POLL:How likely do you think it is we see double digits in 2015?

ensurance982

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Trust me!

Quote from: phoenix1 on April 16, 2015, 10:10:14 PM

Inspired by two equally bold and opposing calls in the Chessnut's 'Critical Level's' thread (85% and 20%), thought it would be interesting to see what anyone else has to say ...
Poll closes in 30 days, unless target hit earlier Wink

I see the probability at about 20%. Just keep in mind: People back in 2011 were anticipating and predicting a sub $2 coin again, and it never happened. We're now at a serious support level and I wouldn't be surprised if we, at least to some degree, bounce off that.

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 20, 2015, 12:33:50 AM

Quote from: cbeast on April 17, 2015, 08:38:00 PM

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 17, 2015, 03:18:42 PM

Quote from: cbeast on April 17, 2015, 05:00:50 AM

All centralized exchanges would shut down if that happened. Then truly decentralized exchanges would thrive. Let's see them skin the sheep.

You must be new here, but your "legendary" status says otherwise. What did Gox, BTC-e and Stamp all do 2 years ago before we broke above $100? Were they losing their asses or did they open up because they knew it was a lucrative business even below $100?
I'd actually wager a guess that they make more money at lower prices because volumes are higher and more people are able to buy more with the same balance. Their actual USD fees wouldn't change much if at all but their BTC fees would double. Win win.

"You can sheer a sheep many times, but skin it only once." In bitcoin's case meaning unregulated central exchanges will be finally exposed as bad for bitcoin because they favor fiat profit taking. Even Wall Street doesn't allow such volatility. Decentralized exchanges will slow down trading and allow natural price discovery without panic trading. Also such low prices are boring and nobody will care anymore. Bitcoin will go back to hobby status until the next development wave creates more disruptive technology that eliminates exchanges entirely.

I disagree!
Slower exchange of BTC to/from USD does not make more natural price discovery and will actually hinder growth through inefficiency of payment processing. Sure, it may cut down on some panic because it will be absolutely more hassle than it's worth. How is that efficient or natural? Sounds more like forced price discovery to the upside. Low, unimaginable prices will be the true test of Bitcoins' stay power and the loyalty of it's investors.

Nothing would hinder trade from reaching exponentially higher levels without the bottlenecks of centralized exchanges. They would simply be free from fraudulent price reporting and fractional reserve market manipulation.

RyNinDaCleM

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1009

Legen -wait for it- dary

Quote from: cbeast on April 17, 2015, 08:38:00 PM

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 17, 2015, 03:18:42 PM

Quote from: cbeast on April 17, 2015, 05:00:50 AM

All centralized exchanges would shut down if that happened. Then truly decentralized exchanges would thrive. Let's see them skin the sheep.

You must be new here, but your "legendary" status says otherwise. What did Gox, BTC-e and Stamp all do 2 years ago before we broke above $100? Were they losing their asses or did they open up because they knew it was a lucrative business even below $100?
I'd actually wager a guess that they make more money at lower prices because volumes are higher and more people are able to buy more with the same balance. Their actual USD fees wouldn't change much if at all but their BTC fees would double. Win win.

"You can sheer a sheep many times, but skin it only once." In bitcoin's case meaning unregulated central exchanges will be finally exposed as bad for bitcoin because they favor fiat profit taking. Even Wall Street doesn't allow such volatility. Decentralized exchanges will slow down trading and allow natural price discovery without panic trading. Also such low prices are boring and nobody will care anymore. Bitcoin will go back to hobby status until the next development wave creates more disruptive technology that eliminates exchanges entirely.

I disagree!
Slower exchange of BTC to/from USD does not make more natural price discovery and will actually hinder growth through inefficiency of payment processing. Sure, it may cut down on some panic because it will be absolutely more hassle than it's worth. How is that efficient or natural? Sounds more like forced price discovery to the upside. Low, unimaginable prices will be the true test of Bitcoins' stay power and the loyalty of it's investors.

stonerider

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

I believe there's 100% chance that we will see double digits within 8 months. Bitcoin prices have been steadily and consistently declining for over 16 months. And it will continue the trajectory for the next 8 months or so, without a major breakthroughs like the Winklevoss ETF. With or without the ETF, the next halving will have an effect on the price. By the end of 2016, we will see the btc price rise to $5000. However, there's still more blood ahead in the short to medium time frame.

Chef Ramsay

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 1001

Quote from: 1Referee on April 17, 2015, 04:27:10 PM

I voted for 0-20% as it is not very likely to see double digits this year.

If there would be a reason for it, then the Bitstamp hack could have triggered double digits. But it didn't.

That's pretty much my thoughts on the subject unless, God forbid, Bitfinex goes the way of the dinosaurs or any similar way. Let's hope that notthing else happens to trigger mayhem.

BlindMayorBitcorn

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1115

Substantial thread. I'm hooked! And I voted, too Grin

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 17, 2015, 03:18:42 PM

Quote from: cbeast on April 17, 2015, 05:00:50 AM

All centralized exchanges would shut down if that happened. Then truly decentralized exchanges would thrive. Let's see them skin the sheep.

You must be new here, but your "legendary" status says otherwise. What did Gox, BTC-e and Stamp all do 2 years ago before we broke above $100? Were they losing their asses or did they open up because they knew it was a lucrative business even below $100?
I'd actually wager a guess that they make more money at lower prices because volumes are higher and more people are able to buy more with the same balance. Their actual USD fees wouldn't change much if at all but their BTC fees would double. Win win.

"You can sheer a sheep many times, but skin it only once." In bitcoin's case meaning unregulated central exchanges will be finally exposed as bad for bitcoin because they favor fiat profit taking. Even Wall Street doesn't allow such volatility. Decentralized exchanges will slow down trading and allow natural price discovery without panic trading. Also such low prices are boring and nobody will care anymore. Bitcoin will go back to hobby status until the next development wave creates more disruptive technology that eliminates exchanges entirely.

1Referee

legendary

Activity: 2170

Merit: 1427

I voted for 0-20% as it is not very likely to see double digits this year.

If there would be a reason for it, then the Bitstamp hack could have triggered double digits. But it didn't.

RyNinDaCleM

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1009

Legen -wait for it- dary

Quote from: Tzupy on April 17, 2015, 03:54:31 PM

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 17, 2015, 03:18:42 PM

Quote from: cbeast on April 17, 2015, 05:00:50 AM

All centralized exchanges would shut down if that happened. Then truly decentralized exchanges would thrive. Let's see them skin the sheep.

You must be new here, but your "legendary" status says otherwise. What did Gox, BTC-e and Stamp all do 2 years ago before we broke above $100? Were they losing their asses or did they open up because they knew it was a lucrative business even below $100?
I'd actually wager a guess that they make more money at lower prices because volumes are higher and more people are able to buy more with the same balance. Their actual USD fees wouldn't change much if at all but their BTC fees would double. Win win.

Win win just in theory. The exchange owners probably are large BTC holders, they would personally benefit much more from higher prices.

I guess my main point is that they flourished just fine for 3 years before we broke $100 and I don't understand why breaking below it now would make any difference to that. Sure, they may prefer higher prices, but that doesn't mean they go under. Only if people leave by the droves due to perceived failure would they end up hurting financially from such an event.

Tzupy

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1074

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 17, 2015, 03:18:42 PM

Quote from: cbeast on April 17, 2015, 05:00:50 AM

All centralized exchanges would shut down if that happened. Then truly decentralized exchanges would thrive. Let's see them skin the sheep.

You must be new here, but your "legendary" status says otherwise. What did Gox, BTC-e and Stamp all do 2 years ago before we broke above $100? Were they losing their asses or did they open up because they knew it was a lucrative business even below $100?
I'd actually wager a guess that they make more money at lower prices because volumes are higher and more people are able to buy more with the same balance. Their actual USD fees wouldn't change much if at all but their BTC fees would double. Win win.

Win win just in theory. The exchange owners probably are large BTC holders, they would personally benefit much more from higher prices.

RyNinDaCleM

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1009

Legen -wait for it- dary

Quote from: cbeast on April 17, 2015, 05:00:50 AM

All centralized exchanges would shut down if that happened. Then truly decentralized exchanges would thrive. Let's see them skin the sheep.

You must be new here, but your "legendary" status says otherwise. What did Gox, BTC-e and Stamp all do 2 years ago before we broke above $100? Were they losing their asses or did they open up because they knew it was a lucrative business even below $100?
I'd actually wager a guess that they make more money at lower prices because volumes are higher and more people are able to buy more with the same balance. Their actual USD fees wouldn't change much if at all but their BTC fees would double. Win win.

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

^^

futureofbitcoin

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: phoenix1 on April 17, 2015, 09:05:05 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm one of the 0% forced to vote for the 0-20 range, so I'm writing this post to file an official protest.

My humblest apologies for not allowing you to fully express yourself and forcing you to give the appearance that you might possibly be even slightly open to the possibility. Very pleased you feel able to talk about it now and relieve you angst. I will punch myself in the face several times as pennance. I hope that helps. After all, it was clearly a deliberate attempt to skew the poll to give us a misleading average greater than zero Cheesy

Would 1% intervals keep everyone happy? Or do we need to go to decimals ?

Any other 0-20 haters out there, c'mon, speak up, don't be shy!

*speaking for them*: Just change the poll such that the answers are either 0%, 0%, 0%, impossible, or no way in hell.

srgkrgkj

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1000

Quote from: phoenix1 on April 17, 2015, 09:05:05 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm one of the 0% forced to vote for the 0-20 range, so I'm writing this post to file an official protest.

My humblest apologies for not allowing you to fully express yourself and forcing you to give the appearance that you might possibly be even slightly open to the possibility. Very pleased you feel able to talk about it now and relieve you angst. I will punch myself in the face several times as pennance. I hope that helps. After all, it was clearly a deliberate attempt to skew the poll to give us a misleading average greater than zero Cheesy

Would 1% intervals keep everyone happy? Or do we need to go to decimals ?

Any other 0-20 haters out there, c'mon, speak up, don't be shy!

xD phoniex, well some people feel strongly about the success of Bitcoin and i might be one of them too lol

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm one of the 0% forced to vote for the 0-20 range, so I'm writing this post to file an official protest.

My humblest apologies for not allowing you to fully express yourself and forcing you to give the appearance that you might possibly be even slightly open to the possibility. Very pleased you feel able to talk about it now and relieve you angst. I will punch myself in the face several times as pennance. I hope that helps. After all, it was clearly a deliberate attempt to skew the poll to give us a misleading average greater than zero Cheesy

Would 1% intervals keep everyone happy? Or do we need to go to decimals ?

Any other 0-20 haters out there, c'mon, speak up, don't be shy!

NeuroticFish

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 6382

Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm one of the 0% forced to vote for the 0-20 range, so I'm writing this post to file an official protest.

That said double digits would mean that Bitcoin was completely abandoned by investors and almost everybody cashed out. I'm sure we're far from this extreme outcome.
There's still a chance we'll go below $200 for a bit, but we are already below the long term trend line so it won't last long.

You have been in here too early. The poll is still young and already more than 50% of us voted for 0-20%.
Don't make your assumptions too quick, your life will be easier then.

futureofbitcoin

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm one of the 0% forced to vote for the 0-20 range, so I'm writing this post to file an official protest.

That said double digits would mean that Bitcoin was completely abandoned by investors and almost everybody cashed out. I'm sure we're far from this extreme outcome.
There's still a chance we'll go below $200 for a bit, but we are already below the long term trend line so it won't last long.

I think many of the smartest folks are a bit more long term than that. Those who will abandon bitcoin when the price reaches double digits are mostly people who made 0 contributions to the system and don't really matter anyway. There will be enough people who will replace them in the next rally.

Correction. I HOPE that's the case.

futureofbitcoin

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

I would've voted for 0-100%, but since there was no such option, I just voted 40-60% since I wanted to see the results.

You see, I'm no market analyst so I have no clue what will happen. You guys can mentally remove 1 vote from 40-60% i guess

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: srgkrgkj on April 17, 2015, 07:44:03 AM

Quote from: phoenix1 on April 17, 2015, 07:41:15 AM

Quote from: srgkrgkj on April 17, 2015, 07:32:44 AM

Quote from: swansong on April 17, 2015, 07:10:16 AM

You should add another option = 0%.

lol thats what i was thinking too Tongue

but yeah i believe the chances of double digits are near 0 or 0.1 even in a flash crash this year ...

Bit late now as we dont know how many 0%'ers are already in the 0-20% category.
Next time ... goddam extremists Tongue

xD guess we should poll again lol they were pretty wide ranges tho :O

Intentionally so. I almost went for 10%, but I thought it would be easier for people to place themselves in a 20% band than agonise over which 10% range. Seemed a bit narrow. Personally I would find it difficult to quantify my feelings to that degree of precision Wink

0 or 100% woulda been fun in order to see the extremists, but also encourages trolling I think, and I am hoping we get honest votes and a representative result. Maybe 0-10 and 90-100 would be good to put into the mix next time ...

srgkrgkj

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1000

Quote from: phoenix1 on April 17, 2015, 07:41:15 AM

Quote from: srgkrgkj on April 17, 2015, 07:32:44 AM

Quote from: swansong on April 17, 2015, 07:10:16 AM

You should add another option = 0%.

lol thats what i was thinking too Tongue

but yeah i believe the chances of double digits are near 0 or 0.1 even in a flash crash this year ...

Bit late now as we dont know how many 0%'ers are already in the 0-20% category.
Next time ... goddam extremists Tongue

xD guess we should poll again lol they were pretty wide ranges tho :O

Topic: POLL:How likely do you think it is we see double digits in 2015? (Read 2686 times)