I've seen various comments on here suggesting that any fall in the value of BTC is the result of some conspiracy by the banks to make the price fall so that they can buy up all the BTC cheaply, and then get all the profits themselves.  The fact that anyone believes that betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how Bitcoin works, and of the realities of the world.

So let's follow that scenario through.  Somehow, by manipulating the news the banks manage to precipitate a massive sell off where the price crashes to almost zero.  To do that, you have to convince all the HODLers that Bitcoin has no future, so they all cash out, and you can pick up their BTC for almost nothing.

So what are the banks left with?  A digital currency that no-one trusts.  If that's what they want, why not just save themselves a lot of time and effort, and create their own blockchain?

But that doesn't mean that the banks won't take over BTC - they'll just be much smarter about it.

What they'll do is simply press for Bitcoin to be under the same regulatory framework as fiat currencies.  They'll point to the scams, they'll point to the use by drug dealers, and in some countries they'll point to the use of BTC for illegal currency exports.  And they'll say "all these are reasons why all the normal banking regulations should apply to BTC".  And then they'll say that any entity that doesn't follow these regulations should be cut out of the system by making transactions with them illegal.

And this is what the majority of the population will want - they don't really care about the economic justifications for digital currency.  All they want is to be protected from scammers, and to feel that their money is safe.  And they trust the big banks for that, because by and large they've done a reasonable job of that.  (Bitcoin has a far worse record on bank stability.)

So the banks will slowly strangle Bitcoin, while making use of the technology with their own coins.  That's what they're already doing with Ripple, after all, where they're using the technology, but not the coins.

And maybe that's no bad thing.  If you truly believe in Bitcoin as an alternative currency, then the fiat link should be anathema to you.  Once the speculators have been squeezed out it will revert to its original intention - as a peer to peer currency independent of the financial system.  And your BTC will be worth just as much to you as they ever were.

If you read what he actually said, it equates to "If the EU banks were mad enough to start holding significant amounts of crypto, we'd have to  regulate them".  Whether you think that's correct or not, it certainly doesn't come over as a very positive statement.

While all that may be true for you, it's pretty obvious that even on this forum most people are into Bitcoin because they see it as a "get rich quick" solution.  That's classic for a bubble. 

That doesn't mean there isn't an underlying value, just that at the moment it's swamped by the bubble.

So in summary, from reading this thread:

1) Miners voted for Segwit, and it got approved.
2) Most of them haven't implemented it yet, so the block size charts don't show a huge change.
3) Coinbase say they're going to go live with it in the next few days

Sounds like we need to wait a little while to see what happens.

I'm not sure I totally agree with that - to me the shape of the curve suggests that there the people buying are buying in much greater amounts than the people selling.

If you've looked at share price graphs, you'll notice that they tend to rise gradually, interspersed with sudden large falls.

The Bitcoin price graph over the last month is the opposite of that.  It's a gradual decline, with the occasional sudden jump.

Any opinions on why that is?

That is, I'm afraid, completely wrong.  The technology is open source and so can be used by anyone to set-up their own blockchain.

Bitcoin's value is mostly from it's brand, the fact that most people have heard of it.

(There is a little bit of value from it being a means of exchange, but that value has almost been destroyed by its recent volatility - the number one requirement for a means of exchange is that it be reasonably stable.  That underlying value will return once the speculators have been burnt and left.)

I think you have to distinguish between the technology, and the current coins.

The technology will grow and prosper, because it's useful to the big players.

The current coins will become almost worthless as the big players have no interest in preserving your wealth when they could just create their own coins and save themselves a lot of money.

Bitcoin is a movement with genuine ideals and underlying value.

Unfortunately it's been hijacked by others to build a ponzi scheme on top of, and that element dwarfs the real value.

If you "double-down" it will increase your chance of becoming very rich, but it will also increase your chance of becoming very poor.

It's a personal decision whether the benefit of the former outweighs the risk of the latter.

So what you're saying is that digital currency is useless in the real world?  For a currency to be useful, it's value has to be predictable - that's why hyper-inflation is so bad.

Actually, most people have a life.  They've got better things to do with their time than support Bitcoin.

They're quite happy to use a bank because it makes their life easier.

Current BTC owners probably fall into four groups

1) Those who are using BTC to buy things (probably about 1%)
2) Those who believe in BTC so much that they'd continue to support it even if they made a loss in doing so (about 1%)
3) Those who believe in BTC, but only as long as they make a profit out of it (about 50%).
4) Those who are only in it for the profit (the rest).

It's only when you get rid of the last two categories that BTC will find its real price.

If the banks got convinced that cryptocurrency was the future the first thing they'd do is create their own blockchain, and cut the existing BTC holders out.  So it doesn't make any sense that they're manipulating the BTC price.