Distribution of bitcoin wealth by owner

[sgbett]

Trust me, Bankers will own over 25%+ of Bitcoin by this Christmas and over 50% in the next 18 months.

I said last year Wall-Street was gonna come in strong this year and I was laughed at.

I traded stocks for over 20 years.  When bankers accumulate a stock, no matter how massive the accumulation, the price doesn't always go up, it actually often goes down.

How is that possible?  Manipulation.  Between the Media, constant China banning (which is all preplanned and I called it some 3 months ago) and clever ways to accumulate Bitcoins, bankers will get the coins they want THIS YEAR.

We will know this for a fact as banks and hedge funds have to report new investments quarterly.  I have no doubt we will see that they bought Bitcoins, hand over fist, this entire downturn.  And this is just a hunch but I think they grabbed a lot of the coins from Gox, although I don't know how.  Wall Street is untouchable when it comes to their survival [and annihilating opponents] and it was clear to me last year that Andreas et al were wrong; Banks and governments actually LOVED Bitcoin.

My 25%+ target should actually be reached well before Christmas and that will cause some panic in the libertarian circles, which is a large portion of the current Bitcoin holders.

And that's why I said Bitcoin incumbents and Millionaires should have a contingency plan.  

I expect a mass migration to a new coin sparked by a respected Bitcoin insider.  They may first try a Newly launched coin but that will probably fail.

An already tested and ultra secure coin will probably prove to be the best choice.  This may already be planned, hard to say with so much going on behind the scenes.  It would only take the move of one high profile and trusted individual, like Gavin, to create a mass exodus from Bitcoin to a different "decentralized" coin. [No successful coin will ever be decentralized, that's not how/why they were designed].

Bitcoin will see at least a $2,000 price this year.  I've said it before:  All the money and power in the world has converged to one massive focal point to make the Bitcoin protocol a success and Bitcoin will not be allowed to fail, at least not until cryptos reach critical mass.

Critical mass, the point where Groupthink takes over, won't happen for at least 18 more months and also, given the mass amount of SmartMoney going into Bitcoin, it's guaranteed to go much higher later this year, and especially next year.  Due to The sheer illiquid nature of Bitcoin and lack of available coins, even if a mass migration happens, there will still be a massive shortage of Bitcoins to go Around and Wall Street is very good at increasing perceived value of an asset, especially a rare asset.

The media will jump in and make the masses go nuts for Bitcoin [and a few other select alts].

Throw in the guaranteed ETF license [by year's end, as i predicted last year] and you'll see a massive influx of billions of dollars by next year from mutual funds and pension funds.  This is why the SmartMoney is hurrying to buy Bitcoin hand over fist now, those in early will see the most massive profits later this year and especially next year, when Mutual Funds And Pension Funds throw billions into Bitcoin ETFs [which will overcrowd buyers and demand will spill-over into alts].

So the contingency plan is not for profits sake, although one can make much more buying select alts, but rather for the reason Bitcoiners bought into Bitcoin in the first place.  For financial freedom and decentralized money.  

That will be gone by year's end and even Andreas will stop telling lies on TV.  So Bitcoin millionaires should get together and figure out where the masses will migrate to once it's obvious Bitcoin is not decentralized and worse, it's ran by banks, Corporations, hedge funds and maybe even the NSA.  

Cause besides the huge profits one can make by finding that coin now, one can also position oneself strategically to try and slow down another systemic hi-jacking like what's happening now with Bitcoin.

This hi-jacking was obvious from last year but nobody was listening and unfortunately, even a new coin, if it succeeds, will see a takeover attempt.

But it's fun to try and stop them, and maybe have a little bit of financial success while doing it.

Thanks and Good luck!

mostly agree with this, though i deviate in my opinion on the final outcome. I don't think there needs to be a move to another coin if banks already have ~50% of btc (and I totally agree that they are accumulating like mad behind the scenes now, whilst at the same time holding the market down. pretty easy to do so with the volume at the moment).

I still think btc was always intended to be the new money that actually fixes the "problem" of fiat being anonymous. Occams razor says it was invented (or at least instigated) by the people that want to retain power/wealth rather than the FLOSS crowd. I think the coders were sold the dream of currency that sticks it to the man, without realising that the man was pulling the strings all along. Maybe my tinfoil hat needs adjusting though.

Anyway, in this scenario (BTC is the one coin to rule them all), just holding is the contingency plan. I'm glad I got in when i did, its really hard to buy significant amounts at these prices without tweaking my risk tolerance.

I suspect the "1000/1 stock split" when we go full mbtc will have a big psychological effect. (if the 7/1 split of AAPL is anything to go by!) probably will be petrol poured on the fire in the next run up. I would not like to be out of the market when that comes, and I am quite prepared to ride the price to zero to ensure I don't miss what could be the biggest 'gap up' in the entire history of money. Sure people can put this down to greed, but i'm quite sure there is a big helping of prudence involved.

[Alley]

What are the banks planning on doing with all this bitcoin?

[explorer]

What are the banks planning on doing with all this bitcoin?

To do what they do.  Manipulate markets, and amass yet more assets.

[jmw74]

I still think btc was always intended to be the new money that actually fixes the "problem" of fiat being anonymous. Occams razor says it was invented (or at least instigated) by the people that want to retain power/wealth rather than the FLOSS crowd. I think the coders were sold the dream of currency that sticks it to the man, without realising that the man was pulling the strings all along. Maybe my tinfoil hat needs adjusting though.

Obfuscation wins out over analysis in the long run.  Anyone who would have designed bitcoin to track everyone's money would have known this.  They would never have created a pseudonymous ledger if retaining power was their goal.  Bitcoin's (and its popular wallets) defaults do indeed allow tracking, but with proper software running on top of it, the people in power have absolutely no hope of maintaining control by analyzing the blockchain.  The "proper software" is not necessarily trivial to implement, but it can be done.

[edit] Also, fiat is NOT anonymous at all, only cash is.  In first world countries, anyone who the government cares to track can already be easily tracked by the government.  With bitcoin it would allow anyone to do the tracking.  Where would the advantage be?

[Vlad2Vlad]

What are the banks planning on doing with all this bitcoin?

Control the world.  Charge massive fees of 7 billion instead if just 4 billion.

Cause who's gonna be able to afford to mine (secure) Bitcoin in a couple years?

That's right, only the rich and corporations with data centers.

[boumalo]

I still think btc was always intended to be the new money that actually fixes the "problem" of fiat being anonymous. Occams razor says it was invented (or at least instigated) by the people that want to retain power/wealth rather than the FLOSS crowd. I think the coders were sold the dream of currency that sticks it to the man, without realising that the man was pulling the strings all along. Maybe my tinfoil hat needs adjusting though.

Obfuscation wins out over analysis in the long run.  Anyone who would have designed bitcoin to track everyone's money would have known this.  They would never have created a pseudonymous ledger if retaining power was their goal.  Bitcoin's (and its popular wallets) defaults do indeed allow tracking, but with proper software running on top of it, the people in power have absolutely no hope of maintaining control by analyzing the blockchain.  The "proper software" is not necessarily trivial to implement, but it can be done.

[edit] Also, fiat is NOT anonymous at all, only cash is.  In first world countries, anyone who the government cares to track can already be easily tracked by the government.  With bitcoin it would allow anyone to do the tracking.  Where would the advantage be?

I think you can anonymise your bitcoins if you want to.

Let's say you buy cash without using your name : how would those bitcoins be related to you if you create the wallet through an IP that doesn't direct to your name?
If you use a tumbler you can anonymise your bitcoins as well : they would know you had them but they wouldn't know where they are now and what you did with them
If you mine you get anonymous bitcoins as well

[JorgeStolfi]

Let's say you buy cash without using your name : how would those bitcoins be related to you if you create the wallet through an IP that doesn't direct to your name? [ ... ] f you mine you get anonymous bitcoins as well

At some point you will have to spend the bitcoins or convert them to cash.  How can you buy a house or a car anonymously? How can you get half a million dollars in cash anonymously?

If you use a tumbler you can anonymise your bitcoins as well : they would know you had them but they wouldn't know where they are now and what you did with them

Indeed, only you and the tumbler's operator will know that.

[boumalo]

Let's say you buy cash without using your name : how would those bitcoins be related to you if you create the wallet through an IP that doesn't direct to your name? [ ... ] f you mine you get anonymous bitcoins as well

At some point you will have to spend the bitcoins or convert them to cash.  How can you buy a house or a car anonymously? How can you get half a million dollars in cash anonymously?

If you use a tumbler you can anonymise your bitcoins as well : they would know you had them but they wouldn't know where they are now and what you did with them

Indeed, only you and the tumbler's operator will know that.

As long as you don't spend it, your bitcoins can stay anonymous and you can go to an other country and buy a car or a house there if your government is too greedy

You can obviously sell small amounts of bitcoins quite discretely if you want to

[boumalo]

...
That will be gone by year's end and even Andreas will stop telling lies on TV.  So Bitcoin millionaires should get together and figure out where the masses will migrate to once it's obvious Bitcoin is not decentralized and worse, it's ran by banks, Corporations, hedge funds and maybe even the NSA.  
...

What are you smoking?  You want to decentralize bitcoin distribution?  Just go ahead and buy some and stop bitching about rich people owning more than you. 

Bitcoin is not controlled by anyone.  You want to own 100k of bitcoins?  Just go and buy them, see what happens.

Gold, stocks, fiat and their derivatives can all be manipulated by creative GAAP rules.  Bitcoin? not so much.  You either own it or you don't.
Easy to verify if you really own the address you claim you own.

The price of bitcoin can be "manipulated" like most markets but at least the manipulation by banks and government agencies are not working too well and it gives back some power to the people

[Vlad2Vlad]

...
That will be gone by year's end and even Andreas will stop telling lies on TV.  So Bitcoin millionaires should get together and figure out where the masses will migrate to once it's obvious Bitcoin is not decentralized and worse, it's ran by banks, Corporations, hedge funds and maybe even the NSA.  
...

What are you smoking?  You want to decentralize bitcoin distribution?  Just go ahead and buy some and stop bitching about rich people owning more than you.  

Bitcoin is not controlled by anyone.  You want to own 100k of bitcoins?  Just go and buy them, see what happens.

Gold, stocks, fiat and their derivatives can all be manipulated by creative GAAP rules.  Bitcoin? not so much.  You either own it or you don't.
Easy to verify if you really own the address you claim you own.

I wanna respect the scope and direction the OP had in mind with this thread so I'll keep it short and not continue on this tangent.  If you're serious you can PM me.

A) I'm not smoking anything.

B) I don't want anything per sé.

C) I only want the truth because that's the only way you'll make money (in the long run) on this Crypto Phenomenon.

That said, I don't have an agenda.  If Bitcoin is the one, great, I want in.

If Bitcoin is now centralized and the whole world will realize it by Christmas, then I'd prefer to figure it out before the herd and stay ahead of the curve.

Finally, I said last year, before there was any evidence, that Bitcoin was NOT anonymous, NOT decentralized and was being secretly accumulated by Banks, Hedge Funds, MNCs, etc., and I was called insane cause experts like Roger Ver and Andreas Antonopolous were telling people the exact opposite.

That Banks, Hedge Funds, etc., hated Bitcoin and that the state could never control Bitcoin.  Andreas actually blocked me on twitter when I tried to explain to him that the truth was the exact opposite of what the lies he was propagating. 

I call them lies cause a guy with his knowledge and insider info should have figured it out way before me.  So Andreas et al are either all incompetent or simply liars.  I think the latter is the most probable.

What's shocking to me is that we now know a lot more than last year, things which I predicted last year only to me called crazy.

So for guys like you to still not grasp what's really happening now, after all the events of the past 6 months, well, I really have no words to alleviate your blindness.

Good luck!

[Siegfried]

...
That will be gone by year's end and even Andreas will stop telling lies on TV.  So Bitcoin millionaires should get together and figure out where the masses will migrate to once it's obvious Bitcoin is not decentralized and worse, it's ran by banks, Corporations, hedge funds and maybe even the NSA.  
...

What are you smoking?  You want to decentralize bitcoin distribution?  Just go ahead and buy some and stop bitching about rich people owning more than you.  

Bitcoin is not controlled by anyone.  You want to own 100k of bitcoins?  Just go and buy them, see what happens.

Gold, stocks, fiat and their derivatives can all be manipulated by creative GAAP rules.  Bitcoin? not so much.  You either own it or you don't.
Easy to verify if you really own the address you claim you own.

I wanna respect the scope and direction the OP had in mind with this thread so I'll keep it short and not continue on this tangent.  If you're serious you can PM me.

A) I'm not smoking anything.

B) I don't want anything per sé.

C) I only want the truth because that's the only way you'll make money (in the long run) on this Crypto Phenomenon.

That said, I don't have an agenda.  If Bitcoin is the one, great, I want in.

If Bitcoin is now centralized and the whole world will realize it by Christmas, then I'd prefer to figure it out before the herd and stay ahead of the curve.

Finally, I said last year, before there was any evidence, that Bitcoin was NOT anonymous, NOT decentralized and was being secretly accumulated by Banks, Hedge Funds, MNCs, etc., and I was called insane cause experts like Roger Ver and Andreas Antonopolous were telling people the exact opposite.

That Banks, Hedge Funds, etc., hated Bitcoin and that the state could never control Bitcoin.  Andreas actually blocked me on twitter when I tried to explain to him that the truth was the exact opposite of what the lies he was propagating. 

I call them lies cause a guy with his knowledge and insider info should have figured it out way before me.  So Andreas et al are either all incompetent or simply liars.  I think the latter is the most probable.

What's shocking to me is that we now know a lot more than last year, things which I predicted last year only to me called crazy.

So for guys like you to still not grasp what's really happening now, after all the events of the past 6 months, well, I really have no words to alleviate your blindness.

Good luck!

I just spent a few minutes learning about IXcoin advertised in your signature. From the information I have been able to gather, it seems to be one of the least useful or innovative coins in existence, but your signature says it is the next Bitcoin. Your theory of Bitcoin's death by centralization seems plausible, but in light of your absurd endorsement of IXcoin, your credibility is diminished. If I am wrong, please show me why.

[JorgeStolfi]

Trust me, Bankers will own over 25%+ of Bitcoin by this Christmas and over 50% in the next 18 months.
I said last year Wall-Street was gonna come in strong this year and I was laughed at.

Is there any evidence that the banks or "Wal Street" (whatever that means) are buying bitcoins for themselves?  Any public news?

SecondMarket's BIT and Pantera's PBP do not buy for themselves; they only skim fees from common investors who buy bitcoins through them.  It is these investors who bear all the risk.

Fortress had invested in Bitcoin, but it only gave them a red stain in their quarterly report.  I read that they gave their bitcoins to Pantera in exchange for equity in their fund management company -- which, like SMBIT and PBP, will make money for the managers no matter what happens to the bitcoin price.

Bitpay stated that they do not keep any bitcoins themselves.  So, who are those "Wall Street' investors?

[ Banks/Wall Street ] may first try a Newly launched coin but that will probably fail.

It is quite likely that banks and/or credit card companies will eventually adopt the offline key/address generation method and crypto-signed "digital checks", which is the only part of the crytocurrency concept that is obviously a win.  However, a bank-managed crytpocurrency will not need any of the other parts of the Bitcoin protocol, such as mining and distributed confirmation by voting; and therefore would be much faster and more resource-efficient (hence cheaper to operate, hence could drive Bitcoin out of the "market" just by making more profit with lower fees).

Indeed, by negating some of Bitcoin's "features" (such as irreversibility, anonymity, and immunity to confiscation) such a BankCoin will be better than Bitcoin from the consumer and/or law enforcement viewpoints.  Once such a law- and consumer-friendly BankCoin is available, governments will surely outlaw the "Bitcoin International Bank" (the miner network) for not complying with AML, KYC, etc. 

I would hate this outcome, but I can't see why it could not happen.

[Vlad2Vlad]

I just spent a few minutes learning about IXcoin advertised in your signature. From the information I have been able to gather, it seems to be one of the least useful or innovative coins in existence, but your signature says it is the next Bitcoin. Your theory of Bitcoin's death by centralization seems plausible, but in light of your absurd endorsement of IXcoin, your credibility is diminished. If I am wrong, please show me why.

It's funny, everyone says that [and I can see why] but do you realize what you just said?

You just said Bitcoin is one of the least useful and innovative coins.

So you must not know yet [what open source means] that I can put any "innovation" and "features" into iXcoin, which is exactly what I plan to do with Colored Coins, Counter Party and any other wonderful thing that comes out.  

And I'll do it ahead of Bitcoin cause iXcoin has no red tape and no Foundation to get in the way.

iXcoin is the only TWIN of Bitcoin.

But it's better, it's more liquid, with all 21 million coins done in the next 4 months, it has ZERO bad press and no horrible actors and image problems and it is more evenly distributed than Bitcoin.

So whatever you think Bitcoin is, iXcoin is exactly that and then better and soon, iXcoin will be much more advanced than any coin, even Bitcoin, while being one of few coins offering an ultra secure network.

Now if you were JP Morgan, wouldn't you notice this and use it to compete with Bitcoin, just in case hi-jacking Bitcoin doesn't work out as planned, or in case 2 coins is better [short term]?

[Siegfried]

I just spent a few minutes learning about IXcoin advertised in your signature. From the information I have been able to gather, it seems to be one of the least useful or innovative coins in existence, but your signature says it is the next Bitcoin. Your theory of Bitcoin's death by centralization seems plausible, but in light of your absurd endorsement of IXcoin, your credibility is diminished. If I am wrong, please show me why.

It's funny, everyone says that [and I can see why] but do you realize what you just said?

You just said Bitcoin is one of the least useful and innovative coins.

So you must not know yet [what open source means] that I can put any "innovation" and "features" into iXcoin, which is exactly what I plan to do with Colored Coins, Counter Party and any other wonderful thing that comes out.  

And I'll do it ahead of Bitcoin cause iXcoin has no red tape and no Foundation to get in the way.

iXcoin is the only TWIN of Bitcoin.

But it's better, it's more liquid, with all 21 million coins done in the next 4 months, it has ZERO bad press and no horrible actors and image problems and it is more evenly distributed than Bitcoin.

So whatever you think Bitcoin is, iXcoin is exactly that and then better and soon, iXcoin will be much more advanced than any coin, even Bitcoin, while being one of few coins offering an ultra secure network.

Now if you were JP Morgan, wouldn't you notice this and use it to compete with Bitcoin, just in case hi-jacking Bitcoin doesn't work out as planned, or in case 2 coins is better [short term]?

Bitcoin is the most useful because it can actually be used to buy things from thousands of merchants online and around the world, and it is the most innovative because it was the first cryptocurrency.


Is iXcoin ultra-secure because of merge-mining?

Where can I find information about the current distribution and usage of iXcoin?

What is the best way to acquire iXcoin?

Are you really going to design/implement all of those advanced features yourself or is there a high-quality team working on it?

[Vlad2Vlad]

This is not an iXcoin thread.

If you want to discuss iXcoin there are lots of ways to do it.

Thanks.

[show_off]

Sadly I only have 2 bitcoin in total

[rpietila]

This is not an iXcoin thread.

If you want to discuss iXcoin there are lots of ways to do it.

Thanks.

Good that you both realize it!

Otherwise Vlad2Vlad contribution is welcome.

But I find it truly impossible to believe that any coin would have a more equal distribution than Bitcoin with its 1,400 owners owning 50%. Does any coin come even close?

[Vlad2Vlad]

This is not an iXcoin thread.

If you want to discuss iXcoin there are lots of ways to do it.

Thanks.

Good that you both realize it!

Otherwise Vlad2Vlad contribution is welcome.

But I find it truly impossible to believe that any coin would have a more equal distribution than Bitcoin with its 1,400 owners owning 50%. Does any coin come even close?

To be honest I'm only guessing.

The reasons are this.

-  BTC had an ultra low mining difficulty period for around 2 years and even after that there was maybe 1 additional year with fairly low mining difficulty, and given there were few miners there was a lot of Bitcoins going in very few wallets.

-  By contrast, iXcoin, only had low difficulty for around 6 months after-which merge mining kicked in and it became very hard to mine IXC in large quantities and the number of merge miners over the last 2 years numbered easily in the tens of thousands or possibly a lot higher.  That's a long time and a lot of people who have accumulated some IXC.

-  Also, IXC has been seen as a dead or worthless coin so people have not accumulated (bought) it in large quantities and neither have miners sold off the little iXcoin they may have had.  As opposed to BTC which was the only game in town so the people who were into cryptos had little else to buy.

For these reasons I think IXC has at least 10,000-50,000 individuals [and maybe well over 100,000] with at least a few hundred [to a few thousand] IXC in their wallets which they've mostly forgotten about, cause it wasn't worth selling nor was it ever a hot or pumped coin to consider swapping out for a different coin.

So imagine if that many people had that many Bitcoins, if Bitcoin created some 10,000 to 50,000 [or more] multi millionaires.  That would have a massive uplifting effect on all cryptos (more than even Bitcoin has] and on the economy as well.


Which leads me back to the hidden message in iXcoin:  "The Twin to Lift up the Colonies".

Before anyone laughs and dismisses that hidden message, remember, Bitcoin also has a hidden message in the dev's name:  "Clearly Thinking inside the Foundation."

I wish I had the money cause I would pay someone to do the same research you have done for Bitcoin.  Because it does make sense to me but without proof it's hard to really stand behind it with any conviction.

[Rassah]

Translation:  Vlad was right and Bitcoin is very poorly distributed with the large majority of wealth in the hands of a few, thus making Bitcoin very much centralized and eerily similar to a Fiat 2.0.

The awesome thing about Proof of Work versus Proof of Stake is that this wealth centralization does not equal control/power centralization over bitcoin. Miners are still in control. Had Bitcoin been Proof of Stake, I'd be worried.

[Vlad2Vlad]

Translation:  Vlad was right and Bitcoin is very poorly distributed with the large majority of wealth in the hands of a few, thus making Bitcoin very much centralized and eerily similar to a Fiat 2.0.

The awesome thing about Proof of Work versus Proof of Stake is that this wealth centralization does not equal control/power centralization over bitcoin. Miners are still in control. Had Bitcoin been Proof of Stake, I'd be worried.

That's only right in theory.  Unfortunately it fails in the real world.

Money begets Power.  And there's already a massive anonymous pool growing at a massive pace.

You wanna guess who's probably running that pool?

Hint:  Banks were getting bids from ASICS manufacturers a while ago.

And the big money of the world organize coups all the time of entire nations.  How hard do you think it would be for these people to take over just 1 of the 3 larger pools.

It's gonna be a cake-walk to control every aspect of Bitcoin [or Any Coin that Rises in its place]:  From Mining to Ownership to The Foundation [the Bitcoin Protocol].


In fact, it's already done.