the ones who are saving wont sell it. . .
and i mean saving - NOT hoarding.
Topic: What happens if some1 rich buys it all? (Read 3305 times)
This has already happened.
Bitcoins are only actually worth about a penny each, but an investor came along and started buying them up slowly driving them up slowly until they were above 100 dollars.
Now he has stopped and the price has just stagnated and people are looking at each other, wondering what to do. And wondering why many of them spent $100+ on a coin that doesn't actually exist.
Bitcoins are only actually worth about a penny each, but an investor came along and started buying them up slowly driving them up slowly until they were above 100 dollars.
Now he has stopped and the price has just stagnated and people are looking at each other, wondering what to do. And wondering why many of them spent $100+ on a coin that doesn't actually exist.
Yes, it has happened already with Avalon and ASIC miner, and both those companys are at the top of the game that I mentioned earlier. You must use bitcoins to buy millions of dollars worth of Avalon chips and ASIC miner blades/shares. They then hold to inflate the value even more.
I don't agree with you on your position that bitcoin is worth a penny and does not exist. If each bitcoin is worth even a penny then it exists. The program is what exists and it has value. I know you can't touch it but its there.
Without going off into detail let me just say that bitcoin is worth more than you think in the short term. Long term? Who knows. 
I think the better question is "What if someone rich sells it all?"
This has already happened.
Bitcoins are only actually worth about a penny each, but an investor came along and started buying them up slowly driving them up slowly until they were above 100 dollars.
Now he has stopped and the price has just stagnated and people are looking at each other, wondering what to do. And wondering why many of them spent $100+ on a coin that doesn't actually exist.
Bitcoins are only actually worth about a penny each, but an investor came along and started buying them up slowly driving them up slowly until they were above 100 dollars.
Now he has stopped and the price has just stagnated and people are looking at each other, wondering what to do. And wondering why many of them spent $100+ on a coin that doesn't actually exist.
This might work... If you can achieve and maintain "amazing product" monopoly on free market. But I do not think that real monopoly is possible without state cooperation.
You won't need a monopoly at all. In fact, you usually just have to be the first to market with a cool gadget. Or be a company where people will buy your products because they have an edge. Like apple. Wait untill 3d holograms or virtual reality systems are perfected. The first to market with a good working system could take billions of dollars in pre sales alone. These will be big ticket items that everyone will want in their homes.
This might work... If you can achieve and maintain "amazing product" monopoly on free market. But I do not think that real monopoly is possible without state cooperation.
unless there was something vary importaint you could only get with bitcoins.. causing the price to be high as people would be willing to pay almost anything for it.
Bingo. Thats the last piece. I've always thought that this right here is why bitcoin will stay around. Once you have enough coins and own a lot of mining power your ready. Then you sell items exclusively for bitcoin. Lets say its the future and 1BTC equals $100,000. You sell your amazing product at a 5% discount to cash in bitcoin instead. So even after the exchange rate your customers still feel like their money is going further. They all now are forced to know how to use bitcoin and they now all have a wallet.
Say you can buy the next generation neural net virtual reality on pre-order, but only using bitcoin. The system you want is valued at $10,000. You can only pay with bitcoin. But it sells for 0.095BTC which only cost you $9,500 in cash to get. You can scale this as the price of bitcoin goes through the roof with people trying to buy to make a purchase. With each generation of product you make the price in bitcoin a little less, encouraging people to hold knowing that the value will rise due to a guaranteed demand for coins. The people holding only drive the price higher. And the pre-order sales keep driving the coins right back into your pocket. Eventually you get most of the coins and you can set the price because you are the one selling most of them. You sell them back to your customers through exchanges and they trade them right back to you for a product.
This would keep people valuing bitcoin at insanely high levels. If you had multiple products that people would do anything to pre-order your set. Think if apple only offered its next i-pad 3D and i-phone hologram (or whatever the new tech is) for customers paying with bitcoins...seriously. Once someone starts doing something like this to pump the value of bitcoin its going to the moon. But what if they did this with a bitcoin spin off that is exactly the same as bitcoin, but not our bitcoin. What would that do to the value of bitcoin? Crypto coins have some amazing potential for manipulation once people start to throw some real money behind them.
What happens when some super rich buys all the land and houses in a country?
(Considering the government does not cooperate with this rich one, that means only way of buying is voluntary exchange and not for example state tolerated blackmailing, bribing authority and police, usage of force, etc.)
(Considering the government does not cooperate with this rich one, that means only way of buying is voluntary exchange and not for example state tolerated blackmailing, bribing authority and police, usage of force, etc.)
Ok, then we'd let them buy them all and using all the money we get from that, we all switch to ppcoin which implements proof of share alongside proof of work.
Why would someone throw away their money crashing a market when they can just pay the government to shut it down?
You do it throughout the inflationary period of bitcoin. At which point bitcoin has replaced dollar, you as the govt own most of it, all the while you have also been cornering the block chain by ramping up govt controlled cpu power. You then set your miners to ignore zero fee / low fee, thus effectively enforcing a minimum price for transactions that have any need to go through quickly. Now you are taxing the world. Welcome to The New New Order!
I'd agree your plot is feasible, but as NewLiberty put it, the cat is out the bag.
I see Bitcoin as voluntary, you are not coerced into using it, (maybe you are if Fiat is collapsing - and that is part of your plan)
So given the voluntary nature, why not switch to a new crypto currency and avoid the monopolistic tax, or even carry on under a different fork? (problematic for obvious reasons and not inviting an answer to the forking idea)
They didn't go bankrupt "because they tried to monopolise silver", they went bankrupt because COMEX changed the rules of the game.
You don't buy *all* the bitcoin, you would just buy enough of it.
You are the US govt. You have infinite money. You buy anything below market price, and put it back up for sale at some percentage higher. The market will trened higher, and you will gradually accumulate bitcoin all of which was bougth for less then the market price.
The more you own the more scarce a commodity it becomes and this is what will support the price. You do it throughout the inflationary period of bitcoin. At which point bitcoin has replaced dollar, you as the govt own most of it, all the while you have also been cornering the block chain by ramping up govt controlled cpu power. You then set your miners to ignore zero fee / low fee, thus effectively enforcing a minimum price for transactions that have any need to go through quickly. Now you are taxing the world. Welcome to The New New Order!
You don't buy *all* the bitcoin, you would just buy enough of it.
You are the US govt. You have infinite money. You buy anything below market price, and put it back up for sale at some percentage higher. The market will trened higher, and you will gradually accumulate bitcoin all of which was bougth for less then the market price.
The more you own the more scarce a commodity it becomes and this is what will support the price. You do it throughout the inflationary period of bitcoin. At which point bitcoin has replaced dollar, you as the govt own most of it, all the while you have also been cornering the block chain by ramping up govt controlled cpu power. You then set your miners to ignore zero fee / low fee, thus effectively enforcing a minimum price for transactions that have any need to go through quickly. Now you are taxing the world. Welcome to The New New Order!
Why does anyone think that this is not already happening?
The defense is slow and continuous selling from the large holders and exchange for real assets such as gold/silver/property/asic miners/means of production.
This is already happening now, and more Bitcoin enter the market from the miners. It is a wise design with much safety built in.
It becomes very expensive to kill one of these crypto-currencies, and a new one can start.
Try putting the cat back in the bag.
I know it's impractical and can't be done within probably even a day nor a week, but what would happen if someone very rich would like to spend ~1 billion on bitcoins and buy it all?
At first glance looks like it would be the end. Thinking a bit more it suggests that the later bitcoins would be so expensive that even he couldn't afford it, but he would have so much that could make a huge profit out of it.
If there's someone more literate than me in economics, I'd love a detailed and argumented response.
At first glance looks like it would be the end. Thinking a bit more it suggests that the later bitcoins would be so expensive that even he couldn't afford it, but he would have so much that could make a huge profit out of it.
If there's someone more literate than me in economics, I'd love a detailed and argumented response.
This has bee discussed before.
1) you go bankrupt as did the Hunt brothers - in there attempt to monopolise silver. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Bunker_Hunt
2) an amazing feature of Bitcoin not often discussed is if you have them all they become worthless.
So in conclusion even if you think you have the means you don't, and if you were successful you have gained nothing.
They didn't go bankrupt "because they tried to monopolise silver", they went bankrupt because COMEX changed the rules of the game.
You don't buy *all* the bitcoin, you would just buy enough of it.
You are the US govt. You have infinite money. You buy anything below market price, and put it back up for sale at some percentage higher. The market will trened higher, and you will gradually accumulate bitcoin all of which was bougth for less then the market price.
The more you own the more scarce a commodity it becomes and this is what will support the price. You do it throughout the inflationary period of bitcoin. At which point bitcoin has replaced dollar, you as the govt own most of it, all the while you have also been cornering the block chain by ramping up govt controlled cpu power. You then set your miners to ignore zero fee / low fee, thus effectively enforcing a minimum price for transactions that have any need to go through quickly. Now you are taxing the world. Welcome to The New New Order!
If one guy tries to buy 100 billion USD worth of bitcoin, the following happens:
1. The exchange price will shot up quickly until he exhausted all his USD, if he is lucky enough, he might get about 10% of all the coins, and one coin might worth 1 million + USD
2. The bitcoin economy will boom and generate many billionares in the mean time
3. Bitcoin get worldwide acceptance and become the de facto world currency reserve
Considering that FED is printing 85 billion USD per month, 100 billion USD is really nothing for those money printers, it's just a matter of their interest, and I believe they will be interested in it sooner or later
The only way to acquire a large amount of bitcoin without sending the price to moon is quietly buy it during a long time period, like twins did last year, but now when price has settled at this level, even if someone want to buy 1% of coin, the exchange price will at least double
1. The exchange price will shot up quickly until he exhausted all his USD, if he is lucky enough, he might get about 10% of all the coins, and one coin might worth 1 million + USD
2. The bitcoin economy will boom and generate many billionares in the mean time
3. Bitcoin get worldwide acceptance and become the de facto world currency reserve
Considering that FED is printing 85 billion USD per month, 100 billion USD is really nothing for those money printers, it's just a matter of their interest, and I believe they will be interested in it sooner or later
The only way to acquire a large amount of bitcoin without sending the price to moon is quietly buy it during a long time period, like twins did last year, but now when price has settled at this level, even if someone want to buy 1% of coin, the exchange price will at least double
If someone bought 75% of all btc, if the utility of btc still exceeded that of other cryptocurrencies, then the remaining resources used to acquire btc would then be divvied up among the remaining coins, wouldnt it?
why would a theoretically infinitely divisible currency be less valuable, less useful, if you had to use satoshis rather than millis, or millis rather than full btc's? (assuming the majority holder wasnt intentionally destabilizing the currency)
i think this question is practically the same as 'what if 75% of all btc were destroyed?'
you would move the decimal and get on with your day
why would a theoretically infinitely divisible currency be less valuable, less useful, if you had to use satoshis rather than millis, or millis rather than full btc's? (assuming the majority holder wasnt intentionally destabilizing the currency)
i think this question is practically the same as 'what if 75% of all btc were destroyed?'
you would move the decimal and get on with your day
It's not the same, an owner of 75% might chenge his mind and sell it all at once. Lost coins cannot be sold.
I know it's impractical and can't be done within probably even a day nor a week, but what would happen if someone very rich would like to spend ~1 billion on bitcoins and buy it all?
At first glance looks like it would be the end. Thinking a bit more it suggests that the later bitcoins would be so expensive that even he couldn't afford it, but he would have so much that could make a huge profit out of it.
If there's someone more literate than me in economics, I'd love a detailed and argumented response.
At first glance looks like it would be the end. Thinking a bit more it suggests that the later bitcoins would be so expensive that even he couldn't afford it, but he would have so much that could make a huge profit out of it.
If there's someone more literate than me in economics, I'd love a detailed and argumented response.
It is simply not possible to buy it all even with an infinite amount of money. The simple reason is that not all bitcoins are for sale. Currently, the only ones that can be purchased are on the exchanges. If someone spent a large amount of money on the exchange, the exchange rate would rise and this would probably lead to other coins being available on the exchange, but it would never lead to all the coins being available on the exchange.
Many people won't let go of their coins for less than $10,000 each. If the price is rising 100% per month, they may even increase this threshold to $100,000 or $500,000. Thus, the new market cap becomes $5 trillion instead of $1 billion.
If someone bought 75% of all btc, if the utility of btc still exceeded that of other cryptocurrencies, then the remaining resources used to acquire btc would then be divvied up among the remaining coins, wouldnt it?
why would a theoretically infinitely divisible currency be less valuable, less useful, if you had to use satoshis rather than millis, or millis rather than full btc's? (assuming the majority holder wasnt intentionally destabilizing the currency)
i think this question is practically the same as 'what if 75% of all btc were destroyed?'
you would move the decimal and get on with your day
why would a theoretically infinitely divisible currency be less valuable, less useful, if you had to use satoshis rather than millis, or millis rather than full btc's? (assuming the majority holder wasnt intentionally destabilizing the currency)
i think this question is practically the same as 'what if 75% of all btc were destroyed?'
you would move the decimal and get on with your day
well at least if someone buys it its proably more easy to get it back out in the system
What's the difference between one persion buying 75% of all the btc, and 75% of all btc being lost or destroyed?
A lot or not much. Depends on the scenarios. wouldn't it be possible to detect if one entity was buying them all? If it looked as if that were happening people would stop selling altogether.
Never underestimate the power of greed.Someone's buying a lot -> prices go up -> people will sell their pants off.
Jump to: