Bitcoin Forum

I'm tempted to have a go at speculating on a few one cent crypto coins. If one chooses coins with interesting concepts and utility, and that have the semblance of an efficient structure, could one expect a success rate of better than 1 in 10?

In this thread, I'm not looking for members to spam coin suggestions, but I would like a discussion on the general concept of speculating in extremely low cost coins, and the points one should consider when evaluating them.

I wouldn't do it.  Some of those coins are cheap for a reason, i.e., no one wants them.  You have to look at whether there are any buy orders on the exchange you're looking at, what the trading volume is, etc.  It could easily happen that once you buy one of those coins you'll never be able to sell it.  Some of them are moribund and will never rise above 1 cent or 1 satoshi ever again.

On the other hand if you've got money to play with and can stand losing it, go for it.  You might get lucky, but I'm thinking you probably won't.

Now even though I just said it's probably not worth it to buy any of these turds, I would say that IF you're going to do it you ought to buy more than $1 worth.  I'd probably buy $10 at least, but that's just me.  A coin would have to seriously skyrocket to make $1 turn into anything significant.  There are exchange fees to consider, and trading minimums too.  I'm not even sure if $10 would be too little for most exchanges.

I'd buy no more than a dollar's worth of each coin to start with (you can always go higher if one looks more interesting).
I'd take a look at how the coin is marketed and also it's receptoin here (if the creator has negative trust from a DT because the binary exectuables are laced with viruses, I'd say that's one reason to look away from it.

You could also look at how much their ICO made (if they used an escrow agent) or how much they paid for their domain name too.

I'd be willing to bet that if you analyze the coins as you've mentioned for utility, structural efficiency, some implemented concept(s) that solves an existing problem and found them to be around 1-cent, that these coins will go up significantly. Certainly more than 1-in-10 coins, of the type you've described, will go beyond $0.01 in value, so long as their supply doesn't experience hyper-inflation or something else that would decimate the usefulness of the coin. You'd have to have that 1 coin out of 10 go up at least 10x in value, assuming the other coins flop, for this to be considered successful. More likely though, the other coins will move with the market in a corollary manner and you can expect profit on multiple fronts.

I know you're not looking for spam about specific coins, but even an algorithm like x16R being adopted by a coin that is otherwise benign gives it a huge leg up on a majority of alt-coins (long-term). You could run your own personal LoyceV-style investment game, using your own money (if preferred), following your criteria (with the help of the community, if needed) and keep a diary of your progress and process in the form of a thread. I'd say this would be a profitable endeavor, without hesitation or any reasonable doubt.

Personally, I wouldn't put more than $100 into a 1-cent coin, but I wouldn't put anything less than $10-$25 that I actually had faith in.

I like that idea. I need to sort myself out and do something like this. I might do the same thing with crypto related domain names.

I looked at LoyceV's thread, and the concept is good, but it seems to be a passive investment vehicle. Given the volatility of crypto currencies, I think one needs to monitor the performance of the alts. I don't like the idea of investing Bitcoin either. I would rather hold the Bitcoin, and maybe use the profits on the alts ( if any ) to increase my Bitcoin holding. I think it wiil also need to be discussed in a private forum, if one is postulating a possible investment. Individual holdings might be a better idea as well, especially as people may have different ideas.

I would call it being a realist. For every ICO that gives 100x return, there are a thousand or more that will fail. Most of the altcoins that currently exist will fail.

The altcoin market is completely irrational at the moment. Shitcoins like BCH, EOS, TRON, XVG are worth billions of dollars. I agree there will still be an ICO or two that goes x100, but it will be impossible to predict those coins based on them having a good product or utility. It will be pure chance and speculation.

Better to do that in a bull market, not right now, simply because the chances that you hit the jackpot in a bull market are much higher. Also, if I did that, I would buy more than just 1$, as The Pharmacist and Bill Gator say, always making sure that the total amount you spend in the different coins is something that you can afford to lose, and that you really don’t mind losing it at all.


That’s a good way to lose everything you bet, when those shitcoins go to zero.


I’m hurrying up to buy shitcoins.

The point is which ones are going to do that.


Totally agree. For me, that's similar to saying: I'm going to bet for one number in the roulette because I can get 35×. Yeah! But you always have less than 1 in 35 odds of hitting the number.

When you are betting, like in this case, it all comes down to the knowledge of the asset you are buying, and the market. The more you know about an asset and about the market, the more you are investing. The less you know, the more you are gambling. I would include here knowledge about investment strategies and choosing the best one for your personal situation depending on age, net worth, income, previous portfolio allocation, etc.

As for shitcoins in particular, it is better to do research and to chose the ones you believe have strong projects but you are still gambling because the market is highly volatile and speculative.

1. Active development preferably from people with a track record in blocktech
2. Active community
3. Growing infrastructure (retailers accepting it, exchanges, use cases, support structure)
4. Coin count/total coins issued, I prefer hard caps but some inflationary coins are useful for speculation
5. Try to aim for high count low cap coins, but not at the expense of the other traits you are looking for. This means more risk but more reward potential.
6. Solid network protocol - technical and security aspects are solid
7. A unique use case utility

These are some of the primary things I look for in smaller cap coins.

One in ten is a huge chance of success in Venture Capital for such projects. Perhaps one of the first signs of having a competent team behind the coin, at least in marketing, is that the coin will not be undervalued.

That's right. However, some ICO are having success even in this bear market, such as Ontology.



I saw an interesting classification few days ago in a video:

1 - Protocol coins
2 - Utility Tokens
3 - Security tokens

He said that protocol coins would be those such as Ethereum, NEO, Waves, Cardano, EOS... they are a plataform where it is possible to build  tokens on, such as Utility and Security Tokens.

He mentioned that utility tokens are coins that may have some use in the future, and they are delivering an especific service, such as BAT for example (an ERC20 token built inside a browser with an AdBlock that allows users to receive coins when watching ads).

THere are hundreds of utility tokens.

Utility tokens are double risky. If the plataform where they are build fail, the utility will also fail. So, thinking this way, protocol coins would be a safer bet (Eth, NEO, EOS, etc).

Security tokens I don't remember much from the video, but he said that they were coins which were backed by real world assets, and would be less risky than utility tokens. I don't remember an example now.

THere are some utility tokens that may go beyond their protocol, such as Oracles, for example. There are quite a few oracles out there.

I don't know how some coins like XRP fit in this model.

My portofolio is about 60-70% bitcoin, 25% protocol and 5-10% utility tokens.


I liked his model of classification and I think it can be useful.

I think Loyce set up a group of people here some time ago, the idea was for 10-15 people (more if possible) to all invest something like $25 worth of BTC & each individual person picks an obscure shitcoin to invest in (Loyce collected the money & invested for them).

12 months later they split the profits (if there were any).

It wasn’t a lot of money but you never know do you, some shitcoin might go x 100.

Edit - Just read further up, you’re already aware of Loyce’s thing duhh!

I'd like to run another version of LoyceV's Legendary 10 Month 10 Person 10 Altcoin Investment Roller Coaster #2 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4597341.0) with more active voting on what to buy and sell while it's active, but I still haven't figure out a good way to do so yet.
If you create one as a shared experiment, I'd like to join :)

This is the key indeed, although many (new) buyers seem to ignore the different in total supply and just go for the cheaper coin.
Take Doge (https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dogecoin/) for example: it's worth 0.34 cents, but there are 117 billion of them.
Finding the one coin with great potential while it's still cheap is like the holy grail of investing.

I've got the domain name https://cryptocointree.com/ (https://cryptocointree.com/). I put this up for sale, but it hasn't had any interest. I'd be happy to use that for such a project. I can add SMF to create a closed forum for pre-investment discussions, and a few public pages to list post investment decisions and comments. If I add a few affiliate links to those pages, that would cover admin costs, and it would meant that all the profits from the pool could be shared amongst the members.

We would need discussions about wallets and payment methods though.

Why not use OneCentCryptoCoins.com, just like the original title of this topic? I'm surprised it's still available!

I've got a bit of a problem with domain names - I've got too many, and I've just picked up BitcoinOpera.com. Opera has just announced a crypto web wallet as part of their Android browser, and I need to look into that at some time. Also, one cent in the name could turn out to be a bit restrictive.

I've got too many CMS packages installed on my hosting, so I decided to add the crypto coin tree prelim discussions to my Net Barons fake forum site - https://netbarons.com/  I don't mind chucking $50 into a speculative pool to get theings started.

I might try this for myself if nobody wants to start a pool. My first obstacle is to work out how to fund purchases without using a bank account or Bitcoin. This is not for secrecy, but because I don't want to spend any Bitcoin, and I don't want to associate my bank accounts with crypto transactions.

Satoshi = USD $0.0000640365

https://99bitcoins.com/satoshi-usd-converter/

What is the fascination with $0.01 stocks / crypto ?

You can have 100 billion shitcoins @ $0.01 or $1 billion shitcoins @ $1 still equals $1 billion unrealistic market cap.

At the end of the day it is still a shitcoin.


Marketcap and utility are far more important. Look for a low market cap coin that has good practical use and lots of active development and a positive community.

Unrealistic market cap = no room for growth.
Practical use = potential good investment
Active development = value being added
Positive community = no Charles Manson type cult that will consider criticism FUD that deserves instant chatroom culling. Coins that discuss issues in an adult type manner use the constructive criticism to improve the roadmap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVZxjVJz4ds

I agree with you about marketcap. That's the most important indicator.
A practical use is obviously a good indicator, but if the marketcap is too big, it's a potential bad investment, such as EOS.

Personally, I believe community support is useless. Successful companies doesn't need community support. What is Satander community support, for example?

Do you really need bounties and fake bots to shill a good project? That's most of what community support is about. Personally, I have participated in many ICOs. But I have never invested in a Ico that promoted a bounty, where they give away tokens to bots and spammers.

There are some top50 coins which barely do any marketing. Those are the ones I see as the most interesting projecta. Hype is not sustainable. And hype keep prices high, only to later on collapse

I believe that instead of looking at the individual value of each currency, you should look through the marketcap. Even if you do not consider it a good comparison, it is the simplest.

Therefore, I would consider projects that are worth less than 10 million in marketcap today.

---

• Coins that are exchanged in at least 1 large exchange.
• Having well-known developers
• Have at least 1 known investor or director
• Have an ANN topic on BitcoinTalk that is not tainted with bots or spam
• Have a busy and always updated Git
• Have a clear roadmap with short, medium and long term goals.
• No promises out of reality.
• liquidity to buy and sell

You can use bitscreener to put some parameters. I put coins that are worth less than 10 million in mktcap, that have been in existence for more than 3 months and with a negotiated volume of more than 10,000. (https://bitscreener.com/default?timeframe=1w&f=mkt_lt_10m,age_gt_3m,avg_vlm_gt_100k)

I think you misunderstood the "positive community" comment.

If you read my comments carefully you'll notice it was anti-shilling.
Communities that have open and honest dialogue are important for startup and evolving coins.

Coins will face technical challenges along the way.

Often communities can become so invested that they see any criticism as FUD.

I agree that HYPE does not make a coin.  

However - a toxic community that will censor any discussion that they consider FUD -  can kill a potentially good coin / concept.

Shills, shill BOTS, Hype, Pump and dump are the bad side of crypto. As investors wisen up - they will become more aware of it and it will have a lesser effect.

A positive community can also work on getting actual vendor support.

"one cent coins" has become a broader description than just a literal description. It is similar to "penny shares", and describes low cost assets that may have explosive growth potential. There are not too many of them, and choosing wisely is not an easy task. That is why I thought a private information exchange and discussion could be of mutual benefit.

As most people seem to diss the idea, I might just chuck £100 or so into a pot, and buy a few to see what happens. I'll post after the event with my justifications. If I lose the lot, then I can write it off to "education",

Did you buy? Terrible timing if you did  :D. Crashes like this is why I don't buy cheap/trash coins, Bitcoin goes down 10%? They go down 20%.

I'm still planning out the structure for the club. I might have one other member, so that will make things easier.

Bitcoin is starting to look attractive again, so I might buy a few Satoshis to underpin the portfolio. That would make payments easier as well. At the speed I work, it wll probably take another month to plan out a structure. I'm still not sure if I should use Thermo Coin, or Diamond Crypto as a name for the share holding tokens. I'm also looking for some open source software for a proof of stake blockchain.