Hey, folks gamble with actual lottery tickets, so if they want to gamble with a longshot alt, so be it. I don't think anyone here is under any delusion that the odds aren't against them, nor think their current #1000+ ranked coin is a sure thing to hit the top 5.  I'm also not sure that many are basing their hopes that the next altcoin rally will repeat like the last one did. Perhaps those holding longshot coins think that. I won't say they are absolutely wrong, but personally I think the odds are extremely, extremely unlikely.

But could BTC dominance decrease if BTC falls below 7K and it spurs on a mini-altcoin recovery? Sure, I see no reason why not. It's actually been decreasing since you started this thread.

Would I tell folks to chomp up alts for this possible mini altcoin season as btc falls? Of course not. Same way I wouldn't pretend to be an expert and tell them it's nearly impossible to occur and to run for the hills, sell everything into btc. It's all guesswork -- the one thing we can learn from crypto and its history is that there are no such things as experts and nobody has a clue where the markets will go.

 If we look at your advice, we can already see it was incorrect -- folks shouldn't have sold their alts into btc, they should have sold both alts and btc into fiat. But that's just an example of nobody knowing how this will play out.

Buying the dip by portions, setting up buy orders on the way down, is probably the safest approach. There is no way to guess whether a current dip is the best entry point or not, so might as well just go with a staggered approach and average it out.

But if anyone feels BTC will hit 20K again (or even over 10K), might as well buy in during dips like these.

The bigger question (which nobody has an answer to), is if alts will outpace btc for the next month or two ... which then logically would mean one is better off investing in alts, selling the alts during a rise and then going back into btc. Kind of risky though.

Although we disagree, I do get where you are coming from. There are certainly some alts that are more or less doomed ... forever sinking. And yeah, many of their holders probably would be better of selling into fiat or btc.

However, the same way we can't say what coin will be #2 years from now, we can't even say where most alts will be even 1-3 months from now. Sure, perhaps btc dominance increases, every alt flounders, and folks will wish they have sold. Or btc crumbles back to 6K, alts have a run, and we are kicking ourselves for selling our alts at their bottom when if we waited a month we could have gained 2-3x as much.

It works both ways. Most (or I should say many) here aren't just holding a fortune in junk alts hoping 2 years from now it turns into ETH. Many trade the swings, many hold but have no reservations about selling at the right price... and many realize they have no clue where the crypto market will lead.

You are also overlooking risk/reward. If someone puts $100-1000 into some dinky alt hoping it'll turn into ETH years from now, so what? That's a risk they feel worthwhile and isn't so much as to really hurt their finances... yes, most likely they will lose, but if they win, they win big. So who is to tell them they are wrong?

And I'm sure you have noticed BTC isn't exactly doing great lately either. Folks selling into fiat would have been the better move, not into BTC ... but as I stated, nobody really knows where prices will go.

I'll also state you may not even be wrong, perhaps every alt holder should sell into btc -- nobody can say. I just dislike it when folks post here acting like they are some expert and know for a fact where markets will lead. It's up to each person to weigh their own risks and decide for themselves.

Buy low, sell high.

Of course we run into the little problem of not knowing where the low or high actually is ... or I'm basically saying, nobody can really say when to invest into a coin or not. Generally speaking though, it's not a great idea to invest into a coin while it's pumping ... early pump is fine, mid is risky, and at the end you'll get stuck. But as I stated, it's not always clear where those points are.

If you want BAT, look at publishox and the brave browser, gather up some freebie coins. You won't make much, but it's not like you have a ton to invest to begin with. You'd at least get some guaranteed profit that way.

That's why those who cry for more regulation thinking it'd somehow be a good thing are misguided in my opinion. It's not like these low volume alts would flow into BTC to begin with, or even move prices that much, but do we want all crypto, including BTC, to be locked into stock-market like movement? So 5-10% a year would be great, and we'd go years without any movement at all?

They also seem to have short memories. ETH went up crazy amounts during its first big rise, like over 10x, and  BTC went from around 1K to 20K in less than a year ...  asking for more regulation is throwing the baby out with the bathwater... tiny alts would no longer do their crazy pumps, but it'd also mean BTC wouldn't do its crazy rise either.

Although BTC is down about 60% from its ATH, as well. It just looks better because it's not an insane 90%+ loss like many alts. Still, we can't pretend the entire crypto market, including BTC, hasn't been disappointing.

Yeah, probably not the best idea to buy a car from that place, doesn't look very professional.

To be honest, I see no point in using crypto, be it btc or bch, as a currency unless the retailer is offering a discount for using crypto. Otherwise one might as well just use fiat.

An exception may be in 3rd world countries with hyperinflation, but in such places buying cars probably isn't their first priority.

It's such a dinky coin it baffles me why the OP even bothered mentioning it. There will always be random coins that spike up, usually with such low volume it hardly matters. OP acts like the money from those coins are what is keeping the price of XRP (or top coins) down, and money would instead flow into them.

So 10K or so would go into BTC or XRP, big whoop.

Besides the fact that all coins are pumped/dumped, including BTC and ETH, I'm not so sure we should even being wishing for more rules or all 'amazing gains' to regulated out of existence. The reason BTC went insane in 2017 wasn't solely because of BTC, it was because smaller alts went crazy too. When folks see 5-10x gains, or coins doubling in a day, they are willing to invest. If they see 2% gains, they aren't quite as enthusiastic.

New trend? Huh?

I remember seeing this happen way back in 2014. It's always happened. And let's not pretend it only occurs with shitcoins, how do you think ETH went to the value it reached? There was a crazy pump on Poloniex.

I guess people have short memories, but the reason that crypto is popular and reached the values it did isn't based on fundamentals or organic price growth. It was all pumped up, even BTC. Remember BTC's first rise was from Mt. Gox and fake money pumping it up. Without that occurring, we may still be looking at 10K BTC buying a pizza.

So folks here shouldn't act all innocent and think this is a new thing or only shitcoins are to blame.

I'm seeing a volume of less than 10K today, unless I am looking at he wrong coin there. You really think 10K will move XRP's price? Even if we take all shitcoins and pile their volume up into one big bundle, it wouldn't matter as much as you think -- there is also no saying that money would go into XRP, BTC or any top crypto either. It's a mistaken notion bitcoin maximalists have as well, that all volume will flow back to them if every other coin just disappeared.

Besides, as far as regulations go, be careful what you wish for. If the SEC defines XRP as a security, you might not be so happy about it.

Safest bet would to just buy BTC and forget about it. If you prefer a whole coin for some reason (not that it matters in the least as far as investing goes), save up a little more and buy 1 ETH.

Or if you just want something to play with + trade once in a while, do the Dogecoin thing like someone else mentioned here.

Just be aware that $100 can turn into $50 or less real quick in crypto-land.

The problem with that mindset is it'd require an imaginary world, where investors wouldn't expect a return of any sort. It'd be like saying stock ICOs would work better if folks considered it a donation to the company, not expecting any profit (or even their investment) back. That's nonsensical.

We can't equate giving money to a homeless person to investing either. It's not like ICOs are charitable endeavors. ICOs work on greed, pure and simple.

And the reason they are failing (besides the whole SEC issue) is that so many projects are scams or are simply bad projects. It also doesn't help much that alts are generally in a bear market.

As far as I know, coinmarketcap has been including yobit's bean volume for quite some time, even though it's volume is based on a broken wallet. Go back a year and you'd probably see the same thing, broken wallet yet coinmarketcap counting it.

Remember a broken wallet doesn't mean a coin can't be traded at all. There are a ton of beans still on yobit, but they are all trapped there... beans went in, but they can't come out. So it's just folks trapped there trading their trapped beans against btc, kind of like a fake marketplace.

Beats me why coinmarketcap counts that as meaning anything, especially at such tiny volume numbers.

Doesn't look like it is working to me either. It's been broken for over a year now, at least. Not sure if it's yobit's fault or the code is faulty ... knowing yobit, they probably ran out of beans somehow and turned the wallet off just so folks can't withdraw what doesn't exist. Or they preferred staking the coin for themselves.

You aren't necessarily wrong, but I might question why you invested in high (or relatively high) marketcap coins if you are going with the lottery ticket mentality there. If going for a high payout, lower cap coins might make more sense. Although beats me as to what to recommend, your guess is as good as mine.

If you wanted to hedge the bet a little by putting money into higher cap coins, you might have been better off just putting a small amount into BTC instead, as I have a feeling it'll either be: Alts + BTC both do great or BTC does great, Alts collapse ... not something XRP, ETH or ADA does great, every other alt collapses, BTC collapses.

It doesn't sound like you chose the coins you did to hedge the bet though, so that's why I'm wondering why you didn't focus on lower cap a bit more if going for the longshot high payout route.

The thing to look at is marketcap, not if a coin is cheap or expensive. A cheap coin with a zillion coins in circulation isn't the same as a cheap coin with low number of total coins.

If $500 is a small amount of money to you, pick something lower cap, and consider it like a lottery ticket -- most likely it's lost money, but you never know.

If medium amount, consider something like ETH or a higher cap coin.

If it's a lot, just stick it into BTC and forget about it. That may be the best way to go regardless.

And if it's all the money you have, don't put it into crypto at all.

I wouldn't expect institutional investors to put that much into alts. There will be some who put money into big (and new alts) ... like if Libra ever gets going, or Gram, or coins like that. But small cap alts? I don't see that happening. But that doesn't mean such coins may not be profitable, they sure went up plenty last time without any institutional investing. I wouldn't expect to see new ATHs for the majority of coins however -- those prices were just utterly insane.

Depends on what you expect. If you bought in at crushed alt prices, I can see some being profitable eventually. For all we know they will bump up a bit pre-btc halvening and therefore makes sense to hold for now. Or they'll just smushed further...

Another reason why institutional investors might not be putting money into alts is simply they aren't offered outside of regular exchanges. Grayscale doesn't have things like a Monero Trust, or a Dogecoin Trust, for instance. What I'm kind of baffled about is why Grayscale has a ETC trust -- weird choice there. I suppose a top 50 or 100 coin trust could make sense though, sort of like a coin index -- that could be of some interest, and wouldn't require an institution to explain how they just invested all of their crypto money into a coin with a dog meme.

To be a sleeping giant, I'm not so sure coins ranked so highly already really qualify. Now I like some of the OP's coins and they may do well, but several of them are already semi-Giants. Perhaps only coins ranked 20+ ... or 50-300ish could really be called sleeping giants, as that infers coins without any hype or much recognition, but one day may be very profitable.


Problem of course is picking a future giant from the zillion coins out there. There are some coins I like, but I'd hardly say with any certainty they'll ever crack the top 10.

That's the big question, are they feeling fine about it? Who knows. Rather than lay out guidelines, apparently they just sort of bide their time & hand out lawsuits whenever they feel like it.

They basically waited until the last minute before shutting down Gram, for instance. Some companies get a minor fine (EOS), others get a hefty fine for seemingly doing less than EOS did.

So I have no clue what they think of BNB, or if they ever plan to do anything about it at all. They may ignore it, or next month they crush Binance with a huge fine, and US exchanges are told not to list it. No idea how it will go, and that is what would scare me a little about putting real money into the coin.

I should add that I don't mean this as FUD and I'm not trying to scare away anyone from the coin. For all I know it'll end up being a great longterm investment. I'm just saying that personally I'm a little wary ... it's closer to a security than a lot of other coins are.

Owning BNB is more comparable to owning shares in a company than most coin offerings

That's what actually scares me away from BNB ... now if the SEC is fine with it, then sure, it may be a decent investment. However who knows what the SEC thinks. If looking at it impartially, it does seem awfully similar to a security.