Why switching to mBTC won't increase Bitcoin price.

[flynn]

Here is a handy table for those that need it.

Code:

        BTC     milli BTC      micro BTC      Satoshis        nano BTC
----------   -----------   ------------   -----------   -------------
1.00000000   1,000.00000   1,000,000.00   100,000,000   1,000,000,000
0.10000000     100.00000     100,000.00    10,000,000     100,000,000
0.01000000      10.00000      10,000.00     1,000,000      10,000,000
0.00100000       1.00000       1,000.00       100,000       1,000,000
0.00010000       0.10000         100.00        10,000         100,000
0.00001000       0.01000          10.00         1,000          10,000
0.00000100       0.00100           1.00           100           1,000
0.00000010       0.00010           0.10            10             100
0.00000001       0.00001           0.01             1              10

I understand that a protocol change would be needed to get a resolution smaller than the Satoshi.
But I may be wrong.

[zimmah]

stop making treads with the sole purpose of complaining that BTC is not at $10,000 yet. It will happen eventually, but it's not likely to happen overnight, or this month for that matter.

Come back next year or so.

Some people are just so impatient these days.

[William Wood]

The only thing I have ever agreed with "revans" about is the scarcity illusion with Bitcion.  Something that is "infinitely" divisible is not scarce.

What you are saying about scarcity is in contradiction with its very meaning. Scarcity is about quantity, not divisibility. If there was only one kilogram of rice on earth, the ability to divide it between everyone on the planet would not magically make it abundant : everyone would have some rice, but a quantity so infinitesimal that they better find something else if they don't want to starve to death.

[bitpop]

So m is micro what milli?

[bitpop]

Oh u is micro. That's gonna confuse anyone that never used utorrent

[BurtW]

m is standard for milli
µ is standard for micro, but if you cannot type a µ character then u is standard for micro
n is standard for nano

#1 reason for using nBTC is that it will make everyone will feel very rich because they can easily own millions of nBTC!

[GigaCoin]

mBTC main argument is for bitcoin utility as a currency.

mBTC 2nd argument was to help fuel mainstream investment, since $1 looks more appealing than $1000 (similar to 1 ounce gold bar vs 1 TTbar)

[Mjbmonetarymetals]

The only thing I have ever agreed with "revans" about is the scarcity illusion with Bitcion.  Something that is "infinitely" divisible is not scarce.

If you could divide a cake into an infinite number of pieces, do you have more cake?.

mbtc is a compromise to folk that need to feel like they have more of something than they have, what the need to start adding extra layers of confusion onto something that already has the average person confused. If you asked me how many btc I have with - 100 mbtc - 100 microbtc -100 nanobtc I wouldn't have a clue 

[Jcw188]

The thing I like about moving to mBTC is that you can own a whole bitcoin then instead of now a bitcoin is fairly expensive. It's like a stock split where the value is not increasing but makes it more palatable to own a decent number of shares.

[boogi]

so when does it get decided to make the change.

[drewster]

It will have nothing to do with anything, except in making some of the numbers easier for people to understand.

With publicly traded companies, companies often split the stock to bring the price down.  For example a stock at $90 per share might do a 4:1 split to drop the price to $22.50 per share.  Nobody makes money from a stock split (except whoever is actually handling the split gets fees for the work), but because on most exchanges, investors need to buy stocks in multiples of 100 shares.  So, bringing the minimum investment down to $2250 from $9000 makes the stock accessible to smaller investors.

If the value of bitcoin were to climb to $10,000/BTC, many people will find it annoying to have to be typing BTC0.0001 to buy a candy bar, and people will do the things people do with numbers with lots of zeros before or after the decimal point, and make errors in order of magnitude.  For this reason, mBTC or perhaps uBTC will make it more convenient.

Having "normal looking" numbers might help demand somewhat, however, as that will seem less hard to understand for some.

I have created numerous threads asking people exactly how Bitcoin is supposed to reach the $10,000 mark.  By what method.  Pages of responses all say "We need to switch to mBTC, which will encourage more people to purchase BTC, which will in turn push the price up".  It dawned on me today that switching to mBTC won't necessarily do a thing to increase price of Bitcoin.  In fact it may cause it to go down.

In my understanding, in order for Bitcoin price to go up, there needs to be (1) increased demand and (2) lack of availability, at any given time.  This is why the price shot up when China stepped in.  Purchases were still mostly in whole Bitcoins, everyone was scrambling to get one, and there were daily shortages.

Switching to mBTC will actually act as a psychological multiplier of increased availability.  Psychologically, people no longer "need to buy 1 whole bitcoin".  Therefore instead of 100 people buying 100 Bitcoins, you could very well have 100,000 people buying 1 Bitcoin.  And they could, theoretically all do so, at an unchanging price of $650 per BTC.  Scarcity goes right out the door.  When something is not scarce, there is no competition, and when there is no competition there is no shortage of supply.  When  there is no shortage of supply, there is no increase in price.  

In order for the price of Bitcoin to rise, there has to be a lack of supply.  The only thing I have ever agreed with "revans" about is the scarcity illusion with Bitcion.  Something that is "infinitely" divisible is not scarce.  Only if Bitcoins become (1) scarce (2) in comparison to the number of people who want to buy them at (3) any given period of time, will the price begin to nudge up.  If everyone can get a portion of a bitcoin at $650, there is nothing which will push the price of 1 bitcoin to $10,000.  You would need billions of people scrambling to buy Bitcoin in waves, and not enough people selling, for the price to rise.  

Thoughts?

[dynodog]

corporations have been "splitting" their stock price since the beginnings of the stock market.  It's basic human psychology.  For whatever reason, people don't like to pay $700 for a stock (or for a bitcoin).  That is why master card, for example, recently had a 10 for 1 stock split, which immediately resulted in a big increase in the stock's value (stock split from $780 to $78).  Picture a new bitcoin user goes to a bitcoin atm.  What's more palatable - getting 135 mBTC for your $100 bill or 0.135 bitcoin? For a consumer, isn't it much easier to wrap your head around paying 7.5 mBTC for a coffee as opposed to 0.0075 bitcoin.  To me, bitcoin advocates should all be pushing for exchanges, ATMs, etc to quote bitcoin in terms of mBTC.  The scarcity argument you make doesn't make sense in this case although clearly one of the big draws to btc is that it is limited in nature.

[Siegfried]

The problem with mBTC is, four letters/syllables, awkward to say, ugly to write/type. All other major currencies use a three-letter abbreviation. Using mBTC would be more of a defect than having to use decimals.

[bitpop]

I vote nbtc beginning January 1, 2014

[cryptobanks]

m is standard for milli
µ is standard for micro, but if you cannot type a µ character then u is standard for micro
n is standard for nano

#1 reason for using nBTC is that it will make everyone will feel very rich because they can easily own millions of nBTC!

Windows Hold alt and pres 230... in case anyone ever wanted to know

[bitpop]

m is standard for milli
µ is standard for micro, but if you cannot type a µ character then u is standard for micro
n is standard for nano

#1 reason for using nBTC is that it will make everyone will feel very rich because they can easily own millions of nBTC!

Windows Hold alt and pres 230... in case anyone ever wanted to know

I cant do it

[BittBurger]

The scarcity argument you make doesn't make sense in this case although clearly one of the big draws to btc is that it is limited in nature.

Can you explain why it doesn't make sense?  Everyone likes to say "wrong" but nobody gives an explanation why its wrong.   I just end up writing the same thing 50 different ways, and not getting a single explanation why its wrong, in response.   The only thing that can push 1 whole bitcoin price up, is a lack of supply and an overabundance of demand.   Why will switching to mBTC, which alerts people to an "infinite" supply of sub-1BTC purchases, going to do a damn thing to push the price of 1 BTC up?  It may ... but it doesn't *have* to.  It can, in fact, provide 100,000 people with the ability to buy divisions of 1 BTC at a 1 BTC price of $650 without the value of 1BTC going up even one penny.  That was the argument I stated, and I fail to see why its false?

stop making treads with the sole purpose of complaining that BTC is not at $10,000 yet. It will happen eventually, but it's not likely to happen overnight, or this month for that matter. Come back next year or so. Some people are just so impatient these days.

Why don't you actually read what I write, so that you don't make inane comments like this.  Nothing in my post (or previous posts) was intended to "complain that we're not at 10,000 yet".  Open your eyes and take the time to actually read what's written.  Maybe this is why I am not getting any intelligent responses.

[bitpop]

The scarcity argument you make doesn't make sense in this case although clearly one of the big draws to btc is that it is limited in nature.

Can you explain why it doesn't make sense?

Everyone likes to say "wrong" but nobody gives an explanation why its wrong.

I just end up writing the same thing 50 different ways, and not getting a single explanation why its wrong, in response.

The only thing that can push 1 whole bitcoin price up, is a lack of supply and an overabundance of demand.

Why will switching to mBTC, which alerts people to an "infinite" supply of sub-1BTC purchases, going to do a damn thing to push the price of 1 BTC up?

It may ... but it doesn't *have* to.  It can, in fact, provide 100,000 people with the ability to buy divisions of 1 BTC at a 1 BTC price of $650 without the value of 1BTC going up even one penny.

That was the argument I stated, and I fail to see why its false?

Why would it push the price up? Simple. Each mbtc would be sold for $1 and that would push the final btc price much higher.

[BittBurger]

Why would it push the price up? Simple. Each mbtc would be sold for $1 and that would push the final btc price much higher.

The only way 1 mBTC would sell for $1 is if one whole BTC is *ALREADY* priced insanely high.  So no ... your argument doesn't work.  
We're discussing right now.  When one mBTC is worth $x.xxxxxxx1.  
We are not discussing 100 years from now when an mBTC is priced at $1.00
I want to know how it gets to that point.

Next?

[kuverty]

Why would it push the price up? Simple. Each mbtc would be sold for $1 and that would push the final btc price much higher.

The only way 1 mBTC would sell for $1 is if one whole BTC is *ALREADY* priced insanely high.  So no ... your argument doesn't work.  
We're discussing right now.  When one mBTC is worth $x.xxxxxxx1.  
We are not discussing 100 years from now when an mBTC is priced at $1.00
I want to know how it gets to that point.

Next?

What? 1 mBTC is about 0.7 $ at the moment and has already been worth more than 1 $.