Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1322. (Read 4671575 times)

Ha I remember a time when someone was buying BCN for MRO. Price was like 100BCN = 1 MRO. I made a huge mistake in sticking to Bytecoin...

L'OL

We are on the same page here. That's why when something brilliant comes up, it must be executed swiftly, and fluently.

Eg. We have spent months to form consensus that the emission must be cut. Once the vote affirms that there actually is a consensus (you never know until ballots are counted), we will not wait another month for execution.

But pricewise, anyone who cannot concentrate on the (technical and economic) development for 3 years and totally forget the price, no matter if it goes to zero meanwhile or not, as long as it will succeed in the end, is in a "wrong place"

No its not. I sold 100 coins for 0.005 (price = 0.00005)

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/auction-closed-wtb-bitmonero-bmr-with-0025-btc-new-anonymous-coin-577296

He's saying that he got involved at the top of the market and Bitcoin certainly hasn't "delivered" what he is looking for which is high and increasing prices. So that would be 0/69 at this point.

Get involved at the top of any market and things will look bleak later from that perspective. Quite understandable.

Maybe I misunderstood the discussion. I certainly wouldn't wait three years for any progress at all, but that progress will happen over a period of years.

I see your point, but is emission really a problem with Bitcoin? because apparently it is for Monero. If the reduction of emission of Monero isn't happening because the community won't be happy, then why don't we ask them if they actually will be happy or not? I mean, Monero is still in its infancy so it can't be too bad. I'm sure most would agree that the selling pressure of Monero has been quite overwhelming. I think most people will want a higher and more stable price too.

I'm in the wrong place?  Where should I be?  

All I'm saying is that you have a window of opportunity and it's much less than three years.  I'm not one of those complaining about price.  I'm just stating what I think is a widespread sentiment regarding altcoins in general.  Why would someone wait three years when bitcoin already exists?  In three years bitcoin could very well have incorporated all the features that all these altcoins claim to offer or will offer.  Time is not on Monero's or any altcoins side.  But I guess we'll all know in a few years.  

Is it rational to expect the moon though, when only one out of 69 currencies, and now only one out of >545 currencies and a few assets has actually delivered?

Even at the time you started, 1 out of 69 isn't the greatest odds when you're led to believe that everyone is offering only the moon.

Now, at 1 in 545, the chances of offering the moon are much less, if you were to randomly throw money at these things.

When bitcoin started, it offered a cryptocurrency. Investors saw the moon. Chances back then were likely 1 in 1, or even 1 in 5, and the ticket was cheap.

With the complete disregard for the technical offerings of some of these things, and incessant talks about the moon, I have only been left with the thought that everyone here is absolutely irrational. I say irrational, because >99% is basically everyone.

Especially when they're offering, for the most part, something you already have, or think you have, in your bank account .. and tend to think very very little about what it is or where it came from .. just that you need it to live and you need more of it to make more of it.

I mean, there's very few moons out there. Earth has one, Saturn has (62?) moons. So the idea that we're even talking about potentially legitimate alternative cryptocurrencies offering the moon means most of us are on another damn planet in regards to where our heads are at.

With that in mind, I must admit that I likely would have had to pay to be on another planet, as I'm pretty sure I started on earth. so my fee paid is in grabbing a rational amount of just about anything that pokes out of bitcoins shadow and seeing what they did.

I like this one, because the developers were there when I had questions, and have been there when I've had more questions. I'm convinced that they'll continue to be here when I have even more questions. That's important .. that they're here and responsive and helpful, because they've convinced me that they'll likely always be here. That's just as important as innovation, of which they have also provided. Electrum seeds, i2p development, GUI development, core protocol development, seeding a community, there's lists of things that have been provided. Not many of these things were available for the US dollar for a few hundred years, save for seeding a community, so I think we're pretty on track here.

Worst comes to worst, it's just tulips

As smooth pointed out, the price only will decrease until the emission can be absorbed. The lower the price, the less money is required to absorb it. It's that, or more adoption. Changing emission is problematic. Can you imagine bitcoin changing block rewards to 1 BTC today? It would upset a lot of people.

Well if emission is very high as you say, then why haven't we lowered it? What issues could possibly arise? Surly the problems that arise would be smaller than the big problem of the ever decreasing price.

And what exactly is wrong with a slower decline in emission? Wouldn't that mean a more stable price, which is what I'd expect you'd want for a non pump and dump coin. I really do think that reducing emission would be a good idea at this point.

Price is lowest in history of Monero.
There is a hope?
I don't see it.
Anyway, will mine it a bit more days.
Days not months.

Nobody is expecting history to be repeated. But the idea that it takes time (years) to build something truly useful has nothing to do with history. Anything but a pump-and-dump takes more than a few months to build. People need to come up with useful ideas, organize, and build them out. That takes time. Some of that is already ongoing. If you can't wait you are in the wrong place.

i don't complain about the price
imho the way "fast new feature fast to market next exchange..." is the reason why most altcoins fail.
it just takes a while to get adopted. there is nothing anybody can do about it. if anybody tries to force it faster it just fails harder

To go high and stay high something needs to change. But to stop the pressure all that is needed is for the price to drop. Then less demand is needed to absorb the 20k coins.

Also, with the fast emission the decline in emission is also fast. So another solution is to simply wait for the 20k to decline. At the start it was 25k. This is something to consider with respect to the suggestion to reduce it -- slower emission means slower decline in emission.

It is?  Then why all the selling and people complaining about the price?


If you use the history of bitcoin to justify holding any new cryptocurrency you'll end up holding worthless coins in three years.  What worked for bitcoin or the history of bitcoin will never be repeated.  But good luck.

In the beginning there was not a lot of monero and demand was super high. New exciting technology that actually has merit is not something you see every day in the pump n dump altcoin space. Naturally it became very sought after by people, especially by large bitcoiners who previously may not have shown much interest in altcoins.

They are first and foremost investing in monero because they believe in the new and unique technology. The problem is, everybody wanted to grab a piece of the pie at once and thus the price was pushed high, probably too high, it lasted temporarily because large holders eventually had accumulated the moneros they wanted. A trend reversal combined with reality setting in (there are ~20k XMR generated every day) means the high price could not be sustained at this time. The adoption is not big enough and large bitcoiners can only sustain the price for so long. Now that the initial gold rush is over I speculate that many hold large bags of monero, and most are probably in the red too. Little willingness to invest more when already down a lot, so who will absorb the new coins?

You see, the emission is very high, and it makes it difficult for monero to rally high and stay there. There is simply too much pressure at this time. The only way to change that is to increase adoption or make current holders invest more. Another solution that has been suggested for voting is changing emission to make the coins spread out over a longer period of time. That will put less pressure on the price in regards to mined coins, however there are other issues with doing so which must be contemplated.

Personally I see any sub 0.002 as a good entry point. I have been buying a little all the way down and intend to continue to do so. It's hard to predict the bottom, but there are certainly things planned which can trigger new interest. Every coin has up and downs, make sure to take advantage of each.  

Does that mean that all cryptocurrencies are falling in value? Why isn't Monero ahead of Darkcoin?

Monero is currently almost exclusively owned by people with a horizon of 3 years or more, as was Bitcoin 3 years ago.

Last time the owners were richly rewarded, let's see this time.

Humans are irrational.  But in this case it's warranted.

I forgot to add this in my previous post.

When I first got involved in crypto there were 69 currencies listed on coinmarketcap with a total market cap of $ 13,890,378,655  https://web.archive.org/web/20140104141936/http://coinmarketcap.com/

There are now 545 currencies with a market cap of $ 5,192,835,057.

789% more currencies worth 37% of what 69 were worth January 8th 2014.

All of these currencies offered the moon but delivered nothing.  Why should people think any different of Monero or any other coin?  One thing is for sure, nobody's going to wait three years.