I do not find Bitcoin to be marketed like HYIP or like a ponzi.
Having actually worked in marketing, I can tell you that most things are marketed through word-of-mouth and community. Getting the community to do all the marketing is one of the basic goals of any marketing strategy.
And honestly, it does seem a bit ponzi-ish when you look at it at the wrong angle.
But Bitcoin is not some worthless meme-coin with a useless blockchain. It has use-cases. And When Bitcoin gets "marketed" which aspect gets marketed?
With a HYIP or ponzi, the point is to get everyone excited about it for no reason. Basically a meme.
With Bitcoin, we keep talking about how decentralized it is, how impregnable and incorruptible. And those are only a few examples... We can actually understand why Bitcoin is so valuable. And those are the aspects we 'market'.
Topic: Bitcoin is not a Ponzi. But sometimes it is marketed like one. - page 2. (Read 1118 times)
November 30, 2024, 11:54:52 AM
November 29, 2024, 07:30:49 PM
If you trust wrong people then yeah they will promote it that way, but that means you are just hanging out with the wrong crowd and getting that kind of vibe from them, just don't do that and you will be fine in the end.
That you can do that personally is of course completely okay. The problem is instead that the Bitcoin community cannot trust that everybody "does their homework" and researches Bitcoin's real character and its risks by their own initiative.I think the community should be a bit bolder in educating newbies, that's my point. Individuals entering the Bitcoin world may have little or no understanding about Bitcoin.
If the community doesn't do that, then we could hit a ceiling for price and adoption earlier than some people may think. I think "crypto-affine" people have all already invested. If Bitcoin wants to continue to grow, then it must reach out to other groups. And if we only rely on institutional investors, then we're basically trusting in a ponzi ("we buy because greater fools will buy too").
If Bitcoin doesn't reach a state where it circulates among a large amount of people and businesses, its long term bull market will come to an end eventually. And while Bitcoin won't die, the first bearish phase after this top, which will last for more than a year, could become really hard for many hodlers.
November 29, 2024, 06:29:36 PM
Most people know that Bitcoin exists, even not very technical minded ones. The question about Bitcoin's image is thus much more important now, if people want Bitcoin to continue growing.
Bitcoin can of course get into another bubble even with its current image. Perhaps also two bubbles, above all if Central Banks get involved. But the more negative the image about Bitcoin, the earlier this bubble will burst, and the less likely an "established Bitcoin" or even a "Bitcoin standard" will be. Because eventually the growth will stop, and then it will depend if the price can sustain itself (due to real usage in the general population) or if we then have a lot of bagholder whales (including governments).
Bitcoin is resilient, it thus would probably even recover from a crash following such a situation but it wouldn't be nice for many investors.
A few influencers marketing BTC as a ponzi will also not do much harm, but the more, the worse.
This is true, we are already in a world where everyone knows about bitcoin, and even nearly a billion people got in, some got out but the total of people who got in at least once. So, we could safely say that it is going to be quite amusing to assume bitcoin is a ponzi, not that it is not doing that kind of marketing by some people, but the reality is, what kind of ponzi grows this much, that's quite unlikely and I do not think that will stop anytime soon neither.Bitcoin can of course get into another bubble even with its current image. Perhaps also two bubbles, above all if Central Banks get involved. But the more negative the image about Bitcoin, the earlier this bubble will burst, and the less likely an "established Bitcoin" or even a "Bitcoin standard" will be. Because eventually the growth will stop, and then it will depend if the price can sustain itself (due to real usage in the general population) or if we then have a lot of bagholder whales (including governments).
Bitcoin is resilient, it thus would probably even recover from a crash following such a situation but it wouldn't be nice for many investors.
A few influencers marketing BTC as a ponzi will also not do much harm, but the more, the worse.
We should consider how to grow further with crypto and forget about all the marketing stuff. Influencers will do whatever they can to get the attention of the people, including sometimes sound like a ponzi, but that is their stuff and I do not think that will change anytime soon.
November 29, 2024, 03:54:53 PM
However, I am worried about some influencers who do market Bitcoin like if it was some kind of HYIP scheme, perhaps not directly a Ponzi (because there is still no central entity benefitting), but a bubblish asset with no real value which happens to go up in price because people/entities/businesses are buying it.
Their story is approximately this one: Buy Bitcoin now! It can only go up because its supply is limited and others are buying it too. Companies and even nation states will enter the market, and you soon will be rich. Don't be late!
In short, they focus only on the potential price increase, not on the intrinsic value. Okay, maybe something like "censorship resistance" is nerdish and perhaps even unpopular (because some still believe the "Bitcoin is for criminals" lie).
But the problem is that with this narrative predominating, nobody knows why Bitcoin's price should go up, i.e. why people should be buying it. If this "why" can only be answered by "because it goes up", this benefits the critics who (pretend to [1]) argument that Bitcoin is a Ponzi or that it has no intrinsic value.
What do you think? Is this narrative problematic? Or do we need it to drive more people into Bitcoin? Discuss!
[1] I often distrust the critics who sustain the Ponzi theory. Their real problem may be instead that they, in reality, don't like the censorship resistance aspect and support tight government control over money.
Majority of people are here for the money and majority of them invest because they have heard from friend or relative or from media that Bitcoin was worth a few cents in the beginning, a few hundred dollars in 2016, a few thousands in 2020 and up to 100K today. For average person this translates as that there exists a coin that grows and gives back good profit. In order to not miss the profit and get the benefit, people start investing in Bitcoin.Their story is approximately this one: Buy Bitcoin now! It can only go up because its supply is limited and others are buying it too. Companies and even nation states will enter the market, and you soon will be rich. Don't be late!
In short, they focus only on the potential price increase, not on the intrinsic value. Okay, maybe something like "censorship resistance" is nerdish and perhaps even unpopular (because some still believe the "Bitcoin is for criminals" lie).
But the problem is that with this narrative predominating, nobody knows why Bitcoin's price should go up, i.e. why people should be buying it. If this "why" can only be answered by "because it goes up", this benefits the critics who (pretend to [1]) argument that Bitcoin is a Ponzi or that it has no intrinsic value.
What do you think? Is this narrative problematic? Or do we need it to drive more people into Bitcoin? Discuss!
[1] I often distrust the critics who sustain the Ponzi theory. Their real problem may be instead that they, in reality, don't like the censorship resistance aspect and support tight government control over money.
I believe that 90% of Bitcoin users have no idea about what Bitcoin really is, what is blockchain and what are P2P payments. They don't know why Bitcoin's price goes up, they don't know that it's the decentralization, blockchain, peer-to-peer and many more that gives Bitcoin a real value and I agree with you, this narrative is problematic. I always try to enlighten people about Bitcoin but sadly people are easily influenced by wrong information and most of them are very inattentive.
November 29, 2024, 10:52:24 AM
If you trust wrong people then yeah they will promote it that way, but that means you are just hanging out with the wrong crowd and getting that kind of vibe from them, just don't do that and you will be fine in the end.
I don't really end up with those kind of people, I have smarter people around me, like the old saying goes "if you are the smartest person in a room, you are in the wrong room", so I always try to find people who are smarter than me and they always talk about the risk. That's why banks and investment places have risk analysts all over the place, because analysing the risk is the most important part and I am sure that we are going to do fine in the end, and reach to a better point without a doubt.
I don't really end up with those kind of people, I have smarter people around me, like the old saying goes "if you are the smartest person in a room, you are in the wrong room", so I always try to find people who are smarter than me and they always talk about the risk. That's why banks and investment places have risk analysts all over the place, because analysing the risk is the most important part and I am sure that we are going to do fine in the end, and reach to a better point without a doubt.
November 27, 2024, 12:49:41 PM
Well, it's not a doomsday argument to say that there's something wrong with fiat. Neither is it a doomsday scenario to describe fiat as perpetually losing value.
Of course inflation exists and fiat indeed tends to lose value slowly (this is also politically intended, due to the problems associated with deflation by the classical economics schools -- maybe wrongly), but the fiat system provides a lot of means to preserve your value. In most years if you hold government bonds for example, then you will be able to counter inflation successfully. Not always (2022/23 was a prime example) but mostly. The "Doomsdayers" instead predict hyperinflation or constant high inflation since ... ancient times? Well at least since the 90s, and probably since the end of the Bretton Woods system.But in the rest of the post it seems you got what I meant with the "Doomsdayers", so I wrote that only to clarify
A sort of doomsday scenario? 
It's a difference if you (mentally) prepare for a worst case scenario with a probability of let's say 5% in 30-40 years, or if you sell entire books predicting the end of the world in at most 5 years 
What's good with Bitcoin, one which assures me 100%, is that the narrative doesn't matter, so far at least. Whether it's falsely associated-- and it was-- with drugs, pedophiles, gamblers, black market, clueless geeks, traditional financial giants, politicians, political parties, ideologies, and so on and so forth, at the end of the day, everybody can verify themselves that the technology is indeed decentralized, neutral, censorship-resistant, immaculate.
Regarding technology you're correct, but I disagree a bit that the narrative doesn't matter at all. A "popular and universally accepted Bitcoin" is probably a much better scenario as a "niche Bitcoin with support of a few Central Banks", even if both could lead to the same Bitcoin price. Above all, the "popular Bitcoin" scenario would be more sustainable, while the "Bitcoin for a few" or "Bitcoin for special people" (like another forum member has called it earlier in this thread), inherently, can lead to overly restrictive regulations (justified with "the majority population doesn't like Bitcoin") which counter Bitcoin's advantages and makes it more difficult to benefit from them.The widespread KYC obligations for exchanges, for example, a product of the "Bitcoin is for criminals" narrative, make it more difficult for opposition movements in dictatorships to raise funds with Bitcoin (and Monero, etc.).
November 27, 2024, 09:35:39 AM
Most people know that Bitcoin exists, even not very technical minded ones. The question about Bitcoin's image is thus much more important now, if people want Bitcoin to continue growing.
Bitcoin can of course get into another bubble even with its current image. Perhaps also two bubbles, above all if Central Banks get involved. But the more negative the image about Bitcoin, the earlier this bubble will burst, and the less likely an "established Bitcoin" or even a "Bitcoin standard" will be. Because eventually the growth will stop, and then it will depend if the price can sustain itself (due to real usage in the general population) or if we then have a lot of bagholder whales (including governments).
Bitcoin is resilient, it thus would probably even recover from a crash following such a situation but it wouldn't be nice for many investors.
A few influencers marketing BTC as a ponzi will also not do much harm, but the more, the worse.
This is true, we are already in a world where everyone knows about bitcoin, and even nearly a billion people got in, some got out but the total of people who got in at least once. So, we could safely say that it is going to be quite amusing to assume bitcoin is a ponzi, not that it is not doing that kind of marketing by some people, but the reality is, what kind of ponzi grows this much, that's quite unlikely and I do not think that will stop anytime soon neither.Bitcoin can of course get into another bubble even with its current image. Perhaps also two bubbles, above all if Central Banks get involved. But the more negative the image about Bitcoin, the earlier this bubble will burst, and the less likely an "established Bitcoin" or even a "Bitcoin standard" will be. Because eventually the growth will stop, and then it will depend if the price can sustain itself (due to real usage in the general population) or if we then have a lot of bagholder whales (including governments).
Bitcoin is resilient, it thus would probably even recover from a crash following such a situation but it wouldn't be nice for many investors.
A few influencers marketing BTC as a ponzi will also not do much harm, but the more, the worse.
We should consider how to grow further with crypto and forget about all the marketing stuff. Influencers will do whatever they can to get the attention of the people, including sometimes sound like a ponzi, but that is their stuff and I do not think that will change anytime soon.
November 27, 2024, 07:38:12 AM
When you don't know Bitcoin you will say anything you feel like because I know quite well that bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme this argument has happened before and I'll see you where they discussed about it earlier when bitcoin was introduced so because of that discussion I am well convinced that bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme but some people think that bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme because of each increment and decrement in value so it is obvious that bitcoin is a decentralized currency which there is no one can manipulate or regulate the price of Bitcoin so if it is a Ponzi scheme it is the time it can be manipulated because when you check across of other Ponzi scheme that trend you will see that they could not last so I believe that for bitcoin to have been state over 15 years is a real digital currency that come to stay
November 27, 2024, 04:10:17 AM
Bitcoin's price has moved beyond the realm of scams. Scams typically need to allow more people to participate, but at $90,000 per Bitcoin, it has long surpassed what the average person can afford. This feels more like a game for the few, with ordinary people already excluded.
November 27, 2024, 02:33:24 AM
I think most people in this community know that Bitcoin does have intrinsic value.
This is the only problem I see with Bitcoin and more reason why many people do not want to associate with it. But certainly, Bitcoin is not a Ponzi, though, like even fiat, many unscrupulous people are looking for ways to do Ponzi in the name of Bitcoin. That's certainly not the fault of Bitcoin.Quote
What do you think? Is this narrative problematic? Or do we need it to drive more people into Bitcoin?
My brother, time will naturally fix things. With the way Bitcoin has been impressing more people and shaming others, people will naturally come to the realization that "Bitcoin does not need them but they are the ones who need Bitcoin." 
November 26, 2024, 10:34:43 PM
~snip~
Yes, that's indeed a quite popular narrative with some influencers and a popular opinion in certain groups too. However, it also indirectly is a price-related argument. In addition -- basing the value of BTC on a doomsday prediction may give you attention in the circles surrounding some gold bug groups and Roubini fans, but ... those doomsday predictions are really not new and they never really matched the reality. One could of course mention the 2007-09 crisis which was correctly predicted by some, but that was not even close to a final collapse of the fiat system (and was also only marginally related to fiat's problems at all).I would even say that I prefer the permabulls to the "doomsday" arguments.
These "doomsday circles" are a bit too cult-like for me and they don't give a good impression to the rest of the society.Well, it's not a doomsday argument to say that there's something wrong with fiat. Neither is it a doomsday scenario to describe fiat as perpetually losing value. Those are facts. Those are factual arguments. They're happening right now. Everybody can attest to their veracity.
However, I don't believe that the USD, for example, will collapse in the next several decades. This has been predicted decades ago. But it's still here today, powerful. So, I myself don't like doomsday preachers. But they're probably the extreme opposite of perma-bulls. In a way, they're equally nuisance.
But, yeah, these arguments are still attached to Bitcoin's price. It's quite common to see Bitcoin posts on social media pointing out how an iPhone, a house, or a car is actually getting cheaper over the years if priced in Bitcoin. They're like memes, but at least they're pointing out some truths about the fiat system. For example, there are pics labelled "$100-grocery today vs. $100-grocery 10 years ago", "your house in 2010; your house today" and then there's their values in BTC, and so on.
~snip~
That's where o48o's argument comes into play: the intrinsic value is of course there, but its strength depends also on the community, as Bitcoin is not only a technological solution but also a social system which works through network effects. And if the Bitcoin community gets dominated by the decisions of state-governments or even single political parties, then the community/network may be distorted in a way the "true fundamentals" lose strength. IMO in this case it's likely that some altcoin could take over the lead in terms of censorship resistance/decentralization.In general however I'm still optimistic. This is some kind of worst case scenario.
A sort of doomsday scenario?
What's good with Bitcoin, one which assures me 100%, is that the narrative doesn't matter, so far at least. Whether it's falsely associated-- and it was-- with drugs, pedophiles, gamblers, black market, clueless geeks, traditional financial giants, politicians, political parties, ideologies, and so on and so forth, at the end of the day, everybody can verify themselves that the technology is indeed decentralized, neutral, censorship-resistant, immaculate. In a way, Bitcoin has this Teflon-like protection.
~snip~
Good point, yes I noticed that too. It is possible that these shifts could eventually end (or weaken) when the price volatility lowers considerably and above all the bear markets are less sharp and panicky. I guess however that we will still see these crashes until the narrative that "Bitcoin has no intrinsic value" (yesterday I just read that again in a mainstream newspaper article *yawn* ... and the consequence is of course that some think "and it can crash to 0") is finally losing traction also in the general public.False opinions can only last for a while. They can never outlive the truth. Bitcoin skeptics can only have two options. One, to eat their humble pies and accept that the truth has repudiated them. It's no shame to join the likes of Saylor, Trump, the CEO of Charles Schwab, and others. Two, they remain adamant, stick to their mistakes, and be bitter about it for the rest of their lives. Well, Schiff, Taleb, and a few more probably need more company.
November 26, 2024, 02:03:07 PM
Main point that is misused in Bitcoin is the irreversible payment method, so a bunch of lies will get told to people to pay anything to an address in advance. Thats never a good idea with any payment medium but with BTC or similar crypto its usually fatal and the payment cant be reversed.
Twitter is full of people promising to repay money sent with a larger amount as part of a giveaway. I get the same empty offers through normal physically mailed post, lots of fake marketing that is a steal basically. So the rule applies to BTC dont pay in advance for some random entity you dont know with big promises.
That possible negative is always going to be there, people have to be very careful. On the positives I will say BTC has to increase its usability to the wider world, as said most people arent technically minded.
If BTC is to become commonly used, it has be more user friendly and usable by anyone, thats its job going forward. All the scenarios for much higher prices are really relying on mainstream adoption.
Twitter is full of people promising to repay money sent with a larger amount as part of a giveaway. I get the same empty offers through normal physically mailed post, lots of fake marketing that is a steal basically. So the rule applies to BTC dont pay in advance for some random entity you dont know with big promises.
That possible negative is always going to be there, people have to be very careful. On the positives I will say BTC has to increase its usability to the wider world, as said most people arent technically minded.
If BTC is to become commonly used, it has be more user friendly and usable by anyone, thats its job going forward. All the scenarios for much higher prices are really relying on mainstream adoption.
November 26, 2024, 12:49:59 PM
for bitcoin any publicity is good publicity.
That was maybe the case in 2013 or so, but now we're in 2024. Most people know that Bitcoin exists, even not very technical minded ones. The question about Bitcoin's image is thus much more important now, if people want Bitcoin to continue growing.Bitcoin can of course get into another bubble even with its current image. Perhaps also two bubbles, above all if Central Banks get involved. But the more negative the image about Bitcoin, the earlier this bubble will burst, and the less likely an "established Bitcoin" or even a "Bitcoin standard" will be. Because eventually the growth will stop, and then it will depend if the price can sustain itself (due to real usage in the general population) or if we then have a lot of bagholder whales (including governments).
Bitcoin is resilient, it thus would probably even recover from a crash following such a situation but it wouldn't be nice for many investors.
A few influencers marketing BTC as a ponzi will also not do much harm, but the more, the worse.
November 26, 2024, 11:59:32 AM
Who gives a damn about its marketing? I can do marketing for gold and make it look like a Ponzi scheme too and it doesn’t matter in the end. If that kind of marketing attracts people, it’s still a good thing because for bitcoin any publicity is good publicity. Those ponzi lovers buy and sell coins and create liquidity in the markets and some of them actually make money even though most of the time it is by sheer luck.
Do you know what Michael Jordan said about endorsing demo*rats?
“Republicans buy sneakers too.”
Do you know what Michael Jordan said about endorsing demo*rats?
“Republicans buy sneakers too.”
November 26, 2024, 09:59:10 AM
It's marketed as a ponzi by those that are into crypto scams mostly. The crypto space is filled with a lot of opportunities but at the same time you can lose a lot of you are not careful of what you invest in. Bitcoin isn't something that you should expect to get financial freedom from overnight, it's a process that might take as long as one year or more, it all depends on the movement of the market. People who have been hodling Bitcoin for 2 years are now reaping the benefits of what they sowed. Bitcoin hodling is a long term investment not something you should consider make a short term investment.
November 24, 2024, 04:31:10 PM
However, I am worried about some influencers who do market Bitcoin like if it was some kind of HYIP scheme,
These influencers mostly show up when the market is bullish, they know it’s easier to convince people to buy during the hype. I’m not sure about their exact reasons, but they’re likely benefiting in some way. It could be promoting their channel to gain followers or viewers, basically taking advantage of the situation. But You know, potential investors don’t want to hear about the boring technical aspects and the risks involved in investing in Bitcoin. Influencers often present only one-sided narrative focusing only on the positives. In the end, though, it’s up to us as investors. We need to stick to DYOR to avoid blaming others if things go wrong.
The power and influence of DYOR is greatly influencing and raising advantages all over the web.Normally,the fear of regarding Bitcoin as a PONZI SCHEME should be addressed properly; probably based on the fact that Bitcoin itself is no scam.Bitcoin has circulated the affairs of Fintech and there's no two ways about it.Sincerly,the impacts of Bitcoin makes a whole lot of sense and that's how it should be.
November 24, 2024, 01:42:52 PM
When I made that statement, I mostly had Bitcoin as a cryptocurrency in mind - and if we're going to be honest, then we can say that Bitcoin is the least used for that purpose.
I'd not say "the least". Bitcoin doesn't need to be used for small purchases to be a successful cryptocurrency. Even on Bitpay, which manages mostly relatively small purchases, BTC is the second most popular crypto.The "migrants" use case I mentioned is an example: Remittances (international transfers) aren't something you do every day, but most of the time once per month. The amount is often in the region of three- or four-fold dollar values, so it's not something you need to do in a few seconds. And with fiat the process of international transactions is often a hassle too.
However, I personally concluded that it is too complicated for most people, especially when a transaction needs to be made, not to mention if a custom fee needs to be set or if the story is going in the direction of RBF or double-spend possibilities.
This is one of the reasons why I think Bitcoin needs more second layers. Lightning is fine but it doesn't fit all use cases. Ark and sidechains (I'm not so fond of statechains instead) can complement it well. Users will then not anymore have to study fee levels or deal with RBF. Instead a "L2-driven" Bitcoin's usability for payments would be like Litecoin or Avalanche today, where you rarely have to bother with the fee issue.For those of us who didn't need the confirmation of politicians and big companies to understand what BTC is and what potential it has, we can say that we had the rare luck of outsmarting them.
From this perspective I agree. But I think there is more space for Bitcoin "as a currency" in the future. My big worry however is volatility: if it stays in the same order of magnitude than now, adoption "as a currency" becomes very difficult. It is very slowly lowering but still not in a fashion people would see Bitcoin as an alternative to a bank account. And speculative usage is the main driver of volatility, above all the "ride the waves" or "hoard and sell" usage patterns. In the best case that can change naturally towards an "hold and pay" pattern, but otherwise it's not bad to make Bitcoin users think a little bit about their usage patterns 
November 24, 2024, 08:17:01 AM
Bitcoin is not a Ponzi and anybody that is attributing it to Ponzi schemes is not knowledgeable about it. Bitcoin is a store of value and it represents freedom and privacy for it's holders, so in practical it is a decentralized digital currency that is not controlled by any centralized authorities like governments. Ponzi schemes are scams, they gather funds from many, pay a few to gain trust and more people will keying into the project, then they will exit, Bitcoin is not in anyway like that. Bitcoin has circles and at every bull run we will see ATH price because it is a store of value.
November 24, 2024, 07:04:45 AM
~snip~
I don't completely disagree though. Bitcoin does not necessary need to be used by everybody to be successful. There are user groups (people liking to have control over their money, migrants, heavy international internet users, opposition members in dictatorships, some groups of "the unbanked" ...) benefitting more from the intrinsic qualities than others. If among these user groups the Bitcoin adoption was higher, at a cost of lesser speculative usage, then the value could indeed grow.
Bitcoin is simply something special for a special kind of people - after 15 years I think that theory has proven to be quite convincing.
This opinion is a bit pessimistic. If Bitcoin is only "for a special kind of people", then the price might already be overvalued at high five digits. Because that "special kind" in the present are a minority among Bitcoin users/investors.I don't completely disagree though. Bitcoin does not necessary need to be used by everybody to be successful. There are user groups (people liking to have control over their money, migrants, heavy international internet users, opposition members in dictatorships, some groups of "the unbanked" ...) benefitting more from the intrinsic qualities than others. If among these user groups the Bitcoin adoption was higher, at a cost of lesser speculative usage, then the value could indeed grow.
When I made that statement, I mostly had Bitcoin as a cryptocurrency in mind - and if we're going to be honest, then we can say that Bitcoin is the least used for that purpose. When you want to explain to someone who has never heard of BTC or knows almost nothing about the reasons why it is wise to invest in BTC, then you start from concepts such as decentralization, the possibility of being your own bank and transactions that can take place 365/24 without involvement of banks or any other financial institutions.
However, I personally concluded that it is too complicated for most people, especially when a transaction needs to be made, not to mention if a custom fee needs to be set or if the story is going in the direction of RBF or double-spend possibilities.
Therefore, from the technical side, compared to using cash or bank cards, there is no doubt which is simpler for the average person - and when you add to that that the majority of people today still blindly follow what their governments tell them (either directly or through controlled media) then it is not coincidence that even the most optimistic figures indicate that only about 5% of the world's population is in some way involved in cryptocurrencies, but not exclusively in BTC.
However, considering that investment trends have changed in the last 4-5 years and that BTC has been noticed by rich investors, I think that they will have an impact on ordinary people in the future. For those of us who didn't need the confirmation of politicians and big companies to understand what BTC is and what potential it has, we can say that we had the rare luck of outsmarting them.
November 24, 2024, 12:31:13 AM
In all fairness, every once in a while, you could read something like Bitcoin is the option to counter inflation or fiat is losing value over time. Such lines don't just point at Bitcoin's price at least. They're somehow pointing out that there's something wrong with the current system and Bitcoin is a kind of solution.
Yes, that's indeed a quite popular narrative with some influencers and a popular opinion in certain groups too. However, it also indirectly is a price-related argument. In addition -- basing the value of BTC on a doomsday prediction may give you attention in the circles surrounding some gold bug groups and Roubini fans, but ... those doomsday predictions are really not new and they never really matched the reality. One could of course mention the 2007-09 crisis which was correctly predicted by some, but that was not even close to a final collapse of the fiat system (and was also only marginally related to fiat's problems at all).I would even say that I prefer the permabulls to the "doomsday" arguments.
These "doomsday circles" are a bit too cult-like for me and they don't give a good impression to the rest of the society.I'm of the belief that there won't be a final crash like in the tulip mania, because whether we're strongly promoting it or not, or whether most are aware of it or not, Bitcoin has intrinsic value.
That's where o48o's argument comes into play: the intrinsic value is of course there, but its strength depends also on the community, as Bitcoin is not only a technological solution but also a social system which works through network effects. And if the Bitcoin community gets dominated by the decisions of state-governments or even single political parties, then the community/network may be distorted in a way the "true fundamentals" lose strength. IMO in this case it's likely that some altcoin could take over the lead in terms of censorship resistance/decentralization.In general however I'm still optimistic. This is some kind of worst case scenario.
I don't know if you also noticed this but I've actually observed some sort of pattern in marketing Bitcoin. Whenever the price is falling fast and the market seems to be in panic, what's being highlighted is the technology.
Good point, yes I noticed that too. It is possible that these shifts could eventually end (or weaken) when the price volatility lowers considerably and above all the bear markets are less sharp and panicky. I guess however that we will still see these crashes until the narrative that "Bitcoin has no intrinsic value" (yesterday I just read that again in a mainstream newspaper article *yawn* ... and the consequence is of course that some think "and it can crash to 0") is finally losing traction also in the general public. Jump to: