Topic: The Big Decentralized Alts (DOGE, LTC and XMR) - Speculation (Read 272 times)

In addition to what I wrote in the post before, I invite you to read about the theories and arguments about a "tail supply" (and why for example XMR has adopted such a scheme).

Even if there is "endless" "printing" of 10.000 DOGE per block, this means that, in comparison to the supply, the inflation (i.e. the equation "newly printed coins" / "available coin supply") is lower in each block*, even if there is no halving. This is because the newly printed amount is constant, while the supply increases, so the equation result in a lower value for each block.

"Demand will forever have to increase" would only be true if there were no lost coins at all. Lost coins however are happening constantly. And even if there were no lost coins, as I wrote the demand surplus needed would decrease with each block. Doge inflation is currently 3.727% per year, next year it will be 3.59%, and so reducing over time (in comparison, BTC has 1,5 and decreasing currently, but will sharply reduce to 0,7 next year; that looks better for hodlers of course, but also is a bit an obstacle for "as a currency" adoption).

Doge's tail supply also ensures its long-term security as there's always a reward for miners, and it may even have positive benefits for LTC's security (and thus its price evolution), because LTC's reward lowers like Bitcoin's, but as both coins are merged mined, a LTC miner will always be able to receive DOGE, and vice versa, so it's rational always for miners to mine both.

---

That's actually what the famous "Stock to flow" theory is all about, and it's the part I agree with - but they build a complete price theory around that concept with a predicted price evolution without taking into account demand, which I think is pseudocientific (in short: because scarcity != supply, scarcity == supply / demand).

How is the endless block rewards of 10,000 doge every minute a good thing?  It's literally one of the pillars of crypto and why this experiment was created to combat endless "printing"   demand will forever have to increase otherwise your buying power will always decrease.  Why would ypu hold doge long term?

I think it's time for a little update on the state of things regarding the three major decentralized altcoins.

First, let's talk about Monero (XMR). Coingecko shows us an interesting pattern: it was, in the last 90 days, almost 100% pegged to Bitcoin, following all of BTC's ups and (mostly) downs. There are only short term significative variations: so when bitcoin dipped from the 29k to the 26k level, Monero went up for some days, but then returning to the mean fastly, which is between 0.0054 and 0.0056 BTC.

Monero was in the past indeed one of the most stable altcoins, but this level of "peg" is surprising. I think there are good reasons to think this could be continue. However, that could change if Bitcoin turns bullish again. I would expect a price increase with respect to BTC in this case.


Source

Litecoin (LTC) instead suffered a major crash around and after its block reward halving date in August. In late August, after a bearish "glide", a single selloff event crashed it down into the 60-70$ area, or 0.0024-0.0025 in BTC. Since then however, it hovers around these values in a quite stable manner, and there were no major variations neither compared to the USD nor to BTC.

My guess for the following months is here that the further price development could be very dependant on the general market sentiment. If the market turns bullish, I guess LTC could recover even more than BTC. In the case of a continuation of the sideways market however it's not unlikely that we see another dip even compared to BTC. Anyway, I think surpassing the 0.0025 mark would imo trigger probably an uptrend, and the 0.00238 low should be held to prevent another dip.
 
In general terms I continue to think that LTC is long term undervalued, as it's a currency with a significant regular usage.


Source

Dogecoin (DOGE) had a similar selloff as LTC in late August, however it "only" crashed until the mid-year levels after a short uptrend in late July and early August. It then stabilized, but still is in a very slight bearish trend.

I think DOGE is the most speculative of all three decentralized alts. I have several times thought its time as a memecoin was over, but it surprised me a lot of times with new heights, in particular in the era when everybody and their grandpa traded Elon Musk's tweets. So while in my opinion it's maybe the coin with the least positive long term outlook (as it's used a lot less for transactions than LTC, for example, despite its reputation as a "tipping" cryptocurrency) I don't rule out that it can surprise me again and, for example, passes the 10 cent mark again eventually. For example, there's a real possibility for it to form a double bottom pattern. It continues to be a coin for gamblers


Source

For memecoins and "so-called DeFi" (which isn't decentralized) ETH is indeed a good choice. Even if memecoins do not need smart contracts (turing complete) at all. In BTC-style coins they work with OP_RETURN or the controversial (and quite inefficient) BRC-20 format, which for example was adopted also by a part of the LTC community (as "LTC-20").

But Bitcoin-style smart contracts, which would work better with Simplicity, work different than ETH's, so they're covering a different niche. There's normally no single smart contract owner, instead all parties involved own parts of the smart contract, i.e. they control different transactions, while in ETH normally it's one single monolithic smart contract transaction. Take Lightning, atomic swaps, discreet log contracts, decentralized options ... If LTC adopted Simplicity, and perhaps covenants (which would allow rollups) much of what's become possible on ETH would become possible there too, only in the Bitcoin-style, non-monolithic fashion.

And then there is the issue that ETH itself is not really decentralized. While it has improved, the founders and the foundation have still enough power to prevent protocol changes they don't want to support.

If you want more expressive smart contracts why not just use ETH?  I know there's a lot of hate for VB and ETH around these parts but ETH and its roll ups seem to work fine for what I need which these days is mostly just trading memecoin stuff and just play around DeFi stuff.

But the MWEB thing is interesting.  I will check it out.

I do agree that it sounds like they all got enough attention as it is and the rankings show that they are not ranked badly neither. I understand that they are not in the top 10 mostly, but even if not that is fine, they do not have to be high at the top, they all liked by one party of community or the other. They are not going away anywhere anytime soon, they all did what they promised to do and that's enough for it.

The fact that bull run is around the corner and in a year or so we are going to start seeing huge increases, would make sure that everything will be as normal as it gets for a long time and won't create any chaos at all. I understand that it may not be that great for the time being, but it can still do fine.

those coin already spreaded to many holder, and ltc mostly for chinese money laundry, xmr gain adoption in darkweb and already used widely,
while doge became musk toy and us retail adoption, the gold standar meme  but its already hit beyond sky and only small room to growth
while xmr banned in may country cus privacycoin, while ltc seem quite ok in the future

@adaseb: Im gemeral I agree with your post, with the exception of this sentence:
I think it's actually the other way around. The higher the market cap and above all the trading volume, the lower the incidence of halvings, because miners' importance as sellers shrinks if these indicators go up. (There's one exception: the first halving of a coin pumped to a high market cap).

Actually I believe the only halving which had incidence in BTC due to the reduced supply was the 2012 halving. Its consequence was that home mining became increasingly unprofitable, and thus people had to buy coins. In later halvings, miners were a seller group increasingly shrinking in importance, and it was already an "buy the rumors sell the news" event, like in 2016 when there was a pre-halving pump and a later dump. The 2017 and 2021 bull runs in my opinions had completely different triggers, they were demand driven; halving could have helped still in 2017 but not by much.

LTC is, if I'm not wrong, in terms of miner importance as sellers, already past Bitcoin in 2012. I believe thus that the supply reduction won't have incidence on price, maybe the halving can help a little bit due to the psychological boost. But as I wrote before, looking at LTC's history, its price is driven by other factors.

In contrast, in the case of a low cap coin where miners are the primary seller group, however, a halving can reduce the seller side supply significantly and thus push the price - but only if demand is constant or rising. Low cap coins normally are very volatile, so that depending on market direction, halving sometimes doesn't even help against a general dump.

@bittraffic: Why the nationality of the LTC holders is important for you?

LTC as far as I know is dominated by Chinese. There were discussions about these before China ban crypto but Bob Lee already influenced a lot of Chinese holding LTC.

Doge is decentralized if it weren't for Elon trolling about it all the time.  He could be holding more than 30% of its supply and XMR imight just be the only decentralized but I think majority of its holder are from dark web.

If I have to chose, I be going for Doge at least this one, I can still bag thousands.

Currently lite coin is not going anywhere. The way I see it is as follows. If we get a big pump a few days before. Then right after the halving there will be a big dump most likely.

Don’t think the lower supply will really affect the market price since it’s not as large cap as Bitcoin or Ethereum. I just think this is a pure buy the rumor and sell the news type of event.

Yes, for me I prefer Dogecoin (DOGE), Litecoin (LTC).
Although DOGE's performance has not been good in the recent period, I am optimistic about it in the future.
LTC's performance has been good over the past period, and I expect it to grow significantly in the near future.

The Litecoin halving, probably on August 2, is an event some are likely looking at to trade. Either because they think the price will rise due to the decreased supply, or because they expect volatility near the date.

I am generally a Litecoin supporter, and I also own a few, because I think it's currently the strongest and most solid decentralized alt-chain. However, I don't really have big expectations regarding this halving, so what I write here may not be what some may expect

Generally, Litecoin seems to react only in a weak fashion to halvings. Let's look at the LTC/BTC price over the years (LTC/BTC instead of LTC/USD, so the data isn't "contamined" by BTC price volatility):


Source: Yahoo Finance
The red dots are approximately the halving dates.

- In 2015, there was a big jump in price in the first half of the year: LTC/BTC went from 0.006 up to 0.018 - a x3! But after having reached this high in late June, it went all downhill. The halving was in August, and is barely (or not at all) visible in price.
- In 2019, LTC pumped hard again in the first months, this time from 0.008 BTC to 0.019. But again: The peak was well before the halving, at the end of March, and then LTC/BTC entered a bear market which lasted until 2022!

The absolute ATH of LTC/BTC wasn't in any way related to any halving: it occurred in early 2018, when it went to 0.023 BTC.

I have to admit that I've used Litecoin as an example to counter the Stock to flow theory (I don't think that this theory works, even if it may have some correlation to BTC price between 2012 and 2018 or so).

This does not mean that I'm bearish about LTC. LTC has recovered from the 2022 low pretty well and is looking good for the rest of the year in my opinion. But I don't think the halving has any importance for its success. This may be caused by the fact that miners are only a small part of sellers already, so demand plays a much bigger role than supply - just like it occurred to BTC.

You're correct, corrected

I don't understand what you mean here, can you explain? Do you mean that Litecoin has to continually improve because otherwise it's likely it will fail? (In this case I agree somewhat.)

Of course, there are lots of people who don't care and buy everything even if it's highly centralized. But these aren't the intended public of this thread

Strongly disagree. Let's have a simple example:

A car's unique selling proposition is to bring you faster from point A to B than on foot. If a car is as slow as going on foot, what's the point in buying one?

Cryptocurrencies were developed because they allow decentralized monetary systems, and decentralization is their USP. Why should I buy a cryptocurrency if it's as centralized as PayPal is?

(Of course this is an oversimplification. But even if you can "stake" a centralized cryptocurrency and thus "participate" - PayPal-like services could also offer you interest and the outcome would be almost the same one.)

I agree with you that decentralization alone is not enough to be successful as a cryptocurrency. But if decentralization is absent, then the strongest advantage of cryptocurrencies is simply not present. There are other advantages of cryptos, for example the ease to launch tokens on an established crypto platform without having to think about server security. I'm actually strongly supporting things like utility tokens. But the platform's decentralization continues to be the strongest USP for me. For example, what if a centralized project just gets bankrupt like Terra/Luna? That wouldn't happen to a decentralized currency.

Having these type of trust in decentralization is great but I feel like people do not have the same feeling towards this as one might think. I know that it is going to take a while before people could see it change anytime soon, but I also think that the best thing to do regarding this situation is that we should not be considering it as "that" important.

Not saying that decentralization is unimportant, just saying that investing into something just because it has decentralization doesn't mean anything. Sure it brings in some feature that is a positive, but that's about it, we are not going to see anything bigger or more major during that time at all, we are going to need a lot more for a project to keep on succeeding for longer.

That's the only good about that meme token, DOGE is a good alternative and pretty stable right now.
I don't know if XMR still doing great when it comes to being anonymous but I think this is also a sleeping giant. No doubt with LTC as well, its already a proven coin and I'm sure its value will start to rise as well as halving is near, expect holders to hold more LTC this year.

Litecoin was actually launched in 2011 if I am not wrong and it is one of the best alts out there because it is doing what it suppose to do and it is literally the lite version of bitcoin, it is not one people should ignore. It is also highly ranked as well and that means it is going to be around for a very long time.

Even after over a decade it can be staying this powerful which shows that no matter how many other coins with some new technological advancements happened in the crypto world, specially in blockchain world, we need to remember that it is going to be not that hard to stop this, and we need to make sure it happens a lot better. This is why it is quite important and needs to be reconsidered as a good thing for the time being.

This is indeed also the problem I have with DOGE. It's too dependant on Musk's tweets/actions. My stance for now is, as I don't believe it will really get major adoption inside the Twitter universe: Let it sleep a bit, once people forgot about Musk it may become again a good investment option. (And the project should really think about updating its code to a "modern" codebase with Segwit/Taproot.)

I believe this is actually a good thing, there's a "roof" created by the miners which decreases volatility at least a little bit. Not good for traders and bagholders, but better for the long-term viability. The issue with $1 or $5 is that this "looks" like it was still a low price, but it would be an enormous increase  (a ~x15 to ~x75) from the current value. Its large supply distorts expectations a bit, as people have a tendency to associate the value with its price per unit (coin) and not so much with market cap. So I think unfortunately it won't go to such a market cap value sustainably, taking into account the current state of the project (old codebase, Musk bagholders ..)

I think the "silver to BTC's gold" argument could make sense if LTC continues to experiment with features which are too controversial to add to BTC, like it did with MWEB. Maybe there's a possibility something like Simplicity could added to LTC (a language supporting more expressive smart contracts); that's a feature I'm pretty eager about for BTC but it may make sense to add it first to LTC. Basically, "silver to BTC's gold" would then mean: a bit more experimental and volatile and thus less valuable, but nevertheless a solid asset/currency.

DOGE is practically the money of the people, or how actually the Paper money works. If the people accept is going to worth. In terms of decentralization I go with BTC and one not so known token that some people might find risky $ARRR from Pirate Chain

I love doge just because it doesn't have any use lol, that aside, due to it's 1 doge transfer fees I use it as middle ground on instant exchanges. I think ltc also has low fee but doge gets confirmed faster on local exchange I transfer to. Doge memes counts a little as well.

I would possibly never go further than using them for quick transfers (doge, ltc.. have never used xmr).

You are right that people were very FOMO in 2020 and 2021 to buy Dogecoin about $0.7 because they believed that Musk will do something really big for Dogecoin. Their experience in the last two years would be painful if they did not cut loss soon enough. I am doubtful that they did cut loss with Dogecoin and most of them will hold Dogecoin, stacked more coins all the down of price in a long bear market.

I agree with you that Dogecoin has very strong resistance and selling pressure will be very huge which will need very big demand, buy up, forced liquidation to break $0.7 all time high. It will be impossible in 2023 but in next two years, with a bull run it will be more possible. I am more keen on forced liquidations will help Dogecoin to break $0.7 cap.