Real Bitcoin Value

[nice.duck]

The WSJournal article says if BTC is to change dollar, its current value is 0. Plus the ways of possible transactions with BTC is very limited and it requires spending lots of energy (who can explain the part with the energy spending?).
On the other hand if in future BTC  would depend on gold, its value will be stable and it won't be opened to any fluctuations at all.

What do you guys think about that?

[mekar sari]

The WSJournal article says if BTC is to change dollar, its current value is 0. Plus the ways of possible transactions with BTC is very limited and it requires spending lots of energy (who can explain the part with the energy spending?).
On the other hand if in future BTC  would depend on gold, its value will be stable and it won't be opened to any fluctuations at all.

What do you guys think about that?

The value is $ 3k + why they say the value is $ 0, and BTC is not dependent on anything gold or anything else, BTC will be stable if everyone is using bitcoin

[Wind_FURY]

The WSJournal article says if BTC is to change dollar, its current value is 0. Plus the ways of possible transactions with BTC is very limited and it requires spending lots of energy (who can explain the part with the energy spending?).
On the other hand if in future BTC  would depend on gold, its value will be stable and it won't be opened to any fluctuations at all.

What do you guys think about that?

The value is $ 3k + why they say the value is $ 0, and BTC is not dependent on anything gold or anything else, BTC will be stable if everyone is using bitcoin

Yes, the market says what the value is. If a trader is willing to buy it from me for $4000 per Bitcoin right now then that is its price. That person writes for the Wall Street Journal, he should know more than others that the Bitcoin market is dictated by supply and demand.

[mk4]

WSJ is basically full of shit. They say bitcoin's value is $0? LOL. People currently pay $3600 for a BTC, and that's simply because of the supply vs demand. Whereas the USD is the one that actually doesn't cost shit; it's just a piece of paper. People only use it because the government told them to and USD only has value because the government told us so. Whereas in bitcoin, the people or the markets to be specific is the one to decide on what it's value is.

WSJ in general is known to make articles that are out of context and articles that are obviously biased. I personally wouldn't trust their articles.

I don't know what you mean by transactions with BTC is "very limited" and "energy spending". Do you mind expounding your statements?

[Kakmakr]

Bitcoin mining use a lot of electricity to power the ASIC chips needed to hash the complex calculations to mine Bitcoins. I recently saw a article where someone mentioned that mining a single Bitcoin in the USA, cost about $1000. < combined cost >

Bitcoin's price is also not linked to any commodity like gold, because it is simply based on supply and demand in open markets. We do not want to be linked to any other commodity, because they are being manipulated by governments and cartels with lots of money.

The volatility will improve, once Bitcoin is distributed more evenly between more people. ^smile^

[rcoins0720]

I think the author who wrote or state that didn't search and seek for the BTC the current value as of now is above 3k$ so what is that

and also the BTC price will not be equivalent to 0 at all because of the investors who are using them like Bill Gates

and the BTC is unstoppable

[Herbert2020]

The WSJournal article says if BTC is to change dollar, its current value is 0. Plus the ways of possible transactions with BTC is very limited and it requires spending lots of energy (who can explain the part with the energy spending?).
On the other hand if in future BTC  would depend on gold, its value will be stable and it won't be opened to any fluctuations at all.

What do you guys think about that?

that Wall Street Journal article never said these things. you just made a conclusion that was the last thing that article was meant to say. the article was mostly attacking bitcoin and saying it is useless and a waste of energy. the author of that article did not even understand how bitcoin works. which means the article did not worth even wasting your time to read.

and also i should add, just because other things depend on something (like them depending on Gold) does not mean that is the only way things can have value. the real value comes from supply and demand. and the demand for bitcoin is there and that means it has value. the value being above $3000 each and rising with the rising demand.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

First of all, link to the article, please? @Herbert2020 is saying you haven't understood it well. So put the link and we can see for ourselves.

Second, what tends to zero is the price of dollar. As time goes by, it gets more and more devaluated so the article is doing the comparison the other way around. In this world, things tend to have the price people are willing to pay for them. Bitcoin is scarce and has an increasing demand, therefore it has a high, increasing, price (with dips, of course). Dollar is more abundant as the FED creates more of it, and, although it has a high demand, that demand doesn’t increase. Therefore, as other fiat currencies, tends to zero in the long term.

[BingoDog]

How could bitcoin be depending on gold? That makes no sense at all. Bitcoin is decentralized and it's not depending on other currencies, assets or goods, it's depending on the demand and supply and relations on the market. So many articles with false or half true informations appear everywhere and people trust everything they read without any criteria.

[Herbert2020]

First of all, link to the article, please? @Herbert2020 is saying you haven't understood it well. So put the link and we can see for ourselves.

apparently you have to log in or something to read the full article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoins-wild-ride-shows-the-truth-it-is-probably-worth-zero-1505760623

but here is the break down: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/wall-street-journal-argues-bitcoin-is-probably-worth-zero-joins-obituary-list/

the article is already added to the list of obituaries: https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoinobituaries/

[BlockEye]

How could bitcoin be depending on gold? That makes no sense at all. Bitcoin is decentralized and it's not depending on other currencies, assets or goods, it's depending on the demand and supply and relations on the market. So many articles with false or half true informations appear everywhere and people trust everything they read without any criteria.

The journalist wrote that article doesn't have a background on cryptocurrency that's why he writes it based on what he knows. Maybe he didn't know that USD and EUR value are already not based on Gold. BTC value is based on the supply and demand of the market, It is impossible to become zero value in technical speaking if there are many countries already implementing the used of it. 

[Carlsen]

There are nearly no hard numbers somebody could use to calculate the true value of a bitcoin.
So to me the true value is whatever the market price for a bitcoin is.

The wsj article claims bitcoin was designed to replace ordinary money. I think that was never the idea.
To me bitcoin was always ment to be used parallel to the fiat system.

[valentin68]

In my opinion less than 1% of the population of the USA know what a bitcoin is. Thus in this respect I can agree with what you are saying. To become the true currency of an entire nation much effort has to be done. The number of merchants accepting it has to increase, the number of transaction has to grow up, the network has to be extended, many othet things have to happen. But we are on the good way for this to happen.
 Everythig begins with a step, isn't it?

[Afnan_faizah]

The WSJournal article says if BTC is to change dollar, its current value is 0. Plus the ways of possible transactions with BTC is very limited and it requires spending lots of energy (who can explain the part with the energy spending?).
On the other hand if in future BTC  would depend on gold, its value will be stable and it won't be opened to any fluctuations at all.

What do you guys think about that?

The value of bitcoin is depend on the people who want it,  for example if I have 1 btc then I offer you to buy it using $5000 but you only agree if the price is $4500, so the price can be determine by the final price that we deal. It is about bargaining.

[allthebitandbobs]

unless one bitcoin equal one physical  gold bar somewhere then no bitcoin will never be linked  with  gold .There are other coins how ever  looking into doing this however 1 coin equally one gold bar in a vault .There are issues with this storing gold bars cost money and what guarantee they wont be stolen  are the dev running the coin wont steal then  and say they are there .Also what happens when someone whats to cash out there coin for a gold bar?.There lots of issues with this which have not be .It is also going to be centralize so very easy for a government to tax and steal your assets .


Currently bitcoin is like fiat technically the writer is right but the actual value of the dollar is also zero by the same standard

[dlorah111]

Nothing is linked to gold exept for Fiat money. Banks need to have a certain amount of gold reserve to cover the Fiat (bank notes) amounts.
Bank notes are easily printed but gold is not.

[allthebitandbobs]

Nothing is linked to gold exept for Fiat money. Banks need to have a certain amount of gold reserve to cover the Fiat (bank notes) amounts.
Bank notes are easily printed but gold is not.

No bud fiat money is no longer based on the gold standard the dollar and the euro anyway or not .That why it is called fiat money.Money that is backed by gold is called gold standard money   

[Pursuer]

there are a lot of weird articles about bitcoin these days and majority of them (surprisingly coming from same sources as before) are attacking bitcoin one way or another and the same sources were praising it not long ago. and they always go at it with finesse! they quote someone for example.

the articles says someone said "bitcoin will be 100,000 dollar in 2 years"
or they say "probably bitcoin is worth $0".

that way no can never accuse them despite them spreading FUD clear as day.

[edynolan]

the price is now above $ 3000 instead of $ 0 and why should it depend on gold when bitcon is now more valuable than gold. although with it will not necessarily be stable with the price that is coming.

[gilangIDR]

The WSJournal article says if BTC is to change dollar, its current value is 0. Plus the ways of possible transactions with BTC is very limited and it requires spending lots of energy (who can explain the part with the energy spending?).
On the other hand if in future BTC  would depend on gold, its value will be stable and it won't be opened to any fluctuations at all.

What do you guys think about that?

Maybe I would agree if bitcoin is based on gold. Although the increase and decrease is not too high but this will greatly help the stability of bitcoin prices. Of course we all want stability because in the future bitcoin will be able to get a better position. A stable bitcoin price will make bitcoin even more reliable. This will greatly help the development of bitcoin to be used officially and also recognized in the world financial system.