Topic: "Silver to bitcoin's gold" (Read 1741 times)

there's a new silver to Bitcoin's gold in town

http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/2013/09/11/copper-bars-beats-litecoin-per-coin-value/

Also HD-DVD was basically just a distraction that Microsoft and Toshiba threw money at without any real intention of supporting. They knew it was DoA.

You could argue that all commodities are "like" gold...but they're not gold...which is why they have their own name. I tried your test using BitGem, Goldcoin, and Diamond and the test subject chose diamond. At this point, I don't know anybody who hasn't at least heard of Bitcoin so I left it out of the test. So as soon as somebody rolls out PlatinumCoin the "power" of the Goldcoin name will be further diluted.

I have nothing against your coin...but I find it surprising if you really believe it will be #1 because of the name.

This isn't true at all, actually. It's like the HD-DVD vs Blu-ray debate several years back -- Blu-ray was the superior format...but a ton of money was backing HD-DVD and they were betting on the fact that consumers would prefer it due to the fact that the name makes more sense to them. Everybody knew what DVDs were...and everybody knew what HD was. This, of course, was not the case.

Another thing that doesn't make sense is that Goldcoin has nothing to do with gold. That would be like discovering a new element and calling it SilverRock even though it has no similarities to silver -- it's just confusing. You can't just give something a name that is associated with value and instantly everybody wants it -- most people aren't that dumb. By your logic, DiamondCoin should be the top coin. What if somebody comes out with PlatinumCoin? Also, there are a number of people that think Goldcoin is related to E-Gold/etc. The gold name has been tarnished with things like "shares of gold" schemes and jokes like cash-for-gold and more -- it's slowly being associated with scams in the digital world. The only type of gold I'd want to own would be physical gold bars and coins I can hold in my hand.

I'm not saying Goldcoin doesn't stand a chance...I'm just saying the name is probably hurting it more than anything with serious miners and investors. The second I saw the name Goldcoin, I thought "cheap junkcoin." I have done no research on it (simply haven't had a chance -- too many irons in the fire) so I'm not accusing Goldcoin of being junk -- just saying that's what the name implied to me. It's a digital currency we're talking about -- that's why bitcoin is so perfect. It's a new concept to most people and unless Goldcoin is actually backed by gold what's the point? If it's not tied to the value of gold in any way it's just misleading/confusing more than anything.

Litecoin could potentially fail -- the value has been stagnant for quite a while. However, it's hands down #2 right now and there are a ton of services/etc (and even more in the works) -- it just has a huge headstart. The name is irrelevant, really. If it fails, I assure you it wouldn't be due to the name.

No offense intended, but investing your time and money into a currency primarily because of the name is pretty naive, really.

Yeah it actually had little to do with the name, so much as some of the updates that were implemented to it were not very transparent, it tried to actively compete and best Bitcoin which already had a somewhat established userbase and market, and more than a few people weren't a fan of the the dev. RealSolid is a brilliant dev, however his demeanor used to rub some people the wrong way.

If you think the ALT coin with the best name will win the ALT coin wars, purely for the reason of what its name is, then I am afraid you will be disappointed.

It will be about which coin is best, has the most uses and features, the strongest community support, the most talented developers, etc.

For instance, I don't think most sane people invest in Google for the sake the companies name is Google. It is because they are a solid, innovative company that produces quality services and products.

If you would be so kind as to indulge me. I would like to use some assumptions and logic to make some predictions.

The future always repeats the past. However, we don't know the past perfectly, so we cannot know the future perfectly.

What we know:

-Bitcoin was the first cryptocurrency to successfully launch.
-Bitcoin is currently the cryptocurrency with the highest price.

-Litecoin was the second cryptocurrency to successfully launch.
-For a long time, it was the cryptocurrency with the second highest price.

-Bitcoin's design was truly marvelous, yet we know it has so much room for innovation.
-Changing Bitcoin's protocols is difficult, and it only gets more difficult as its network grows. Yet, its value and security is closely linked to the size of its network.

-New cryptocurrencies, like PPCoin, PrimeCoin, NameCoin, FreiCoin, and BitGems, to name a few, introduce new technologies.
-All other things being equal, technically these coins have more value than the older coins like litecoin and bitcoin because they have adopted new ideas.

Conclusions I make:

-Buy the best altcoins you can find.
-Ignore hype.
-Learn as much as you can about the technology behind cryptocurrencies.

Personally, I would recommend NovaCoin because it implements both proof-of-stake and Scrypt, although I need to learn more about the alledged scam its inventor pulled.
Second, I would recommend OrbitCoin, just released a few weeks ago, if it catches on and if 0% proof-of-stake stands up to analysis.

Thanks. I'll get off my soapbox now.

You never took a Psychology class did you?

One of the most important factors in hooking the consumer is called the mere exposure effect.

Basically, the more you are exposed to something, the more you will prefer it.

Sure, brand name is important, but I'd say LTC/BTC is light years ahead of GLD in terms of advertising and general awareness.

Do keep in mind though, when Litecoin was created, Bitcoin, Solidcoin, and Litecoin were the only major coins. The Bitcoin community didn't like the Solidcoin community, the Litecoin community didn't like the Solidcoin community, and Bitcoin and Litecoin liked each other pretty well. Thats where the terms came from, that and the fact that Litecoin was designed to be complementary to Bitcoin, so there were many many analogies. I might check through some very old threads to find more.

Bitcoin was the Big Brother to Litecoin, Bitcoin was Gold to Litecoin's Silver, and a lot of other bad metaphors. There were a few other coins kicking around at the time or shortly after, however many of them didn't gain much traction until the boom, where it became fashionable to create your own coin over a boring Saturday. I think had Solidcoin not been the bad guy that Bitcoin and Litecoin users could both harass, there wouldn't be that old bond dynamic between them.

However, I should mention, I did like Solidcoin, twas neat.

The saying that "Litecoin is silver to Bitcoin's gold" is just basically a marketing campaign, and with all marketing campaigns you need to take the information for what it's worth and do your own research.

It actually originated from the founder of Litecoin himself (Coblee), and most of the Litecoin community seems to have adopted the saying as Litecoin's official motto.

I do not particularly think it is either true or untrue. Whether that is truly the case is certainly debatable. Again, take it for what it's worth.. basically a marketing slogan.

Death&Taxes: I love that picture. Well played.  

http://xkcd.com/605/

What will be comedy gold is when the price of GLD takes a dive to 0 and MicroGuy the great starts freaking out.

More like just as HARD lol..... tis where BTC FAILS

Well I don't find that much better.  If I need to spend a quarter Bitcoin I can.  The OP got it exactly right it is a simplistic saying.  Silver and copper currency evolved because the purchasing power of gold was so high and the PRACTICAL LIMITATIONS OF REAL WORLD COINAGE puts a finite limit on useful coins.


As an example the US gold dollar (circa 1849) it was smaller than a dime and about 1/3rd lighter.  The average unskilled laborer made about a dollar a day in 1849.  What the hell was he going to do with a gold coin.  Can you imagine your employer giving you a coin smaller than dime and about 1/3rd as light for an entire day's salary.  The workers daily expenses (food, entertainment, etc) would obviously be less than a dollar.  What was the government going to do mint coins 1/10th the size of a dime containing 0.15 grams of gold?  Of course not.  The real world has physical limitations.  It was far easier to make coins out of silver everything from the tiny 3 cent silver piece up to $5 silver coin.  It is very likely a laborer never saw a gold coin .... ever.  What would be point just to get it and immediately need to exchange it for silver?

With Bitcoin one can spent 1/100,000th of a BTC just as easily as 100,000 BTC.  The idea that it needs complimentary coinage is silly.  I think some crypto-currency which compliments Bitcoin will come along but it would just be something that is a drop in replacement with 4 times as many coins.  It will be some outside the box thinking. 

GLD - top lel, comedy gold, top kek, etc
really? is this a joke?

Truth

-- you should get an act!  

In my opinion, the silver and gold thing is a horrible analogy. I know some will debate it, but I really don't see Crypto Coins as a solution to storing value. I see Crypto Currencies as a better solution to Fiat, where you earn it, and spend it, you don't hold it. Crypto Currencies aren't stable enough to be a long term store of value, many people however have just been lucky enough that they bought in before it went up, rather than the other way around.

When people say Bitcoin's gold to Litecoin's silver, Its more like Bitcoin's Dollar to Litecoin's Quarter, but people don't like to associate cryptos with fiat, so the analogy became a way to say that Litecoin will be Bitcoin's partner.

I think Copper Bars will be the Copper to BTC's Gold, even if it is priced at 4 LTC each right now