Compare gold chart to bitcoin chart. Very similar. Must see.

[dzeros]

The difference? the time in the charts...
IF the trend keeps up (yes it's extremely similar) we have a good time up ahead, but, if it continues to follow the trend expect it to fall over again. And then we wait, 30 odd years lol....

We'll see what happens, I have faith holding over 100BTC with small sells at a time.

[1714123847]

1714123847

[1714123847]

1714123847

[1714123847]

1714123847

[1714123847]

1714123847

[1714123847]

1714123847

[afbitcoins]

Looks like quite an old gold chart that one. But I guess the point is yes bitcoin can recover from a bubble, as gold has done and bitcoin has already before.

With each bubble eventually looking like a tiny bump compared to the next. Get ready for take offfff

[derpinheimer]

That is all.

[Bitcoiner2015]

Judging from optical comparison alone there's certainly a high degree of similarity. But I don't think it's appropriate to draw conclusions from optical similarities for these reasons:

1. The charts have entirely different time spans: Gold >30 years, Bitcoin 10 months.

2. Being allowed to pick an arbitrary amount of data from an arbitrary asset and from arbitrary points in time to compare it to equally arbitrary data from another asset has a 100% probability to find similarities if you search for them.

3. Gold and Bitcoin are not from the same class of assets. At least, gold has been and is subject to intervention from central banks - it's not a free market.

4. Past results are not an indicator of future performance. You will find other charts (already posted in this thread) that will also look similar to Bitcoin's current chart but will show a totally different future projection.

ya.ya.yo!

spurious correlations are fun!
http://www.tylervigen.com/

[mrhelpful]

Well if its such a similar comparison, why the value so damn low?

Because the demand of all that use would see more people repurchasing btc right if its like based on daily usage or whatever. But, yeah gold had more duration time obviously so its pretty huge that bitcoin is doing it in 10 months then years.

[ensurance982]

Looks like quite an old gold chart that one. But I guess the point is yes bitcoin can recover from a bubble, as gold has done and bitcoin has already before.

With each bubble eventually looking like a tiny bump compared to the next. Get ready for take offfff

Yes, and that's actually the only valid point we can gather from that chart. If you take a loot at the other charts posted on the last page, you can see that a lot of investments that had a bubble-period also tend to "pop" and never recover. I guess the jury is still out on Bitcoin's future, but I think it is at least reasonable to include both possibilities into your considerations.

[Amph]

I do not think it is rising (if we compare it to the old 1'000 dollars per bitcoin). However until one bitcoin will be valued 0.01 $ I think it is more better than other alternative.

in the sense that it is rising per day, look at the grand scale of the chart, not just the peak

That is all.

basically looking at another graphic to tell how another one will go, is bullshit, because they all seems the same apparently

[americanpegasus]

That is all.

Yes, but do you have the log version of this chart?

[minerpumpkin]

Computer protocols like TCP/IP and bittorrent have shown much more resiliance than many financial institutions. With bitcoin you are trusting everyone else who owns bitcoin to have the desire to protect the value of their asset, with a bank you are trusting a group of bankers to not have to resort to fucking you, and we all know who controls gold.

Alright, I'll just answer this seriously... With banks you don't necessarily trust some random bankers with your money. The banks are still governed by certain rules and regulations. With a regular savings account, "bankers" can't just go and do whatever they like with your money. There are safety nets and insurance funds in place in case that a bank has to fold. Bitcoin is still much more risky (although potentially more profitable - otherwise no one would be invested in it, right?).

[HeliKopterBen]

With banks you don't necessarily trust some random bankers with your money. The banks are still governed by certain rules and regulations. With a regular savings account, "bankers" can't just go and do whatever they like with your money. There are safety nets and insurance funds in place in case that a bank has to fold.

You must have missed the financial crisis of 2008.

[minerpumpkin]

With banks you don't necessarily trust some random bankers with your money. The banks are still governed by certain rules and regulations. With a regular savings account, "bankers" can't just go and do whatever they like with your money. There are safety nets and insurance funds in place in case that a bank has to fold.

You must have missed the financial crisis of 2008.

It always depends on which financial products you use. In the EU there are perfectly fine insurance funds and policies that guarantee private customers that they won't lose any money. I believe Germany even gave out guarantees backed by the state itself that funds, up to a certain limit, will be safe from any potential collapse of a bank.

[lyth0s]

With banks you don't necessarily trust some random bankers with your money. The banks are still governed by certain rules and regulations. With a regular savings account, "bankers" can't just go and do whatever they like with your money. There are safety nets and insurance funds in place in case that a bank has to fold.

You must have missed the financial crisis of 2008.

It always depends on which financial products you use. In the EU there are perfectly fine insurance funds and policies that guarantee private customers that they won't lose any money. I believe Germany even gave out guarantees backed by the state itself that funds, up to a certain limit, will be safe from any potential collapse of a bank.

Until you realize that there is not enough "funds" in these insurances to cover a multibank failure. Also are you not read up on the most recent G20 meeting about worldwide bail-in's ("hair cuts") in the case of the next bank failures?

[ensurance982]

I was also under the impression that personal savings were rather safe, at least in Europe. Multi-bank-failures can be a bit tricky, sure. But do you really think it will come to this? What do those "hair cuts" imply, if they should happen, can you elaborate?