The fifth growth spurt

[wachtwoord]

I want to show everyone that predicting what will happen next based on what happened in April is very shortsighted.



Basically we just experienced the 4th growth spurt (or as some people call it: "bubble")

1: to 10^0 between OCT '10 and FEB '11
2: to 10^1 between APR '11 and JUN '11
3: to 10^2 between OCT '12 and APR '13
4: To 10^3 between OCT '13 and DEC '13

The only constant is that every time it's to the next power of 10. The duration of the spurt isn't constant, the pop isn't either and the duration until the next spurt is also different every time.

Look at the pull back for #1. it hardly looks like a pull back and is followed by the next growth spurt 2 months later. That could happen right now too as we start shooting for 10^4 (10000) very fast. The pull back after #2 however was very violent and it took 16 months for the next growth spurt. That could happen as well.

[justusranvier]

The pull back after #2 however was very violent and it took 16 months for the next growth spurt. That could happen as well.

I think #2 is an outlier due to what was going on during those 16 months.

It was a nearly-constant stream of high profile Bitcoin sites getting hacked (or sometimes "hacked") and losing customer funds. Mt Gox and Bitcoinica being the largest examples.

[nobbynobbynoob]

The pull back after #2 however was very violent and it took 16 months for the next growth spurt. That could happen as well.

I think #2 is an outlier due to what was going on during those 16 months.

It was a nearly-constant stream of high profile Bitcoin sites getting hacked (or sometimes "hacked") and losing customer funds. Mt Gox and Bitcoinica being the largest examples.

Also, inflationary pressure from the BTC50 block reward and miners being able to sell profitably at ever lower prices?

[accord01]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

[Voodah]

I do agree we've had the growth spurt. It doesn't mean we've had the final capitulation though.

[Philj]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

I disagree. Each burst has gone down to between half and a third of the peak (except for the June 2011 peak which went very low). This last peak was ~1200, so finding support between 400 and 600 would follow the previous trend.

[wachtwoord]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

I don't think you read (or comprehended) the OP. This growth spurt (#4) could easily be like growth spurt #1 and consolidate at current levels for 1 more month before taking of again to 10^4*. It could also be like #2, drop to $75 (the equivalent of $32->$2 then) and take 16 months to take of again. Since there is no pattern or constant whatsoever (except the exponential growth targets) it could also do something completely different. To show this is the purpose of this thread

* In fact, to me #4 seems to resemble #1 the most as #2 and #3 both overshot their exponential growth targets (10^1 and 10^2 respectively) with a factor 2 and 3 respectively. #1 just made it to 10^0 just as #4 just made it to 10^3

[accord01]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

I don't think you read (or comprehended) the OP. This growth spurt (#4) could easily be like growth spurt #1 and consolidate at current levels for 1 more month before taking of again to 10^4*. It could also be like #2, drop to $75 (the equivalent of $32->$2 then) and take 16 months to take of again. Since there is no pattern or constant whatsoever (except the exponential growth targets) it could also do something completely different. To show this is the purpose of this thread

* In fact, to me #4 seems to resemble #1 the most as #2 and #3 both overshot their exponential growth targets (10^1 and 10^2 respectively) with a factor 2 and 3 respectively. #1 just made it to 10^0 just as #4 just made it to 10^3

You're right I did no comprehend.  Yes it could go down to sub 100, that is what I'm saying.  I'm also trying to say that there is a chance (although small but not as small as one would think) that there is no spurt #5.  This could be the end and the beginning of a multi year downtrend to oblivion.

[GigaCoin]

Thanks for that analysis, well thought out and it's great to look at the chart history from this perspective.

[windjc]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

I don't think you read (or comprehended) the OP. This growth spurt (#4) could easily be like growth spurt #1 and consolidate at current levels for 1 more month before taking of again to 10^4*. It could also be like #2, drop to $75 (the equivalent of $32->$2 then) and take 16 months to take of again. Since there is no pattern or constant whatsoever (except the exponential growth targets) it could also do something completely different. To show this is the purpose of this thread

* In fact, to me #4 seems to resemble #1 the most as #2 and #3 both overshot their exponential growth targets (10^1 and 10^2 respectively) with a factor 2 and 3 respectively. #1 just made it to 10^0 just as #4 just made it to 10^3

You're right I did no comprehend.  Yes it could go down to sub 100, that is what I'm saying.  I'm also trying to say that there is a chance (although small but not as small as one would think) that there is no spurt #5.  This could be the end and the beginning of a multi year downtrend to oblivion.

Yes. And you could be run over by a car tomorrow.

[DPoS]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

you want cheap coins and u mad

[Peter R]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

I don't think you read (or comprehended) the OP. This growth spurt (#4) could easily be like growth spurt #1 and consolidate at current levels for 1 more month before taking of again to 10^4*. It could also be like #2, drop to $75 (the equivalent of $32->$2 then) and take 16 months to take of again. Since there is no pattern or constant whatsoever (except the exponential growth targets) it could also do something completely different. To show this is the purpose of this thread

* In fact, to me #4 seems to resemble #1 the most as #2 and #3 both overshot their exponential growth targets (10^1 and 10^2 respectively) with a factor 2 and 3 respectively. #1 just made it to 10^0 just as #4 just made it to 10^3

You're right I did no comprehend.  Yes it could go down to sub 100, that is what I'm saying.  I'm also trying to say that there is a chance (although small but not as small as one would think) that there is no spurt #5.  This could be the end and the beginning of a multi year downtrend to oblivion.

Everyone agrees, accord01, that the bitcoin experiment could collapse.  This has been a risk that every single investor has had to weigh since the genesis block was published on Jan 03, 2009.  But like Nassim Taleb says, the expected life of a complex system (like the Fed or like bitcoin) is on the same order of magnitude as how long it has already survived for.  So each day as the blockchain grows longer, bitcoin becomes stronger.  

If we *knew* that bitcoin was going to become a successful global currency, then the price would already be 5 figures.  The price is significantly discounted right now to reflect the fact that indeed, like you say, the experiment could fail.  

But every new user that decides to give this game-changing technology a chance, makes bitcoin a little more likely to succeed.

[TERA]

It's a lot easier for nothing to become to something than for 10,000,000,000 to become 100,000,000,000. There are complications in moving gigantic sums of money and winning over those types of investors, versus joe schmoe handing over his pocket change to buy a pizza. That's why the initial growth was able to be so fast.

[Miz4r]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

It doesn't need to do anything. Where do you guys get this crap from that bitcoin 'needs' to do something before going this or that way? Bitcoin doesn't care about your neediness.

[oda.krell]

One of the best original posts in here for a long time. Thanks, wachtwoord.

There's additional detail to be added, and I'm not sure if I completely agree with your (growth spurt) count or the exact choice of the exponential series you see, but your post is much appreciated, if for no other reason than the following: establishing a much better word for what we see than "bubble".

For some irrational reason this board (bulls and bears alike) keep referring to the periods of extreme growth (up to a new ATH), subsequent correction (down to a capitulation low), followed by continuation somewhere between the two previous extremes, as "bubbles". Conceptualizing them as "growth spurts" is much more accurate.

[oda.krell]

This is a joke.  The last bubble/correction hasn't even begun yet.  It needs to get back to 200-300 before its next move of up or down.

It doesn't need to do anything. Where do you guys get this crap from that bitcoin 'needs' to do something before going this or that way? Bitcoin doesn't care about your neediness.

It's been a mantra of board members as long as I'm on here (not that long, but long enough to see it recurring). It's what evolve and even Rampion kept on saying after the April peak, that it has to "deflate all the way". I kept arguing against that notion over and over again... probably a misunderstood lesson from other markets, in particular what is called "bubbles" in those, applied crudely (and incorrectly) to the growth model of Bitcoin.

[Luckybit]

It's a lot easier for nothing to become to something than for 10,000,000,000 to become 100,000,000,000. There are complications in moving gigantic sums of money and winning over those types of investors, versus joe schmoe handing over his pocket change to buy a pizza. That's why the initial growth was able to be so fast.

That is a myth. There are hedge funds who move that kind of money for a living and institutional investors have trillions. It's a lot harder winning over joe schmoe who has to have the technology explained to them than professional investors who have been studying Bitcoin all year and just waiting.

[Dragonkiller]

It's a lot easier for nothing to become to something than for 10,000,000,000 to become 100,000,000,000. There are complications in moving gigantic sums of money and winning over those types of investors, versus joe schmoe handing over his pocket change to buy a pizza. That's why the initial growth was able to be so fast.

That is a myth. There are hedge funds who move that kind of money for a living and institutional investors have trillions. It's a lot harder winning over joe schmoe who has to have the technology explained to them than professional investors who have been studying Bitcoin all year and just waiting.

I agree.

You can go from 10 billion market cap to 100 billion market cap in two ways:

1. Either the average investment is now 10x larger or;
2. 10x as many people invest.

With regards to Joe Schmoe, I've been doing some rough calculations; if we consider only the US:

~120 million households

About 50% are able to/have funds to invest in Bitcoin (~50% have investments in the stock market)

Currently no more than 150,000 Americans own at least one Bitcoin

So to go from $1,000 to $10,000 we will need 10x as many people to invest in Bitcoin (assuming they invest the same amount; although the average investment size now is bigger than it was a year ago).

That's still only 1.5 million households (2.5% of the total households that have investments in the stock market).

I think with the media attention etc it is very likely that we will get 10x as many people investing. I don't think growth will slow down until we're at about 1 trillion market cap.

[wachtwoord]

Thanks for that analysis, well thought out and it's great to look at the chart history from this perspective.

One of the best original posts in here for a long time. Thanks, wachtwoord.

Thank you both

your post is much appreciated, if for no other reason than the following: establishing a much better word for what we see than "bubble".

For some irrational reason this board (bulls and bears alike) keep referring to the periods of extreme growth (up to a new ATH), subsequent correction (down to a capitulation low), followed by continuation somewhere between the two previous extremes, as "bubbles". Conceptualizing them as "growth spurts" is much more accurate.

I agree completely

There's additional detail to be added, and I'm not sure if I completely agree with your (growth spurt) count or the exact choice of the exponential series you see

If you want to contribute that's more than welcome. I agree my analysis lacks details and my identification is based on analysis with the naked eye rather than a clear identification method. My goal with the OP was mainly to share my general viewpoint and I'm glad that has come across

[GigaCoin]

"spurt" is kind of a weird word if you think about it 

[BittBurger]

the expected life of a complex system (like the Fed or like bitcoin) is on the same order of magnitude as how long it has already survived for.  
So each day as the blockchain grows longer, bitcoin becomes stronger.

Exactly.

Funny how some people don't grasp this isnt it?

-B-

[kwoody]

I wanna spurt all over your blockchain, baby