My anticipation is a peak price during it's lifetime of ~$25,000 (probably mid-end of 2017) and come 2019-2020, we'll see it drop and level out around $15,000
Whoa, that is not a light statement. You're talking about going from over a $450bn cap to under $300bn cap. That's a lot of money. Heck, not even Apple has that much cash on hand (and they have a lot). Even in major financial markets, a $150bn swing is not something to sneeze at. If BTC has as much adoption as you anticipate, a swing like that would have massive impact. It's just a feeling, obviously, but we're dealing with a whole different beast here. I think it will peak, and then over a few years level off much lower and then stabilize. My reason for this is because I see big companies, fortune 100 companies, picking it up in masses in a few years time which will bring people quickly to bitcoin. Then, over a few years, users will slow down and drop off, and we'll stabilize. That's fair, I only mention it because when I read that part, tons of flags went off in my head. I actually think you have a reasonably lucid justification for the price points and development along the way. I agree that the success that Overstock has had will likely materialize into something much more significant and adoption by a Fortune 100 retail company would be a huge step. Although Bitcoin is still yet to be adopted by a Fortune 500 retail company. What I could imagine happening is there being major companies that transact in BTC for the convenience for most people. |
|
|
|
My anticipation is a peak price during it's lifetime of ~$25,000 (probably mid-end of 2017) and come 2019-2020, we'll see it drop and level out around $15,000
Whoa, that is not a light statement. You're talking about going from over a $450bn cap to under $300bn cap. That's a lot of money. Heck, not even Apple has that much cash on hand (and they have a lot). Even in major financial markets, a $150bn swing is not something to sneeze at. If BTC has as much adoption as you anticipate, a swing like that would have massive impact. |
|
|
|
|
Intuitively, it may make sense that if BTC goes up then alts must follow, but during the amount of time I've watched alt-currencies and BTC, I rarely see that trend follow directly.
Most of the time, I notice that there is a delay in the market caps when tied to fiat of the alt-coins tied to BTC (usually a delay that is proportional to the amount of time that there is a spike). In terms of alts-BTC, I have usually seen an alt's price first drop before having a surge that leads to an over correction and then afterwards dropping again to a different floor.
|
|
|
|
I've been using Bter to trade Doge and haven't had a problem with them since I started (about 6+ months).
Hi Kaninm, Please forgive me, but you're full of shit. How could you possibly have been trading Dogecoin on Bter for about 6+ months now? This might be a case of a dangling participle. I think he meant he trades DOGE on Bter, a site that he has used for 6+ months without issue. If not, then sure, he's full of it. |
|
|
|
Wow, lot of market activity while I was asleep. Although it looks like it was somewhat of a pump (poloniex and coinex have similar graphs). That said, it looks like we're away from the sub-20 satoshi floor (at least for now). And it does look like the difficulty floor has gone up. It also seems that someone burned an extension cord. Let's not do that.  Hehe. |
|
|
|
|
It's fairly commonplace for prices to swing somewhat dramatically (maybe upwards of 15-20%) with just over 1k BTC. With 7% of the coins, you do some incredible manipulation. Part of me feels that if that much was dumped in a flash sell, the volume would crash BTC for a long time. But on the other hand, there are a whole bunch of people who have gone all in with BTC so there could be a fair amount of resilience to it.
But to be honest, I feel like it'd most likely be a case of diminishing returns: 1k can cause a 15-20% shock, but it might take 10k to cause double the shock (i.e. 30-40%). And then you have all of the factors like news in a given day and that sort of thing.
|
|
|
|
Are your calculations assuming that we aren't reinvesting stake?
That is correct. This is not assuming reinvestment/compounding. Thanks for the clarification. I assumed that was the case after reading your rule #6, but I just wanted to be sure. Converting obtained stake (I guess it's okay calling them dividends, hehe) with each month into BTC would give this effect. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but with PoS, I don't recall it being a hard rule that you'll generate stake in a given time frame, just that your chances of generating a PoS block even out to what the coded return rate is throughout the given time frame. What are your thoughts on reconciling returns if it takes longer than usual? |
|
|
|
|
Are your calculations assuming that we aren't reinvesting stake?
|
|
|
|
i was in it for a few days. some serious manipulation going on by people who bought large amounts dirt cheap at the start. dunno about the btc connection. seems to me there is a lot of infrastructure disorganization, the whole airdrop thing is not really figured out yet, merchants are not on board, etc. a bit sad because i think it is an interesting experiment.
Like most of the Alt-coins. Impossible to read charts because it isn't really market action that is going on, just plain old whale manipulation. I to like the concept of Aurora coin and Meza coin also.....but this is the world of pump n dump alt-coins we are talking about. Noble causes mean shit in this world, its all just pump em high and crash em low. Yeah that's pretty much how the whole flow of things keep being and will most likely continue to be. That said, there has been some links with the increase in price of BTC with significant increases of volume (in BTC) with altcoins before. It's kinda like that relation between altcoins and BTC market caps. When BTC market cap goes down a substantial amount, so does the BTC exchange rate of altcoins. The contrapositive in this case isn't necessarily true, but a lot of the time, there is a strong link. |
|
|
|
Mintpal just upped the antes for voting...
You MUST be logged in and can vote 5 times.
Price is now 0.0001 per vote...
Don't forget, you also have to have at least one successful trade in order to vote. It looks like a lot of these voting increases are going to slowdown by a lot unless people are willing to dish out some BTC. To be honest, I figured Mintpal would pull a move like this at some point. Remember, it's all about profit points so yeah. Okay what a joke.. How can I trade when there's nothing I want to trade, add NOBL and then you get my 1 trade  My eyes are on agx.io now.  Yeah, I'm kinda viewing Mintpal and Cryptsy in the same kinda bucket and I don't think they are particularly motivated to add coins that they can't make a decent profit off of. Fortunately, I had some other spare alts that I sent to Mintpal so that I could keep voting for NOBLE, not sure how many others will, but at least NOBLE will get around 30-40 votes a day from me. Hehe. But we definitely should look towards hitting another exchange for the benefit of NOBLE, trying to get onto Mintpal/Cryptsy I think is a waste of time and effort at the moment. Unfortunately, I think the market will continue to remain diluted for a while to come until a bunch of coins either are consolidated or a bunch of coins capitulate (the latter I'm thinking is much more likely). |
|
|
|
Mintpal just upped the antes for voting...
You MUST be logged in and can vote 5 times.
Price is now 0.0001 per vote...
Don't forget, you also have to have at least one successful trade in order to vote. It looks like a lot of these voting increases are going to slowdown by a lot unless people are willing to dish out some BTC. To be honest, I figured Mintpal would pull a move like this at some point. Remember, it's all about profit points so yeah. |
|
|
|
We will be completely revamping the public ledger to make it more readable and understandable. We will also publish the excel spreadsheet with every spend on it done since we released - it's at 2400+ entries (names will be removed but addresses will remain).
We released at a time where premines were still acceptable and considered great for long-term development report. However we immediately knew we had to provide a public ledger and transparent/accountable devs (public social media details and real name, etc.) in order to stay competitive compared to coins like EAC. We knew we had to be legitimate if we wanted to be taken seriously. We delivered this.
Since then, the alt-scene has jumped from coins like Coinye (privately premined and dumped), Panda (massively premined and dumped - worst case so far), and now EAC (seems they are constantly dealing with concerns the private premine has been dumped over the last couple of months and the anonymous devs refuse to release any information). The amount of private premines from now dead coins is too many to list at this point.
We know this has hurt the image of premines. What is frustrating for us is that while miners/supporters cry out for exactly what we delivered, they really just want to jump on the next bandwagon and get rich quick so ultimately they don't really care (excuse the cynicism). I personally feel it is unfair to be lumped in with scam coins when we have provided everything that was demanded.
Without the premine, we would not be supporting charities to do good and get exposure, we could not provide 10% discounts or fund the marketplace, and we would not be promoting on multiple channels as we simply would not have the funds to do so. It's easy for big miners with big rigs to point at us and say mine it yourself and support the coin, but to be frank with you guys we are not wealthy, we are not miners, my graphics card pulls 400khs. There are coins out there with 40x our cap now who can't put together enough to fund anything, can't develop infrastructure or merchants or a marketplace. If you dig deep and read the threads and their fundraising campaigns you will realise this. We have to stick to our initial plan of having a premine to bounty for and provide just that in a transparent manner. Things have changed since BTC and LTC, and miners and newcomers do not want to spend a dime or give in this environment or take risks that might interfere with 'profit'. They want everyone else to spend theirs and reap the rewards should the price rise.
Our initial plan was to spend about 10% of the premine a month to support a huge amount of development and handsomly reward anyone who wanted to build something also. To this day we've spent 10% of it month one and about 7% of it in month two - we will release the sheets/update the public ledger to show this. I don't know of many coins doing this - they are staying private or not building anything at all. I can tell you one thing I know for certain now (and hopefully the sheet shows this): coins that say 1% or 0.5% of premine (private) to be used for giveaways/promo etc. and people believe that because it's so small are getting fooled. If we did just 1% on release and actually dumped any of it (even slowly over a month) during the high weeks we would not have to work for two years and I could be on a beach right now.
We want to spend this, we want to build stuff: but the current state of exchanges taking in flavour of the week, bought coins and 'scam' coins and not even listing us for vote after being here for 2 months with a public ledger that is still legit and myself not remaining anonymous means we have no volume or buy support to reward anyone in BTC or otherwise without crashing the price and getting labelled a scam like PandaCoin. We are worlds apart and still trying to prove ourselves so that we get attention from a big player who doesn't want to abuse us for short-term profit like the rest. The development map is there, the rewards are there, and people will come as crypto grows and this game of deceit and anonymous scam artists comes to an end. Sooner or later this scene will cannibalise itself or start regulating/holding higher standards to save itself. When that day comes, either we all lose no matter what coin we support (cannibalise) or the coins that did things the right way will win.
Part of me wants the price to drop to 1 satoshi so that we can provide the ultimate proof and continue building with the premine still in position, but we don't want to lose everyone who has stuck with us or let down those who spend real money on this as a vote of confidence. That all being said, over the weekend we will flesh out the premine, the plans, the strategy behind it and where/what we want to spend it on.
Thank you Rofo for your response. I really appreciate your candor on this matter. And I appreciate how much thought you continue to put into this crypto-currency. I definitely agree that there is a vast chasm between how you guys have done it and how many other dev teams have done it (maybe someone can write up something on this). I definitely don't blame the nuanced cynicism within your post. You guys really have built quality infrastructure around NOBLE but yet many others write this crypto-currency and its community off. As a note, my post wasn't meant to instigate any negativity and I hope it wasn't taken that way. I just want to continue to critically look at things and provide feedback based on what I see. In this particular case, I just wanted to note down my thoughts on the alt-coin scene in relation to Noblecoin and a possible challenge I see for the community in the near future driven by recent happenings. And frankly, the more polished and refined the response is the stronger I feel the community will look. I definitely don't blame any slowdown in use of the reserves, the current BTC rate makes it essentially fool-hardy to disburse it at a quick rate (a significantly lower return which doesn't make sense). I know that you guys will continue to monitor the situation and lead the community in the best direction. |
|
|
|
Just sucking numbers out of my thumb. And my logic probably grossly underestimating reality. World GDP of $85 trillion A rough estimate of total money supply M2 is $60 trillion Forex markets trade about $1515.8 trillion per year Forex trading is 25 times that of total Monet supply. Total Market Cap of all Crypto: $ 10,834,351,000 http://coinmarketcap.com/About 80% are in cold storage, leaving an active Market Cap of all Crypto @ $2,166,870,206 A total fiat equal between, $86, million per year could be circulating in Bitcoin land. so I guess somewhere between $8 and $80 million has been invested in Crypto. Thank you for this post. This is a very smart approach. Although, there may be significant underestimation, I think this is a very strong approach and to me yields the most meaningful results. Two things I would modify are the proportional cap correlation between the ForEx Market and Bitcoin, and summing up all cryptocurrencies in the calculation. Since 1) ForEx is used for many currencies and crypto-currency exchanges primarily deal with Bitcoin (and maybe some other major coins) and 2) the crypto-currency scene acts as a subsegment (and involves much less people) of currency trade, I say we just use BTC for simplicity sake, and adjust the value to about 8-12x that of the fiat money supply (I'm basing this off a logarithmic comparison). I would have ~$7.8B + ~$.7B (including some of the other major markets excluding ripple because of how it functions) *.2 = ~$1.7B This gives around $140-$210M. Considering that Mt. Gox had around 15-20% of this value in buy orders, this seems fairly reasonable. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, short-term, things still look to be a bit down. There is lots of buzz and news surrounding AUR and MZC that is basically gobbling up a lot of the attention of the alternative crypto-currency scene. Compound this with all of the buzz surrounding Bitcoin (stories about Satoshi, regulatory reaction in Japan concerning Mt. Gox and Bitcoins, and the death of the CEO of First Meta). It is unfortunately very difficult to grow a base with all of this activity.
In terms of exchange news, the issues with coinmarket.io continue to push a downward trend on NOBL so this has put a lot of the volume on coinex.pw. The way bots function on that site continuously puts downward pressure on the price (which is compounded by the slight downturn in the price of BTC).
Just as a point of consideration, I personally feel that one of the biggest issues ahead in the adoption of NOBL is having others get past the stigma of the "pre-mine." I think the current deal with AUR and its 50% premine (which actually accounts for 95% of all AUR currently in existence) will trickle over to many of the other pre-mined coins.
In regards to the reserves, there are two issues that I think the team will need to address regarding the pre-mine:
1) Currently, the pre-mine accounts for slightly over 1/3 of all NOBL in existence. That's usually not a comforting feeling for a lot of people in this scene despite how transparent the pre-mine funds are used. Assuming that the rate of use with the reserves in the next 3 months equals the current amount used, this proportion shrinks to around 17%, but even that can be a turn-off. I fundamentally think this will be a big hurdle for NOBL.
2) The public ledger is not easily readable. Sure it has everything, but compiling it into a table format I think will go a long way in explaining how the funds have been used. Also, including a current estimated timeframe for how and when more of the reserves will be used can also go a long way. A road map already exists for the coin, I think a reasonable next step would be mapping out (at least to a certain extent) a road map regarding the usage of the reserves.
With that said, the continuous proliferation of other competing alts is hurting much of the market, and because there is so much dilution, it ends up seeping to all of the various coins and detracting from a lot of possible value.
|
|
|
|
I wonder what their thoughts on regulating are. And I wonder what kind of punishments they could come up with. Personally, I think that they should force all of those complicit to go in public and perform dogeza. Just like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG6oT5kYI0Y[On a Mt. Gox note, the funny thing is that I could imagine Karpeles acting like this; especially the ending of this video...] |
|
|
|
Price 22 satoshi now, this is getting ridiculous  Coinmarket.io will be back soon and hopefully will bring some volume to NOBL again, but I'm afraid everybody has switched over to Mintpal/cryptorush/poloniex already If coinmarket.io would get out of beta stage the volume would be boosted surely As unfortunate as it is, coinmarket had the majority of trading volume with NOBL, the extended downtime has impacted NOBL much more than I thought. I personally thought that coinmarket would have been up by now, however that prediction was wrong. I also thought that there would be a floor of around 29, but now it's already 25% lower than that (despite the fact that BTC seems to have stabilized at the $650 range). It seems that NOBL needs to reach more hands and players and somehow open up at another more widely used exchange. That said, I still think the longer-term prospects of NOBL are still quite bright. |
|
|
|
|
It's funny, the two closely linked best current coins (AUR and MZC) are in a spectacular freefall with some very intriguing numbers. Alas, that is the nature of the Pump and Dump...How low will it go? I personally prescribe to the 1/16th rule:
AUR: High of 0.17 BTC with a 24 hour-mark value that after ATH went to ~0.09. Using the 1/16th rule, probably a crest of a round 0.011-0.014 at the absolute lowest before following a different type of trend. Do I think it can rebound back to 1/2 of its high (0.085) from where it is right now? Sure. Will it sustain that? I would be surprised.
MZC: High of 0.17 mBTC, with a 24 hour-mark value after ATH that went to about ~0.09 mBTC. Using the 1/16th rule, likely a crest of 0.011-0.014 mBTC. Same other comments as with AUR.
Once again, both of these coins were hyped, pumped, dumped and now it's in a consistent short-term downward trend. Kinda like a lot of other coins in the alt-scene. Isn't it funny how they both hit a high-target and a 24 hour mark value that were nearly identical? Oh well, happy coincidence right?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm really inclined to say you got scammed. You should probably post this in the Scam Accusations thread (assuming that this wasn't done before). If he was a person representing coinmarket.io, you would think he would have at least one post that vaguely mentions coinmarket.io or something about an alt-exchange. But there isn't.
If you look through a lot of his posts, he either was going on about trying to make a pool, talking about TTC or HUC, or asking for someone to code a coin that he had in mind. In fact, he had a few posts asking for free coins. In all likelihood, that wouldn't be the post trail for someone that is associated with an alt-exchange service.
All you can do now is let the trust rating system take its course. This account could likely be a sock of some sort, but it's the best that you can do.
|
|
|
|
|
This has either got to be an attempt to FUD, a scam due to some at least a little bit of incompetence, or a really big deal.
I personally think the likelihood for each situation is like 35%/62%/3%.
In the future, either do more confirmation/verification or use some sort of escrow process. It really doesn't sound like you should have lost your money if you took more care. I say it is a scam because of the whole wrong address deal, that's a commonplace move by scammers and since you can reverse it, you're pretty much out of luck.
|
|
|
|
|
Is it a game-changer? Quite possibly because it adds a sort of "regulatory legitimacy" layer onto Bitcoin (or at least a perception of that) which could make it more appealing to a broader audience. In general, people are willing to take risks on things they don't fully understand if there is some sort of protection and that is what this would provide (at least to a certain extent). I'm actually very interested in seeing the risk analysis that is developed from this. The predictive models and financial break points have got to be very interesting in the crypto-currency realm.
That said, I think it deviates from some of the fundamental ideas behind Bitcoin. I personally wouldn't pay for FDIC-style insurance when anyone can take measures to protect their Bitcoins. An equivalent sort of functioning mechanism would be to insure deposits to exchanges so that we only need to insure "active" coinage, but that could easily become tricky.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
