Are "Ultra Rare" altcoins more valuable than the rest?

[bucciarati]

interesting analisys, thank you. sure is a smart take on the crypto market to find potential coin to invest in, problem is liquidability of assets..

Posted From bitcointalk.org Android App

[qwizzie]

On coinmarketcap, the next highest valued coins after Bitcoin are the Ultra Rare Altcoins such as DASH (with a cap of fewer than 7 million coins) among others.

With Dash you also have to take the combined collateral of its masternode network into account.
Dash has 4568 masternodes currently active, each masternode needs to have 1000 Dash reserved and verifyable to the Dash network
(this collateral is kept safe in cold wallets and is in full control by its masternode owners)

Dash circulating supply according coinmarketcap --> 7,433,997 Dash
Masternode Combined Collateral                        --> 4,568,000 Dash

Dash netto circulating supply                             --> 2,865,997 Dash

[CrowdFunder]

The rarity of the coin is pointless, plenty of high marketcap coins have huge supply. At the end of the day if the coin is useless it doesn't matter if there is only 1 in existence it will die.

[daniel244king]

Are "Ultra Rare" altcoins really more valuable than other altcoins?

Ultra Rare coins are easier to Pump and manipulate than coins with larger numbers.

Problems with Ultra Rare coins,
The less coins available the less secure a proof of stake coins is.
Proof of Stake requires a large number of coins to secure the network.

Also by having only a few coins , this decreases the utility usage of a coin and causes the transaction fees to be higher verses fiat.

So why are all of the new ICO limited amounts, so they can manipulate the price and gain more suckers.
Even BTC numbers are too low to be a world currency, which is why their high transaction fees have caused many to move to LTC.

 

What you are not considering:

1. Ultra-rare coins CAN be POS coins.

2. Every coin can be divisible by 1 millionth of a coin = 0.000000000

3. The number of coins has nothing to do with the PRICE of each coin.  What is the difference between having 100,000 coins and 100 coins is both sets of coins are worth the exact same?  You can pay $100 for one coin or pay $100 for 1000; what the difference?  I guess some people "FEEL" like they have more because the number of coins is higher.  If each coin is divisible by 1 million what difference does it make?

[qwizzie]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarcity_value

I belief the scarcity of a coin can have a direct impact on its price.
I also belief a lot of hype around coins who have larger circulating supply (less scarce), can also have a direct impact on its price.

Thinking back at the time when Bitcoin got its blockrewards cut with 50%, i'm pretty sure a large price increase followed.
Dash has an annual 7% cut on its blockrewards, consistently reducing the circulating supply over time, i belief this too will have
an effect on its price. Just like Bitcoin next blockreward halving in 4 years will (again) have a direct impact on its price.

Its simply economics at play.

[daniel244king]

I still don't understand why some people don't get it, the value of a token depends on the total market cap, all this coins mention above are very low in market cap and can easily crash and burn. For me it is all about the marketcap of a coin not the number of coins in circulation that can be easily manipulated with few thousand of USD buy order

I completely agree with this. OP's use of Torcoin as an example was a bit misleading. I was watching that coin from its release. The price jumping to $5 out the gate was completely due to pumping of the coin by the "creator" and the "developer"... and nothing more. Many people got badly burned by that developer because after that initial pump the coin's "value" dropped drastically and the dev was fired and immediately dumped his stash of the premine. Now the coin is all but abandoned by its "creator". Even at its short-lived height of popularity its market cap was only in the $Tens of thousands. Very low market cap with very low movement on the few exchanges where it was traded. It was a pipe dream that burned many people.
So no, OP, I do not agree that "ultra rare" automatically means more valuable than the rest.

First let me say - I got burned by torcoin.

Torcoins value was due to a niche market NOT pumping.  I lost money on torcoin.  I tried to buy 3000 torcoin from the dev the day after the announcement was made (before the coin was on any good exchange) - all because the coin operated over the TOR network not because the coin was pumped.  Unfortunately I was not able to secure a wallet because of the poor way the wallet was distributed. I ended up having to buy the coin later on an exchange for a much higher price only to end up losing my investment when the coin tanked after the dev was exposed as a fraud (from other coins he developed).

The coin still has a niche market; the problem is the dev and producer were incompetent - However they were smart enough of make a few coins (1 milllion coin cap).  

I watched Torcoin (on CEX) go from less than $1.00 USD to $20.00 USD in less than 2 days - no other coin in cryptocurrency history (including Bitcoin) has ever done that before. Not one coin ever!  No amount of pumping on Earth can make a coin do that!  There was a market long before the coin was produced.  

There were two failed attempts to make a torcoin the past 5 years.  I promise you that sooner or later someone is GOING to make a torcoin that is successful; why? because the demand is still there and will NEVER go away!

Just like ANYTHING that is rare - rarity has value unto itself; just look at stamps, goldcoins, misprinted dollarbills, misprinted baseball and basketball cards, rare comic books, rare collectable, etc...

[daniel244king]

And to prove my point Torcoin is still trading above $2.00 USD even after all the drama! :

https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/Exchange?market=TOR_BTC

Rarity is a value unto itself!

[andrei56]

Yes your are absolutely right; and that is so sad - That people don't understand the value of the currency they support.

Is it better to have a few coins with a higher percentage of overall ownership - like the Winklevoss twins who own 1% of all Bitcoins, or lots of coins with very small percentage of ownership?

I own more FootyCash coins with a higher ownership percentage than any other altcoin I invested in.

There is a cap of 84 Million coin on LTC (Litecoin).  I owned 2000 LTC that I paid $100 USD for back in 2012 - A few months later my 2000 LTC were worth approx $80,000 - $120,000 USD (when LTC went to $60).  I only owned a small percentage of overall LTC.

Now one month ago I found a better deal - There is a cap of only 4 Million FootyCash.  Footy was worth a fraction of a penny when I bought into it 30 days ago - It's now worth approx $0.10 USD.  The point is that I now own a MUCH larger percentage of FootyCash than I did with LTC - enough to temporarily impact the market If I wanted to.

Now I have money AND power.

  

Being a whale comes with its own problems as well, now you can manipulate the market in which you are in and if you make a bad move you could crash the market also it is more difficult to get out if the coin begins to fail so be careful.

[Renji Abarai]

You need someone to be willing to buy an ultra-rare coin.

So, they might be more a liability than anything else. Seriously.

That is correct. You may have that coin but if the circulation is limited then its possible it will become a rare collection. Community support and awareness is really important also to consider.  and that is what OP is doing? Or OP is the bagholder of that coin peace...

[elite3000]

Altcoins aren't stickers for the "ultra rare" be more valuable than the rest. Other coins are pumped too, I think this is just selection bias.

[Haesoo]

I still don't understand why some people don't get it, the value of a token depends on the total market cap, all this coins mention above are very low in market cap and can easily crash and burn. For me it is all about the marketcap of a coin not the number of coins in circulation that can be easily manipulated with few thousand of USD buy order

Indeed.
For me it's all in the market cap that I look up to and also its community support. If these two are increasing so the value of the coins is.
But I also consider the volume or circulation of the coin in the market because if its a huge volume it can attract people to invest in.

[KikloV]

Are "Ultra Rare" altcoins really more valuable than other altcoins?

Ultra Rare coins are easier to Pump and manipulate than coins with larger numbers.

Problems with Ultra Rare coins,
The less coins available the less secure a proof of stake coins is.
Proof of Stake requires a large number of coins to secure the network.

Also by having only a few coins , this decreases the utility usage of a coin and causes the transaction fees to be higher verses fiat.

So why are all of the new ICO limited amounts, so they can manipulate the price and gain more suckers.
Even BTC numbers are too low to be a world currency, which is why their high transaction fees have caused many to move to LTC.

 

What you are not considering:

1. Ultra-rare coins CAN be POS coins.

2. Every coin can be divisible by 1 millionth of a coin = 0.000000000

3. The number of coins has nothing to do with the PRICE of each coin.  What is the difference between having 100,000 coins and 100 coins is both sets of coins are worth the exact same?  You can pay $100 for one coin or pay $100 for 1000; what the difference?  I guess some people "FEEL" like they have more because the number of coins is higher.  If each coin is divisible by 1 million what difference does it make?

 

Actually Daniel,  I never said Ultra-Rare coins could not be PoS coins, there are a boatload.
But if you look at the security formula ,
hashProofOfStake <= [Coin-age] x [Target]      
[Coin-age] = [amount of coins] x [days in stake]  

Meaning the lower the overall # of available coins for staking the lower the security.

Where you are missing the point is transaction fees.
example:
Two PoS Coin Networks both with a 1 billion Dollar Market cap.
Your ultra rare coin only has 1000 coins
The larger # coin has 1 billion coins.

So 1 of your ultra rare coins are worth 1 million dollars
And one of the larger # coin is worth $1

The Transaction fee on the ultra rare is .00001
The Transaction fee on the larger # coin is .01

The ultra rare transaction fee is a fiat equivalent of $10 per transaction.
The larger # coin Transaction fee is a fiat equivalent of  1 Penny. ($0.01)

So your ultra rare coin become useless in transferring amounts of less than $1000 , which the $10 would only be a 1% fee on top of the amount.

Where as the Larger # coin can transfer amounts as small as $1 , which the penny would only be a 1% fee.

Which if they have the same market cap and liquidity, I can send coins (at the same Fiat Conversion Amount) at a much cheaper rate and be conformable that the larger # coin network is more secure thank to the security formula mentioned above.  

 

[bobitza202]

One of the rarest coins out there  



And a bigger market cap here:

[KikloV]

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/42-coin/

Max money: 42 coins

If the ultra rare people believe that divisible forever nonsense,

hey this one only has 42, so buy her up.  


 

[xiaohang07]

I don't think so. I think the altcoin with real-life applications are more valuable than the pure-hype copy coins.

[stevegreer]

First let me say - I got burned by torcoin.

Sorry to hear that.

Torcoins value was due to a niche market NOT pumping.  

I partially agree. It was a niche, true. But it was also a lot of hype and pumping.

I lost money on torcoin.  I tried to buy 3000 torcoin from the dev the day after the announcement was made (before the coin was on any good exchange) - all because the coin operated over the TOR network not because the coin was pumped.  

But that was the hype. the dev and owner were saying from the get go that it operated over the Tor network, but it was soon uncovered that it didn't. That didn't come until a couple of weeks after the launch. That could be credited to incompetence on the part of the "dev", but it was inexcusable to hype a coin as operating over Tor when it in fact didn't.

The coin still has a niche market; the problem is the dev and producer were incompetent - However they were smart enough of make a few coins (1 milllion coin cap).  

I will agree that dev and producer were highly incompetent.

I watched Torcoin (on CEX) go from less than $1.00 USD to $20.00 USD in less than 2 days - no other coin in cryptocurrency history (including Bitcoin) has ever done that before. Not one coin ever!  No amount of pumping on Earth can make a coin do that!  There was a market long before the coin was produced.  

I disagree. That is textbook definition of pumping. How quickly after that did the price fall? And how far did it fall? Back to $5, then to just above $2, then below $2. Having a coin get pumped that high on ONE exchange is just that... a pump.

There were two failed attempts to make a torcoin the past 5 years.  I promise you that sooner or later someone is GOING to make a torcoin that is successful; why? because the demand is still there and will NEVER go away!

There already is another Tor network coin called Deep Onion.

Just like ANYTHING that is rare - rarity has value unto itself; just look at stamps, goldcoins, misprinted dollarbills, misprinted baseball and basketball cards, rare comic books, rare collectable, etc...

Rarity is only part of the value. There still has to be a demand. There can be only one Torcoin in existence, and if no one wants it then what value does it truly have? All of the examples you listed have demand as well as rarity.

[Trollollo]

Ultra rare = Ultra scammy.
Value of them is illusion,if these coins have no good use case.

[Nascor]

you have to keep in mind what makes a coin valuable

If the coin has no value (zero), it doesn't matter whether there are a trilion coins or only one coin

[masterchief001]

The rarity of the coin is pointless, plenty of high marketcap coins have huge supply. At the end of the day if the coin is useless it doesn't matter if there is only 1 in existence it will die.

No, any coin still has a meaning, it represents a real project, and that coin works to continue the project, so the development of a coin expresses. The success of a project, it does not die if the project persists.

[speaktome]

I still don't understand why some people don't get it, the value of a token depends on the total market cap, all this coins mention above are very low in market cap and can easily crash and burn. For me it is all about the marketcap of a coin not the number of coins in circulation that can be easily manipulated with few thousand of USD buy order

Indeed.
For me it's all in the market cap that I look up to and also its community support. If these two are increasing so the value of the coins is.
But I also consider the volume or circulation of the coin in the market because if its a huge volume it can attract people to invest in.

In long term the total of supply could be  a key factor,personally I think that the reduced number of it and plays against the effectiveness of this may have a period that cause much expectation but until then nothing else happens,of the same way I do not think that a large number of supply benefit a lot but rather,I think those who are most successful and are more likely to survive in the long run are those that are within the intermediate ranges and at least those can be observed in greater number.