https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2214rank.htmlLooks like the CIA database of M1 has been updated as at 2017-12-31 ... unsurprisingly a lot of these countries have inflated their money supplies (as measured in USD  ) so some of the countries that bitcoin had surpassed have now got 'bigger' money stocks. Isn't money wonderful when you can just print it out of thin air like that! So bitcoin needs to run faster just to stay still it seems  bitcoin is now back below Burma at position 69 with $18.2 billion M1, i.e stock of narrow money.
|
|
|
|
|
A bitcoin ETF would be for the bitcoin 'market cap' like an IPO for big. tech. stock ....
|
|
|
|
It sure is getting bullish in here.
Really? I was waiting for $9588 blow off before I popped some champers ... just saying. |
|
|
|
I like to think parity in terms of ~380 ounces per BTC. That's due to the ratio of 6.1 bn above ground ounces vs 16.15 mn bitcoins mined. That would require a price of $456k per BTC - but at least the scarcity ratio would be accounted for... As a side note, the problem with gold spiking upwards is its large marketcap and large annual production levels. At current prices, ~3500 tons of gold per year of new mining output (without factoring recycling) is ~110mn oz. That requires 132bn USD to absorb. A tenfold increase in the price of gold, would suddenly require 1.32 trillion USD per year just to buy annual production. The problem is that there is no such liquidity in the system for allowing this. On the other hand, silver or bitcoin, can do much larger runs due to their smaller marketcap and much smaller liquidity requirements to buy their annual production. BTC at 10500$ (10x) would require just 6.9 billion per year to buy the annual production (657k coins x 10.5k usd). Silver at 170$ (10x) would require 136 billion per year to buy the annual mining output of ~800mn oz. Gold is priced so high that the numbers involved are too high at 1.32 trillion USD (in a scenario of 10x price) for its 110mn oz. It could happen in a hyperinflation scenario, but then the money one takes wouldn't be worth it anyway. In a sense, gold is constrained from doing a huge run by its large marketcap and the liquidity requirements in the fiat system to sustain prices of 10x+. Silver less so, and bitcoin even less so. Bitcoin seems to be the best bet in terms of upwards potential because it's so small and its fiat requirements to sustain its rise and mining output absorption are equally small. Some interesting points in here, especially the the scarcity ratio comparison between bitcoin:gold ... ... anyone watching this may also be interested in following this thread Gold Price Parity Watch |
|
|
|
Price differential is now convincingly less than $200 ($167 at last check) ... Also some relevant pearls of wisdom from AlexGR in another thread ...
I like to think parity in terms of ~380 ounces per BTC. That's due to the ratio of 6.1 bn above ground ounces vs 16.15 mn bitcoins mined.
That would require a price of $456k per BTC - but at least the scarcity ratio would be accounted for...
As a side note, the problem with gold spiking upwards is its large marketcap and large annual production levels. At current prices, ~3500 tons of gold per year of new mining output (without factoring recycling) is ~110mn oz. That requires 132bn USD to absorb. A tenfold increase in the price of gold, would suddenly require 1.32 trillion USD per year just to buy annual production. The problem is that there is no such liquidity in the system for allowing this.
On the other hand, silver or bitcoin, can do much larger runs due to their smaller marketcap and much smaller liquidity requirements to buy their annual production.
BTC at 10500$ (10x) would require just 6.9 billion per year to buy the annual production (657k coins x 10.5k usd).
Silver at 170$ (10x) would require 136 billion per year to buy the annual mining output of ~800mn oz.
Gold is priced so high that the numbers involved are too high at 1.32 trillion USD (in a scenario of 10x price) for its 110mn oz. It could happen in a hyperinflation scenario, but then the money one takes wouldn't be worth it anyway. In a sense, gold is constrained from doing a huge run by its large marketcap and the liquidity requirements in the fiat system to sustain prices of 10x+. Silver less so, and bitcoin even less so.
Bitcoin seems to be the best bet in terms of upwards potential because it's so small and its fiat requirements to sustain its rise and mining output absorption are equally small.
and an oldie but goodie webpage, incl. chart on the topic ... http://pricedingold.com/bitcoin/ |
|
|
|
I've never had much concern or interest in the shennanigans surrounding the bitcoin ETF quasi-pyramid schemes because they are inherently un-bitcoin ... introducing a new third party where none is needed (at least in the future when the tools for the techdoofi get built up to mil. spec. standards). Also I've seen the crazy amount of manipulation that was introduced by gold and commodity ETF's by Wall St. into the markets for real raw goods and nothing good has come from those particular shit-shows except for massive profits for the grifters and parasites on Wall St. Reading this latest kite-flying article from the WSJ gives me the uneasy feeling that an ETF is on its way. The WSJ is the propaganda rag for all the crap the banksters want peddled around and the fact this article is even in there is a big red flag something is up ... the content is even more making the spidy senses tingle ... The Winklevosses declined to comment, through a representative; Mr. Silbert said, in an email, that his lawyers had put him on “total lockdown” with the press since filing for his fund’s NYSE listing. The reason for press lockdown precautions is so no-one can be accused of insider-trading, front-running, or etc after the fact ... what we can take from this is someone knows something. I sense they are getting it ready for a huge run up, and then probably a savage dump to make all the unsophisticated noobs who buy a ticket for a crazy BTC ETF ride crap themselves and swear off bitcoin for life ... don't think for one minute they are tooling up to help bitcoin, if an ETF is approved they will be well-prepped to rip it around for their best advantage. This WSJ article smells a lot like a fishy heads up ... For his part, ARK’s Mr. Burniske says he is preparing for March 11 by reading a history of financial bubbles. |
|
|
|
1. 2011-06-09 W. Avg: 29.58
2. 2011-06-08 W. Avg: 27.25
3. 2011-06-10 W. Avg: 24.67
4. 2011-06-13 W. Avg: 20.11
5. 2011-06-07 W. Avg: 19.90
6. 2011-06-15 W. Avg: 19.68
7. 2011-06-14 W. Avg: 19.25
8. 2011-06-16 W. Avg: 18.86
9. 2011-06-06 W. Avg: 18.46
10. 2011-06-19 W. Avg: 17.77
11. 2011-06-11 W. Avg: 17.61
12. 2011-06-05 W. Avg: 17.32
13. 2013-01-22 W. Avg: 17.15
14. 2011-06-27 W. Avg: 17.01
15. 2011-06-28 W. Avg: 16.93
16. 2011-06-29 W. Avg: 16.88
17. 2011-06-30 W. Avg: 16.51
18. 2011-06-04 W. Avg: 16.41
19. 2013-01-21 W. Avg: 16.38
20. 2011-06-12 W. Avg: 16.21
(w. avgs rounded to 5 decimal places (mBTC) or 2 decimal places (BTC), Mt. Gox USD data before June 10, 2013; Bitstamp USD data after June 10, 2013)
Every one of the entries is in June 2011 except for the two previous days, which now rank 13th and 19th. I have a feeling that we'll break top ten soon.
anyone know whatever happened with dree12? does he still post on bitcointalk? edit: nm, I see he recently posted for first time in 2 years to say he was becoming inactive ...  |
|
|
|
People are finally opening their eyes to bitcoin!!!  How can the governments around the world crush this rally? By hiring "forking" actors. Forks and threats of forks are traditionally bad for price. And just when price is starting to go well, just like clockwork, the forking drama is reignited. These people are cancer. We are just lucky that demand is so heavy that it exceeds the possible short-term problems created by the drama.  ^" BTCitcoin The movie™ " forking actors? :-D haaa there is no fork  bend your mind to the illusion of crises behind governance power grabs |
|
|
|
Gold might be able to hear bitcoin breathing down it's neck ... making a small run higher it seems. Bitcoin belongs above gold because bitcoin is a better way to store value than a physical piece of metal that is easily confiscable when you need to cross borders.
Are you saying that 1 Bitcoin should be worth more than 1 troy ounce of Gold? That means Bitcoin has to rise by $200 or so, and could happen soon. It seems very unlikely that Bitcoin will be worth more than Gold though. All the gold in the world is worth about $7 Trillion, Bitcoin is worth $16.5 billion, or $0.0165 trillion, or 0.23% of the value. I don't think that gap will be bridged any time soon (ever). I would already be happy when 1-2% of the gold market share moves to Bitcoin! That could happen in the future in my opinion. Especially when goverments continue their NIRP shit, ban bigger bills and payments in cash as we see now.Then the next step would be the attempt to forbid certain amount of gold. Try to get that stuff out of the country! Bitcoin would fit perfect here. 1 troy Oz of gold is an arbitrary measure, just as much as 1 bitcoin/U$D of 21 million is also, but psychological pricing levels do seem to be important to the great unwashed of the investing masses, so unit pricing needs to be watched for that reason alone ... unless someone feels like re-educating the masses about honest standards, weights, measures and relative vs. absolute scales (via twitter perhaps? ). The bigger picture is of course the relative value of total outstanding float of gold (~160k tonnes some say? and on-going mining) versus the known bitcoin float ~18 million and a highly regulated supply. I'll save that total float value thread for another day after this small pricing hurdle is overcome ... currently bitcoin is a tiny fraction of gold needless to say. |
|
|
|
  I'll update as/when relevant. |
|
|
|
Doubling in price in half the time pattern essentially still holding for this exponential bull run ... late March 1600-1800, mid-May 3200-3600, early June insane vertical up to 6500-7200 and pop. For approximate repeat of 2013 halving bull adoption wave blow-off.
Doubling usually happens within a month for it to repeat 2013. The low was $750, January 12. We need $500 more in 10 days for this to be an exponential run. I'm taking the 'low' base beginning of the bull run as 200-225 in June '15, doubling to 450 around the actual reward halving in June '16 (12 months doubling time), then doubling again to 900 in Dec '16 (6 months doubling time) ... et cetera, et cetera, we shall see. Nov. 13 did not happen in a vacuum, there was a similarly long rising build up to the final 'doubling in a week' climactic event ... and none two will be exactly alike anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Doubling in price in half the time pattern essentially still holding for this exponential bull run ... late March 1600-1800, mid-May 3200-3600, early June insane vertical up to 6500-7200 and pop. For approximate repeat of 2013 halving bull adoption wave blow-off.
|
|
|
|
|
$1000 is basically in the bag for good now ... nuff said.
Psychologically the market is already 'over it' ... now it is mulling where to target next before setting off on the new direction. I'm conservatively targetting $1200 for next rest stop ... but who knows, $1500? $20 billion market cap is another maybe?
|
|
|
|
 Year of the rooster, cucks. |
|
|
|
will chickun arise in the year of the chicken?
It's not the year of the chicken, it's the year of the cock. ... year of the cuck ... ask roach about chicomm cucks. |
|
|
|
BUg bitcoin software
|
|
|
|
MA is pointing to 2018 as when we start going off the rails: ... before that it was 2012, then it was 2015, then 2016 ... he's run out of rails himself a long time ago. |
|
|
|
Oh gawd ... when did this place become infested with the BU idiots again?!! FFS.
It's a walking disaster, a true shit show in terms of network systems thinking and an even worse fuck-up in terms of software implementation.
When will you guys grow a brain and at some point and leave that fucking huge shillfest mess behind already?!
Word! Too bad they are using Bitcoin-Mainnet as a Testbed for thair so called "alternative implementation" piece of shit. effective blocksize + relying on LN working out is using Mainnet as a Testbed too? Sorry but Segwit has been tested excessively on Bitcoin Testnet and an seperate network... and it does not even introduce such serious changes to bitcoin like BU does. BU changes the consensus mechanism, maybe the most important part of bitcoin ... if you believe consensus mechanism = hardcoded limits you're too far gone to be saved.Conspiratists argumentation detected ... good bye. Ignore How to spot a BU supporter ? Look for a tin foil hat with "blockstream"-defense engraving. yep, looks like we flushed another one out from under the rug. Mission accomplished, troll mode off. I wonder how much Roguer pays these guys? |
|
|
|
I think I'll pass on setting up a mining pool ... 'with BU parameters'. I'll say a prayer for you. You obviously have a lot of hate in your heart.
Ok, a passive-aggressive pussy who lacks the courage of their convictions. You should just paste that in your signature so next time I'll know not to bother logging on ... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
