden" about it. If you care to look back a post I used the word "net effect". If you want to interpret that as "tautology" then fair enough. I just call it "net effect of diversification" which is one amongst many perspectives with which to assess the future of the market.
The significance of that analysis is that 18 months ago there was some genuine ambiguity surrounding the debate over bitcoin's susceptibility to being superseded by some technically superior alt coin.
Now that debate has a whole new set of priorities because hundreds of technologically viable candidates have since come and gone without significantly challenging it commercially. So the argument logically moves to the long term viability of an altcoin economy since the short term one was significantly based around prospects of a "decapitation".
Dash is currently sitting at
0.3% of Bitcoin's marketcap. That is a tiny proportion. So if there's a future for alts at all, it's reasonable to assume that it can improve on this given that it's practically the only functionally diversified cryptocurrency network going. One who's approach has been endorsed through successfully achieving all kinds of early design objectives and giving rise to many new ones. Capturing a mere 3%, for example, of Bitcoin's cap would be a 10-fold increase from here, even if you discount the prospect of chunking out genuine mainstream markets due to Dash's technological compatibility with bitcoin.
So the
logical questions that present themselves in that respect would seem to be:
(a) why would anyone invest in alt currencies anyway ?
(b) what is the net effect on alt currencies of a massive increase in Bitcoin's marketcap+a small amount of diversifictaion ?
The answer to (a) is of course speculative, but two points at least don't seem unreasonable to me: 1. hedging 2. market sectors where bitcoin is uncompetitive. Make no mistake, if Bitcoin really goes mainstream in a few years, there will be huge areas it simply won't touch. Blockchain transactions will be expensive because all the commercial and retail traffic will be carried by payment channels. Likeways with anonymous transactions, which will probably be viable if you're transferring 5 figure sums but not small amounts.
Dash is one of the most mutually exclusive technologies there is relative to bitcoin (while still remaining technologically compatible) and whatever criticisms are made about its approach it remains one of the few (only ?) genuine compatible alternatives that works and is consolidating:
• it has native mixing while remaining a fully transparent public blockchain: Bitcoin will never support that
• it has native accelarated blockchain confirmations: Bitcoin is unlikely ever to have that
• it has a native, non-blocksize based true scaleability proposal on the cards: Bitcion will definitely not have that
• it has a self-sustaining decentralized business model for sustaining both inherent network services and 3rd party development services on a long term basis: Bitcoin will probably have the latter eventually due to its commercial ubiquity, but they will be proprietary to a large extent
Finally, the answer to (b) is academic and described in my previous posts - i.e. "tautology" in your terminology
P.S. One last thingDon't forget that the developer of this coin originally
'bet' on bitcoin being "the one". He didn't take the minority tech route. So what's happening now in the markets and in the commercial landscape is a vindication of that policy, not a threat to it. IMO, Dash could not be better placed right now to take advantage of both it's own unique technological potential and bitcoin's rising dominance in the commercial realm.