Topic: Bitcoin could hit $10M in 9 years but more sidechains needed: Blockstream CEO - page 2. (Read 372 times)

$10  million dollars in 9 years to come isn't gonna be possible just with a normal environment for Bitcoin, definitely something will trigger such dramatic price increase, Like world wide adoption, Regulation, a World war 3 event that will cause a lot of devastation around world ,where people will be looking for save heaven asset like Bitcoin, because a lot of countries currency and economy is going to crumble.

But in a normal circumstances, I do believe that Bitcoin price will hit $1 million dollars in 9 years to come, If we have those money sitting right there in Bonds, 1-2 % of money sitting in Real Estate and Gold , money used in buying expensive watches ,jewelries and Cars etc begins to melt into Bitcoin, the price will likely be above 1$ Million in 9 years time.

No matter what the know-it-alls say, the truth is that nobody knows where the price will be in 2032.


This

Have we already forgotten? Do we remember the price predictions made in 2021? They all failed. Price performance has in the end been much lower than predicted by apparently very sophisticated analyses.


The point is that impressive growth usually occurs in the first few years of the life of a business project or whatever it is that has a market valuation. Going from being worth USD 1 to USD 2 is much easier than going from being worth USD 10,000 to USD 20,000. It is even much more difficult if we are talking about millions.


 
 

That's a very optimistic prediction. $10 million per Bitcoin in just 9 years is too high I have difficulty agreeing with it. I think this is the highest price prediction of Bitcoin that I have encountered. Even $1 million per Bitcoin in a decade is a far-fetched idea to me. I'm not saying it won't happen but it is hard to imagine. But you are right that when Bitcoin was in its infancy days, nobody would also have imagined that it could grow as high as $69,000.

It could be changed if we don't compare it with fiat or dollar USD.

I don't know why bitcoin has a price?. the white paper said, bitcoin is currency which mean don't have price and stand alone.

I just dream in the future people might compare bitcoin with goods. example: tesla car price BTC0.01, iPhone BTC0.01, etc.
today all people think bitcoins is goods, not currency that can compare with USD or another currency. We have homework for our descendants to change their mind if bitcoin is a currency, not goods in that always have a price.

1 bitcoin = 1 bitcoin, 1 sat = 1 sat, not $10 million or $23K.

current side-subnetworks are not the best,, by a long shot, in many many ways not. thats why not many are using them after 7 years of the waiting for promises to flourish

im not saying saying side/subnetworks as a concept are useless.. but the current options dont meet their promises nor have the security policies needed for people to want to trust them

new side and subnetworks will come about offering different niche use cases in the future. but thinking we should wait around for a few years on current side/sub networks dreams and hopes wont help

for now bitcoin devs should work on hardening bitcoin consensus (network security)
because things are going backwards (softrules causing less tx count and more expense)

and then expand utility for funky features for other networks

---

one major flaw of both side and sub networks both beginning with L
by processing payments via "federated managers" or "routers"
those entities are classing themselves as fiduciaries(money service businesses)
offering the management and handling of payments for a third party for a fee

(google:"expensive licence and regulatory compliance please because im a fiduciary")
and enjoy the hole you dug yourselves into legally
..
so yea sidechains and subnetworks that are not silly schemes like that will come about in the future to escape things like regulations.. but just not those ones

I'll also agree that $10M by 2031 is very romantic.

Not many, but more than a few years ago. People who gamble with it, end up selling it to those who don't.

Sidechains can help in sustainability on the long-term, and probably in scaling as well. I don't argue we need them, but if there might be a need.

Because a person has to build his story around something, and what is better than some new solutions that would enable billions of new users to use Bitcoin every day, as if this is impossible today with the technology we already have. It's not that I'm against development, but I don't think it's necessary to invent something new in that direction in order to increase the demand for Bitcoin - because let's be honest, what percentage of people today bought it because it's something new, innovative and technologically advanced?

---

When I just remember how much effort was needed to eliminate those who were paid to shill their link, and we are still bombarded with low-value news from that source. Kudos to the OP though for bypassing the direct link.

We already have L1 and LN networks. Why we need anymore?

That infrastructure improves is a given, but all those improvements won't mean much if we don't also maintain trajectory for utility (and that's to me without custodial services) as well as fundamentals securing the network (hashrate for sure, but probably also node numbers and diversity). Of course it has to be more complex than that but I tend to see these as more important.

200 Trillion market cap, i would say that's impossible, Look at the market cap, is close to 1T. and has been really hard for It to get until that point, and the max has been 2T. So, 200 trillion is just impossible from my point of view, even if big companies like Mac or Tesla decide to sell all their shares and invest in BTC the goal will not be even close. I just can't imagine where all that money will come from.

I agree. Bitcoin itself is enough to revolutionize money. Sidechains are just increasing its efficiency at best, though with good enough scaling upgrades then what's the point other than more niche/private purposes for them? Sidechains aside, the fall of a global reserve currency and a race to take its place (presumably lead by Bitcoin) can lead to this kind of meteoric rise quite easily under the right circumstances. The only variable that might put a speed bump in the process, is war. I don't think people factor this (likely) variable into the equation while making predictions like this.

If we are talking about the exponential growth of Bitcoin, it become smaller and smaller as the price of Bitcoin goes up.  Just look at the discrepancy of growth of each all time high, meaning every 4 year Bitcoin ATH % growth gain will be smaller than the previous ATH growth gain.  So following the % of growth gain every 4 years of ATH, it will fall short in calculation.  I don't even think that Bitcoin will reach $3m in the next two halving.  and the 9th year will be on 2032 which is one year short for the next record breaking ATH event where new ATH is always happen after 1 year (2033) of Bitcoin halving.

No doubt that bitcoin can grow exponentially and but giving timeframes is already off the radar. We'll just see it then if it happens.

I cannot imagine how much the inflation rate would that be by that time when bitcoin is up to that price. We can't remove that fact that as the price increases for bitcoin, there goes the other factors that will certainly have its own move just as how it moves as well.

That's what they do. Every single tweet by a known individual in the community or by those ceo's that are giving their insights and opinions, they're putting it as a content and making it interesting as a headline.

One of the things we need to get familiar with about a decentralized network like bitcoin is the fact that it is very volatile, the price can change anytime, if we can look into the history of time from its inception since 2009, bitcoin has been very volatile rising and falling and despite that the value has always been found increasing along side, all hope is not dashed out about believing if in few years time bitcoin can arrived at this milestone, remember when we are talking about bullrun, if takes speed within a short time frame to rise sporadically in price, who knows maybe after this $68k ATH we are heading towards $200k or beyond and so continuously with every four years after or before halving, we can continue to having something big in pushing the price to ATH till we are close to the said rate as thought by OP.

By these measures, all Satoshi has to do is to sit and wait 9 more years to own 10 trillion $ worth of bitcoin? Don't mind the inflation rate globally, This means that I could have 1M $ by then if I hold 0.1BTC. What am I waiting for?🤑

Bitcoin market can get higher at any point, because no specific time that's been enshrined for speed increment of Bitcoin the way i see things. The possibilities is there for Bitcoin to reach up to one million dollars in nine years intervals. Everything about the market is dependable on the market. So i believe that Bitcoin have to do gravities of demands in annual, and when you cross check Bitcoin market you will notice that the market always get increase every year. So it's believable that the market can get to $1m before the stipulated year if possible.

Luckily, a bitcoin reached below 1$, I'm sure all the buyers who held bitcoin for a long time are now rich.

    Now, I can't understand clearly how you calculated that it will be 10M$ each bitcoin after 9 years. Maybe it's too good to be true, of course. No one knows how much bitcoin will be worth in the future even though it is volatile.

Bitcoin can do this on its own.  No side chains necessary for it.  Please keep in mind that money is changing.  And its value too, pretty quickly in fact.  And then there are Coins that are being lost forever.

Is any body even really using the existing Bitcoin side chains?  I experimented with them a while ago and they seem less interesting even than Shit coins do.  Bitcoin should in my view pretty much only be mostly used as it is.  The default coin.  By implementing side chains, we risk inserting vector attacks on Bitcoin too.  Not necessarily an attack on the Bitcoin infrastructure, but on its trust and market.  Because if we get side chains that end up being brutally attacked like we have recently seen LUNA, then Bitcoin will directly be affected by it.

So why bother even trying to do this just for a price increase when we already know Bitcoin can do it all by itself.  I mean it had the most incredible price increase of all Coins that ever existed.  It will continue to do wonders in the future as well.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

Even more, the point of that speculation pretty much was that Bitcoin needs more side chains (which may be counted also as a biased conclusion), not the yet-another-very-high-price-in-the-future...

the reason why they say the price is possible is:
because my math of just 50% hashrate rises per year are reasonable amounts not extremes
so the possibility is maybe with other factors(10% efficiency per year)
~$800k-$5m without extremes

the reason said about sidechains by blockstream(obvious common sense):
a. blockstream ceo does not make money from people moving coin p2p on the bitcoin network
b. he owns liquid and also has major stake in (core-lightning) which he can if his employees and his businesses are the federations and payment routers/hubs respectively he can make profits on fees their subnetworks
c thats the whole game going on.. its why blockstream employees, sponsored influncers, fans, affiliates,  were pushing to get everyone over to subnetworks while hyping up things that restrict and expense BITCOIN utility)

b. also if 1btc was $10m then 10sat would be $1
(1btc=100000000sat
 1btc=$10000000
10sat=$1)
meaning onchain fees of lean tx 250bytes(1sat per byte) 250sats =$25 which no one wants to pay as a minimum fee(1sat/byte) to make payments

so he thinks people will want/need to use sidechains (locked to only function and service bitcoin as a sole bitcoin feature network(no cross boarder)
would be the only way to offer people "cheap fees"