Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitcoin value in January 2013 (Read 16214 times)

legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1000
May 07, 2014, 02:25:55 PM
#30
Came here looking for the price in Jan 2013, and found speculation that it might be $5.00 or $2.50.

Wow!



Don't forget the bitcoin price back then in late 2011 was around $2 - $5. Wink
https://blockchain.info/charts/market-price?showDataPoints=false&show_header=true&daysAverageString=1×pan=all&scale=1&address=
legendary
Activity: 2296
Merit: 1014
May 07, 2014, 01:47:24 PM
#29
easy your hairy Wink, this will all tune itself
full member
Activity: 588
Merit: 107
May 07, 2014, 01:35:19 PM
#28
Came here looking for the price in Jan 2013, and found speculation that it might be $5.00 or $2.50.

Wow!

newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
November 30, 2013, 01:45:50 PM
#27
Hello mufa23,

I would like to ask you something privately.
Could you please PM me an e-mail address through which I may contact you?
For some reason I am not allowed to send a PM on this message board.

Hope to hear from you soon!
sr. member
Activity: 533
Merit: 251
November 28, 2013, 10:39:04 PM
#26
Well, I was wondering what the heck this $5/BTC and $2.5/BTC these guys were talking about and finally realized its two years old...A LOT HAS CHANGED!
legendary
Activity: 1022
Merit: 1001
I'd fight Gandhi.
November 28, 2013, 09:53:14 PM
#25
It's fun revisiting old topics. So much has changed since the initial guesses.
member
Activity: 117
Merit: 10
December 08, 2011, 10:12:30 AM
#24
Netrin is right, no mainstream company like Sony, MS or even Facebook are going to make a currency capable of being what Bitcoin is. The most they can do is make an internal or partially internal credit system. I wouldn't worry about competition from mainstream company currencies.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 251
FirstBits: 168Bc
December 07, 2011, 12:22:53 AM
#23
But they simply won't. Suppose it was popular and kids accepted untraceable PlayStationCoins selling pictures of their sister - or more nefarious business. Any/every corporate legal team would ensure it's a non-starter.
donator
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1014
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
December 06, 2011, 09:54:40 PM
#22
I wonder what would happen if MS, Sony, and Nintendo develop crypcoins that run on their nextgen systems.
newbie
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
December 06, 2011, 07:51:57 PM
#21
I am talking not about giant companies. I am talking about relatively small websites. User auditory of 10 million people is enough to launch bitcoin killer.

Why would they do that? What makes Bitcoin, would be destroyed in the process IMHO. First, probably centralized network, so, controlled. Two, being a company, they would have to play by big gov rules. Three, given one and two, how that creation would be different from dollars and make users jump on it? If you like getting screwed, there is PayPal there for you.

Part of appeal of Bitcoin comes from the fact that this is basically a guerilla network, uncontrolled, no masters, no fear, everyone is equal and has equal opportunity to profit from this system. Nobody can shut you off from your resources, nobody knows how much you have and how you spend it. Proprietary currency would have none of it.



First - not exactly. Centralized only emission. Company will just sell all initial coins. To the end uses (not miners) this is don't play any role. Then - decentralized use on bitcoin principles.

Second - different countries, different rules. Big company always can find country that can support such thing.
full member
Activity: 235
Merit: 100
December 06, 2011, 07:46:58 PM
#20
I am talking not about giant companies. I am talking about relatively small websites. User auditory of 10 million people is enough to launch bitcoin killer.

Why would they do that? What makes Bitcoin, would be destroyed in the process IMHO. First, probably centralized network, so, controlled. Two, being a company, they would have to play by big gov rules. Three, given one and two, how that creation would be different from dollars and make users jump on it? If you like getting screwed, there is PayPal there for you.

Part of appeal of Bitcoin comes from the fact that this is basically a guerilla network, uncontrolled, no masters, no fear, everyone is equal and has equal opportunity to profit from this system. Nobody can shut you off from your resources, nobody knows how much you have and how you spend it. Proprietary currency would have none of it.

newbie
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
December 06, 2011, 06:28:57 PM
#19
Sure Facebook, Google, Apple, may be successful selling paypal-like tokens and they may be wildly popular and useful. They still will not match all of the properties of bitcoin. I strongly believe no US/EU registered company can produce a bitcoin killer without some revolutionary as-yet unfathomed idea.

Facebook will never produce anonymous cash. Never!

I am talking not about giant companies. I am talking about relatively small websites. User auditory of 10 million people is enough to launch bitcoin killer.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 251
FirstBits: 168Bc
December 06, 2011, 05:22:46 PM
#18
Sure Facebook, Google, Apple, may be successful selling paypal-like tokens and they may be wildly popular and useful. They still will not match all of the properties of bitcoin. I strongly believe no US/EU registered company can produce a bitcoin killer without some revolutionary as-yet unfathomed idea.

Facebook will never produce anonymous cash. Never!
newbie
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
December 06, 2011, 02:54:30 PM
#17
I don't think any company can afford the liability associated with 'owning' a bitcoin fork. A company may use and integrate bitcoin or a future improvement, but any value a company 'adds' will likely be more of the same (credit card, paypal, online banking).

Bitcoin lacks demand. Any social network (like FB) can make huge demand on currency. And I don't see any reason they choose bitcoin over own fork.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 251
FirstBits: 168Bc
December 06, 2011, 02:41:45 PM
#16
I don't think any company can afford the liability associated with 'owning' a bitcoin fork. A company may use and integrate bitcoin or a future improvement, but any value a company 'adds' will likely be more of the same (credit card, paypal, online banking).
newbie
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
December 06, 2011, 01:36:29 PM
#15
I guess bitcoin value in 2013 will be around 0. Bitcoin is nice thing, but any huge company can (and some day will) start own fork of btc. If they don't than the price will be OK Smiley
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 1000
December 05, 2011, 10:15:45 PM
#14
$2 - $3 is more unstable than $12 - $15. A drop from $3 to $2 means that I lost 1/3 my money while a drop from $15 to $12 means that I lost 1/5.

While it is true that difficulty follows price, it is also true that miners are a big part of the selling force at the markets. That selling force will halve in 2013, so this could create some upward pressure in the markets. But then again, there are so many things that affect price... We've seen a 90% drop and the bitcoins per block are still at 50.

When the block return halves, theoretically we should see miners selling half of what they did when blocks gave 50 coins.

As for what non-miners do with their coins will depend heavily on the usefulness of coins at that point in time. I guess there is a lot of pressure on bitcoiners this year.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 502
December 05, 2011, 09:37:38 PM
#13
$2 - $3 is more unstable than $12 - $15. A drop from $3 to $2 means that I lost 1/3 my money while a drop from $15 to $12 means that I lost 1/5.

While it is true that difficulty follows price, it is also true that miners are a big part of the selling force at the markets. That selling force will halve in 2013, so this could create some upward pressure in the markets. But then again, there are so many things that affect price... We've seen a 90% drop and the bitcoins per block are still at 50.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1020
December 05, 2011, 08:51:45 PM
#12
"mining cost always follows price"

What's the argument for this statement?  I don't understand it as a forgone conclusion.  There could, for example, be a large number of miners that are insensitive to price fluctuations (e.g., they get their electricity for "free", or they are happy to pay for the waste heat through mining rather than an electric heater).

If that's the case, then someone who wants to accumulate Bitcoin, will look at the marginal cost of mining as an input to their decision to either invest in mining or buy outright at an exchange.  This would tend to increase the demand for bitcoin at exchanges as the cost of mining goes up.

What's wrong with my argument?

Mike Koss
Coinlab.com



I fit your description.
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
December 05, 2011, 08:22:53 PM
#11
Re: supply vs. demand:

A supply and demand market is not rocket science. The true law governing it is that the market will always try to equalize the supply and demand. If we know the value of the supply S, the value of the demand D, and the price P we can easily determine the target price via the formula:
Code:
T = D * P / S
or more commonly
Code:
T / P = D / S
Target is to current price as demand is to supply.

So because we know exactly what the price will become, the important part is estimating supply and demand. This task is not as simple as one would assume, because both parts are unpredictable. Notice that supply is not the same as money supply or money supply growth, because much of that is infungible.

Simple Demand Model: Demand is constant
To simplify things, we can assume that demand remains constant. This is untrue, but is the simplest approximation possible. Since we are not dealing with quantified prices, we do not need to know exactly what the demand is, only that it remains constant.

Supply Model 1: Fixed proportion of miners selling1
The gross underestimation of supply, we assume that only miners sell their coins. The effect of the halving on this is that the price should spontaneously approach the doubling mark, because the effect is geometric.

Supply Model 2: Fixed proportion of money supply sold1
This seems more of a overestimation of supply, and under our demand scenario will cause the price to drop in a manner looking like an exponential decay2 trend, with drops slowing down the decline.

Supply Model 3: Custom model
Code:
S = T + cM
Effectively, this model is based on the amount moved as both a function of total money supply and mined supply. This hybrid can produce interesting price target models, some listed below:



Footnotes
1: This proportion can be greater than 1
2: Actually the multiplicative inverse (1/x), which mathematically is completely different from "exponential decay". The term "exponential decay" however is more common, and is used here. The term "reciprocal" is rarely if ever used to describe a trend.
Pages:
Jump to: