i think people need to define 'hoarding'
if i buy a bitcoin and dont trade it for 1 year is that hoarding? 1 month? 1 week? 1 hour?
people hold onto something for a reason. they arent doing it to be annoying.
define your terms. make an argument. show your work.
Topic: Hoarding Vs. Spending - page 3. (Read 4136 times)
Agree with the OP and I believe this is what is constraining the growth of Bitcoin.
People need to realize that in order to break through to the next 'level' of Bitcoin valuation, the infrastructure and ease of use need to be improved for less tech-savvy people. This requires an investment from the people who know Bitcoin best.
The issue is that many of the people who have profited so immensely from being an early adopter are hoarding their coins instead of using them to improve Bitcoin, relying on others to do the legwork in getting Bitcoin mainstream.
People need to realize that in order to break through to the next 'level' of Bitcoin valuation, the infrastructure and ease of use need to be improved for less tech-savvy people. This requires an investment from the people who know Bitcoin best.
The issue is that many of the people who have profited so immensely from being an early adopter are hoarding their coins instead of using them to improve Bitcoin, relying on others to do the legwork in getting Bitcoin mainstream.
First hoard, then spend
Gavin just said, if you spend half of your coin each year and the value of bitcoin doubles each year, you can spend forever
Gavin just said, if you spend half of your coin each year and the value of bitcoin doubles each year, you can spend forever
In other words, if Bitcoin doubles in price every year, and you have $5000 in Bitcoin now, and spend $2500 a year, you'll always be able to spend ... $2500 a year? Sigh... Not fabulous...
First hoard, then spend
Gavin just said, if you spend half of your coin each year and the value of bitcoin doubles each year, you can spend forever
Gavin just said, if you spend half of your coin each year and the value of bitcoin doubles each year, you can spend forever
New user Whizz94 sent me this private message as he cannot reply, seems fair to share his post in case anyone wants to respond.
I think you have a good point, at the moment my merchant store by default lands on a FIAT (GPB) pricing option, perhaps directing straight to BTC prices would encourage spending in BTC. Restricting only to BTC at present would only be sensible for a Bitcoin related niche but perhaps in the future producers/merchants could make BTC the primary payment option. I guess in relation to the last question it is a bit of both, both savers and producers play a part in the Bitcoin ecosystem but without some collaboration, coupled with failing exchanges we wont realize the full potential of Bitcoin. As a network circulation is key, transactions & exchanges need to flow freely between each node(point) in order to encourage new levels of growth otherwise we are just a bunch of strangers living in the same house.
Sorry about my abstract metaphors, I am a visual person lol.
Quote
What I think is needed now is for more commodity trade prices to be defined in bitcoin, along rational lines, so that their purchase in BTC does not involve the hassle of going through a money changer and looking up what the speculators at Mt Gox are paying today for one BTC.
I am a landlord and solar panel operator. Part of my income is from solar electricity. I plan to define the 2014 price for electricity sold in BTC and based around the electricity costs of GPU mining then, which with the considerable difficulty expected by then might be an interesting challenge. That would oblige my electricity customers to either make or buy bitcoin to pay the electricity bill. Since not everyone has BTC, I'd give them the option in 2014 of looking up the Mt Gox price and paying me £ instead. But the price of the goods will be defined in BTC.
Does the "hoard v spend" question depend less on what savers are doing and more on producers defining a BTC price for their output?
I am a landlord and solar panel operator. Part of my income is from solar electricity. I plan to define the 2014 price for electricity sold in BTC and based around the electricity costs of GPU mining then, which with the considerable difficulty expected by then might be an interesting challenge. That would oblige my electricity customers to either make or buy bitcoin to pay the electricity bill. Since not everyone has BTC, I'd give them the option in 2014 of looking up the Mt Gox price and paying me £ instead. But the price of the goods will be defined in BTC.
Does the "hoard v spend" question depend less on what savers are doing and more on producers defining a BTC price for their output?
I think you have a good point, at the moment my merchant store by default lands on a FIAT (GPB) pricing option, perhaps directing straight to BTC prices would encourage spending in BTC. Restricting only to BTC at present would only be sensible for a Bitcoin related niche but perhaps in the future producers/merchants could make BTC the primary payment option. I guess in relation to the last question it is a bit of both, both savers and producers play a part in the Bitcoin ecosystem but without some collaboration, coupled with failing exchanges we wont realize the full potential of Bitcoin. As a network circulation is key, transactions & exchanges need to flow freely between each node(point) in order to encourage new levels of growth otherwise we are just a bunch of strangers living in the same house.
Sorry about my abstract metaphors, I am a visual person lol.
I think as the currency matures, thats what will happen, the price will be somewhat tied into the energy that is required to mine it/purchase it. Thats really all any currency is when you get down to it, a means of exchanging spent time and energy.
If the current monetary practices continue then at some stage in the future BTC or Precious metals will be the preferred medium of exchange instead of USD. Bitcoin has a long way to go before thats viable, gold and silver don't perform adequately either because you can't easily transfer them. Whether Bitcoin gets there or not remains to be seen, i think if the exchange issues are overcome then the chances are very high that it will end up being the case.
As to the hoarding or not, people only hoard it so they can sell it at a later date... I don't think its something that needs to be worried about as long as a decentralized exchange gets off the ground and retail POS purchases are made easy by some means. Those 2 issues are the real barriers to BTC gaining traction as a truly viable alternative to mainstream fiat currency, solve them and there won't be issues with liquidity, there'll always be someone willing to sell.
New user Whizz94 sent me this private message as he cannot reply, seems fair to share his post in case anyone wants to respond.
I think you have a good point, at the moment my merchant store by default lands on a FIAT (GPB) pricing option, perhaps directing straight to BTC prices would encourage spending in BTC. Restricting only to BTC at present would only be sensible for a Bitcoin related niche but perhaps in the future producers/merchants could make BTC the primary payment option. I guess in relation to the last question it is a bit of both, both savers and producers play a part in the Bitcoin ecosystem but without some collaboration, coupled with failing exchanges we wont realize the full potential of Bitcoin. As a network circulation is key, transactions & exchanges need to flow freely between each node(point) in order to encourage new levels of growth otherwise we are just a bunch of strangers living in the same house.
Sorry about my abstract metaphors, I am a visual person lol.
Quote
What I think is needed now is for more commodity trade prices to be defined in bitcoin, along rational lines, so that their purchase in BTC does not involve the hassle of going through a money changer and looking up what the speculators at Mt Gox are paying today for one BTC.
I am a landlord and solar panel operator. Part of my income is from solar electricity. I plan to define the 2014 price for electricity sold in BTC and based around the electricity costs of GPU mining then, which with the considerable difficulty expected by then might be an interesting challenge. That would oblige my electricity customers to either make or buy bitcoin to pay the electricity bill. Since not everyone has BTC, I'd give them the option in 2014 of looking up the Mt Gox price and paying me £ instead. But the price of the goods will be defined in BTC.
Does the "hoard v spend" question depend less on what savers are doing and more on producers defining a BTC price for their output?
I am a landlord and solar panel operator. Part of my income is from solar electricity. I plan to define the 2014 price for electricity sold in BTC and based around the electricity costs of GPU mining then, which with the considerable difficulty expected by then might be an interesting challenge. That would oblige my electricity customers to either make or buy bitcoin to pay the electricity bill. Since not everyone has BTC, I'd give them the option in 2014 of looking up the Mt Gox price and paying me £ instead. But the price of the goods will be defined in BTC.
Does the "hoard v spend" question depend less on what savers are doing and more on producers defining a BTC price for their output?
I think you have a good point, at the moment my merchant store by default lands on a FIAT (GPB) pricing option, perhaps directing straight to BTC prices would encourage spending in BTC. Restricting only to BTC at present would only be sensible for a Bitcoin related niche but perhaps in the future producers/merchants could make BTC the primary payment option. I guess in relation to the last question it is a bit of both, both savers and producers play a part in the Bitcoin ecosystem but without some collaboration, coupled with failing exchanges we wont realize the full potential of Bitcoin. As a network circulation is key, transactions & exchanges need to flow freely between each node(point) in order to encourage new levels of growth otherwise we are just a bunch of strangers living in the same house.
Sorry about my abstract metaphors, I am a visual person lol.
Well I have over 2000 Bitcoin so if that really came to pass, I'd probably just buy Goldman Sachs and have my vampire squid minions do it all for me.
Don't want to ruin your dream , or nightmare of rulling Goldman but
1) If bitcoins go over 300k , I doubt somebody (you) will be interested in Goldman Sachs
2) I doubt he hasn't already bought 2000 coins himself
3) I can top that offer =)))))))))
It was a joke. They aren't really squids either.
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
This is the fact. Bitcoin will explode in value when the exchange problem is solved. Until then, it makes no sense to spend them. After that, the price will be stable and they will be offloaded in exchange for houses, cars, boats and all the other things a currency is useful for.
Makes sense, so who wants to make an exchange?
...and who wants to fund with their capital?
I'd love to. But to do it in the UK, you really need to incorporate as a bank rather than just as a business with a bank account. Otherwise you will keep having your accounts frozen. It takes about £5 million in capital. I don't have that
According to an expert in this forum , this will be only 20 BTC next year so I think you can afford it.
Well I have over 2000 Bitcoin so if that really came to pass, I'd probably just buy Goldman Sachs and have my vampire squid minions do it all for me.
Out of interest do you spend too or just hoard, judging from your pic it seems you are a serious miner?
I stopped mining as GPU wasn't worth it. Now I am strictly in the hoarding camp. I did try to increase my holding through day trading but it looks like I don't have a talent for it. I'm thinking of buying again.
Well I have over 2000 Bitcoin so if that really came to pass, I'd probably just buy Goldman Sachs and have my vampire squid minions do it all for me.
Don't want to ruin your dream , or nightmare of rulling Goldman but
1) If bitcoins go over 300k , I doubt somebody (you) will be interested in Goldman Sachs
2) I doubt he hasn't already bought 2000 coins himself
3) I can top that offer =)))))))))
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
This is the fact. Bitcoin will explode in value when the exchange problem is solved. Until then, it makes no sense to spend them. After that, the price will be stable and they will be offloaded in exchange for houses, cars, boats and all the other things a currency is useful for.
Makes sense, so who wants to make an exchange?
...and who wants to fund with their capital?
I'd love to. But to do it in the UK, you really need to incorporate as a bank rather than just as a business with a bank account. Otherwise you will keep having your accounts frozen. It takes about £5 million in capital. I don't have that
According to an expert in this forum , this will be only 20 BTC next year so I think you can afford it.
Well I have over 2000 Bitcoin so if that really came to pass, I'd probably just buy Goldman Sachs and have my vampire squid minions do it all for me.
Out of interest do you spend too or just hoard, judging from your pic it seems you are a serious miner?
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
This is the fact. Bitcoin will explode in value when the exchange problem is solved. Until then, it makes no sense to spend them. After that, the price will be stable and they will be offloaded in exchange for houses, cars, boats and all the other things a currency is useful for.
Makes sense, so who wants to make an exchange?
...and who wants to fund with their capital?
I'd love to. But to do it in the UK, you really need to incorporate as a bank rather than just as a business with a bank account. Otherwise you will keep having your accounts frozen. It takes about £5 million in capital. I don't have that
According to an expert in this forum , this will be only 20 BTC next year so I think you can afford it.
Well I have over 2000 Bitcoin so if that really came to pass, I'd probably just buy Goldman Sachs and have my vampire squid minions do it all for me.
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
This is the fact. Bitcoin will explode in value when the exchange problem is solved. Until then, it makes no sense to spend them. After that, the price will be stable and they will be offloaded in exchange for houses, cars, boats and all the other things a currency is useful for.
Makes sense, so who wants to make an exchange?
...and who wants to fund with their capital?
I'd love to. But to do it in the UK, you really need to incorporate as a bank rather than just as a business with a bank account. Otherwise you will keep having your accounts frozen. It takes about £5 million in capital. I don't have that
According to an expert in this forum , this will be only 20 BTC next year so I think you can afford it.
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
This is the fact. Bitcoin will explode in value when the exchange problem is solved. Until then, it makes no sense to spend them. After that, the price will be stable and they will be offloaded in exchange for houses, cars, boats and all the other things a currency is useful for.
Makes sense, so who wants to make an exchange?
...and who wants to fund with their capital?
I'd love to. But to do it in the UK, you really need to incorporate as a bank rather than just as a business with a bank account. Otherwise you will keep having your accounts frozen. It takes about £5 million in capital. I don't have that
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
This is the fact. Bitcoin will explode in value when the exchange problem is solved. Until then, it makes no sense to spend them. After that, the price will be stable and they will be offloaded in exchange for houses, cars, boats and all the other things a currency is useful for.
Makes sense, so who wants to make an exchange?
...and who wants to fund with their capital?
Nobody will fund this to have a profit margin of even 10 , 20% when they can get bitcoins for the usd and wait till next year when 1 BTC= 300K.
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
This is the fact. Bitcoin will explode in value when the exchange problem is solved. Until then, it makes no sense to spend them. After that, the price will be stable and they will be offloaded in exchange for houses, cars, boats and all the other things a currency is useful for.
Makes sense, so who wants to make an exchange?
...and who wants to fund with their capital?
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
This is the fact. Bitcoin will explode in value when the exchange problem is solved. Until then, it makes no sense to spend them. After that, the price will be stable and they will be offloaded in exchange for houses, cars, boats and all the other things a currency is useful for.
The problem is that buying them is a hassle.
Until the Exchange Problem is addressed and alleviated...
Human nature is to hoard scare, hard to acquire commodities.
I have a spending wallet & a savings wallet. I limit myself to how much I want to spend on a monthly basis, if I go over, then I have to go without that amount next month. It's working for me, and I think it's a good idea.
I think catch 22 is not exactly accurate. Those two scenarios apply to different people at different times, not the same person at the same time, or all people at all times.
additionally, animorphicizing bitcoin is going to cause problems trying to communicate clearly. 'bitcoin' itself cannot do anything or wait for anyone. It might be more accurate to say bitcoin companies aren't making enough profit to justify the infrastructure that you mentioned.
I realised "Bitcoin" was an incorrect term, out of laziness I used it is as a sweeping statement to encompass everything Bitcoin related, including services, freelance and so on as we are talking more that just business/companies. I guess the "Bitcoin movement" is more appropriate.
also, 'success' is subjective and in the case not defined. What do you consider 'success'?
I would consider bitcoin to be an outrageous success already.
In regards to success I was trying to not be overly specific in regards to what I feel should personally be measured as success, as you say that would be very subjective so I felt a general "long term" mention would suffice and would fit most most peoples desires for the future.
'success' might be considered additional companies offering additional products and services in exchange for bitcoin. To the point where it might approximate the USD economy minus all the war and what not.
lastly, it's important to realize that hoarding serves an economic function that is crucial for price and supply stability.
so what will 'get the ball rolling'? many people trying many things and the free market deciding which ones add value and which ones don't.
True, saving does have a function, as does balance, I believe we are currently a little to one sided and that is what I am trying to get at. Once enough people start actively buying I believe a new phase of growth will occur, not so much in relation to attracting larger companies, but rather the attention of new every day users. additionally, animorphicizing bitcoin is going to cause problems trying to communicate clearly. 'bitcoin' itself cannot do anything or wait for anyone. It might be more accurate to say bitcoin companies aren't making enough profit to justify the infrastructure that you mentioned.
I realised "Bitcoin" was an incorrect term, out of laziness I used it is as a sweeping statement to encompass everything Bitcoin related, including services, freelance and so on as we are talking more that just business/companies. I guess the "Bitcoin movement" is more appropriate.
also, 'success' is subjective and in the case not defined. What do you consider 'success'?
I would consider bitcoin to be an outrageous success already.
In regards to success I was trying to not be overly specific in regards to what I feel should personally be measured as success, as you say that would be very subjective so I felt a general "long term" mention would suffice and would fit most most peoples desires for the future.
'success' might be considered additional companies offering additional products and services in exchange for bitcoin. To the point where it might approximate the USD economy minus all the war and what not.
lastly, it's important to realize that hoarding serves an economic function that is crucial for price and supply stability.
so what will 'get the ball rolling'? many people trying many things and the free market deciding which ones add value and which ones don't.
I think catch 22 is not exactly accurate. Those two scenarios apply to different people at different times, not the same person at the same time, or all people at all times.
additionally, animorphicizing bitcoin is going to cause problems trying to communicate clearly. 'bitcoin' itself cannot do anything or wait for anyone. It might be more accurate to say bitcoin companies aren't making enough profit to justify the infrastructure that you mentioned.
also, 'success' is subjective and in the case not defined. What do you consider 'success'?
I would consider bitcoin to be an outrageous success already.
'success' might be considered additional companies offering additional products and services in exchange for bitcoin. To the point where it might approximate the USD economy minus all the war and what not.
lastly, it's important to realize that hoarding serves an economic function that is crucial for price and supply stability.
so what will 'get the ball rolling'? many people trying many things and the free market deciding which ones add value and which ones don't.
additionally, animorphicizing bitcoin is going to cause problems trying to communicate clearly. 'bitcoin' itself cannot do anything or wait for anyone. It might be more accurate to say bitcoin companies aren't making enough profit to justify the infrastructure that you mentioned.
also, 'success' is subjective and in the case not defined. What do you consider 'success'?
I would consider bitcoin to be an outrageous success already.
'success' might be considered additional companies offering additional products and services in exchange for bitcoin. To the point where it might approximate the USD economy minus all the war and what not.
lastly, it's important to realize that hoarding serves an economic function that is crucial for price and supply stability.
so what will 'get the ball rolling'? many people trying many things and the free market deciding which ones add value and which ones don't.
Jump to: