Bitcoin Transfer Fees Will Go Up With Time - How Can This Affect BTC Market

[HeroCat]

Currently Blockchain transfer fee is ~0.0002 BTC ( transfer time ~ 20 min. ), previously was 0.0001 BTC. That means with time Blockchain transfer fee will go up. How can this affect BTC market in future, because Blockchain is largest web wallet ? 

[1714174110]

1714174110

[1714174110]

1714174110

[1714174110]

1714174110

[1714174110]

1714174110

[Pursuer]

Currently Blockchain transfer fee is ~0.0002 BTC ( transfer time ~ 20 min. ), previously was 0.0001 BTC. That means with time Blockchain transfer fee will go up.

and fees were once 0.01BTC for a normal size transaction so this means fee is going down
https://blockchain.info/tx/ec0efa594f5d71ca0863d43643f0820e51b2159548b59310ab97fa6ac0c11e33

How can this affect BTC market in future, because Blockchain is largest web wallet ? 

WHAT

amount that is paid for fee is determined based on the price of bitcoin and the cost of mining. it is paid for the job miners are doing so in the future it will be adjusted to be compatible with the price and the block reward miners are getting.

so if price goes down to $1 fees should rise
and if price goes to 1,000,000,000 price should go down.

[franky1]

0.0002 is $0.12 at this moment
which is the equivalent to over 1hour minimum wage for atleast half a dozen countries.

knowing people complain about visa/mastercards 2% fee, means that people are kind of happy with 1% fee(preferably less). thus spending anything below $12 is treated as having more than a 1% fee, which makes bitcoin not a good/useful tool for transmitting value, where people actually wants to buy things for less than $12

in short trying to buy things up to a value of 100 hours minimum wage in a number of countries can be seen as expensive to use bitcoin in developing countries

but developed countries treat this with ignorance by saying they dont want people making small payments, thus making things that may be 1-100 hours of minimum wage in developing countries, be treated as annoying spam by developed countries.

its the same mindset of a richguy in a suit thinking he has divine right to not wait in a shopping queue, purely because his $200 bottle of champagne means more to him then a poor mother counting out a handful of change to buy food for her starving child, and has the mindset to argue with the the shop to enforce a $100 minimum spend to sort out the riffraff/underclass so he can buy champagne without waiting. rather than suggest the shop opens up another cashiers aisle

one solution is supposed to be, when bitcoin fiat value goes up, the fee goes down (fee used to cost a tenth of an american cent, now 12cent) so that solution has gone..
another solution is supposed to be, to increase capacity over many years (20-30+) where instead of having a block with 2500 tx's for 0.0002individual fee, capacity grows so that 5000 tx blocks have a 0.0001 individual tx fee (which totals the same 'income bonus' for pools so no loss)

after all pools main income is from rewards, not fee's and the flip where fee's become more important and rewards become less important wont occur for atleast a predicted 20-30 years, and fee's dont become the sole income stream for well over 120 years, so forcing fee wars right now is not 'needed' by pools

in short, delaying capacity growth, forcing a fee war are not good for bitcoin. it does not help users and does not help bitcoin as a whole
slowly bitcoin has/is reduced in its utility and many bitcoiners are stupidly happy for this to continue while they twist bitcoin out of the open currency for the world to use without borders and restrictions, and into a more centralized reserve currency for altcoiners to hop in and out of.

[Senor.Bla]

Currently Blockchain transfer fee is ~0.0002 BTC ( transfer time ~ 20 min. ), previously was 0.0001 BTC. That means with time Blockchain transfer fee will go up.

and fees were once 0.01BTC for a normal size transaction so this means fee is going down
https://blockchain.info/tx/ec0efa594f5d71ca0863d43643f0820e51b2159548b59310ab97fa6ac0c11e33

How can this affect BTC market in future, because Blockchain is largest web wallet ? 

WHAT

amount that is paid for fee is determined based on the price of bitcoin and the cost of mining. it is paid for the job miners are doing so in the future it will be adjusted to be compatible with the price and the block reward miners are getting.

so if price goes down to $1 fees should rise
and if price goes to 1,000,000,000 price should go down.

0.01 BTC was what in $ at the time? 0.01 cents? anyway, just yesterday i was cleaning up some smaller wallets and the fees are to high to make small (not micro) transactions. if i buy a coffee and have to pay 5-10% fees, then bitcoin is doomed. and do not tell me those are peanuts still. in some countries this is worth a whole days work.
so my hope is that the fee will go down. my best guess is that we need to crank up the volume of transactions per second. 

[philiveyjr]

Why do you think it would affect the Bitcoin Market in the future ? Bitcoin fees is anyways too low compared to any other payment means. I don't see in the next 10-20 years it would be at a level we would be affected by it.

[talkbitcoin]

Currently Blockchain transfer fee is ~0.0002 BTC ( transfer time ~ 20 min. ), previously was 0.0001 BTC. That means with time Blockchain transfer fee will go up.

and fees were once 0.01BTC for a normal size transaction so this means fee is going down
https://blockchain.info/tx/ec0efa594f5d71ca0863d43643f0820e51b2159548b59310ab97fa6ac0c11e33

How can this affect BTC market in future, because Blockchain is largest web wallet ? 

WHAT

amount that is paid for fee is determined based on the price of bitcoin and the cost of mining. it is paid for the job miners are doing so in the future it will be adjusted to be compatible with the price and the block reward miners are getting.

so if price goes down to $1 fees should rise
and if price goes to 1,000,000,000 price should go down.

0.01 BTC was what in $ at the time? 0.01 cents? anyway, just yesterday i was cleaning up some smaller wallets and the fees are to high to make small (not micro) transactions. if i buy a coffee and have to pay 5-10% fees, then bitcoin is doomed. and do not tell me those are peanuts still. in some countries this is worth a whole days work.
so my hope is that the fee will go down. my best guess is that we need to crank up the volume of transactions per second. 

you can find the price of that time (2011) at any bitcoin price chart.

and also i have to say, whether you are paying for a cup of coffee or buying a house you will have to pay the same amount of 0.00013000BTC fee which is nearly 8 cents so if you think that is for a whole day's work payment then you may want to think about changing your job !

[btccashacc]

Currently Blockchain transfer fee is ~0.0002 BTC ( transfer time ~ 20 min. ), previously was 0.0001 BTC. That means with time Blockchain transfer fee will go up.

I dont think it will affect bitcoin market at all if the fee will go up since it's very cheap if we compare to other payment, in case sending milion dollars, but i don't think will go up however there's so many way to send bitcoin without a fee like using xapo or coinbase, or convert to the altcoin with the lowest fee.

How can this affect BTC market in future, because Blockchain is largest web wallet ?  

i'm sure the blockcahin you meant is blockchain info a wallet service, fyi blockchain is the technology behind bitcoin, where every transaction are shown out there

[Senor.Bla]

Currently Blockchain transfer fee is ~0.0002 BTC ( transfer time ~ 20 min. ), previously was 0.0001 BTC. That means with time Blockchain transfer fee will go up.

and fees were once 0.01BTC for a normal size transaction so this means fee is going down
https://blockchain.info/tx/ec0efa594f5d71ca0863d43643f0820e51b2159548b59310ab97fa6ac0c11e33

How can this affect BTC market in future, because Blockchain is largest web wallet ? 

WHAT

amount that is paid for fee is determined based on the price of bitcoin and the cost of mining. it is paid for the job miners are doing so in the future it will be adjusted to be compatible with the price and the block reward miners are getting.

so if price goes down to $1 fees should rise
and if price goes to 1,000,000,000 price should go down.

0.01 BTC was what in $ at the time? 0.01 cents? anyway, just yesterday i was cleaning up some smaller wallets and the fees are to high to make small (not micro) transactions. if i buy a coffee and have to pay 5-10% fees, then bitcoin is doomed. and do not tell me those are peanuts still. in some countries this is worth a whole days work.
so my hope is that the fee will go down. my best guess is that we need to crank up the volume of transactions per second. 

you can find the price of that time (2011) at any bitcoin price chart.

and also i have to say, whether you are paying for a cup of coffee or buying a house you will have to pay the same amount of 0.00013000BTC fee which is nearly 8 cents so if you think that is for a whole day's work payment then you may want to think about changing your job !

so i checked the price at the time was in the $10-$20 range which meant the fee was 10-20 cents. higher then i have expected, but you could still pay way less and get confirmations quickly. so i at least heard.
anyway my point was that i paid for a transaction of 8 dollars over 50 cents and had to wait 3 hours for the first confirmation. blockchain.info listed the change of 600 sat as the reason for this. well this is a problem in my eyes.
bitcoin is the same all over the world and so are the fees. so your get another job shows very little respect to poorer people or a very bad understanding of how much people earn in some places. bitcoin s not only for the rich to use.   

[~Bitcoin~]

I don't think fee have direct relationship like you have shown with confirmation time. However it is true that including high fee increase priority of your transaction getting confirmed within next block that will be mined, and also fee depend much upon transaction size in bytes. So actually fee is directly proportional to size and also have some relation with confirmation time depends upon total number of transaction between two consecutive blocks.

I have done several transaction recently also with same 0.0001BTC fee which also get confirmed within 10 minute or first block mined.

[FruitBucket]

Fees go up because block are full. So fees tie neatly to the block size debate. BTC developers already work on implementing various solutions such as segwit or groundwork for enabling lightning network to address the problem.

As a result, it is only a matter of time until fees will go down somewhat. Market are expecting this already which is why the BTC price will not be affected much at all.

[shinratensei_]

Currently, Blockchain transfer fee is ~0.0002 BTC ( transfer time ~ 20 min. ), previously was 0.0001 BTC. That means with time Blockchain transfer fee will go up. How can this affect BTC market in future, because Blockchain is largest web wallet ?

It's not a problem and will not affecting the market because a bitcoins is realized about the increasing fee and that is just a little fee if you wanna for sending more than $50. and will not giving any effect for he bitcoin market.

[illyiller]

bitcoin s not only for the rich to use.   

There are different opinions on what this means, but I believe all Bitcoin users generally agree with you. But there are some things to consider. Increasing throughput increases bandwidth usage for nodes. If we force increased throughput on all nodes, some will drop off the network. At high enough levels, you start pricing out entire regions of people, because they don't have access to enough bandwidth, let alone affording it. One of the biggest reasons we seek scaling mechanisms that are backward compatible is to retain nodes on the network as we allow for more capacity. It's to avoid pricing out groups of users -- and regions -- from running nodes.

Personally, I've changed my spending habits a lot over the last year or so....batching payments, considering the urgency of payments in regards to fees, etc. At the end of the day, we're paying 5 cents, 17 cents....that's a pittance compared to the actual cost of a confirmed transactions, once we consider mining costs.

Capacity increases are coming via Segwit (and further optimizations that it enables) but the real solution is payment channels. The fact is that the base protocol is a broadcast network. It doesn't scale. You can only optimize it so much before letting throughput run unmitigated---pricing people (and regions) out of running nodes, and centralizing hash power due to latencies. We need non-bandwidth scaling. Haters gonna hate, but if you want Visa-scale payments, it's never going to happen on-chain.

[Ai7xpressTV]

I think the fee is good 0.0002 BTC

[Carlton Banks]

but the real solution is payment channels.

yep.

The fact is that the base protocol is a broadcast network. It doesn't scale.

yep.

We need non-bandwidth scaling. Haters gonna hate, but if you want Visa-scale payments, it's never going to happen on-chain.

Payment channels are on-chain, just not necessarily in the most immediate block. The transactions are verified by checking their hash has the correct value in reference to the original mining rewards that it's inputs came from, just as they are now. The only difference is delaying the stage where the blockchain itself records where the money moved to. The delay provides an opportunity for patterns in the transaction flows to be aggregated together, meaning that when they are finally written to the blockchain, the space they use is far more efficient.

I like to think of this as "pre-chain", as all the same checks and balances are applied right up to the point where a normal transaction would just get processed in the next available block. And all the verification that happens pre-chain carries more than sufficient security and veracity to maintain Bitcoin's monetary properties.

"Off-chain" implies the blockchain is never involved, which in the case of centralised wallet providers like Coinbase and Xapo is true, those kind of wallets don't give users direct access, and so Coinbase can just adjust their own internal ledger to represent a transaction (verified by humans, not the blockchain...). Payment channels are more like a stratification of how and when transactions are committed to the blockchain.

[Winner]

With transaction fee's being high I think that it will lead to big players creating more online wallet websites that will pay the transaction fee's for the regular people.

[franky1]

Payment channels are on-chain, just not necessarily in the most immediate block. The transactions are verified by checking their hash has the correct value in reference to the original mining rewards that it's inputs came from, just as they are now. The only difference is delaying the stage where the blockchain itself records where the money moved to. The delay provides an opportunity for patterns in the transaction flows to be aggregated together, meaning that when they are finally written to the blockchain, the space they use is far more efficient.

I like to think of this as "pre-chain", as all the same checks and balances are applied right up to the point where a normal transaction would just get processed in the next available block. And all the verification that happens pre-chain carries more than sufficient security and veracity to maintain Bitcoin's monetary properties.

wrong on so many levels

payment channels (lightening network) are multisigs.

say you want to spend funds regularly with a merchant.
you set up a multisig with the merchant, by both sides giving a public key to create a multisig address. they doublecheck the multisig is correct and matches to the same 3Bl4ahBlahBlahBlahBlah address before funding it.

both sides put funds in and lock them for X blocks (onchain)
onchain shows 2 deposits
eg person 1btc, merchant 1btc making so both sides have collateral and incentive to not mess around, because they both have something to lose

now without broadcasting to the network(offchain) person and merchant agree on who owes what amount of the funds in the multisig to each other and both sign the transaction (but dont transmit it onchain). it just sits in each others individual mempool, not random nodes.
making it a private transaction at this point
day 0 both parties agree merchant gets 0.1btc person gets 0.1btc, both sign
EG

the first day (offchain) both parties agree that when person buys a coffee merchant gets 0.11 person gets 0.09, both sign
the next day (offchain) both parties agree that when person buys another coffee merchant 0.12 person gets 0.08, both sign
the next day (offchain) both parties agree that when person buys another coffee merchant 0.13 person gets 0.07, both sign
and so on and so on.. untill the locktime has expired and both sides decide its time to settle the transaction by closing the channel and broadcast the most upto date transaction ONCHAIN.

carlton. please research harder

payment channels can be useful. but we should not rely on them for every transaction. just the ones where you would regularly spend and happy to and X funds over upfront so you dont have 10mins+ at the cashiers aisle.
signing the transaction of who owes what is a split second activity. thus allowing fast "spending"
the reasons we should not rely on merchants holding all the coin is that places like walmart and starbucks could become the new banks, by being the middleman required to authorise payments with people begging those middle men permission(to close channel) to pull out money to spend elsewhere..

we still need onchain scaling too, otherwise bitcoin becomes middlemen controlled by hub hoarding all the coins and we needing their signature to move our money

[bryant.coleman]

The advantage with Blockchain.info is that you can set the transaction fee as per your wish. A few days back, I had to transfer BTC0.07 to one of my wallets. There was a lot of dust, and the default tx fee was showing as BTC0.01, which was around 15% of the total value of that transaction. I went to "custom" tab, and changed the tx fee to BTC0.0002. It took some time for the transaction to get confirmed, but eventually it went through.

[davis196]

Currently Blockchain transfer fee is ~0.0002 BTC ( transfer time ~ 20 min. ), previously was 0.0001 BTC. That means with time Blockchain transfer fee will go up. How can this affect BTC market in future, because Blockchain is largest web wallet ?  

The transaction fee is still small but it will increase for sure.

If btc fees become higher than paypal fees a lot of people might be dissapointed by bitcoin and

sell their btc.This might affect the bitcoin price.

[Carlton Banks]

Payment channels are on-chain, just not necessarily in the most immediate block. The transactions are verified by checking their hash has the correct value in reference to the original mining rewards that it's inputs came from, just as they are now. The only difference is delaying the stage where the blockchain itself records where the money moved to. The delay provides an opportunity for patterns in the transaction flows to be aggregated together, meaning that when they are finally written to the blockchain, the space they use is far more efficient.

I like to think of this as "pre-chain", as all the same checks and balances are applied right up to the point where a normal transaction would just get processed in the next available block. And all the verification that happens pre-chain carries more than sufficient security and veracity to maintain Bitcoin's monetary properties.

wrong on so many levels

But none of what you are saying refutes my description. All you did was explain different aspects of a specific system. Remember when Matt Corallo implemented the first payment channels in BitcoinJ? Those were not Lightning style channels.

Lightning payments literally will be getting validated pre-chain, just like standard transactions, just as I said. And you can't deny it, it's a fact.

[franky1]

Payment channels are on-chain, just not necessarily in the most immediate block. The transactions are verified by checking their hash has the correct value in reference to the original mining rewards that it's inputs came from, just as they are now. The only difference is delaying the stage where the blockchain itself records where the money moved to. The delay provides an opportunity for patterns in the transaction flows to be aggregated together, meaning that when they are finally written to the blockchain, the space they use is far more efficient.

I like to think of this as "pre-chain", as all the same checks and balances are applied right up to the point where a normal transaction would just get processed in the next available block. And all the verification that happens pre-chain carries more than sufficient security and veracity to maintain Bitcoin's monetary properties.

wrong on so many levels

But none of what you are saying refutes my description. All you did was explain different aspects of a specific system. Remember when Matt Corallo implemented the first payment channels in BitcoinJ? Those were not Lightning style channels.

Lightning payments literally will be getting validated pre-chain, just like standard transactions, just as I said. And you can't deny it, it's a fact.

validated by only customer and the merchant while offchain ...not the immutable network of thousands of users.
thus makes payment channels no different than a bank.
yes when it settles its then onchain. but thats supposedly weeks/months later that the transaction is truly immutable by being on the blockchain, allowing the funds to be spend (onchain) without middle men permission

now think about why bitcoin is so beautiful compared to banks. and why we should not think of payment channels as the only way to spend bitcoin(require middlemen signatures) and why we should not think of payment channels as the only way to store our hoards(middlemen multisig).

i already said payment channels have a niche market use for regular spenders (faucets, gamblers, day traders) but should not be considered the only way to use bitcoin. we still need onchain scaling for the real utility of bitcoin and why it was invented (no middle men permission)

so far bitcoin has already lost its beauty in developing countries due to fee's being over 1 hours wage in half a dozen countries. we dont need to now twist bitcoin into hubs of middlemen