Ripple have always a similar growth pattern , the pump of course and then crouching to the level where he grew up and starts to grow again

ETH will switch to PoS, I hope next year.
And, you said righ that BCH might build up its strong ecoystem, part of it used for crowfunding platform.
The platform, when implemented officially, will help Bitcoin Cash faster expand its ecosystem, its demand will increase considerbaly.
But, I don't think that BitCoin Cash will be the only competitors with ETH.
There are already so many platforms for crowdfunding on the market, and ETH has still proved its use-case.
Anyway, it is a good technical strategy of Bitcoin Cash. I love it.

Cost is not the issue, Each Block has a defined target of say 1 minute between blocks.

Your chain is 3 months behind, and still has a target time of 1 minute,  your block height will always be ~ the same 3 months behind and as such never a threat to causing a reorg, because a reorg can only happen if your block height # exceeds the main chain.

So how do you make up the 3 months time difference?

FYI:
Any change to the code to modify the time target between blocks could allow faster blocks, would lower the target difficulty making it a weaker chain and also break consensus with the other nodes, therefore making sure it would never be accepted over the main chain.

FYI2:
The phrase (block production has zero cost) , is incorrect.
There actually is a cost , it is time.  
Your block has to wait the coded time before block generation can occur, and those coins go dormant for a coded period, another time factor.
The Time between blocks is hard coded which affects the difficulty # in proof of stake coins, thus defining the strength or weakness of a chain.

A timestamp is accepted as valid if it is greater than the median timestamp of previous 11 blocks, and less than the network-adjusted time + 2 hours. "Network-adjusted time" is the median of the timestamps returned by all nodes connected to you.

The reason why the 2MB upgrade was not done was to fix this problem in a future proof way - the layer 2 solution.

Not sure if this is real or fake, but apparently there's a graffiti in Paris.
Anyone is there now and can confirm?
https://i.redd.it/a889ul8881g01.jpg

The scaling itself is about politics. Making laymen believe in scaling itself is politics. Increasing the block size unnecessarily will only clog the whole system. No one should care about scaling since it is the job of the developers. If you are not into programming you might as well shut up.

Think only risk for hard fork is someone dumping BitcoinBTC1 and buying BitcoinCore instantly after the hardfork for a few hours when there will be little volume on the exchanges and getting a load of headlines that BitcoinCore is worth more than BitcoinBTC1 - at which point some less committed miners start switching from BTC1 back to Core....

Read the report, its all about the Alphabay shut down. I read somewhere that the closing of both Hansa and Alphabay had a lot to do with the price dip last week. Especially for Eth. People may see this as negative news, but not for me. These darkmarkets, as much as I don't like them have played huge roles in making crypto technology mainstream.Without the silk roads and alphabays, I very much doubt if cryptotech will be where it is today. 

The price may be increasing once again and people realizing that this could happen without a chain split but guess what, we will see panic in November when the block size part comes in and on that time, It will be just another opportunity to buy and accumulate more bitcoins in your wallet.

Stupid argument. If bitcoin fails, no one will trust another crypto as store of value again and they will all run into the same political problems at bitcoins size.

#UASF = Make Bitcoin Great Again

Not hunting... you will see.

Segwit is backwards compatible. If you don't like segwit, you can continue to use Bitcoin as you do now with almost zero impact on you.

There are now two transaction formats - legacy and segwit. 

A node that doesn't support segwit will receive transactions in the legacy format.  These transactions will not have the witness data, thus no signatures or public keys.  This works because the witness program allows anybody to spend the output.  A node that supports segwit will not accept a legacy transaction that attempts to spend an output using a witness program.  Thus the need to get 95% of the miners to support segwit.

For low amounts, you can use fake data on an exchange and still trade your xmr to bitcoin and then send the bitcoin to the dark market. Makes it incredibly hard to track you, especially if you use VPN on top of it.

Most of the dark markets accept only Bitcoin. A few of them may accept Litecoin or Ethereum. But I don't think that any of them accept these little known altcoins suhc as XMR and NAV. So it is not possible to buy anything with these coins.