Do any of the models apply?

[hacknoid]

Its certainly interesting to read all the analysis and speculation about the future of bitcoin.    "We had a bubble before" ... "Its following the trend of gold" ... "It's all speculation and hype" ... "Its a pyramid/ponzi scheme"...  "Look at the trends... here is a bear trap/bull run/cow patties"

The thing I keep coming back to is that nobody has really seen anything like this before.  It is the creation of a brand new currency based on a new paradigm.  No more reliance on central banks or government... peer-to-peer... technologically sound.  How can you really relate it to anything we have seen before?

The closest thing I can see regarding its future potential, and it was referenced in a comment I saw this morning, that the talk is not unlike people talking about personal computers in the 80s, or the Internet or WWW in the 90s.  And look where they are now.  This is the equivalent in currency.  And if that is the case, I feel more strongly about its future than ever.

I think we are witnessing history in the making... and taking part!

[siulynot]

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article5818.html

[Minor Miner]

I think people make the mistake of comparing this to a stock (bubble).   Stocks cannot really justify massive moves because moves in a stock should reflect only the new NPV of the future ebitda given that days new announcements.   Currencies trade more in these steps.   Look at EU to USD or the commodity currencies against the USD.   News was known for a long time but the moves are more sudden.    But that does not even apply because govt can control (and actively control the supply of their currencies).   So, then you look at gold (has more of a finite supply) but has a MASSIVE float.   look at the gold chart from 250 to 1800 and then think about what a restricted float of gold would have done to that chart.    
Bitcoins largest problem is that you cannot use it enough places in exchange for goods AND it is TOO HARD for the common man to transact in.   Conquering these two problems so be the focus of everyone serious about bitcoin.    If those hurdles were gone, simple demand would have pushed BTC over 1000 by now.

[Crazy]

This time it's different

[siulynot]

This time it's different

^⁺1

[Minor Miner]

This time it's different

That is the beauty of a market.   It takes both buyers and sellers or you cannot trade.
I appreciate suckers with views like yours as much as you appreciate suckers with views like mine....

[hacknoid]

I think people make the mistake of comparing this to a stock (bubble).   Stocks cannot really justify massive moves because moves in a stock should reflect only the new NPV of the future ebitda given that days new announcements.   Currencies trade more in these steps.   Look at EU to USD or the commodity currencies against the USD.   News was known for a long time but the moves are more sudden.    But that does not even apply because govt can control (and actively control the supply of their currencies).   So, then you look at gold (has more of a finite supply) but has a MASSIVE float.   look at the gold chart from 250 to 1800 and then think about what a restricted float of gold would have done to that chart.    

Exactly.  While there are some aspects of bitcoin that make it look more like a stock, the whole human part is not there.  No CEO to cook the books,  make false claims that never materialize, or miss deadlines.  The one things that would affect it in this way would be if a fundamental flaw were discovered in the system. 

And its not quite like traditional currency.  As I say, with no central government backing, the political aspect is removed.  And the fixed supply is completely counter to traditional currencies.  Couple that with the fact that it can be used by anybody, anywhere, anytime, and the model is changed.

Bitcoins largest problem is that you cannot use it enough places in exchange for goods AND it is TOO HARD for the common man to transact in.   Conquering these two problems so be the focus of everyone serious about bitcoin.    If those hurdles were gone, simple demand would have pushed BTC over 1000 by now.

This.

The other thing is to think about if it were to gain mainstream adoption.  1 Billion US$ sounds like a lot of money, but it is trivial compared to world currency exchanges or large financial dealings.  I think it was Eric Vorhees that last year put out the series of articles about large potential markets that bitcoin could do well in, and they all are way over $1Billion US.

[mccorvic]

This time it's different

Lolololol.  So this has become the best argument?  Not discussing the fundamentals or potential of bitcoins.  Not discussing new user base and new companies that are using bitcoin.  Bitcoins do not equal stocks or mutual funds. Bitcoins do not equal beanie babies.  Get over it.

[Vandroiy]

This time it's different

This is one of the things that made me wake up in the 2011 bubble. In NASDAQ .com, they said the same thing. "This is the internet, this is revolution!"

They were completely right. The market still crashed though. With all the difference and all the revolution, the madness of crowds had stayed the same.

[Crazy]

This time it's different

Lolololol.  So this has become the best argument?  Not discussing the fundamentals or potential of bitcoins.  Not discussing new user base and new companies that are using bitcoin.  Bitcoins do not equal stocks or mutual funds. Bitcoins do not equal beanie babies.  Get over it.

I've been talking to people about fundamentals for days. All I seem to get is "zomg there are 9% spike in reddit readers this week for 'bitcoin'" or "lulz BTC is on newsight it's worth $100 now!" Makes no sense to even hint at talking about fundamentals with people on this board, because the only thing driving this is speculation. The userbase for wallets has about doubled from the user base at $12, last time I checked. What has the value moved by? Approaching a factor of 10.

[Crazy]

-highly divisible true, but so is everything else, what's the advantage?
-finite true, but so are a lot of commodities, what's the advantage?
-recognizable false
-impossible to counterfeit true, but so are a lot of commodities, what's the advantage?
-fungible true, but what currency isn't?
-easily transferable (send and receive) false
-easily and inexpensively secured and stored debatable
-easily accessible, 24/7 (requires internet) once you have it, perhaps, and like you said -- requires internet
-can not be seized false
-pseudonymous true
-worldwide doesn't equate worldwide legitimacy and acceptance
-low fees (if any at all) true
-distributed and decentralized (no central control, I don't need to ask permission to send coins, no central point of failure) false, central point of failure is internet
-irreversible (this is a pro for responsible users) true, but so is cash and a lot of other commodities, what's the advantage?
-voluntary (no one is forcing me to use Bitcoin, for anything, including payment of debt) meaningless
-apolitical (x country's choices won't affect Bitcoin except through free market forces) true, but so are a lot of commodities, what's the advantage?

You're right, those are some of the fundamentals. And a majority haven't changed one iota since inception, so what's commanding this move?

[herzmeister]

though there was only one dotcom bubble afai remember. 

[Crazy]

I can see from your modifications that there is probably no point in talking to you.

-recognizable (if the network accepts the transaction, it's a bitcoin, if it doesn't, it not) true, but how is this different than swiping a $20 with iodine?
-easily transferable (copypasta, click send -> send, provide address -> receive, it doesn't get much easier) I can do that with Paypal right now, just sayin'
-easily and inexpensively secured and stored (free software like armory on a $50 used laptop, I wish I could store and secure my gold so easily) and the backup devices to make copies, don't forget
-can not be seized (go for it, seize my bitcoins, it will be impossible without my permission, tell me one other form of money that works that way) pretty sure during seizure, no one is given permission. so this is just wtf
-distributed and decentralized (Bitcoin won't fail without the internet, it will just freeze until we rebuild the internet, besides if the worldwide internet goes down, you have more to worry about than money) it will fail, because it would cease to exist
-voluntary (might be meaningless to you, but not to me, I wouldn't hold bitcoins if it was forced) what isn't voluntary?

For every time you ask, "what's the advantage", I'd say that property in combination with the rest. Name something else which combines all these properties into one asset.
Practically every advantage you've stated for bitcoin is shared with another commodity or currency. You're just not willing to think about it.

As far as what's commanding this move, well discovery of course. Go ask 50 people on the street if they've ever heard of Bitcoin, when 95% have answered yes, then we can start looking for it's true valuation. You think 95% of 50 random individuals will say they know what Bitcoin is...?

I know there's no point talking to me, but since you did, I'll respond.

[Wekkel]

You're right, those are some of the fundamentals. And a majority haven't changed one iota since inception, so what's commanding this move?

Buyers.

[nwbitcoin]

-highly divisible true, but so is everything else, what's the advantage?
-finite true, but so are a lot of commodities, what's the advantage?
-recognizable false
-impossible to counterfeit true, but so are a lot of commodities, what's the advantage?
-fungible true, but what currency isn't?
-easily transferable (send and receive) false
-easily and inexpensively secured and stored debatable
-easily accessible, 24/7 (requires internet) once you have it, perhaps, and like you said -- requires internet
-can not be seized false
-pseudonymous true
-worldwide doesn't equate worldwide legitimacy and acceptance
-low fees (if any at all) true
-distributed and decentralized (no central control, I don't need to ask permission to send coins, no central point of failure) false, central point of failure is internet
-irreversible (this is a pro for responsible users) true, but so is cash and a lot of other commodities, what's the advantage?
-voluntary (no one is forcing me to use Bitcoin, for anything, including payment of debt) meaningless
-apolitical (x country's choices won't affect Bitcoin except through free market forces) true, but so are a lot of commodities, what's the advantage?

You're right, those are some of the fundamentals. And a majority haven't changed one iota since inception, so what's commanding this move?

I can see from your modifications that there is probably no point in talking to you.

-recognizable (if the network accepts the transaction, it's a bitcoin, if it doesn't, it not)
-easily transferable (copypasta, click send -> send, provide address -> receive, it doesn't get much easier)
-easily and inexpensively secured and stored (free software like armory on a $50 used laptop, I wish I could store and secure my gold so easily)
-can not be seized (go for it, seize my bitcoins, it will be impossible without my permission, tell me one other form of money that works that way)
-distributed and decentralized (Bitcoin won't fail without the internet, it will just freeze until we rebuild the internet, besides if the worldwide internet goes down, you have more to worry about than money)
-voluntary (might be meaningless to you, but not to me, I wouldn't hold bitcoins if it was forced)

For every time you ask, "what's the advantage", I'd say that property in combination with the rest. Name something else which combines all these properties into one asset.

As far as what's commanding this move, well discovery of course. Go ask 50 people on the street if they've ever heard of Bitcoin, when 95% have answered yes, then we can start looking for it's true valuation.

The So What rule is very important in sales, and it does seem that bitcoin isn't passing it by this standard.

At the moment, bitcoin is a speculators dream, and is possibly in the same sphere as Second Life as far as public knowledge goes.

The big problem for me is that too many people I know don't like bitcoin because it doesn't solve a problem they are currently having.

So, what problems do bitcoin solve - and what bigger problem does it create?

[Crazy]

Buyers. Speculators

ftfy

-(like a $5 SD card?) ok, I'll cede this point
(come on... everything in the physical world can be seized while you aren't even there, good luck seizing the private keys in my encrypted wallets) I can't seize your devices while you're not there?
(no, it won't cease to exist, the block chain doesn't vanish when you turn off your comtpuer. do you understand how this thing works?) if you can't use it, how is it existing? it can come BACK into existence, but my point was that it can fail. not usable in 100% of circumstances means there is failure.
(acceptance of fiat for payment of debt in countries with legal tender laws) i'm not sure how this doesn't apply to everything else? gold isn't accepted as legal tender in many countries either.

Again, name a currency with ALL OF THOSE PROPERTIES COMBINED. I realize some currencies have some of the properties, that's why they are currencies! Sheesh...

Gold. Name a commodity or currency that doesn't? Then, consider the trade offs with other fundamentals that are lacking in bitcoin, but highly abundant in other commodities or currencies. Like, for instance, legitimacy.

[byronbb]

Bitcoin in this early stage is like pricing Apple stock when they are still nerding hard in the GARAGE.

[Crazy]

What wasn't rational?

[Crazy]

Yes I know but what in particular ;\

[BTC Books]

Yes I know but what in particular ;\

FTFY