Pages:
Author

Topic: What happens when BTC is too expensive to buy? (Read 3853 times)

legendary
Activity: 2097
Merit: 1070
November 07, 2013, 04:39:30 AM
#49
I agree with Coinseeker. The higher the price of Bitcoin, the more people will look for alternatives. I wouldn't have a problem switching to something really better. You can not make a better gold, it is unique, but you can make a better crypto. I am sure these high prices and popularity of Bitcoin are really good incentives for people to improve the crypto tech. The infrastructure will naturally follow.

You're right here.

Something better is coming. It's looming on the horizon.
hero member
Activity: 631
Merit: 500
So the question is, what's more important.  Bitcoin as a speculative commodity?  Or Bitcoin as a store of value and payment medium?


Bitcoin advantage is it is used already as a payment medium, many merchants use Bitcoin as a pay option. The speculation and trading is secondary as some people see profit can be made here.
full member
Activity: 200
Merit: 100
I don't even know where to start on this thread. So I am not going to. Have a nice day.

+1
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070

Bitcoin is the gold of the crypto world. Yes there might be need for silver too. But you don't seem to understand that gold is a good store of value not because of any superior quality over other metals but because of it's scarcity. And people need a good store of value.

Just because something is rare, does not make it valuable.  It's only "gold" because you say so.  Litecoin is the "silver" because people say so.  It's really arbitrary.  Gold is a good store of value for many more reasons than it's scarcity.    That's also why the comparison of Bitcoin to Gold is ridiculous to me.  Gold is beautiful, tangible, can be molded into art, jewelry, used as a conductor, requires nothing else to exist, has been proven over thousands of years and yes it's rare.  Bitcoin is just rare in brand name.  But is abundant as crypto.  It's nothing like gold.  It's not beautiful, tangible, it can't be molded into anything or used in a circuit board, etc, etc.  It's been proven over a mere couple of years and it certainly can not exist on its own.  It requires the internet, which requires electricity, which requires fuel, which requires infrastructure, which requires taxes, which requires government.  

Point is, it's nothing like gold and it will never be as good as gold at storing value for many reasons but the most obvious being, there will always be some form of counter party risk related to Bitcoin.  Bitcoin and all of crypto is dependent on something else to exist, thus it's existence can be terminated by someone or something else at anytime.  If I own actual gold, it's all mine.  See the difference? One is real, the other is merely an illusion of the mind.  So by that stance, crypto and the value it stores, is only as safe as the government, taxes, infrastructure, fuel, electricity and internet that props it up.  For any signficant storage of value, I think I'll stick with real gold but hey, that's me.




Man, all your posts are weak sauce. You offer opinion only, no facts. No real substantial arguments for anything you write.

When the Spanish invaded Peru, they kidnapped one of the Inca leaders and asked for all their gold. The Incas were relieved and gave them all of it, because they didn't think Gold was anything special. This argument for why gold is so special is bullcrap. Its not the most precious metal. Its not the most utilized metal. Its not the most beautiful metal. Its simple given value by public opinion. And hype.

Bitcoin, unlike gold can be used for business to customer transactions, business to business tranactions, frictionless exchange, borderless exchange, mobile purchasing. Like gold it can me a store of wealth asset, but unlike Gold it only have a finite amount.

You absolutely fail to realize that Gold is valuable because of the massive amount of power, money and interest in keeping it so.

And that is exactly the point I make with BTC. One integrated into society, it will have a massive amount of power, money and interest from people and institutions that will want to make sure it maintains its value.

All this pie in the sky utopian hopes you have for a multi-crypto currency world, rubbish. Maybe in 2050 there will be several cryptos, serving different purposes. But in the near future, BTC will have a tremendous, probably insurmountable lead as the worlds leading crypto currency. Nothing out there offers a game changer in that regard.

You made your bet with Ripple. Lets talk again in 5 years.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1010
Borsche
good to see that it didnt talk more than post #4 for the original poster to be rightly ridiculed for not understanding basic math

That, but it is also sad to see how many people are seriously replying to OP Smiley How can you be into cryptocurrencies and not even know how to add and subtract? Amazing.
sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250

Bitcoin is the gold of the crypto world. Yes there might be need for silver too. But you don't seem to understand that gold is a good store of value not because of any superior quality over other metals but because of it's scarcity. And people need a good store of value.

Just because something is rare, does not make it valuable.  It's only "gold" because you say so.  Litecoin is the "silver" because people say so.  It's really arbitrary.  Gold is a good store of value for many more reasons than it's scarcity.    That's also why the comparison of Bitcoin to Gold is ridiculous to me.  Gold is beautiful, tangible, can be molded into art, jewelry, used as a conductor, requires nothing else to exist, has been proven over thousands of years and yes it's rare.  Bitcoin is just rare in brand name.  But is abundant as crypto.  It's nothing like gold.  It's not beautiful, tangible, it can't be molded into anything or used in a circuit board, etc, etc.  It's been proven over a mere couple of years and it certainly can not exist on its own.  It requires the internet, which requires electricity, which requires fuel, which requires infrastructure, which requires taxes, which requires government.  

Point is, it's nothing like gold and it will never be as good as gold at storing value for many reasons but the most obvious being, there will always be some form of counter party risk related to Bitcoin.  Bitcoin and all of crypto is dependent on something else to exist, thus it's existence can be terminated by someone or something else at anytime.  If I own actual gold, it's all mine.  See the difference? One is real, the other is merely an illusion of the mind.  So by that stance, crypto and the value it stores, is only as safe as the government, taxes, infrastructure, fuel, electricity and internet that props it up.  For any signficant storage of value, I think I'll stick with real gold but hey, that's me.


sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
good to see that it didnt talk more than post #4 for the original poster to be rightly ridiculed for not understanding basic math
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
1MCKW9AkWj3aopC1aPegcZEf2fYNrhUQVf
OP, you're right on point with your thinking.  I agree, people will not buy fractions of Bitcoins in mass and yes, there is likely a cap on the price of Bitcoins or any crypto.  However, the "gold rush" mentality will still live on and that's when people will look to alt-currencies.  What's the "next big money maker?"  99% of people purchasing crypto are doing so for pure speculation, not for actual use.  It's about "getting rich", not changing the world.  

Now, as more people get more educated about what crypto is and assuming they want to actually use it to transact, they will realize there is no reason to pay a premium for a brand name like "Bitcoin", because it offers no advantages over the next crypto or even an exact copy of Bitcoin.  (It is open source after all)  Crypto will likely reach an equalization point where it won't matter that there are only 21 million Bitcoins because the only thing that matters, is its ability to store value.  That can be accomplished with any crypto.  Bitcoin isn't special, it's just first.  So why deal in fractions of crypto when you can deal in whole numbers of another, equally effective crypto?  Not to mention, Bitcoin doesn't scale so there is obviously going to be a limit to what's realistic.  Notice I said realistic, not delusional.  Roll Eyes

What I say is, get rich while people are still ignorant.  Because the time will come when crypto is as common as fiat and equally as inexpensive to own and utilize as a store of value.  Maybe Bitcoin will retain some collectors item appeal for being the first big crypto, but likely not more than that because, there is just no point to stick with one, super expensive crypto when they all do the same thing and some can and will do it better than Bitcoin.  


Bitcoin is the gold of the crypto world. Yes there might be need for silver too. But you don't seem to understand that gold is a good store of value not because of any superior quality over other metals but because of it's scarcity. And people need a good store of value.
legendary
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1094
We are far from the moment when 1 BTC will be too expensive to buy. But too volatile to buy, this can become a problem, for non-traders.
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
I'll get some pop corn and beer, it's going to be an interesting ride either way.
sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
Personally think bitcoin is more important as a payment medium.

I agree with most of what you said, however, I think by your comment regarding people refusing to use more than two decimal places, you're insinuating it will be an issue to buy a big gulp with bitcoin when it is 5,000 USD per coin. (Big Gulp then should be around 0.000264 BTC) But that is 0.26 or 0.27 mBTC, it's not too hard. Take it a step further to 2.6 uBTC or whatever. I think/hope people will just start using the smaller denominations as the price increases.

Until we hit uber bull wetdream price levels, IMO, this might even encourage adopter. Hell, I took my wife to a nice steak dinner for 0.3 BTC and it felt GOOD. lol. It seems like 0.3 of anything is a "Good deal." Of course I know the reality, and part of my view is based on benign into bitcoin since it was $5.... but the perception may be important nonetheless.

It's certainly not impossible, just not likely IMO.  The Bitcoin community would have to start doing it ASAP, as was stated above.  You have to set the standard, long before you need the standard.  Otherwise, people will just gravitate toward other coins and whatever is easiest, while you fumble over each other trying to find consensus and get it adopted through the current infrastructure.  I think they will gravitate toward other crypto regardless but if done right, Bitcoin could continue to increase its market cap by keeping more people using it in fractions, even with the continued existence of many other crypto currencies.  I just haven't seen enough "unity" on this subject over the past several months to believe it's possible for this community to pull off.
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
Personally think bitcoin is more important as a payment medium.

I agree with most of what you said, however, I think by your comment regarding people refusing to use more than two decimal places, you're insinuating it will be an issue to buy a big gulp with bitcoin when it is 5,000 USD per coin. (Big Gulp then should be around 0.000264 BTC) But that is 0.26 or 0.27 mBTC, it's not too hard. Take it a step further to 2.6 uBTC or whatever. I think/hope people will just start using the smaller denominations as the price increases.

Until we hit uber bull wetdream price levels, IMO, this might even encourage adopter. Hell, I took my wife to a nice steak dinner for 0.3 BTC and it felt GOOD. lol. It seems like 0.3 of anything is a "Good deal." Of course I know the reality, and part of my view is based on benign into bitcoin since it was $5.... but the perception may be important nonetheless.
sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
So the question is, what's more important.  Bitcoin as a speculative commodity?  Or Bitcoin as a store of value and payment medium?

If it's just for speculation, then sure, Bitcoin retains value as a brand and rarity, though even that has a limited shelf life as more crypto gains popularity. (Competition) But as anything more, it doesn't offer any significant value over any other crypto down the road.  It's just crypto.  A means to store and send value to each other.  I guess people have to decide which really matters.  Most people outside of the teeny tiny crypto community don't trade so, it's really irrelevant as it relates to mass adoption.  Because of that, I'd say arguments about stock splits, Google, etc are irrelevant and misplaced.  What matters is what people will actually use, day to day, to conduct transactions.  Buying fractions of anything to conduct day to day transactions is just silly and is bound to fail.  People are comfortable with two decimal places and trying to force them into something else, well...lets just say, good luck with that.   Grin
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
Would I invest $1,022.75 for a single share for a 0.12% gain when the stock has a minimal upside potential? No.

The upside (and downside) for Google is exactly the same at $1000 per share as it is at $1 per share.   At $1 per share the company would have 1000x as many shares and thus a $1000 investment would net you 1000 shares but it wouldn't net you a greater % of the company.

Are you saying you won't buy Google at $1,000 per share but if they did a 100:1 split you would buy the exact same company with the same profits, same revenue, same marketshare, same brand for $10 per share?

Still I think you missed the entire point of Elwar's sarcastic comment in that price doesn't matter.  Obviously people have bid Google up enough to triple it over the last couple years despite it having a triple (and now quadruple) digit price.

Right, but can you buy 1/1000th of 1 share of a Google? I actually don't know, forgive my ignorance. If so, then my point in that regard is a fail.

Regarding my comment on upside/downside - my personal opinion is that at this time the upside in Google is minimal - but again that is just my speculation and the company's current size, competition, etc. Not based on current price.
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1000
Want privacy? Use Monero!
people will initially start buying Litcoin, because it is cheap. But they will realise after a while that they just need to buy fractions of a BTC, no problem Smiley

So Im bullish on litecoin for the moment Wink

(and it is already happening)
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
Would I invest $1,022.75 for a single share for a 0.12% gain when the stock has a minimal upside potential? No.

The upside (and downside) for Google is exactly the same at $1000 per share as it is at $1 per share.   At $1 per share the company would have 1000x as many shares and thus a $1000 investment would net you 1000 shares but it wouldn't net you a greater % of the company.

Are you saying you won't buy Google at $1,000 per share but if they did a 100:1 split you would buy the exact same company with the same profits, same revenue, same marketshare, same brand for $10 per share?

Still I think you missed the entire point of Elwar's sarcastic comment in that price doesn't matter.  Obviously people have bid Google up enough to triple it over the last couple years despite it having a triple (and now quadruple) digit price.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
Don't let the OP see Berkshire Hathaway or his head might asplode.

Berkshire Hathaway Inc.
NYSE: BRK.A - Nov 6 4:00 PM ET
172,220.00+466.00 (0.27%)

It went up over 466 just today!  That non-possible.
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
Google is also having the same problem of nobody buying their stock because it is too expensive.




Google Inc
NASDAQ: GOOG - Nov 6 6:54 PM ET


1,022.75+1.23 (0.12%)


Stocks, Google in this case on November 6, do not *typically* move as much as BTC. 0.12 % - that's like 30 bitcoin-seconds of movement. It's moved more than that while I've been typing.

Would I invest $1,022.75 for a single share for a 0.12% gain when the stock has a minimal upside potential? No.

Would I invest my money for whatever amount of BTC, mBTC, Satoshis, etc - when I could win/lose 20% in a day? Perhaps. Regardless of the denomination - bitcoin has a huge potential upside. As TONS of people have already pointed out, you don't have to buy 1 bitcoin. You can buy whatever amount you want. Percentage gain is percentage gain, regardless of what label you attach (BTC, mBTC, USD, Cents, etc) to it.
legendary
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
Google is also having the same problem of nobody buying their stock because it is too expensive.




Google Inc
NASDAQ: GOOG - Nov 6 6:54 PM ET


1,022.75+1.23 (0.12%)
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
I don't even know where to start on this thread. So I am not going to. Have a nice day.
Pages:
Jump to: