Topic: Tulip Mania 2.0 - page 2. (Read 573 times)

it will be the same and no matter how many years it would take for btc to live , they will still call it a tulip because they are nocoiners or btc haters .

bitcoin is going somewhere , not because it will take the money of the investors and scam them but because it is successful and have alot of achievements  .

nft's real purpose are for collection and not to expect anything in return so i dont consider them as a bubble but if there are bubbles in here , they can be the scam projects like the meme coins , ico's , defi  .

Many experts believe the virtual currency is set to dominate financial transactions which has led to substantial trading in the bitcoin domain. The digital currency strengthened to an all-time high. The ease of cross-border operations without the need for central bank support attracts many people to park their funds in Bitcoin investments.  Scarcity is considered one of the main causes of the rally, only 21 million bitcoins are in existence, currently, 90% in circulation. The price of Bitcoin is determined in a free market regime and is not affected by monetary policy. Although Bitcoin enthusiasts believe that the rise of virtual currencies is inevitable, history offers a word of warning.

But now you've given an example of gold's intrinsic value- use in jewelry.  The value comes from it's intrinsic properties; not people speculating on it's value, but actual use.  That's not where bitcoin's value comes from, nor NFTs.  In both cases, that value comes exclusively from speculation on the future value of them, based solely on a mass assumption of future worth.  To differentiate, gold as a store of value is completely arbitrary, just like bitcoin.  But gold still has a demand outside of store of value (the intrinsic value of gold) and bitcoin and NFTs do not.  That's the difference between bitcoin and gold and why there's no difference between bitcoin and NFTs.

There is no swap or exchange for NFT that puts in that type of situation, which is why there is no stop-loss. It is an asset and not a currency, there will be 21 million bitcoins, all are the same bitcoin, does the same thing, it is just one bitcoin. NFT's are all different, all worth differently, you can't have a market like that for a stop loss.

You decide on the value, the buyer and the seller decides it, and for each single individual one as well. What can you do? You can always put it for sale for a million dollars, and one day if it actually worths that then it will be bought, but that is for going up, for going down if you put it on sale for cheap then it will be sold right away and you will lose. You need to be constantly active and constantly checking the prices to decide how much it worths at that point, which many won't do.

During the crash, was there a stop-loss for NFT? NO! Because that market is not like the cryptocurrency market, or the stock market/commodity market where LIQUIDITY can protect you from big losses. A price of a $1,000,000 NFT can crash to $10,000 during an economic depression.

NFTs are the ICOs of this bull run.

There are simply way too many projects that can be created for virtually no cost for the current price tags on these things.

The people who have levered up to "flip" NFTs as a lifestyle will see their capital get wiped away fairly quickly when things go south in my opinion. It is truly a mania right now.

Correct, this is a bubble, people hear stories about people earning a fortune with NFTs and they want the same for themselves, they do not stop to ask themselves where that money is going to come from, and while maybe there are a few NFTs that have the chance to maintain their value and maybe they could even go up, the vast majority of the NFTs will never go through something like that so in my opinion most people are effectively throwing their money away.

It sounds like you're mistaking what makes mania. It's not duration, it's severity of the bubble.  Nobody ever knows they're in a bubble until after it pops, otherwise you'd never have bubbles.  People buying tulips during the tulip bubble didn't know they were buying into a bubble, just like the people buying houses in 2007 didn't know they were buying into a bubble, just like (for all you know) the people buying bitcoin now don't know they're buying into a bubble.  It is impossible to dispel the non-existence of a bubble contemporaneously, it's something that can only be known after-the-fact.

No, I didn't. I'm sorry to have made that impression on you, but I didn't miss your point. The thing is that I'm always trying to write posts that aim not only to someone I'm replying to, but to other people who might read my post also.


If you think of it, it could be said about almost anything. Take gold, for instance. We all know that gold is highly efficient and, at the same time, corrosion-free conductor which makes it irreplaceable in electronics. But do you know that today 80% of the newly obtained gold is used in jewellery manufacture? So, the main demand is coming from that field, jewellery, and thus it's the main factor that affects the price. Now, why do people think that gold jewellery is valuable despite the fact that gold can be replaced by materials that look absolutely the same but thousand times cheaper? Maybe because, using your words, there are large groups of people who arbitrarily agree it is? 

I’m technically very stupid, but I believe it is through the Mastercoin/Omni protocol, and the Counterparty protocol. The Ethereum shitcoin blockchain can’t be trusted because it’s not on a path to ossification. It wants changes, revolutionary changes which is bad for stability.

This is 100% the case.

I believe that people are even neglecting regular cryptos that will actually decentralize the landscape we live in for these short term fads.

There are so many stories of people that are making millions of dollars in a short period of time and that is acting as the stimulus to get new money in. When new money stops flooding in and regulators jump on board, this mania will be over in dramatic fashion.

NFT are a sign of the boom because they cannot stay liquid under any monetary deflation which requires the sale of assets.   Doesnt mean they have to be worthless then but without a price for years might occur because there isnt an effective market for them at that time.   I dont think NFT is far off the rare pepe meme where people just make some iteration I always thought it was a joke but life imitates art perhaps

The problem with the NFT market is precisely their non-fungible nature, when it comes to bitcoin there is a very clear indication on how much interest the market has thanks to the volume, and since all bitcoins are in theory the same then you know exactly how much interest there is in the bitcoin market, however when it comes to NFTs even if we assume there will be a huge market in a few years there is no guarantee there will be any market for the NFTs you bought and you will not know this is the case until you try to sell them and no one wants them.

I don't know what Wind is talking about but Bitcoin originally don't allow such things. However, there are side chains like RSK would allow them. They add  unnecessary complexity so they are not really popular when compared to ETH, so I can't blame you for not using those. Side chain stuff on btc just didn't make the same impact which ETH accomplished.

Kinda missed my point.  I'm not talking about the literal differences between bitcoin and NFTs, I'm talking about what makes each "valuable."  You probably should have been able to pick that up from the context of the rest of the post.  Your post didn't address the substance of my post, which is how are you drawing an arbitrary line between NFTs and Bitcoin and trying to pretend they're different when it's the exact same thing that makes each valuable- large groups of people who arbitrarily agree they are.

And you're grossly overstating Bitcoin's utility as a payment method.  15k businesses worldwide is nothing, and extreme volatility makes it a piss poor currency.  Bitcoin is a speculative asset, same as NFTs.  Anyone pretending otherwise is perpetrating a fiction.




Fair enough, but everything you're saying about NFTs are the exact same thing that's been said about Bitcoin (and continues to be said about Bitcoin by the naysayers) that you take such exception to.  You're just drawing a line that around NFTs and saying "Come on, how is that going to be worth anything in the future?" the same way the mainstream financial media has been doing about bitcoin since it started gaining widespread notoriety.  It does remain highly amusing to me that anyone who thinks bitcoin is the future uses the same arguments against NFTs that they have rejected against Bitcoin for the last 10 years without a hint of irony.  Highly amusing.

Is that even possible? I did not know that NFT's could be in bitcoin blockchain as well, I assumed that the blockchain of bitcoin doesn't allow such things to happen. I am fine with ETH by the way, their blockchain is fine and their price is fine as well and certainly do not consider it a shitcoin. The NFT's in ada, sol and similar stuff would be bad in the future, those are still not "shit" coins as we can see from their rank but just because something is top 10 doesn't mean it will stay in top 10.

ETH on the other hand has been second ranked for a long time, way too long and I do not think that it will drop anytime soon. The reason why most people here do believe that NFT's are like tulip mania 2.0 is because they do not really have a value on their own, people put value in it but they are useless as well that's the problem, bitcoin can be sent or received, eth could be used for many things, NFT's are... just NFT.

More than not having any clue what they're talking about, they're probably ignorant and bitter about crypto too because you wouldn't talk shit when you have a stake or interest in something. Or much worse, these types of people are just plain envious of the people that have crypto and making a lot of money from it.

You can argue for that, and I would respect it. Plus using ONLY the market as the main standpoint for your argument, I would say you’re right. But Bitcoin is more than the market. It’s also the protocol, the incentive structure, EVERYTHING about it that makes the system stick together IS the true value. NFTs are issued somewhere in a shitcoin blockchain that might not exist in 10 years.

The “art” in NFT are also not good. Most of them are worthless or will be, and stupid. It’s Tulip Mania 2.0.

Well, to give you a short answer, Bitcoin is a payment method, and NFTs are far from it.

You can buy BTC for $48k apiece, and since Bitcoin is accepted by 15,000 businesses worldwide, including major companies like PayPal, Microsoft, AT&T, Starbucks etc., the same day you can pay for their goods and services at more or less the same rate. Theoretically, we could be doing the same thing with NFTs using barter system, but good luck with buying an NFT for $48k and expecting provision of goods and services for this amount.

How are NFTs different from Bitcoin at all?  The value of each is based only on speculation, they're premised on a manufactured scarcity to give the impression of being valuable because they are somewhat rare, people are only interested in them as a get rich quick vehicle... the comparison is perfect. I see no difference between NFTs and Bitcoin, so for someone to criticize NFTs as an investment vehicle and not crypto is the peak of cognitive dissonance to me.