Would bitcoin market cap rise faster if bitcoin did a 1000:1 split?

[silversmith]

If bitcoin did a 1000:1 split so there was a 16 billion coin current supply and an adjusted price around $1.20 each, do you think we would hit a $100 billion market cap faster than the current 16 million coins and $1200 price?

Or would it make no difference at all? Mathematically it's the same but price can play tricks with the mind.

What do you think?

[1715089244]

1715089244

[1715089244]

1715089244

[1715089244]

1715089244

[1715089244]

1715089244

[1715089244]

1715089244

[1715089244]

1715089244

[Holliday]

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Help:FAQ#How_divisible_are_bitcoins.3F

[n691309]

If bitcoin did a 1000:1 split so there was a 16 billion coin current supply and an adjusted price around $1.20 each, do you think we would hit a $100 billion market cap faster than the current 16 million coins and $1200 price?

Or would it make no difference at all? Mathematically it's the same but price can play tricks with the mind.

What do you think?

I wouldn't think so, why should be 1000:1 coins at the moment, I don't see any reason for this, only if you want to make yourself to think that I'm richer now because I own 1000x more bitcoins than before but the value is the same, lol. As Holliday user posted the link, bitcoin has enough digits and calculating how much a satoshi costs does not come to 1 cent. Maybe when it is equal to 1 cent bitcoin can be divided into smaller amounts.

[gentlemand]

It seems very, very unfashionable to say it around here, but I think it's an emphatically big fat yes with knobs on.

Most people heavily into BTC at present are not like your average person. Your average person likes to own large numbers of small units. They also don't want a string of zeroes before the figure they need.

You can frame it all you want with a faint air of derision, but that's just how it is and always will be.

Then we'll get the 'well we've got mbtc and satoshis' and indeed we do but why is absolutely nothing priced in them?

[Raimonn]

Bitcoin didn't need to split, you can stop using bitcoins as a unit, and start talking about mbtc. And if you need smaller units you can use  bits or satoshis.

[aso118]

I think psychologically, it could get more people investing in Bitcoin.
But what is the point of debating this? It is not possible to have this split. At best, we can start marketing everything in mBTC.

[davis196]

I think psychologically, it could get more people investing in Bitcoin.
But what is the point of debating this? It is not possible to have this split. At best, we can start marketing everything in mBTC.

I can see some logic behind this "split" idea.
Some total noob, never heard about btc and cryptocurrencies, looks at  the bitcoin price of $1200 and thinks:
"This is too expensive for me, i can`t buy a bitcoin."He doesn`t know that a bitcoin can be divided into smaller parts so he is too afraid to buy.
Or maybe he thinks that $1200 is too much,this is a speculation bubble and the price will be $200 after one week.
Those thoughts might stop a lot of noobs from bying btc.

[lottery248]

splitting is not gonna work due to its transaction fee would not be decreased as so, and there are no difference of splitting or not, unless fees would be as well decreased.

[2double0]

The split you are talking about, seems to me like a leverage being offered to trade. If we go through round figures, then we won't witness any changes, but if the differences are in decimals, then possibly changes may be seen. But then too, why is there any need for such a split when we are already moving towards higher prices? You think that total capitalization would change more if the number of coins would be changed? If the total number gets increased, will the interest remain the same?

[Ibian]

No.

[1Referee]

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Help:FAQ#How_divisible_are_bitcoins.3F

It's funny how people just blindly start writing and completely ignore this ^ post. Most wallets and exchanges by now offer to work with different units (e.g. mBTC, uBTC, Bits, etc). OP's question is redundant in that regard.

[rogerwilco]

It does not need to be changed at the protocol level. But adoption rate would probably improve if two things happened.

First, there needs to be better, smaller, catchier names for the smaller units than "millibitcoins" and "microbitcoins". Names that don't sound inherently fractional. Especially the millibitcoin, as it currently approximates to dollar parity.

Second, apps need to use these smaller names with these smaller denominations by default.

Unfortunately, this is one of the downsides of decentralization. After the conventions were decided at the beginning, they've since been impossible to improve upon.

[gentlemand]

So every activity level above a handful of hundreds is a no. Everyone below that is a yes. That kind of says everything one needs to know.

[Ibian]

So every activity level above a handful of hundreds is a no. Everyone below that is a yes. That kind of says everything one needs to know.

It won't help is the point. Changing the actual code for something like this would shake confidence for those of us who do understand what bitcoin is and how it works, generally older adopters. It's about short term vs long term goals. Short term tends to break the long term.

Not to mention the endless politics. Just look at the blocksize mess, and magnify it a hundred times for every new issue people want to change the code for.

[gentlemand]

It won't help is the point. Changing the actual code for something like this would shake confidence for those of us who do understand what bitcoin is and how it works, generally older adopters. It's about short term vs long term goals. Short term tends to break the long term.

It doesn't have to be code. It's pure perception and could be implemented immediately by the agreement of everyone by simply deciding to do it.

Of course it's far too late now but Satoshi missed a trick there. Perhaps he wasn't expecting such a rapid rise in value. Occasionally stepping beyond computer science into bog standard human psychology can be helpful.

[Vaccinus]

If bitcoin did a 1000:1 split so there was a 16 billion coin current supply and an adjusted price around $1.20 each, do you think we would hit a $100 billion market cap faster than the current 16 million coins and $1200 price?

Or would it make no difference at all? Mathematically it's the same but price can play tricks with the mind.

What do you think?

it would not be ideal because then you have fee that are $1 or more each, would look very bad to have fee as high as the minimum number available, would also make bitcoin look less rare which is not true, satoshi are sub unit don't make them full unit,i still like to talk about 1 bitcoin as the main unit and not mbtc like many say

[Ibian]

It won't help is the point. Changing the actual code for something like this would shake confidence for those of us who do understand what bitcoin is and how it works, generally older adopters. It's about short term vs long term goals. Short term tends to break the long term.

It doesn't have to be code. It's pure perception and could be implemented immediately by the agreement of everyone by simply deciding to do it.

Of course it's far too late now but Satoshi missed a trick there. Perhaps he wasn't expecting such a rapid rise in value. Occasionally stepping beyond computer science into bog standard human psychology can be helpful.

Exchanges and wallet creators can do whatever they want. We don't need to try and make universal rules about that, things will just develop how they do.

And I think you may be underestimating Satoshi.

[gentlemand]

Exchanges and wallet creators can do whatever they want. We don't need to try and make universal rules about that, things will just develop how they do.

And I think you may be underestimating Satoshi.

I'm not worthy to lick the dried sweat off Satoshi's mouse, but if he'd asked his elderly aunt to have a play rather than a bunch of crypto anarchists the decimal thing is the first thing she would've picked up on.

[Ibian]

Exchanges and wallet creators can do whatever they want. We don't need to try and make universal rules about that, things will just develop how they do.

And I think you may be underestimating Satoshi.

I'm not worthy to lick the dried sweat off Satoshi's mouse, but if he'd asked his elderly aunt to have a play rather than a bunch of crypto anarchists the decimal thing is the first thing she would've picked up on.

Who says he didn't?

[richardsNY]

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Help:FAQ#How_divisible_are_bitcoins.3F

It's funny how people just blindly start writing and completely ignore this ^ post. Most wallets and exchanges by now offer to work with different units (e.g. mBTC, uBTC, Bits, etc). OP's question is redundant in that regard.

To add -- 1 Bitcoin does not exist. If someone sends you 1 Bitcoin, he is sending you 100,000,000 satoshis. It's the GUI that shows you have 1 Bitcoin in your wallet. People don't seem to understand that when they look at the 21 million coin cap, it's not that there are only 21 million coins ever to be produced, but in reality the coin cap is slightly under 2,100,000,000,000,000 satoshis or units (whatever people like to call them).