Why I'm Wary to Invest (Change my mind and I'll give you 1 BTC)

[Jack of Diamonds]

Deflation due to limited supply.

Send to slush

[prolixus]

I personally don't think this is an issue, because the success of the existing Bitcoin network creates a very strong barrier-to-entry for competitors.  Who is going to participate or invest in a competing cryptocurrency when Bitcoin already has such a long head start?  Why would anyone switch over when Bitcoin is already so well established?  It would take significant, compelling new features in any competing cryptocurrency to convince people to switch over to it.  Maybe it will happen someday, but I personally don't think it will be soon...

I'm just going to use your quote because it's hard to address everyone individually (although thank you everyone for your input).  I have to disagree with your assertion and it's what concerns me the most.  There are very low barriers to entry.  Bitcoin is open source, it's out there for everyone to see and replicate.  There are many barriers to entry but the primary ones are cost of capital, geography, and regulation.  I'm sure there are more but I'm just going off the top of my head.  Bitcoin has none of those barriers.  

My example of Pfizer would be a better example of a high-barrier-to-entry.  They are protected by patents, have to spend millions on R&D and have to deal with the FDA scrutiny/approval process.  THOSE are high barriers to entry.  Bitcoin can be recreated relatively easily by a saavy computer developer(s).

I'm also a bit surprised about the first to market and Facebook examples.  Facebook was most definitely NOT first to market.  Asian Avenue, MySpace, there were tons of predecessor social networking sites.  Facebook just improved on those concepts.  If anything, Facebook strengthens my point.  It's the latest and most successful incarnation of social networking.  But first?  Not even close.

Speaking of market cap (whether you feel it relevant or not) you simply cannot have an unprotected multi-million dollar concept, or whatever you want to call it, and not expect to see immense competition.  If a guy was selling hotdogs for $50 each, that costs him $2 to make, AND posts his recipe for everyone to see, wouldn't you or someone else come in and start selling hotdogs too?  Of course!  Because there's profit to be made.  That's why I say it's simple economics, to think BTC can go to $100 or whatever arbitrary number you want to use without factoring in competition is coming to a conclusion missing a very important variable.

I just want to finish by saying I'm not trying to sway people one way or the other.  I think it's been a great discussion.  But for me, this is the way I do my investing/speculating.  I play devil's advocate and see what type of responses I get.  

What your argument is missing is the fact that Bitcoin is fully decentralized, so no company can just create a Bitcoin 2.0 and profit. Anyone trying to create a for-profit version of the technology will need to centralize the function mining provides in Bitcoin: transaction validation and currency issuance. If Google created gCoin and intended to profit from it the design would make the product a new Beanz instead of a new Bitcoin. Would you use a new Beanz? Would anyone else? The key distinction is between centralized and decentralized digital currencies.

The only threat from competition is from a superior technology. Even in this case if enough users want to keep the existing blockchain they may find consensus to use it to bootstrap the new technology. If that happened your existing bitcoins would still be valuable.

[NO_SLAVE]

go with your gut, if your weary, then sail along to something else that floats your boat, why belabour it?

good luck and good bye

[ElectricMonk]

Your first question is a misunderstanding of market cap. There's no room for subjective debate here. It's a question based upon a false premise regarding in-flow of USD.

I'm also a bit surprised about the first to market and Facebook examples.  Facebook was most definitely NOT first to market.  

That was my point. Facebook came after a plethora of social networking sites but it was based upon technologies that had existed for years... HTML, HTTP, PHP, Javascript.

Nobody in their right mind would design PHP these days. Trust me, it's f&*(ing horrible and ASP ain't any better but they're used because there's a huge intellectual and infrastructural investment in them. So people take these crap technologies and they invent! They create PHP frameworks and Javascript libraries. That's how the world moves on.

The 'profit' comes from finding new ways to utilize the technology e.g. building Amazon.com. That's where the future money is but right now the money can be made by simply recognizing it as a unique and ground breaking concept and buying some BTC.

People will take the path of least resistance because high utility from a small amount of effort is how we make profit/money. Bitcoin2.0 would be hard to create, even with a significant amount of investment.

Where would you start? If you're the Google CEO and you want to start gCoin (a theoretical decentralised, P2P currency publicised by Google) - leaving aside all the political/social/legal entanglements that a blue chip would want to avoid - your best bet would be to take Bitcoin 1.0, make some minor improvements (hard to think what they'd be to be honest but let's assume you can make some) then repackage as gCoin (still decentralised BTW but with Google brand) and offer out 6.5 million gCoin with a $30 guarantee each. Essentially offer free money to the world! The money would likely be snapped up by those with no understanding of the currency who would be eager to cash out. But say it wasn't, let's assume the 6.5 million gCoins were bought by a group of techies/nerds who could see the potential, then the curreny might take off and a gCoin might be worth 1000 USD in future. Great! What's Google got out of this? Nothing. They were willing to act as guarantor to a fledgling currency that creates no profit for them.

RE: Mining - I personally don't touch mining. It's a hugely competitive and near perfect market so economics tell us that the profits will be low (not for an individual but for the market as a whole). In short, adjusting for the BTC price increase, bitcoin mining is low profit unless you have something that separates you from the crowd and for those few the profits are huge. So personally, I earn money in my business and buy a small BTC investment rather than mine.

I'm always a little bit surprised that people can't see how unique and interesting Bitcoin is. It's like watching the first email to be sent and then shrugging your shoulders and walking away. Very odd.

[Timo Y]

Where does this money come from? 

30 Million a year is nothing. That's the revenue of a small company. Remember that Bitcoin is a global project. There are now Bitcoin early adopters in the most remote corners of the world, and most people in the world haven't heard about Bitcoin yet.

There are 1 Billion internet users in the world. If just 0.3% (3 Million) of them join Bitcoin in the next 12 months and spend $10 to give it a try, the price will stay where it is.

Bitcoin in unpatented intellectual property. 

So is Wikipedia. It is very easy to copy Wikipedia and make a for-profit fork. Even Wikipedia's content can be used commercially as long as it's published under the same license.  Yet, nobody seems to have succeeded with this. Well, there are a few examples but their user numbers are negligible compared to the original Wikipedia.


Why is that? Mainly because of network effects and "community spirit".

Network effects are even stronger for Bitcoin than for Wikipedia.

A closed-source version of Bitcoin would lose the emotional appeal of decentralization. It would be no better than the dozens of centralized virtual currencies already out there: liberty reserve, linden dollars, pecunix, ...

[RomertL]

Where does this money come from? 

30 Million a year is nothing. That's the revenue of a small company. Remember that Bitcoin is a global project. There are now Bitcoin early adopters in the most remote corners of the world, and most people in the world haven't heard about Bitcoin yet.

There are 1 Billion internet users in the world. If just 0.3% (3 Million) of them join Bitcoin in the next 12 months and spend $10 to give it a try, the price will stay where it is.

Bitcoin in unpatented intellectual property. 

So is Wikipedia. It is very easy to copy Wikipedia and make a for-profit fork. Even Wikipedia's content can be used commercially as long as it's published under the same license.  Yet, nobody seems to have succeeded with this. Well, there are a few examples but their user numbers are negligible compared to the original Wikipedia.
.

Why is that? Mainly because of network effects and "community spirit".

Network effects are even stronger for Bitcoin than for Wikipedia.

A closed-source version of Bitcoin would lose the emotional appeal of decentralization. It would be no better than the dozens of centralized virtual currencies already out there: liberty reserve, linden dollars, pecunix, ...

I agree with people here that because of the network effects there will probably not be a successful competitor to bitcoin unless it's radically different, or at least have some kick-ass features that Bitcoin lack. That's why we have near-monopoly on services like Facebook, E-bay, Paypal, Wikipedia etc. Why do we use these services? Because everybody else does. All of them might not have been first of its kind, but they were first to reach the "critical mass" were the network effects get so important that they can't be out-competed by a similar product. I would say Bitcoin have just reached the critical mass. Not that I can back this with numbers or anything, but that's the feeling I get.

Talking about numbers, can you explain yours? Why would the exchange-rate stay the same? 3 million spending 10 each tells you something about demand but nothing about supply, i.e. how many will sell at the same time and to what price

[Tawsix]

Never invest money that you can't afford to burn.  If you lose it, you're still ok, if you make it big, more power to you.

[darkwon]

Prices trend upwards, even after a massive security disaster -> BTC is bulletproof.

[grever]

I think invstment is a good idea. Especialy now when world is overflowed with crypto curencies.
I invested some of my money into @Viberate_com platform.
You can read more about it on link bellow:

https://www.viberate.com/participation

Whish you all to invest the right way!

[baradfo]

I wonder if OP got his questions answered since 2011. If so, did he pay out the 1 BTC yet? If not, OP do you still have questions about BTC? I can help answer for that 1 BTC bounty. PM me.

[Impros88]

I wasn’t really interested in bitcoin when the price was $1800. Then few months passed and I saw the price again – it grew to the amount of $3000+. Now I heard it’s $4000+ but I didn’t check myself.

[jhonnydeep87]

If you say true then I will be the first person who can motivate you to be a successful person for the future. Bitcoin as the core of the digital currency is supported by some crypto currencies such as ETH, Rippler, Bitcoin Cash and others. Bitcoin will be a higher value.

[maxreish]

You should have not to be wary to invest specially in bitcoin, remember market is not a person,  imagine to nothing started bitcoin but now bitcoin is most popular all over the world, some people try to insist perverteth bitcoin but no matter what do bitcoin is still standing in front of them.

[jhonnydeep87]

I will be stubborn or big in bitcoin until I can realize that the bitcoin encryption algorithm and the entire blockchain will be able to be rebuilt in the afternoon by an average kids computer aged 6-7 years.

[Afobaje48]

You should not wary to invest, put your mind in what you  want to get and put it on a mission, you will have testimony

[Daniel91]

Bitcoin value come from supply and demand.
It's very simple, like in any other market in the world.
When demand is higher, price will go up and when more people sell, btc value will go down.
Yes, bitcoin is risk but, in my opinion, not bigger risk than any other market in the world.
Still, you have much bigger chance to earn here than in gambling or casino

[Rubesmatic]

If you are really giving away a btc, that means you have a healthy chunk to throw in.
If it were me, I would break up my entry buying more each $500 dip in the btc price.

I'd then trade 25% of my btc for alts, preferably some in the top 10.  If you want to go outside the top 10, Wanchain and ICX have flourished during btc runs.  This is certainly a prime time to have cash on deck as playing this dip can be super profitable with a big stack.

[Dasinc]

Yes, someone is lazy, to learn something new, to act, as the saying goes - people do not have the patience to build a business for 3 years, but have the patience to go to work for 30 years. And all this is largely due to laziness. You should always look away. Passive investing may be the way to go lazy, it is not strange sounds, but nothing is done about it, and they do not need to use your head.

[bigjake89]

America took over the title of world financial capitol after WW1, and continued with the same central bank modeled after the BOE.  Challenges to the western central bank's dominance over the control of money and credit have been met with force.  Be the challenge from other countries, individual currencies, or strict gold accounting the central bank has survived - for 300 years.  The role of the central bank in the wars, genocides, etc especially of the 20th century is well documented, and many of these things would not be possible if not for it

[monkeydominicorobin]

Let me start by saying that I do not know all of the facts, which is the reason for this topic.  The person who can provide the most convincing argument to my concerns will be given 1 BTC should I decide to invest.  That incentive is just to put out there, really what I would like is a civil and hopefully mostly troll-free discussion. 

From the FAQ, "in the first 4 years of the Bitcoin network, 10,500,000 BTC will be created."  So 2,625,000 BTC's per year.  BTC's fluctuate in price but lets use $15 per BTC as a baseline.  In order to sustain that price over a year period, NEW money would have to be injected in excess of $39 million per year.  Perhaps slightly less as not all will go to market, so lets say, $30 million.  First problem I see:

Where does this money come from?  We have very small scale exchanges, and the largest one has been hacked and isn't even open yet.  A further barrier is the $1,000 transaction limit.  How do you get $30 million a year in with that sort of limit imposed.  Yes, that limit can be removed by providing verifying information, however, the scale we're talking about is going to take institutional investors.  Will these institutional investors be willing to lose their anonymity to invest here?  And even so, the next is my biggest concern....

Bitcoin in unpatented intellectual property.  Everyone who has ever taken an Econ 101 class should understand the law of supply and demand.  Lets say BTC gets this $30 million investment per year, that sort of money is going to spur competition.  As long as there is demand and profit to be made, competitors will come.  The primary protection against competition is patents, trademarkets, etc..   Lets look at a company like Pfizer for example and their immensely successful drug Lipitor.  Lipitor is patented resulting in Pfizer being the only drug manufacturer allowed to produce the product.  Once that patent runs out, generic brands of the drugs will come online and Pfizer will no longer be making large gains on the drug.  They know this, everyone knows this. 

Bitcoin has no patent and in fact, is open source.  There is nothing to stop a competitor from coming in, copying the model, maybe even improving on it, and bring it to market.  Look at it this way, if you're an investor would you really invest multi-millions of dollars worth of capital in something that can be copied today?  Why not create your own?  Whose to stop Google from coming in and making Googlecoins?  Any profitable venture will result in competition.  This may be good for P2P currency's longevity but I'm strictly talking about BTC from an investment standpoint.  If it were legal to make an exact copy of Lipitor and bring it to market today, would it happen?  You're damn right it would.

I have other concerns, the bad press, the security issues, lack of merchants, etc. but really those are my two big ones and they sort've tie in together.  Again, I'm coming at this from an investment standpoint.  I see Bitcoin's value as rampant speculation.  I don't want to use the "B" word, but the price appreciation is unsustainable (LONG-TERM) in my view.

What are your thoughts? 

It states here that there are atleast 1,000 transactions per block if you do the math since there are about 8,000 transactions per hour and 8 minutes per block generation. Just look at the staggering amount of recorded transactions that the Bitcoin network is keeping for the past 9 years.  You are aware of Cambridge Analytica and the bad press about them just think for a second how much money changed hands between them and Facebook just to avail of the customer data from Facebook. Now think about the database that the Bitcoin network is building right how much do you think it will cost. It is available to everyone and it is backing the value of Bitcoin now and into the future. The database of transaction is so huge that there is no way to see it as something finite. Data is the number one treasure of Bitcoin. There is no way that something like this could be a "B" . If you believe in bad press there is no way that you will be able to see an analysis such as this one.



Forty two coin is an alternative coin but today one unit is worth more than 26,000 thousand dollars. The whole cryptocurrency market is in a slump but 42 coin is resilient. Just think of a way on how to sustain a coin with just 42 units. Bitcoin has 21,000,000 million units and you think that it is unsustainable but this coin is seemingly sustainable?



BIT20 is an index fund of top 20 cryptocurrencies and last January there was a point when it reached 400,000 dollars per unit. This fund is a cryptocurrency fund. If it can breach 400,000 dollars what will stop Bitcoin from reaching 1,000,000 dollars per unit. Do you still think that Bitcoin is unsustainable. Yes it lacks the patent but just as you have stated a patent is limited to 25 years. Bitcoin doesn't like 25 years of life span. Besides, a patent is a publicly available pieces of documents. Anyone can copy your idea and concept once you apply for a patent very similar to open source.