Topic: Are "Ultra Rare" altcoins more valuable than the rest? - page 2. (Read 1642 times)
The rarity of the coin is pointless, plenty of high marketcap coins have huge supply. At the end of the day if the coin is useless it doesn't matter if there is only 1 in existence it will die.
On coinmarketcap, the next highest valued coins after Bitcoin are the Ultra Rare Altcoins such as DASH (with a cap of fewer than 7 million coins) among others.
With Dash you also have to take the combined collateral of its masternode network into account.
Dash has 4568 masternodes currently active, each masternode needs to have 1000 Dash reserved and verifyable to the Dash network
(this collateral is kept safe in cold wallets and is in full control by its masternode owners)
Dash circulating supply according coinmarketcap --> 7,433,997 Dash
Masternode Combined Collateral --> 4,568,000 Dash
Dash netto circulating supply --> 2,865,997 Dash
interesting analisys, thank you. sure is a smart take on the crypto market to find potential coin to invest in, problem is liquidability of assets..
Posted From bitcointalk.org Android App
Posted From bitcointalk.org Android App
Absolutely no, this is pure mistake. The value of a coin is determined by market cap, if the supply is low, it may make the price high compared to other coin but ''the supply is low''
+1
The less coins available the less secure a proof of stake coins is.
Inaccurate. The fewer unspent outputs there are, the fewer chances per second of staking there will be.Coins are easily divisible.
Divisible matters little ,as the fiat equivalent continues to rise as the price per coin rises.
The security is a formula, ignore it at your peril
hashProofOfStake <= [Coin-age] x [Target]
[Coin-age] = [amount of coins] x [days in stake]
Sorry # of coins matter a great deal.
I always believed the quick bucks I was promised to have if I looked into cryptocurrencies were in ultra rare altcoins. The thing with these ulta rare altcoins it's that you have to be careful and be informed about the altcoin itself. Things like who created it, why, and what's the possible market for that altcoin. On the other hand, I think what gives these altcoins their enormous percentages is merely speculation.
I think OP's use of Ultra Rare should be replaced with Rare.
Hi KikloV,
Coins are easily divisible.
If non-devs copyclone a coin and fail to consider the affect a relatively high transaction fee would have on their economy, it is a design problem.
You're describing the symptom of the problem rather than the root cause of the problem.
The choice for 8 significant digits where 0.00000001 is the "smallest" has no impact on a future design revision to create new units of subdivision down to 0.000000000000000000000000000000001
Remember, by arithmetic and logic, you may divide anything in two an infinite number of times.
Best Regards,
-Chicago
The less coins available the less secure a proof of stake coins is.
Inaccurate. The fewer unspent outputs there are, the fewer chances per second of staking there will be.Coins are easily divisible.
Proof of Stake requires a large number of coins to secure the network.
Also inaccurate. See the reasoning above for the difference between unspent outputs and coins. Staking 1 million 0.00000010 Foocoin unspent outputs yields the same rewards as staking 1.0 Foocoin, the difference between them being CPU usage and variance, or luck.Also by having only a few coins , this decreases the utility usage of a coin and causes the transaction fees to be higher verses fiat.
Inaccurate. The transaction fee is a choice built into the code and may be set at the appropriate threshold of tolerance given the coin's economy.If non-devs copyclone a coin and fail to consider the affect a relatively high transaction fee would have on their economy, it is a design problem.
You're describing the symptom of the problem rather than the root cause of the problem.
So why are all of the new ICO limited amounts, so they can manipulate the price and gain more suckers.
Even BTC numbers are too low to be a world currency, which is why their high transaction fees have caused many to move to LTC.
Coins are easily divisible. There is no functional reason why they must be bought and sold in whole units.Even BTC numbers are too low to be a world currency, which is why their high transaction fees have caused many to move to LTC.
The choice for 8 significant digits where 0.00000001 is the "smallest" has no impact on a future design revision to create new units of subdivision down to 0.000000000000000000000000000000001
Remember, by arithmetic and logic, you may divide anything in two an infinite number of times.
Best Regards,
-Chicago
Are "Ultra Rare" altcoins really more valuable than other altcoins?
Ultra Rare coins are easier to Pump and manipulate than coins with larger numbers.
Problems with Ultra Rare coins,
The less coins available the less secure a proof of stake coins is.
Proof of Stake requires a large number of coins to secure the network.
Also by having only a few coins , this decreases the utility usage of a coin and causes the transaction fees to be higher verses fiat.
So why are all of the new ICO limited amounts, so they can manipulate the price and gain more suckers.
Even BTC numbers are too low to be a world currency, which is why their high transaction fees have caused many to move to LTC.
no ultra rare altcoins are not valuable more than the rest . anyone who thinks that is not bright person sorry to say this harsh toned. but people think many bad idea. unfortunate
"Not a bright person"
This coming from someone who just made a statement without any facts to back it up.
You are the one who is "not bright".
ok ! hold "FootyCash". good luck with the decision !! ultra rare coin good !!
this is very rare and many people share a same view. so it will be ultra pricy!!!
no ultra rare altcoins are not valuable more than the rest . anyone who thinks that is not bright person sorry to say this harsh toned. but people think many bad idea. unfortunate
"Not a bright person"
This coming from someone who just made a statement without any facts to back it up.
You are the one who is "not bright".
no ultra rare altcoins are not valuable more than the rest . anyone who thinks that is not bright person sorry to say this harsh toned. but people think many bad idea. unfortunate
The price of an individual coin is irrelevant. You need to look at total coins vs total supply, i.e. marketcap.
Coin A has price $1 and total supply 1,000,000 coins
Coin B has price $1,000 and total supply 1,000 coins
A and B both have the same value. Cap is $1,000,000 for both. If you spend $1,000 then you can get 1000 of coin A or 1 of coin B. In both cases you will have 0.1% of a $10m supply.
And if you're planning to hold long-term, you also need to factor in total potential supply.
Coin A has price $1 and total supply 1,000,000 coins
Coin B has price $1,000 and total supply 1,000 coins
A and B both have the same value. Cap is $1,000,000 for both. If you spend $1,000 then you can get 1000 of coin A or 1 of coin B. In both cases you will have 0.1% of a $10m supply.
And if you're planning to hold long-term, you also need to factor in total potential supply.
Thank you. You said it perfectly!!!
Some people are ignorant and think just because they have "a lot of coins" that they have something of value.
That's why I am holding FootyCash!
Hello,
When I was new to the crypto scene and in turn began evaluating alternate chains, those which had a conservative distribution and a very limited money supply became the most attractive bets.
Maybe this supply and demand projection is intuitive for other new traders too.
If that's the case, then expect at least some shitcoin bagholders to do very well as long as there is a catalyst to adapt and build upon their coin daemons with continuous improvement.
The biggest winners will be those blockchains relaunching as BTC reaches a bottom, promoting new traders to buy in with cheap BTC and then maximizing their returns on the upswing of both the altcoin and BTC.
Best Regards,
-Chicago
When I was new to the crypto scene and in turn began evaluating alternate chains, those which had a conservative distribution and a very limited money supply became the most attractive bets.
Maybe this supply and demand projection is intuitive for other new traders too.
If that's the case, then expect at least some shitcoin bagholders to do very well as long as there is a catalyst to adapt and build upon their coin daemons with continuous improvement.
The biggest winners will be those blockchains relaunching as BTC reaches a bottom, promoting new traders to buy in with cheap BTC and then maximizing their returns on the upswing of both the altcoin and BTC.
Best Regards,
-Chicago
I still don't understand why some people don't get it, the value of a token depends on the total market cap, all this coins mention above are very low in market cap and can easily crash and burn. For me it is all about the marketcap of a coin not the number of coins in circulation that can be easily manipulated with few thousand of USD buy order
I completely agree with this. OP's use of Torcoin as an example was a bit misleading. I was watching that coin from its release. The price jumping to $5 out the gate was completely due to pumping of the coin by the "creator" and the "developer"... and nothing more. Many people got badly burned by that developer because after that initial pump the coin's "value" dropped drastically and the dev was fired and immediately dumped his stash of the premine. Now the coin is all but abandoned by its "creator". Even at its short-lived height of popularity its market cap was only in the $Tens of thousands. Very low market cap with very low movement on the few exchanges where it was traded. It was a pipe dream that burned many people.
So no, OP, I do not agree that "ultra rare" automatically means more valuable than the rest.
You need someone to be willing to buy an ultra-rare coin.
So, they might be more a liability than anything else. Seriously.
So, they might be more a liability than anything else. Seriously.
Absolutely no, this is pure mistake. The value of a coin is determined by market cap, if the supply is low, it may make the price high compared to other coin but ''the supply is low''
The price of an individual coin is irrelevant. You need to look at total coins vs total supply, i.e. marketcap.
Coin A has price $1 and total supply 1,000,000 coins
Coin B has price $1,000 and total supply 1,000 coins
A and B both have the same value. Cap is $1,000,000 for both. If you spend $1,000 then you can get 1000 of coin A or 1 of coin B. In both cases you will have 0.1% of a $10m supply.
And if you're planning to hold long-term, you also need to factor in total potential supply.
Coin A has price $1 and total supply 1,000,000 coins
Coin B has price $1,000 and total supply 1,000 coins
A and B both have the same value. Cap is $1,000,000 for both. If you spend $1,000 then you can get 1000 of coin A or 1 of coin B. In both cases you will have 0.1% of a $10m supply.
And if you're planning to hold long-term, you also need to factor in total potential supply.
"Coins in circulation" barely plays a part in the pricing of a particular coin. This comes back of the thing that altcoins with lesser coins in circulation can easily be manipulated at exchanges by just a few people which could lead to a complete dump.
I still don't understand why some people don't get it, the value of a token depends on the total market cap, all this coins mention above are very low in market cap and can easily crash and burn. For me it is all about the marketcap of a coin not the number of coins in circulation that can be easily manipulated with few thousand of USD buy order
Jump to: