Given what the Bitcoin Network experienced with high transaction fees and long confirmation times during BTC's climb late last year (and subsequent reversal of affairs after this year's declines), it would seem that when bitcoin is "too expensive" (as a result of being "too popular"), average transaction fees are bumped up to levels that put it out of contention for achieving its primary mission (correct me if I'm wrong here) as acting as a feasible currency. Thus, generally speaking, when the price of BTC goes up, its ability to function as a currency goes down.
Although implementation of SegWit and Lightning Network transactions have done much to help scale bitcoin (the average transaction fee currently hovers around $0.37... man those exchanges are making a killing on withdrawal fees), there likely will continue to exist an inverse correlation between the price of BTC and its intrinsic, fundamental value as a currency, or such as hypothesized by a member of this forum.
Furthermore, I propose that this malleability (don't think transaction malleability) of the intrinsic worth of bitcoin renders it not subject to classic means of Technical Analysis. I've believed this to be the case this for a number of years for other reasons, but because the fundamental nature of bitcoin changes in response to its price - unlike stocks which work in reverse or commodities which don't change at all - its price movement can't be expected to behave like those of traditional markets.
I agree that it doesn't suit as a feasible currency due to high mining transaction costs and transfer time but I disagree that was its primary mission. I view Bitcoin as digital gold and its value based off of accepted scarcity and rarity is really its only use case. For example gold is very expensive to move around.. its value is volatile.. and its use case doesn't justify or set its price.. exactlly as bitcoin does. I think any other cryptocurrency could step in, have lower fees, be more frequently used, and it wouldn't affect Bitcoin's price at all. Technology and use cases often don't define price structure in many things we own.. For example a Tesla is a lot more efficient, has a lot more modern features.. takes advantage of all the newest technologies.. yet a Model T Ford is worth more because of its scarcity.. its old technology doesn't define its price. I think ultimately bitcoin sooner rather than later will lose ground to a token that functions more of as a high speed currency as far as adoption.. has everything that bitcoin offers for cheaper.. but those who hold bitcoin won't see its value diminish because its just a seperate thing like gold that will maintain its value (even with all of its technology dated faults).
Still one can't deny your more expensive when it becomes more popular statement.. I've never really thought of it that way before.
Poll
