US Marshalls auction...what time will results/winner be announced today?

[vuduchyld]

All I got from that information is that your "evaluation methods" of PRICE are completely subjective.  

Well, evaluating PRICE is pretty easy.  It's not subjective at all.  The market tells you every single minute what the PRICE is.  As for VALUE, though, yes, I think every method is pretty subjective.  Not just mine, but any method anybody is using.  Again, this ain't like stock in an operating business where there are underlying earnings, GAAP book value, or anything else on which one could objectively base fundamental analysis.  There are no real industry group comparables to compare, as there are with stocks.  I know only enough to tell you that I don't KNOW anything.  In my opinion, it is unknowable.    

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

If you want to go back and read posts from long ago that show the work a little more:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=723219.msg8298674#msg8298674
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg8626991#msg8626991
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652652.msg7725333#msg7725333  --this one is good because there is a link to the Honest Node article that, as I recall, a lot of people ran with.  I'm pretty sure that article discusses the velocity issue.

There's only going to be 21 million of them.  The US just added $300 Billion to our $18 Trillion dollar debt just a few days ago. The Chinese have something like $22 Trillion in bank deposits.  The Bitcoin market is only $5 Billion.  It's a drop in the bucket.  

Yes, you are right.  The market cap of bitcoin is just a drop in the bucket.  And right now, bitcoin is also just a drop in the bucket in terms of global usage and adoption.  Should it increase by virtue of its technological superiority?  Probably...if the world operated strictly on merit.  But the world doesn't work that way, unfortunately.  There are political considerations and entrenched powers that have vested interest in their fiat currencies.  These are BIG problems that you point out, I agree.  But a universe might well exist in which bitcoin is not the only answer, not the chosen answer among possible answers (many of which are still as of yet unknown or uninvented), even a universe in which the problems simply are not solved due to lack of political will.  

In response to your statement: "There really ARE no current fundamentals."

As far as value goes, it's an open-source decentralized payment and data retrieval system that owes allegiance to no borders or boundaries, and can transmit value virtually instantaneously to anyone in the world for little to no fees and without a middle man.  The VALUE of that protocol is worth Trillions in market cap when you consider all the traditional payment technologies it can displace

Again, great points.  I don't disagree with any of it.  But in my opinion (only an opinion, and I'm not trying to convince you that you should share mine) these are things of QUALITATIVE value.  How one chooses to assign QUANTITATIVE value are, quite simply, necessarily going to be subjective at this point when it comes to bitcoin.  

Banks pay me good money to take QUALITATIVE aspects of a business, things like customer concentration, supply chain diversity, key management stability, reputation, etc... and translate those QUANTITATIVELY into things like enterprise goodwill or personal goodwill.  In the case of an operational business, though, there is a hook.  There are historical cash flows, and we hope to have some visibility of future cash flows.  I'm absolutely not shy about translating qualitative value into quantitative, in general.  With bitcoin, I don't believe it can be done as of November 2015 with any meaningful degree of confidence.

You make great points above, but how would you assign quantitative value to those points?  I've explained, not in great depth, in some of the posts above how I assign the value that I've assigned.  I basically look at bitcoin as a currency--examine both use and also as a store-of-value.  I've estimated adoption rates in certain areas, looked at what kind of money supply that would require, and calculated bitcoin's value through the lens of money supply.  I'd also admit that it's basically for my personal use, for my personal investment/speculation goals, for my strategy.  It fits in with what I hope to accomplish.  Your goals and your strategy for investment may be different.  I'm 47, almost 48, and if you are younger (or older) I'd hope and suspect your goals are not the same as mine.  I don't need to get a 1000x return or even a 100x return or even a 10x return to think an investment is worthwhile at this point in my life.  

One more important point.  Looking at these qualitative items you correctly pointed out:
--open source
--decentralized
--owes allegiance to no borders
--transmit instantaneously
--no middle man

You're describing bitcoin.  But REALLY you are describing the blockchain ledger.  In other words, there COULD be blockchain-related solutions that are NOT bitcoin.  I think it is worth noting that there are several companies out there building blockchain platforms that are NOT bitcoin. Most of these aren't related to currencies, but more along the lines of registries. Bitcoin doesn't have exclusive domain to those items you listed.  Bitcoin DOES have some limitations, as I pointed out earlier, in the area of block size and ability to to handle quantity of transactions (what is it...like 7 per second, max, right now?).  If bitcoin had some financial claim on everybody who developed open ledger registries, that would be great, but to my knowledge, that doesn't exist.  

Other solutions could come along that are just as disruptive to bitcoin as bitcoin is to fiat.  For this reason, when I discount my perception of future back to a present value, I use a pretty high cap rate.  That, in my view, recognizes the risk of other potential as-of-yet unknown solutions that scale past bitcoin's limitations in terms of transactions.  My GUESS is that those solutions may be based on open ledger registries, or a blockchain-like technology.  But bitcoin won't "own" them just by virtue of them using a similar concept.  

Look, I LOVE bitcoin.  It's so far beyond genius that I can't imagine how Satoshi conceived it, if Satoshi is even just one person.  It's AMAZING.  And frankly, at a potential rate of return of 40% annually over the next 5 years, bitcoin is a worthwhile speculation to make, in my opinion.  I'm not going to dump my entire investment portfolio into it.  I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value.  Honestly, in the last 18-24 months, I haven't seen any new developments that have impacted my model.  

I understand that there are people who see a much higher upside than I do.  They might be right.  If bitcoin does better than I think it will, I'm fine with that.  I'll participate to the upside and be happy about it.  I won't be crying about not buying more, because I'm also pretty sure that I'll be able to follow my overall plan, regardless of what bitcoin does.  

[jaredboice]

"If you want to go back and read posts from long ago that show the work a little more:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=723219.msg8298674#msg8298674
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg8626991#msg8626991
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652652.msg7725333#msg7725333  --this one is good because there is a link to the Honest Node article that, as I recall, a lot of people ran with.  I'm pretty sure that article discusses the velocity issue."

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

"There are political considerations and entrenched powers that have vested interest in their fiat currencies."

There will be a battle between centralized elitists and an exponentially growing decentralized peer-to-peer network.  It would be easier for them to stop peer-to-peer file sharing then it would be for them to stop bitcoin.  If they can't keep Piratebay down for good, they don't have a chance of stopping Bitcoin.

"there COULD be blockchain-related solutions that are NOT bitcoin"

yes, there will be lots of them.  There's already thousands of crypto-currencies out there now thanks to Bitcoin being open-source.  Yet Bitcoin still is top dog by Billions and Billions of dollars.  The hashrate of the network is more powerful then all the world's supercomputers combined.  Bitcoin rising 3 Million Percent from $0.001 to $350+ (jn less than 6 years) is a monumental achievement.  And it speaks volumes of its resistance to attack.  Look at BitcoinObituaries.com for the 78+ times the mainstream media has pronounced Bitcoin dead, yet Bitcoin keeps on growing.

" Honestly, in the last 18-24 months, I haven't seen any new developments that have impacted my model."

You're treating the subject of technological development as something that's required for Bitcoin to succeed.  It's absolutely not.  Other than the Block Reward issue which the network has known about since the early days (something that was artificially set and will sort itself out organically), all Bitcoin needs is a free market of entrepreneurs willing to design new apps and new ways to interface easier with the Bitcoin Protocol.  And that happens every single day.  

[vuduchyld]

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

[jaredboice]

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

Agree to disagree, The mother of cop-outs.  No I asked you a very simple question and you send me links to a bunch of posts you made, and then you append that with a novel of bad arguments that smell like FUD which are all well known and easily countered.  Right, like I'm going to waste my time going in circles trying to figure out what you think you meant by "velocity" and why Bitcoin isn't undervalued. If you can't summarize the answer to the question in a few sentences or a couple short paragraphs then you don't have one.

"Kill Debate with Lots and Lots of Words that will Exhaust the Debater."  That's what your responses feel like.  Especially that last big one.  Try simplifying your arguments.  It will be much more clear and concise and people will take you more seriously

[rtrtcrypto]

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

[rtrtcrypto]

My god man, will you shut the hell up? You've been baiting this guy for two pages now. Enough. He gave you his opinion in a clear enough manner. Stop being a whinny bitch about the fact that he has placed a different value on BTC at this juncture in the game. Both of you are long term holders (as am I)... we will see in 2017 what the price is in 2017 and we will see in 2025 what the price is in 2025.

SMH

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

Agree to disagree, The mother of cop-outs.  No I asked you a very simple question and you send me links to a bunch of posts you made, and then you append that with a novel of bad arguments that smell like FUD which are all well known and easily countered.  Right, like I'm going to waste my time going in circles trying to figure out what you think you meant by "velocity" and why Bitcoin isn't undervalued. If you can't summarize the answer to the question in a few sentences or a couple short paragraphs then you don't have one.

"Kill Debate with Lots and Lots of Words that will Exhaust the Debater."  That's what your responses feel like.  Especially that last big one.  Try simplifying your arguments.  It will be much more clear and concise and people will take you more seriously

[jaredboice]

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

So you think this is part of a clear and concise response to why he thinks Bitcoin isn't undervalued:

"I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value."


 

I call FUD as I see it.  I'll continue to call FUD as I see it.  The fact that you used the term "bag holding" tells me that you might be a shill, and possibly even the same guy I've been talking to.  I'd be happy to hear a bearish point of view if it has merit.  Bearish predicitons (if they are logical) might convince me to wait for another entry point.  The rest of them are just trying to convince people to dump their coins because you missed the train or you have a stake in the traditional financial system.

Saying you agree with the guy who says "I believe in bitcoin but I'm a buyer at $280" tells me that you're either a dumbass, a paid internet troll, or some poor kid who missed the bus (which puts you back in the category of dumbass)

Have a nice day

[rtrtcrypto]

I actually don't share his opinion or the value he estimates BTC to have at this stage, my number is comfortably higher than his and I am a buyer at these prices because of it.

BUT,

He told you he was just giving his opinion and he stated (correctly) that trying to value BTC in a quasi-theoretical way is pointless right now. So, I take his opinion for what it is, and OPINION.

I'm perfectly conscious of the fact that maybe he is in fact WRONG in valuing it TOO HIGH and that BTC goes to zero in 5 years. I am ready to LOSE my money and time invested into the space. To pretend that this is all a sure shot is absolutely a mistake.

I think there is a less than zero chance we see 1 million per BTC and I think a 2020 value in the five figures is very much possible. The % I place on that possibility is a factor in how much money and time I risk TODAY on BTC.

If this guy is more conservative than I am, so be it. I take decisions based on MY feeling and current understanding of the state of the field and BTC specifically.

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

So you think this is part of a clear and concise response to why he thinks Bitcoin isn't undervalued:

"I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value."


 

I call FUD as I see it.  I'll continue to call FUD as I see it.  The fact that you used the term "bag holding" tells me that you might be a shill, and possibly even the same guy I've been talking to.  I'd be happy to hear a bearish point of view if it has merit.  Bearish predicitons (if they are logical) might convince me to wait for another entry point.  The rest of them are just trying to convince people to dump their coins because you missed the train or you have a stake in the traditional financial system.

Saying you agree with the guy who says "I believe in bitcoin but I'm a buyer at $280" tells me that you're either a dumbass, a paid internet troll, or some poor kid who missed the bus (which puts you back in the category of dumbass)

Have a nice day

[jaredboice]

I actually don't share his opinion or the value he estimates BTC to have at this stage, my number is comfortably higher than his and I am a buyer at these prices because of it.

BUT,

He told you he was just giving his opinion and he stated (correctly) that trying to value BTC in a quasi-theoretical way is pointless right now. So, I take his opinion for what it is, and OPINION.

I'm perfectly conscious of the fact that maybe he is in fact WRONG in valuing it TOO HIGH and that BTC goes to zero in 5 years. I am ready to LOSE my money and time invested into the space. To pretend that this is all a sure shot is absolutely a mistake.

I think there is a less than zero chance we see 1 million per BTC and I think a 2020 value in the five figures is very much possible. The % I place on that possibility is a factor in how much money and time I risk TODAY on BTC.

If this guy is more conservative than I am, so be it. I take decisions based on MY feeling and current understanding of the state of the field and BTC specifically.

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

So you think this is part of a clear and concise response to why he thinks Bitcoin isn't undervalued:

"I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value."


 

I call FUD as I see it.  I'll continue to call FUD as I see it.  The fact that you used the term "bag holding" tells me that you might be a shill, and possibly even the same guy I've been talking to.  I'd be happy to hear a bearish point of view if it has merit.  Bearish predicitons (if they are logical) might convince me to wait for another entry point.  The rest of them are just trying to convince people to dump their coins because you missed the train or you have a stake in the traditional financial system.

Saying you agree with the guy who says "I believe in bitcoin but I'm a buyer at $280" tells me that you're either a dumbass, a paid internet troll, or some poor kid who missed the bus (which puts you back in the category of dumbass)

Have a nice day

That's great that you voice your approval for somebody's unsubstantiated opinion.  It shows that you value your liberty as an individual to conduct free speech on the internet. That's absolutely fantastic.  Watch as I do the same and dismantle unsubstantiated opinions in a forum category entitled, "Speculation."  I hope that you continue to make investment decisions based on unsubstantiated opinions.  I'll continue to call people out for opinions that have no substance and make absolutely no sense.  Thanks again for your coments 

[rtrtcrypto]

I actually live in North Korea, so I have no free speech. I was told by the lord and emperor to post what I posted. 

But seriously, I'm not quite sure, STILL, how you want the guy to be more specific when he already had stated that he was giving his opinion and that he feels you can't properly evaluate crypto economically speaking?

Maybe you should argue THAT point with him.

I actually don't share his opinion or the value he estimates BTC to have at this stage, my number is comfortably higher than his and I am a buyer at these prices because of it.

BUT,

He told you he was just giving his opinion and he stated (correctly) that trying to value BTC in a quasi-theoretical way is pointless right now. So, I take his opinion for what it is, and OPINION.

I'm perfectly conscious of the fact that maybe he is in fact WRONG in valuing it TOO HIGH and that BTC goes to zero in 5 years. I am ready to LOSE my money and time invested into the space. To pretend that this is all a sure shot is absolutely a mistake.

I think there is a less than zero chance we see 1 million per BTC and I think a 2020 value in the five figures is very much possible. The % I place on that possibility is a factor in how much money and time I risk TODAY on BTC.

If this guy is more conservative than I am, so be it. I take decisions based on MY feeling and current understanding of the state of the field and BTC specifically.

Just forget about answering this dude, your answers and points were fine and your tone was more than reasonable. The guy just wants to hear "BTC WILL BE 1000000000000 DOLLARS BY 2017 100% CHANCE" because he is afraid he is bag holding.

I respect your gut feeling as to the current value of BTC, I understand your arguments... I place the value at BTC at a higher point than you do, but, I'm 100% ready to be wrong on this front (as you are on your front).

All in all, I think BTC has a great chance, I'm happy to be part of the ecosystem. I'm sure you feel the same.

Jaredboice wants to hear that his bet is a 100% sure winner and that the true value is obviously 10k or 100k or 10million... I'm not sure why he is fighting you over your opinion, being that you clearly stated it as such.

All the best,

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

Oh, boy, the famous precursors "No offense..." and twin brother, "I don't mean to be rude but..."

OK.  You asked for more detail at least twice:

You haven't defined what you mean when you say that your projections are lower than everyone else who has "mistakenly evaluated velocity." You would additionally add more clarity by explaining why exactly you think Bitcoin isn't that undervalued right now?

and

yes but you haven't added substance to your reasons why you will be a buyer at $280.

I gave answers that were as simple as I could possibly make them, but that wasn't enough for you.  Then when I gave you more, you turn phrases like "thousand pages of nothing-ness", "red herring", and "wild goose chase".  Of course, no offense taken, and I'm certain you don't mean to be rude.  Even though you asked for more information on my opinion repeatedly, I was unable to be clear and concise enough to get it across.  It happens.  

You're right, of course.  Nobody SHOULD care about my personal opinion.  I'm not asking anybody to share it.  Not trying to convince anybody of anything.  Made that pretty clear several times, as well.  I thought we were engaging in an exchange of ideas.  I'd say we are just going to have to agree to having divergent opinions.  Reasonable people can surely agree to disagree.

So you think this is part of a clear and concise response to why he thinks Bitcoin isn't undervalued:

"I've got a plan (overall, all investments) that I believe is very strong, very flexible, and aggressive enough to reach my goals.  I'm watching this current run closely because I might well choose to double or even triple the aggressive, high-risk portion of my portfolio in this speculative play.  But I'll do it at a price that I find palatable based on the risk (as I perceive it) and reward (as I perceive it).  I keep a constant eye on developments, because new developments could impact my perception of the 2020 value."


 

I call FUD as I see it.  I'll continue to call FUD as I see it.  The fact that you used the term "bag holding" tells me that you might be a shill, and possibly even the same guy I've been talking to.  I'd be happy to hear a bearish point of view if it has merit.  Bearish predicitons (if they are logical) might convince me to wait for another entry point.  The rest of them are just trying to convince people to dump their coins because you missed the train or you have a stake in the traditional financial system.

Saying you agree with the guy who says "I believe in bitcoin but I'm a buyer at $280" tells me that you're either a dumbass, a paid internet troll, or some poor kid who missed the bus (which puts you back in the category of dumbass)

Have a nice day

That's great that you voice your approval for somebody's unsubstantiated opinion.  It shows that you value your liberty as an individual to conduct free speech on the internet. That's absolutely fantastic.  Watch as I do the same and dismantle unsubstantiated opinions in a forum category entitled, "Speculation."  I hope that you continue to make investment decisions based on unsubstantiated opinions.  I'll continue to call people out for opinions that have no substance and make absolutely no sense.  Thanks again for your coments 

[jaredboice]

Get to know this word and its meaning.  Perfect way to identify trolls and shills

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or in an empty way.

[jaredboice]

I totally argued that point with him.  It's lost in the haystack of the quoted empty words that are between my words.  See if you can find them

[rtrtcrypto]

To be perfectly frank, I felt your level of analysis in responding to him was no "deeper" or more "substantial" than any of his answers to you. I think, in truth, that neither of you can properly value this technology. That if we are right (since all three agree that BTC could be huge / trillions in market cap) we will have great returns. Otherwise, we bust.

That is about all that seems CERTAIN right now. That you imply that there is certainty in the moon shot and the tech is what I find problematic.

Btw, I find it problematic for others (this is, in a way, a warning to you on the matter), I have risked what I think reasonable and I have done so knowing it can fail - you, on the other hand, seem certain it WILL GO MOON, this makes me worry you have in fact risked more than you can afford to lose.

I hope you are right... for what it's worth, and have put my money and time on your side of things.

Get to know this word and its meaning.  Perfect way to identify trolls and shills

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or in an empty way.

[rtrtcrypto]

Ok,

I thought I read all exchanges, maybe I missed some... if so, I apologize.

Regardless, I just don't read him as that big of a FUD/skeptic... there are some many worse examples on this forum. Not sure why his cautious but optimistic reading of the potential of BTC left you so annoyed at him.

Anyway, let's leave it at that. We will soon know if we made the right choices.

I totally argued that point with him.  It's lost in the haystack of the quoted empty words that are between my words.  See if you can find them

[jaredboice]

"To be perfectly frank, I felt your level of analysis in responding to him was no "deeper" or more "substantial" than any of his answers to you."

Would you care to address WHY you felt that way, and specifically WHICH PARTS of my responses you are referring to.  Pleases quote my response and add your reasons...or else, you are also very guilty of: BLOVIATING

[jaredboice]

Anyone who bloviates the way that guy did are either newbs who are completely out of touch, or they are more likely trolls.  Bloviating is seriously the number one identifier.

[nicked]

I'm pretty sure that spelling words in all caps is bloviating.

[rtrtcrypto]

Sure!!!

All of these responses are no good; they act much in the same way his responses act towards your points. The only difference in my mind is that you are stating these positions as being guaranteed outcomes and he has put his positions forward as opinions that influence his current stance. Further, he has stated he doesn't wish to impose his views on you and you are arguing that he should be FORCED to accept your position.
 
Look over what you wrote:

-The first thing, for example, you simply wrote an entire paragraph stating that the way in which he has written is not convenient for you.

-the second thing, you simply assume things - I think your guess is likely right, but, saying it will happen because it will happen is not really an analysis of the situation. Btw, I actually think it would be easier to damage BTC vs piratebay... but, that is for another time.

-this third part is also empty. Yes the hash rate is incredible. Yes there are lots of alt coins and BTC out capitalizes them by an incredible margin. Yes it is amazing that it went up "3 million %". Etc.

Yet, this is not an analysis of future outcomes. Again, they may give advantages for us. I hope those advantages are enough. But, there is no guarantee of that. Yahoo was vastly ahead of GOOGLE (same for myspace vs FB)... network effects alone are not necessarily enough. I think in this case they might be. But, that is just a hunch. To really study this issue would take considerable effort and study. Pretending what you wrote is "analysis" is silly. Pretending that because the network has not been successfully attacked means it CANT be attacked is silly. LINDY effect and all.

Anti fragile systems are interesting, I think that BTC is a great example of such a system. But, to really analyze this is a complex issue demanding a formal paper. I don't think we should hold one another to that standard on a forum like this - but then, we have to let someone else get away with saying "hey, this is my personal opinion, this is my hunch, etc" without demanding more from them then we are willing to do ourselves.



 

"If you want to go back and read posts from long ago that show the work a little more:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=723219.msg8298674#msg8298674
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg8626991#msg8626991
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652652.msg7725333#msg7725333  --this one is good because there is a link to the Honest Node article that, as I recall, a lot of people ran with.  I'm pretty sure that article discusses the velocity issue."

No offense, but your response to my simple question of why your "valuation" is so low and what you meant about "velocity" is entirely too long for so simple of a question.  I don't mean to be rude but it comes across like how NIST produced a thousand pages of nothing-ness just as a red herring to lead a wild goose chase.  The question was much simpler than providing an answer that points me to three different previous posts that you made.  I'd be happy to read something more concise if you can simplify whatever it is you're trying to say.  But nobody cares enough to read that much info on why some guy on bitcointalk thinks bitcoin will only make 40% gains per year.

"There are political considerations and entrenched powers that have vested interest in their fiat currencies."

There will be a battle between centralized elitists and an exponentially growing decentralized peer-to-peer network.  It would be easier for them to stop peer-to-peer file sharing then it would be for them to stop bitcoin.  If they can't keep Piratebay down for good, they don't have a chance of stopping Bitcoin.

"there COULD be blockchain-related solutions that are NOT bitcoin"

yes, there will be lots of them.  There's already thousands of crypto-currencies out there now thanks to Bitcoin being open-source.  Yet Bitcoin still is top dog by Billions and Billions of dollars.  The hashrate of the network is more powerful then all the world's supercomputers combined.  Bitcoin rising 3 Million Percent from $0.001 to $350+ (jn less than 6 years) is a monumental achievement.  And it speaks volumes of its resistance to attack.  Look at BitcoinObituaries.com for the 78+ times the mainstream media has pronounced Bitcoin dead, yet Bitcoin keeps on growing.

" Honestly, in the last 18-24 months, I haven't seen any new developments that have impacted my model."

You're treating the subject of technological development as something that's required for Bitcoin to succeed.  It's absolutely not.  Other than the Block Reward issue which the network has known about since the early days (something that was artificially set and will sort itself out organically), all Bitcoin needs is a free market of entrepreneurs willing to design new apps and new ways to interface easier with the Bitcoin Protocol.  And that happens every single day.  

[rtrtcrypto]

 

MORE CAPS!!!!

Anyway, just to stick to the thread. I have a hunch we will find out early next week that the losing bids for the auction were above the 400 dollar mark. I'm betting on higher prices next week because of it. 

On the FUD side, my main concern over this week has been trying to find out how much of an influence MMM really had on the price move. I'm worried that even if the entire scam was actually not all that significant it will still be presented as such in the media.

Medium term, if MMM proves to not be a problem and the block size debate gets "resolved" properly (I think the entire issue has been overblown) - I would be ultra bullish.

$400-800 is the band I would logical up until around the middle of next year. Just so I don't get confused with a bear, my 2020+ number is over 10,000. Way over, in fact, as we get closer to the full supply being available to the market (3030's). 

[jaredboice]

"All of these responses are no good; they act much in the same way his responses act towards your points."

Why are you wasting your time in a forum category about speculating if you think all responses about speculation are no good?  You are either a troll or you are retarded.


"The only difference in my mind is that you are stating these positions as being guaranteed outcomes..."

No, the only difference is that I'm actually adding substance to my positions with an explanation that adds specific reasons and doesn't bloviate on and on about how my opinion is subjective and I have experience in GPAA and I don't think this and I don't believe in that and I like the color blue, and I like to wear white shirts on thursdays, and I like to eat cereal for breakfast, etc.. ... .. No substance.  No reasons.  Just opinions and beliefs.

"Further, he has stated he doesn't wish to impose his views on you and you are arguing that he should be FORCED to accept your position."

First off, I'm not forcing anyone to accept my positions.  I'm requesting REASONS for a particular opinion or belief.  If you're not adding substance to your views here, you might as well just be masterbating.  
 
"Look over what you wrote:

-The first thing, for example, you simply wrote an entire paragraph stating that the way in which he has written is not convenient for you."

Yes, it's absolutely not convenient to intellectual progress to just state a view in a speculation thread with absolutely no reason why. You might as well not even participate.

"I actually think it would be easier to damage BTC vs piratebay... but, that is for another time."

  Where's your reason why!?  YOU ARE BLOVIATING  


"I hope those advantages are enough. But, there is no guarantee of that."

I have already stated that there's no guarantees.  But should I have to state that?  Isn't that obvious?  Isn't it implied that nobody knows the future IN A THREAD ABOUT SPECULATION.  My god, all I'm asking for is SUBSTANCE.  I don't need a guarantee.  


"Yahoo was vastly ahead of GOOGLE (same for myspace vs FB)... network effects alone are not necessarily enough."

Finally!  You attempt to add substance.  Yes, there's no guarantee that Yahoo was going to stay top dog forever.  But it certainly was used by hundreds of millions of people and made shit tons of money.  There are big differences with Yahoo, however, when compared to Bitcoin.  Bitcoin is completely open source.  It's development potential is distributed.  If something came around that offered a superior property that bitcoin needed but didn't have, Bitcoin could be updated rather quickly.  So it's not so easy to bypass Bitcoin the way Google bypassed Yahoo.  

"Pretending what you wrote is "analysis" is silly. "

You seem to think all speculation is opinion and adding substance to your views is silly.  It's fortunate for me that I don't invest according to the same principals


"Pretending that because the network has not been successfully attacked means it CANT be attacked is silly."

I'm not pretending anything.  There's been plenty of attacks on Bitcoin.  78+ "Bitcoin is dead" articles from the mainstream media over the course of the last few years is very telling to the actual resilience to bitcoin and the actual agenda of the mainstream press. http://www.bitcoinobituaries.com

"But, to really analyze this is a complex issue demanding a formal paper. I don't think we should hold one another to that standard on a forum like this - but then, we have to let someone else get away with saying "hey, this is my personal opinion, this is my hunch, etc" without demanding more from them then we are willing to do ourselves."

Bahaha!  What a bunch of hubris.  OK, so let's not hold ourself to standards such as adding support and substance to our views.  

I DO demand much more from myself.  Notice that throughout this entire thread I have added substance and support for my arguments.  I don't bloviate on and on.  

Bloviate: to talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.