Bitcoin Forum

These words are of a guy that I found rather interesting. What do you think about this?

    Let's not be delusional. I know that Bitcoin maxis are commonly ostracized as too toxic, but they have been right about everything.

    Bitcoin's dominance is at its early 2017 levels, and it keeps surging.

    Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV are dead. Craig Wright and Jihan Wu are over.

    DeFi was a fad that lasted even shorter than the ICO craze.

    XRP has always been a scam. Bitcoin maximalists have always been parroting about it, but very few took them seriously until the SEC lawsuit.

    The S2F model, which was laughed off as tin-foil-hat nonsense, has been extremely accurate so far.

    Institutions don't care about altcoins.

In that case, the term "bitcoin maximalist" was created by shitcoiners who kept being criticized about the garbage they created and everyone kept telling them shitcoins can never grow. Since they had no valid arguments against that, they tried bashing those challenging their useless project by using this term.


Bitcoin dominance has never changed and it has always been nearly 99%.
Over the years people started thinking that market cap ratio is the same as dominance and as an enormous amount of shitcoins were being created from time to time that ratio kept jumping up and down hence this new false "dominance" kept going up and down and each time the shitcoins die or get dumped hard on a large scale the ratio goes back up again.

They were never alive to begin with.
Just because bitcoin price is above a certain level now doesn't change that.

So did STO before that and same with IEO and we will definitely see new ways of scamming newbies soon.

Luckily switched my bcash to btc 5 days ago. Waaaay to late but still greatly in profits already. Still have bsv though. Where can ı sell that into btc?

All they (we?) were doing was trying to be helpful by steering noobs away from shitcoin scams.

Did you ever notice that  the most "toxic" Bitcoin maximalists are often the most experienced?

Many shitcoiners rationalized their shitcoinery by thinking that they had "missed the boat" with Bitcoin and thought they would somehow get the same returns by getting in on the ground floor with some shitcoin scam.

Others thought that Bitcoin was too expensive because they couldn't afford to buy a whole coin all at once.

It's still not to late to buy Bitcoin and see large gains.

i reckon these will be unpopular opinions in this thread, but i hold them nonetheless:

-altcoiners are clearly near capitulation. (after capitulation usually comes reversal)

-BCH and BSV will pump later this year with the rest of the altcoins.

-institutions do care about altcoins, just not at the same volumes as their bitcoin bets---which is natural, given that they are riskier and lower liquidity. grayscale's ethereum trust is at $2.2B AUM now. that's nothing to sneeze at IMO.

Many newbies in my country have been scammed by shitcoiners that they have missed the bitcoin train and now btc price is too expensive and they should invest in early stage coins (shitcoins actually, such as Ilcoins,...) and hoped that these shitcoins will grow like bitcoin after some years...But that never happen. They now feel so sad when seeing BTC is growing while their coins keep going down and down.

I did that just months after getting my forked BCH split from my bitcoins. I held on to a few for some stupid reason and sold them later, after the BCH bubble, but that wasn't a complete loss since I got a few BSV that I also sold right away. The whole narrative by Roger Ver and later CSW did not make sense. Anybody who read a bit about the deals these guys were making and the lifestyles of their "investors" such as that whole Calvin Ayre knew that it was all a well orchestrated cash grab. They weren't trying to improve anything or help the community, they were staging a coup to dethrone bitcoin.

There could have been no other outcome, cryptocurrency space is a giant competition and there can be only one winner. People want to have a currency that is accepted everywhere, instead of having 100 wallets with different coins at the same time. Bitcoin established itself as a secure and reliable coin, but alts have nothing to show - they only have cheap transactions because no one uses them, features like smart contracts are irrelevant to regular users, and there's a lot of downsides to alts like even bigger volatility and poor security - we have seen a lot of hacking, bugs and even 51% attacks.

Capitulation? Reversal? Tell that to a penny mining stock shareholder whose shares have become worthless.

they were scammed by their own stupidity and this false narrative that have been fed to them that "bitcoin is too expensive".
we can't force people to use their heads.

Depends what you mean by bitcoin maximalist. I've always taken that to mean people who think Bitcoin will take over all national currencies and will be the one world currency. It became obvious that won't happen a number of years ago. If you take a lesser idea for maximalism, like say Bitcoin will be the dominant "money" crypto and will be globally adopted, yeah it is increasingly likely that will happen.

Bitcoin was always the one coin to rule them all. Altcoins have always been just stuff to trade for profit so it's not surprising Bitcoin's dominance eventually came back after the great ICO upheaval of bitcoin's marketcap.

BCH and BSV have always been shit coins whose only purpose was for them to lie to people and try to trick people into thinking they are the real Bitcoin.

DeFi is definitely not a fad so I don't agree with that at all, not sure how anyone could say DeFi is a fad as it is growing quickly and certainly isn't going away. DeFi will be the killer app for Ethereum and other smart contract platforms for the foreseeable future.

XRP has always indeed been a shit coin and it isn't remotely surprising at all that the SEC is finally going after them. It never made any sense for XRP to be among the largest coins, really all that says is that every coin outside of BTC and ETH is small and expendable.

S2F does indeed look good, though at some point it will break down as there is only so much money in the world, but it should stay fairly accurate for a good while longer.

And yeah of course institutions don't care about altcoins. Altcoins are for trading, institutions are looking for long term value. That is BTC and ETH, though at this point ETH is still proving itself.

Yes, institution doesn't care about altcoins, or perhaps they are just smarter that majority of us. Bitcoin being the prime mover, what do you expect, will still remain on top and can weathered all the storm.

BCH and BSV and those big blockers argument are still there, but they can't never won in this battle. Bitcoin maximalist are often criticised because of their obvious one side "delusion", but look at where bitcoin is right now.

Well said! Either you believe in Bitcoin or you don't, there is no minimalism or maximalism.


Should have done that right after the fork, lol.

Yes that would have been 10x more than now... Unfortunately that time I did not care. I did not want to move my coins from paper wallet to other places just to claim forks.

... this thread should be in the Altcoin section ...

why we allow shitcoin threads on Bitcoin Forum is totally beyond me, make your own forum!

How is bitcoin maximalism toxic if it's just speaking the facts out loud? That part I completely disagree with.

People tend to label common sense with extremism these days. There is good reason why holding BTC and BTC only is the right thing to do. Most other cryptos, if not all, are created for the sole purpose of benefiting the creator via an ICO or the like. They stop development as soon as they secure funding, and there is never an active user base.

BTC is literally the only widely adopted CURRENCY. There may be other blockchain platforms that have adoption, but nowhere near the scale of BTC and they are not primarily mediums of exchange (think ethereum). XRP and others aren't even decentralised.

It's just common sense. Stop calling it toxic when we're simply arguing with a bunch of manipulative conmen pushing their own agenda.

Did you even read the OP?

It's not about altcoins. It's about the superiority of Bitcoin.

It only mentions shitcoins to point out their failures.

I think I am misunderstanding this thread.

I thought "Bitcoin maximalism" was the ideology that "people who use altcoins are enemies of Bitcoin", not any of the things OP is talking about.

 :D :D :D

.. I just proved the OPs proposition by demonstration ... idiots.

Fuck off with all your shitcoinery! We don't even need to meta-discuss them.

I don't think they are near capitulation, there's still quite a lot of hopium. If you look at the Altcoin board or /r/Cryptocurrency, people still say that they plan to wait for altcoin pump, which in their prediction will happen after Bitcoin slows down.

I can see Ethereum going up, it's the main coin for smart contracts and all the stuff based on smart contracts, but what BCH and BSV have to offer? They are just counterfeit Bitcoin, institutional investors would be dumb to buy them.

TBH I really hate both Bitcoin Maximalist and Altcoiners as they always believe in their side of the story, if you are seeing words of a one-sided story or with some kind of bias you will always not get the full picture of anything. That's why when newbies believe someone with a one-sided story or prediction they will always end up having a bad decision when it comes to trading as what they based it on is with bias. Its wrong to be one of those person so I think the best way to react in this is not to be one of them but always remain neutral as possible.

nocoiners say the same thing at the bottom of bitcoin bear markets---same idea. ;)

there's a big difference between an altcoin dropping 80-90% against BTC in a multiple year bear market and "becoming worthless". any bitcoin investor who has lived through a bubble and the bear market that follows should understand that.

maybe "this time is different" but that mindset usually doesn't work out. altcoin greed is inevitable in a bitcoin bubble.


CME is launching ETH futures next month because of institutional interest in hedging spot ETH positions. https://www.cmegroup.com/media-room/press-releases/2020/12/16/cme_group_to_launchetherfuturesonfebruary82021.html

in addition to ETHE data, that tells me there is serious institutional interest in ethereum. an ETH bubble would in turn fuel a general altcoin bubble.

it's retail, not institutions, who will pump and chase shitcoins like BSV of course.

after watching the last couple bubbles, i'm not gonna bother worrying about the fundamentals behind shitcoins. i'm just thinking about how retail greed works in a bubble.

LOL.

First in all sentences you described what is happening now you did not even posted the right one what Bitcoin maximalism means. Bitcoin maximalism means that there can be only one coin and that coin is Bitcoin. Of course not today or this year but in 10-20 years time. That and nothing else is Bitcoin maximalism.

Does the prices show it will win in last 3 months? Not really. Bitcoin had x3, Etehreum had x2.5, Litecoin had x3, Doge had x5. Out of 10000 coins there wil always be one that will price wise outperform.


Oh and, I am 99.999% sure that 20 years form now we will have 1000 times more coins as we have right now :)

Neither retail nor institutions care if a coin is a shitcoin, they all care about the profit that they can make from that shitcoin. Case in point: interest in ethereum!

What I'm more interested in is how long the greed in any of the altcoins stay. Specially the bigger ones with lots of flaws. For example what are these institutional investors going to do when the time comes that token creation hype is completely dead and the excessive amount of circulating supply of etherum that has unlimited supply keeps pushing the price down every day!

You shouldn't look at USD price of altcoins, instead check their price against bitcoin...

I don't think so. I believe that we will see the number of altcoins grow for a couple of years but as the market matures more and as more people get dumped on by the shitcoins and lost billions of dollars among them, they eventually stop throwing their money away meaning the number of shitcoins created decreases slowly.
Basically the same thing that happened to ICO tokens. We were initially seeing a couple of tokens created every day but we barely see another new one for weeks.
Eventually the day comes when we only have a handful of altcoins that are actually decent not just some pump and dump schemes like the current top altcoins, and the rest will simply die.

Institutions don't care about altcoins. They firstly care about Bitcoin, and secondly as a bit more risky play they care about Ethereum. Everything else are altcoins anyone of them could easily be replaced, even the ones that are serving useful purposes and have momentum and user growth behind them.

Sure there's a small portion of institutions that will put a bit of money in altcoins as a totally speculative play that maybe it'll survive and thrive in the long term, but mostly it's BTC and to a lesser extent ETH. I think once they get used to having a position in BTC more of them will take positions in ETH as well.

Bitcoin is the safe investment for them, because Bitcoin's future has become obvious as a future multi-trillion dollar global reserve source of value. Ethereum is a bit riskier just because blockchain smart contracts haven't yet fully achieved a point at which they will very obviously be a global economic force in the future. But if they do achieve that then Ethereum is almost certain to be the primary platform, and DeFi does seem to be the "killer app" or at least the first lasting big killer app for smart contract ecosystems. Altcoins, on the other hand, are speculative investments in which you hope some of them skyrocket enough to offset your bad bets, so that isn't something most institutions that are looking to grow and preserve value without a lot of risk will be interested in.

Devil's advocate: BTC was the speculative play for high risk hedge funds 5 year ago. Now it's much less speculative so larger, more mainstream institutions are entering.

Now ETH is the speculative bet. How about in a few years, or 10? You think it ends there?

It's a lot like the venture capital and penny stock space. Lots of go-nowhere ideas and scams, but contenders always emerge eventually.

I hear you Mr Devil's Advocate ;p

But will contenders actually emerge?? BTC, even if viewed as a speculative bet 5 years ago, was still the safe bet when it came to crypto. If you thought crypto was going somewhere, BTC was where you get in. That is something you could only ever say about BTC and to a lesser extent ETH.

ETH is likely to become considered a safer bet as long as DeFi and possibly other use cases continue to grow and it continues to be seen as far and away the dominant smart contract platform, the way BTC has always been viewed as the dominant money crypto.

Now there might be a few other coins in the future that start to become viewed as safe bets to keep growing as long as crypto keeps growing, but right now there are none and there never have been any others. And I would say that if any coins achieve that status they wouldn't really be altcoins anymore. I don't consider ETH an altcoin anymore because it has achieved primary status as THE smart contract platform and I don't think anyone serious questions it is here to stay (unless some other crypto actually becomes an ETH killer but every so called ETH killer so far has failed and the longer ETH remains the champion the less likely it will ever have any real competition). Right now there are two main use cases for crypto and they are exemplified by BTC and ETH, everything else is altcoins and is expendable. Beyond perhaps making tiny speculative plays, institutions won't ever be interested in altcoins that could blip out of existence and nobody would really care.

I agree it's possible in the future for something not BTC and ETH to achieve primary status as a major coin, though I don't know how likely that will be, that is considered safe to invest in long term. But I don't ever see institutions just buying up significant allotments of random altcoins that they hope will moon. Like penny stocks, altcoins are for traders, not for big money to put their wealth into. I can see VC's investing in actual companies pre-IPO that build a business around crypto (Coinbase, Ripple, etc) but I don't see VC's just buying altcoins as an investment.

And when a Crash Happens again  then New Newbie account will come to Post Against this Thread or something related to this mean   ;D

Same Scenario over again , What i care now is I made a right decision of Converting my XRP Mid of December and have saved my Funds to Bitcoin in which Made another Record for History .

I will going to Have this until it fell down to at least 28k Level ,and will consider to stay in Stable coins.

Good.  Shitcoins are for gpu mining ⛏ in order to convert to btc.

I have earned more btc with mining ⛏ Doge,Ltc ,and eth then I have ever earned mining btc.


Investors can stay the fuck away from shit coins. It allows the little guy to get a piece of coin with his gaming rig.

If you have a 2200 usd alien 👽 gaming rig with a 3080 nividia card. it earns 30 cents for each hour it mines. it burns 4 to 8 cents an hour.

So 22 to 26 cents an hour profit. Mine 10 hours a day and make 2.50 so in three years your rig is paid off.

And you can get a new rig. so you get a free alien 👽 gaming pc every three years and sell the old one for 500 usd worth of btc.

Any one that is against that will be on the wrong side of history.

This fact above will always attract the gaming guy/girl to mining a bit with their rig.

Basically being only btc is the exact same as saying gamers cant mine.

reality is gamers can and do mine when they are not using the gaming rig to game.


All btc max should read my signature and believe that over only btc.

Good for you. But I actually want to continue counting on newbie posts or necro resurrected accounts to keep sentiment in check. Loving where we are headed but am wary that too fast too soon means a lower floor for when we eventually have to test and find it. And that is coming, of course. Stocks and economy overheating and in flawed valuation. of course that will have some impact later on.

So. Keep them newbie posts coming. Still want to be an early adopter (relatively speaking) for as long as possible!

The difference right now though is that it is going up fast because institutions are scooping up all available Bitcoin and the vast majority of them are holding long term. This makes a very different situation than past bull runs in which it was basically 100% retail investors jumping into something who would then panic sell on any drop. The situation is such that the floor is going up faster than previous bull markets because it is long term holders that are causing the ascent, rather than panicky retail investors trying to jump into some investment they just heard about and know nothing about. This is why instead of seeing solid corrections the past 3 months we've only seen a series of quick bear traps - because the floor is rising rapidly. Sure at some point a substantial correction will happen that may take a month or two to work through, but that won't happen until institutions get wary of how fast the price has gone up, so that is something I'd be looking out for if the price like doubles again in the next two or three months. But at $30k, when institutions are dying to get into Bitcoin, eating up tens of thousands of Bitcoin each week, a substantial correction isn't a worry right now. Retail investors of course still control enough of the market to cause a panicked correction, but any drop will just be bought up by big players until the price rise is so fast and high that they take a break to see if prices go lower. Like I said, that ain't gonna happen at $30k, supply and demand right now is very much in favor of near term significant upside, perhaps after a little bit of time consolidating at this level.

Indeed, that's what I'm banking on that will carry Bitcoin slowly up, rather than rush to 6-figures... that institutions and even government pension funds -- either publicly or discretely -- are thinking of long-term holdings rather than even medium-multi-years. Gold, we know, has already been outstripping supply even in 2020 with banks buying them up, there's not much other similar type of thing they can buy in liey.

The exchange volumes NOT going overly crazy also suggests retail fomo isn't nearly going to be enough to cause a run. Maybe this is the last "parabola" cycle we're witnessing. Not holding my breath though. At $100k, even institutions will be liquidating to diversify.

Sure, but that says nothing about future technological and market developments. You're thinking like a conservative institution: you won't concede that anything is viable until after it's made a move like ETH. That's fine but I don't know how realistic this "there are only 2 use cases for crypto" attitude is. The rise of Ethereum shows Bitcoin maximalists fundamentally misread the market thinking Bitcoin as decentralized money was the only possible use case with network effect. I don't think "there can only be 2" is much more viable of a theory.

I agree altcoins are expendable at this point. ETH was expendable at $0.40. That's all I'm saying.

I don't see institutions liquidating at $100k. They are getting in long term. $100k would be a short term play. So far the price projections I've mostly seen coming out of institutions are in the several hundred thousand dollars. If they were like putting 50% of their money into Bitcoin then sure they'd liquidate quickly after like 2x or 3x, but (other than Microstrategy) they are putting a fraction of a percent in (so far) or at most usually 2-3%. That is not a position they are going to be trying to liquidate quickly to diversify, those are the kinds of positions they will continue to build once their previous positions are already massively in profit and they feel comfortable taking a larger position knowing their overall position is now safe.

As you point out, retail FOMO hasn't even started really. I'm sure there's a little bit going on but compared to past bull runs its nothing yet. I kinda feel like retail FOMO will be less now. Because most people have known about Bitcoin for 3 years now, and most people have the view that it always crashes (as wrong as that view is!). Whereas in previous bull markets people were hearing about Bitcoin for the first time, in the middle of massive bull run, so they FOMO in. The situation is different now. Instead of FOMOing in I think most of the retail market is just assuming its gonna crash any day now, but over time as it doesn't they'll wade in little by little at higher prices once the realize the price isn't crashing.

And I don't expect a big crash / bear market, precisely because I don't think retail will FOMO in, which is what caused previous crashes/bear markets. And also because institutions are getting in and will continue getting in for years, they have enough money to stop any crash in its tracks and the desire to do it because that means they can to increase their position on the cheap before others do. They aren't going to be selling at $100k, they will continue buying at $100k and beyond. Only a fraction of them will even have started to get a position in Bitcoin by the time it hits $100k. And $100k should happen pretty quickly, almost guaranteed to happen this year, there's just too much institutional demand for it not to pass $100k this year. I do, however, think institutions will scale back buying whenever they feel like it has gone up too fast and they are afraid of a bubble forming, and some of the more agile institutions will take some off the table at these points, looking to get back in lower. In that way I think we'll just see repeated shorter bull markets followed by decent months long corrections and that'll last for several years, rather than a single big bull market and then it taking 3 years to get back to that price.

Institutions alone can easily buy this thing up north of $500k pretty quickly if they wanted to, but its only the leading most forward thinking institutions buying now, and even they wouldn't keep buying if the price shoots up too fast. So I believe we're at the start of a super cycle that may last like 5 years of institutions gradually getting in to build up positions of usually a few percent, in combination with more crypto-specific hedge funds opening up, plus at some point during that time an ETF which will open up Bitcoin to a who other class of Wall St retail investors that won't directly buy into something as "confusing" as crypto, and also retail gradually coming in with little bouts of FOMO here and there. It'll be a multi-year bull market when you smooth it all out, but there will be months-long corrections here and there when institutions get wary of the price shooting up too quickly.

This is very true, the reason why we have a big pump, institutions are coming in one of the early adopter is PayPal we all know when a huge online company and probably one of the leader just come in to be part of the community, many small and mid range institutions online and offline will start to coming in, so we now have this huge pump.

Don't disagree completely, but I think it does depend on how much they're investing and from where. Thinking about my country, for example, where a five-fold increase in returns is unheard of, which is what $100k price tag would mean. I know how some pension funds work, for example, and there are two targets. A time target, and a returns target. Whichever hits first, shareholders typically vote to liquidate, at least a portion anyway for a big dividend payout. That said, even 100% gains is unheard of so maybe we see even $40k and $50k this happening. Not to the point it'll crash the market, and perhaps newer funds will set up at that point anyway!

I'm aware also what qualified for "institutional investment" is wildly different in different countries. $100k is a huge amount for private funds in a majority part of the world, the new wealthy, or whatever we want to call them.

I'm not saying no other coins will succeed. I'm saying institutions don't care about coins that are entirely expendable. Maybe in the future there will be other coins beyond BTC and ETH that aren't expendable, but there aren't right now. If at some point other coins achieve a primary status in the crypto world then institutions would be interested in them, but right now nothing outside of BTC and ETH have that status, and until that changes institutions will only be interested in BTC and ETH. Meaning that institutions aren't interested in altcoins. If let's say a couple other coins this decade achieve this primary status, I would say they aren't really altcoins anymore.

You're right there are other use cases besides digital gold and smart contracts. Though smart contracts cover most use cases, there are still others. There's decentralized storage, there's a daily spender (though that will just end up being government/central bank issued stablecoins when fiat upgrades to crypto), there's privacy coins, there's something like LINK that provides Oracles, something like DOT that provides bridges between chains, I could possibly see some sort of public crypto tied to some sort of social uses, and more. But like I said, RIGHT NOW there are two main use cases for crypto and BTC and ETH have them covered. Likely at some point specific coins will become dominant and primary in some of these or other new use cases, at which point they will no longer be "altcoins" and institutions may take notice of them.

The reason I am thinking like a conservative institution is because I am talking about what conservative institutions are interested in! They aren't and won't ever be interested in anything that can be considered an altcoin. They will only ever be interested in something besides BTC and ETH if that something rises out of altcoin status and becomes something useful, highly used, highly valuable, with network effects that will only build, and a penchant for rising in value. Also because institutions have so much money they won't be interested in even altcoins that dominate their niche if that niche is small. Any crypto won't interest institutions to any real degree until its a $100B type market cap. Anything smaller than that they can't even build a decent position without controlling the market.

I guess maybe it depends what you mean by altcoin though. Some may still consider an altcoin anything that isn't Bitcoin. I consider an altcoin any coin that isn't a market driver. Right now everything other than BTC and ETH are altcoins. Maybe 5 years from now there's one or two more dominant cryptos, but right now nothing is on the horizon for achieving such a status that would interest institutions.

RootStock can do everything ETH can do ... except uses bitcoins natively.

Which do you think Institutions will use to do DeFi when they are loaded up with Bitcoin?

it technically uses an altcoin that is pegged to BTC---there is a difference.

no layer 2 protocol can ever provide the same security guarantees that bitcoin does. i think that's why interest in them has traditionally been lacking.


institutions want their bitcoins locked up in cold storage at fidelity, coinbase. how does that fit into that scenario?

Yeah exactly. Institutions will be holding their Bitcoin to protect wealth, not messing around in DeFi with it.

But, they will also be picking up some ETH, and then they can use some of that for doing DeFi on the primary DeFi platform, rather than bothering with some sidechain on Bitcoin.

Rootstock is a merged-mine sidechain, so cryptographically not an altcoin but 1-to-1 swap with bitcoin since it locks coins on bitcoins mainchain. Nice shitcoinery FUD attempt though.

When institutions get enough btc cold stashed away and confident enough with their crypto skills they will definitely be temlted to experiment with some portion for Rootstock DeFi.

that implies an altcoin. it doesn't matter whether it's pegged. RBTC is a token on a different protocol with much weaker security guarantees. trying to claim that a merge-mined sidechain is "bitcoin" is insane.

it was actually paul sztorc (drivechains) who opened my eyes about this when he remarked that sidechains are altcoins---they are just interoperable with bitcoin too.


that prevents unintended inflation but it doesn't make RSK secure.

still true:

I disagree that institutions are not interested in altcoins. There is undoubtedly interest, but it is different from bitcoin. Bitcoin is considered by all market participants as an investment, first of all, and altcoins as a tool. And I can't say that the interest as a tool is bad - bitcoin started with this.

The competitive advantage  inherent in Bitcoin easily makes bitcoin more successful than other cryptocurrencies in many key
areas is its ability to limit new publishing. In particular, bitcoin supply cannot be manipulated, nor is there any more issuance.
This  is  in  contrast  to  other  cryptocurrencies  whose  supply  is  subject  to  change,  such  as  Ethereum (ETH)  and   XRP,
as well as all fiat currencies.

Whatever it is, it's still pegged to bitcoin, has no premine, is immutable, is not as centralized and is much safer compared to the alternative such as ethereum.
The only reason why the interest in RSK is not as much as ETH is because you can't pump and dump it like you pump and dump ETH so there isn't any profit to be made there, and also the hype of the ETH platform means you can easily create the shittest and most useless token and still dump it on idiots and make money whereas if you do that on RSK nobody would even hear about it let alone anyone buying that shittoken.

They are not going to ignore altcoins institutions are no different to us investors, when they see there are profits to be made investing in altcoins and they see the potential and use case of these altcoins they are going to explore these altcoins and they are likely to invest here, it's hard to ignore altcoins like Ethereum Cardano Binance coin among others.

ETH is still by far the king of all altcoins because it is definitely something profitable to hold when hypes happen, it is the second biggest coin so when bitcoin stops eth starts to grow. Think about it this way, if bitcoin is loved so much and everyone gets it, the moment they start to look for something else? They look at ETH and that is why nothing else can ever pass it.

It doesn't matter if the tech is better, it doesn't matter if there is a better feature or a code, it doesn't matter whatever other coins do better, you think bitcoin is the top coin because it has the best blockchain? Obviously bitcoin is one of the worst coins technically speaking, there are so many coins which are hundred times better than bitcoin, but bitcoin still leads them, because it has a larger community that trusts it, which is why you should focus on ETH being second, not ETH code.

Yes, this is partially true, but I think that you will not argue that after all, institutional investors choose bitcoin when they choose to invest in a crypto. When they choose a crypto-related startup or some kind of crypto-based project, then most likely they are talking about altcoins.

I think when money can't be made too much from bitcoin, they will definitely start to move to bitcoin as well. And the biggest deal is, the volume and marketcap of many altcoins are very low, obviously they can't get in with 10 billion dollars like they did to bitcoin, however if you buy 1 billion dollars worth of ethereum today, you are going to easily double that in 2 years, and nobody can do 50% return in wall street that easily, not with 1 billion dollars at least, only very few lucky ones, like one in 10 thousand people may do that and there is like 50k workers anyway.

So long story short alts will get attention for sure, the only problem right now is the fact that bitcoin made them huge sums of money, which means they are not going to start looking into alts just yet, they will probably move to alts only after bitcoin stops profiting them.