What if hard limit on bitcoin had been 21 Billion instead of 21 Million?

[eaLiTy]

price would have been a lot higher than what it is right now. it would probably be at something near $100,000 and we would have been discussing about how strong the $100k resistance is instead of the $20k.

That is a wrong analysis in my opinion,people who are not investing in bitcoin are skeptical about a software which provides tokens and that has a valuation and they really cannot understand the basic and it will be very difficult to teach these individual unless they wanted to know what is the technology and concept behind it and it is not about decimal barriers. If the hard limit was 21 billion i am sure the valuation wont be this high too soon,but it would eventually keep growing at a steady pace.

[vectorshield]

If everything was the same but if instead we had 21 billion coins then the market cap will be the same but instead of having 1 bitcoin in your wallet you will have 1000 for each of those bitcoins, in fact that would not be that bad since that would mean that the current price of a bitcoin with 21billion coins will be 1.7 dollars, we will get even more investors since people will think that bitcoin is still cheap.

[Roukawa]

If there are lots of supply eventhough there are high numbers of demand the price won't increase. That's the law of demand and supply.
If the bitcoin has 21 billion and it can divided in 8 digits approximately then bitcoin price will not increase ever and ever.
Scarce resources help the price goes up and traders and investors gain profits if the price increases. That's how bitcoin price and value works.

[Lucius]

price would have been a lot higher than what it is right now. it would probably be at something near $100,000 and we would have been discussing about how strong the $100k resistance is instead of the $20k.

That is a wrong analysis in my opinion,people who are not investing in bitcoin are skeptical about a software which provides tokens and that has a valuation and they really cannot understand the basic and it will be very difficult to teach these individual unless they wanted to know what is the technology and concept behind it and it is not about decimal barriers. If the hard limit was 21 billion i am sure the valuation wont be this high too soon,but it would eventually keep growing at a steady pace.

I can not also agree that price would be 100k$ today if total limit of coins is 21 billion,this make no sense for me.BTC is today so attractive and interesting just because it is have so "low" limited supply in comparison to some altcoins.As I say before,BTC is available from 2009 and everyone had the opportunity to buy it for 1 or 2 $ in past or for 20k$ recently.People need to know that they can buy small amounts of BTC and increase their total balance with time-problem is most of users want to have 1 BTC instant/from their point of view 21 billion available coins would give them an opportunity to buy 1 BTC under 1000$ today.

[jaysabi]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 8 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 5 instead of 8 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 8 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem.

What do you think?





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoins. And working on new coins. I hate ICOs. I think privacy is overrated. I believe privacy is necessary but not always.

Affecting the decimal place shouldn't have an impact on the price. It limits the extent that a bitcoin can be divided into smaller pieces, but it doesn't change the supply. A 1000x increase in the number of coins should theoretically see a 1000x decrease in the price, but since people speculating don't take into consideration any mathematical or financial valuation when making purchase and share of BTC, I actually don't expect that it would logically follow. When Doge abandoned it's hard cap, the price went up over time, which doesn't make economic sense since the value of each coin is inflated away with the production of every new coin.

[Harlot]

The most definite answer will be of course Bitcoin wouldn't have the same value as to what it has now. Bitcoin will have a lower price overall but I don't think that it will big affect if mining and getting Bitcoin will still be easy. I mean Bitcoin is still the first cryptocurrency available in the market I wouldn't be surprised if other cryptocurrencies would have bigger quantity or follow the direction in which Bitcoin is headed.

[Siopao]

If the market had 21billion bitcoin then we would have not experienced the high prices of it. More supply the lower its price would be, the blvalue will be the one most affected by it. However it would have a liitle advantage as there will he lot of bitcoin fund that will revolve in the market butbwith lower price. In that case I dont think peoppe will be interested tonl invest in.

[deadthings]

Too much product, price of bitcoin would be just X times lower and it wouldn't be as popular as it is nowadays. Whole crypto market would be different then.

[Hell-raiser]

Affecting the decimal place shouldn't have an impact on the price. It limits the extent that a bitcoin can be divided into smaller pieces, but it doesn't change the supply. A 1000x increase in the number of coins should theoretically see a 1000x decrease in the price, but since people speculating don't take into consideration any mathematical or financial valuation when making purchase and share of BTC, I actually don't expect that it would logically follow. When Doge abandoned it's hard cap, the price went up over time, which doesn't make economic sense since the value of each coin is inflated away with the production of every new coin.

Yeah, I remember those times. There was a lot more enthusiasm about new coins than there's today. People were more optimistic back then, and whenever some news from the devs leaked out, folks rushed to buy up the coin. Even though they should have actually sold it if we look at it from an entirely rational point of view like when the Doge hard cap was removed. It is different nowadays, though the hype is still present.

[bob3772]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 8 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 5 instead of 8 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 8 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem.

What do you think?





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoins. And working on new coins. I hate ICOs. I think privacy is overrated. I believe privacy is necessary but not always.

I would imagine that the price would be the same but to a factor of 1000, that being it would be 1/1000th of the current price so about $16. That's based on the belief that market cap is the true driving factor behind the valuation and that is made up of supply and price, if supply increased price would decrease to maintain the same market cap.