rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;)

[thoughtfan]

...

My fear is as the realisation dawns on the bigger players that Bitcoin is 'the one' that it will be pumped by banks and central banks who can magic large sums of fiat into existence with which to buy bitcoin (and who may even dump gold temporarily), creating the ultimate bitcoin megabubble so that billions of latecomer ordinary people and businesses buying their first bitcoins will be shafted as the great bitcoin dump starts, into pms, into land, artwork etc. into a 'better' crypto - assets that had been neglected for the period bitcoin was so attractive, even back into fiat (they could use this point to launch more 'stable' 'new crypto-dollar or new crypto-pound etc.) until bitcoin finds a stable long-term pricepoint well below (even orders of magnitude below) the hyped price the masses bought at.  Problem is of course nobody beforehand can know what this price will be.  We would still be in a much better world than today because with bitcoin established fiats (old or new) will not be that attractive but if central banks are deliberately hyperinflating forcing people into crypto on their pump stage people could end up with 1000th of what they had before.

...

Extrapoloting...

In the same way that morpheus tells neo that he won't have to cash out at BTC $10000 (or whatever). Neither will the big guys have to. I think when if the time comes that BTC is inherently worth that much its too late to worry about buying or selling it (from a speculative investment POV) its more about how much you have (how much you got when the getting was good). So I don't think there will be a final crash, I think this line of reasoning justifies the 'exponential pulse' pattern we see now. The value that fiat represents (if its going to) won't smoothly migrate from fiat into BTC. If its going to it would likely follow this pattern as people get in cheap and then take profits. All the profit takers do is delay the inevitable, the transfer of wealth continues, and gets ahead of itself. When I saw it the first time, it seemed like a bubble that burst. The second time I thought wow, it did it again, the third time I thought, this is ridiculous, this kind of repeated behaviour is entirely without justification and absolutely will not continue.

And yet here we are all wondering whether this is the next one. Many here will be as cynical as I. Pah we;ve seen it all before, like anyone is going to get suckered into this silly pump/dump cycle again. (Just like we thought last time?)

How many millions of people out there are still entirely oblivious to all of this and ready to fuel this go-round?

What about the next one?

Is this really 'institutional investors' stage?

Strange times.

The 'final crash' idea is a new one to me and I would like to think it won't happen.  But:

If the big banks and central banks realise bitcoin is going to happen whether they like it or not;
If some of the world's wealthiest are beginning to put serious money into bitcoin both increasing its value and devaluing the fiat they're taking it out of;
If they are realising that it's game over for the fiat game as has been played for the best part of the last 100 years;
If they know they currently, but if they're not careful temporarily, have more buying power than anybody else;

...why they would not deliberately pump, forcing everybody out of fiat only to then diversify into pms and other assets at the top, deliberately dumping bitcoin to promote their new fiat currencies?  It will be their last chance to keep as much of their advantage (in terms of relative wealth) because the days of 'magicing' money into existence will be over.

Thinks will end up getting complex very very quickly.

Build your supernode on time. Sign up for the Malla conference in June 27-29.!

Been really busy Risto and not going to make it to Malla this time.  Good to hear the development is going well   All the best with it.  Look forward to hearing the reports.

[1714957135]

1714957135

[1714957135]

1714957135

[1714957135]

1714957135

[1714957135]

1714957135

[1714957135]

1714957135

[molecular]

According to my research, the average sum a person would invest in bitcoins is $1000. Therefore, 4 million new users are needed in addition to the 1 million current ones to reach $7000.

That seems like a lot to ask for the next 7 months. I think chances are some bigger investment funds are going to have a big impact though.

That is only 25.8% monthly growth in userbase. Which happens to coincide with the long-term slope of the price appreciation curve.

With this adoption growth, without the logistic slowing, we would be at 2 billion people in March, 2017.

My suspicion is before we get anywhere near 2 billion people using bitcoins that there will be factors at play that will dwarf the impact on price arising out of adoption and its use in day-to-day transactions. 

My fear is as the realisation dawns on the bigger players that Bitcoin is 'the one' that it will be pumped by banks and central banks who can magic large sums of fiat into existence with which to buy bitcoin (and who may even dump gold temporarily), creating the ultimate bitcoin megabubble so that billions of latecomer ordinary people and businesses buying their first bitcoins will be shafted as the great bitcoin dump starts, into pms, into land, artwork etc. into a 'better' crypto - assets that had been neglected for the period bitcoin was so attractive, even back into fiat (they could use this point to launch more 'stable' 'new crypto-dollar or new crypto-pound etc.) until bitcoin finds a stable long-term pricepoint well below (even orders of magnitude below) the hyped price the masses bought at.  Problem is of course nobody beforehand can know what this price will be.  We would still be in a much better world than today because with bitcoin established fiats (old or new) will not be that attractive but if central banks are deliberately hyperinflating forcing people into crypto on their pump stage people could end up with 1000th of what they had before.

Btw, I'm only just exploring this idea so please point out if there's an obvious reason this is not how the future looks!

If that happens we might not end up with the assets / bitcoin and all the stuff in the most desirable hands, true. However what makes me have a positive long-term outlook (for humanity, I personally might be gone by the time we see the fruits of this) is the fact that we will then have transitioned to a sound money regime, which should have the effect of a fairer, more level playing-field and much a more efficient economy that puts much less strain on our human and natural resources than what we currently have (the fiat-fuelled continuous growth paradigm that keeps producing these cancerous escapades and keeps hurting us).

So even if entities that don't "deserve" it end up with the most wealth initially (by the way you described), after the transition is complete that wealth will dissipate from them if they make bad decisions towards the people that make good decisions. If they make "good" decisions on the other hand, they get to keep and grow their wealth, and rightly so. Noone will be bailed out by the taxpayer as is the case now (no more inflation tax) and everybody will suffer or enjoy the consequences of their actions, as should be.

I hope it'll work out and I hope I'll be able to see and live it, too. Crypto is our best shot at this.

This view may be simplistic or even naive, but for lack of better options I hold it (and bitcoin, too ;-) )

[cAPSLOCK]

Is  that not the very kind of unshakable belief that currency relies on to have value?

I think it could be argued both ways that an almost fanatical devotion, belief and desire for BTC to succeed will be what supports it through the dark times and ultimately helps realise that fate.

My worry is that there might not be enough of those people for us to reach critical mass and get the inertia to carry this through to adoption by the masses. The kind of people whom when you mention bitcoin, they start to glaze over because you are making them confront their fragile world view. People don't want things to change, they don't want to think. They just want to go about their business. Those are the people that could end up being the deciding factor as to whether BTC becomes new money, or remains a niche system on the edges of the internet that only dreamers, radicals and geeks ever use.

I don't think we will need to worry about that.  The momentum is here.  Digital money is a sure thing, and every day that goes by without bitcoin being broken, or replaced means it is most likely going to be bitcoin.  The development i under way.  It's all just a matter of time.  I'm not saying there cannot be surprises in store.  In fact I think they are a guarantee.

[pinksheep]

Thinks will end up getting complex very very quickly.

Build your supernode on time. Sign up for the Malla conference in June 27-29.!

Forgive my ignorance, but what is a supernode?

[bitcoinsrus]

Thinks will end up getting complex very very quickly.

Build your supernode on time. Sign up for the Malla conference in June 27-29.!

Forgive my ignorance, but what is a supernode?

If you own a node, you can get fees from transactions.  You help maintain the network.  Mr rpietila has super nodes and can explain this better than I can.

[molecular]

And yet here we are all wondering whether this is the next one. Many here will be as cynical as I. Pah we;ve seen it all before, like anyone is going to get suckered into this silly pump/dump cycle again. (Just like we thought last time?)

It would be quite silly if we wouldn't regularly end up much higher than where we started from after the "crash". Those "bubbles" don't burst all the way. Noone who got "suckered in" and held lost any money (with the exception of the last cycle, of course, but that might turn out to not be an exception either). Only those buying in at above the post-crash value of the "last bitcoin bubble" will have made a bad decision. I think we have at least 2 more to go.

How many millions of people out there are still entirely oblivious to all of this and ready to fuel this go-round?

What about the next one?

Is this really 'institutional investors' stage?

Strange times.

I think there are many billions of people out there who still don't understand crypto. Don't you worry, it's not an easy concept and it takes people a lot of time to wrap their heads around the concept. (see Peter Schiff, who seems to be quite intelligent, but took his time (if he managed to wrap his head around bitcoin) despite the fact that there were certainly enough people offering to explain to him).

I think we have at least 2 more to go.

Strange times, indeed.

[cAPSLOCK]

According to my research, the average sum a person would invest in bitcoins is $1000. Therefore, 4 million new users are needed in addition to the 1 million current ones to reach $7000.

That seems like a lot to ask for the next 7 months. I think chances are some bigger investment funds are going to have a big impact though.

That is only 25.8% monthly growth in userbase. Which happens to coincide with the long-term slope of the price appreciation curve.

With this adoption growth, without the logistic slowing, we would be at 2 billion people in March, 2017.

My suspicion is before we get anywhere near 2 billion people using bitcoins that there will be factors at play that will dwarf the impact on price arising out of adoption and its use in day-to-day transactions. 

My fear is as the realisation dawns on the bigger players that Bitcoin is 'the one' that it will be pumped by banks and central banks who can magic large sums of fiat into existence with which to buy bitcoin (and who may even dump gold temporarily), creating the ultimate bitcoin megabubble so that billions of latecomer ordinary people and businesses buying their first bitcoins will be shafted as the great bitcoin dump starts, into pms, into land, artwork etc. into a 'better' crypto - assets that had been neglected for the period bitcoin was so attractive, even back into fiat (they could use this point to launch more 'stable' 'new crypto-dollar or new crypto-pound etc.) until bitcoin finds a stable long-term pricepoint well below (even orders of magnitude below) the hyped price the masses bought at.  Problem is of course nobody beforehand can know what this price will be.  We would still be in a much better world than today because with bitcoin established fiats (old or new) will not be that attractive but if central banks are deliberately hyperinflating forcing people into crypto on their pump stage people could end up with 1000th of what they had before.

Btw, I'm only just exploring this idea so please point out if there's an obvious reason this is not how the future looks!

No... you have outlined a very probable scenario IMO.  I am not so sure we will see such massive manipulation by central banks, but I don't think that will change the outcome.

One point.  In each industry destroyed by distributed networks (music, newsprint, taxi service), the old guard has held on and fought tooth and nail until it was so overwhelmed by the change that it had NO other choice than to adapt and innovate.  Things like record companies had a LOT of money and power to ride out the fight.  Reserve banks have more power than almost anything on earth.  In some ways it is already too late for them.

[AlexGR]

One of the problems in acquiring all the BTCs by using new fiat is that they'll make every BTC holder rich and make BTC very desirable. You can't buy many BTCs without launching the price to the moon and having everyone say "wow" - increasing attraction and buying interest to it. Certainly not millions of BTCs.

The best strategy is to buy their way in through cycles* of FUD/euphoria or mine it.

* These people don't react to the market. They make the market. They make the "news". They make the political decisions that are then broadcasted as "news". If they make a scenario where BTC is painted under a problematic light for a few days they can buy for cheap, sell for high, repeat the FUD by triggering "bad news", rebuy the panic sellers etc etc. Even china "grasped" the fud/buy mechanism and experimented with it.

[thoughtfan]

My fear is as the realisation dawns on the bigger players that Bitcoin is 'the one' that it will be pumped by banks and central banks who can magic large sums of fiat into existence with which to buy bitcoin (and who may even dump gold temporarily), creating the ultimate bitcoin megabubble so that billions of latecomer ordinary people and businesses buying their first bitcoins will be shafted as the great bitcoin dump starts, into pms, into land, artwork etc. into a 'better' crypto - assets that had been neglected for the period bitcoin was so attractive, even back into fiat (they could use this point to launch more 'stable' 'new crypto-dollar or new crypto-pound etc.) until bitcoin finds a stable long-term pricepoint well below (even orders of magnitude below) the hyped price the masses bought at.  Problem is of course nobody beforehand can know what this price will be.  We would still be in a much better world than today because with bitcoin established fiats (old or new) will not be that attractive but if central banks are deliberately hyperinflating forcing people into crypto on their pump stage people could end up with 1000th of what they had before.
...

If that happens we might not end up with the assets / bitcoin and all the stuff in the most desirable hands, true. However what makes me have a positive long-term outlook (for humanity, I personally might be gone by the time we see the fruits of this) is the fact that we will then have transitioned to a sound money regime, which should have the effect of a fairer, more level playing-field and much a more efficient economy that puts much less strain on our human and natural resources than what we currently have (the fiat-fuelled continuous growth paradigm that keeps producing these cancerous escapades and keeps hurting us).

So even if entities that don't "deserve" it end up with the most wealth initially (by the way you described), after the transition is complete that wealth will dissipate from them if they make bad decisions towards the people that make good decisions. If they make "good" decisions on the other hand, they get to keep and grow their wealth, and rightly so. Noone will be bailed out by the taxpayer as is the case now (no more inflation tax) and everybody will suffer or enjoy the consequences of their actions, as should be.

I hope it'll work out and I hope I'll be able to see and live it, too. Crypto is our best shot at this.

This view may be simplistic or even naive, but for lack of better options I hold it (and bitcoin, too ;-) )

I agree molecular and am happy that the longer term will be free of the consequences of the weaponry fiat money has provided governments with to wield against the governed.  I'm beginning to think though that I have been naive in thinking it would all happen fairly smoothly.  I had previously been quite dismissive of the doom 'n gloom scenarios painted where disenfranchised fiat bag holders are literally up in arms against the new wealthy in a kind of apocalyptic scenario.  However I'm now thinking the transition may be rougher and with much more suffering than I had previously thought.

What got me dismayed just in reading Risto's 2 billion reference was the idea that though not a pyramid scheme, the timing and price of buying-in for the vast majority may end up that they lose out big time.

[bitcoinsrus]

And yet here we are all wondering whether this is the next one. Many here will be as cynical as I. Pah we;ve seen it all before, like anyone is going to get suckered into this silly pump/dump cycle again. (Just like we thought last time?)

I think there are many billions of people out there who still don't understand crypto. Don't you worry, it's not an easy concept and it takes people a lot of time to wrap their heads around the concept. (see Peter Schiff, who seems to be quite intelligent, but took his time (if he managed to wrap his head around bitcoin) despite the fact that there were certainly enough people offering to explain to him).

I think we have at least 2 more to go.

Strange times, indeed.

I think people do not understand crypto because they do not follow up on it.  I researched bitcoin when I first heard about it (and this forum really help my understanding).  It is complex because we are used to  a physical source that gets recycled through means of work or effort (jobs and selling stuff).  

It would be nice for people to start programs going to the high schools or colleges and teaching the young minds about this alternative.  I still think people need the effort to research bitcoin because even if they were spoon-fed, they need to be able to want to understand it.

[eat_more_fruit]

My fear is as the realisation dawns on the bigger players that Bitcoin is 'the one' that it will be pumped by banks and central banks who can magic large sums of fiat into existence with which to buy bitcoin (and who may even dump gold temporarily), creating the ultimate bitcoin megabubble so that billions of latecomer ordinary people and businesses buying their first bitcoins will be shafted as the great bitcoin dump starts, into pms, into land, artwork etc. into a 'better' crypto - assets that had been neglected for the period bitcoin was so attractive, even back into fiat (they could use this point to launch more 'stable' 'new crypto-dollar or new crypto-pound etc.) until bitcoin finds a stable long-term pricepoint well below (even orders of magnitude below) the hyped price the masses bought at.  Problem is of course nobody beforehand can know what this price will be.  We would still be in a much better world than today because with bitcoin established fiats (old or new) will not be that attractive but if central banks are deliberately hyperinflating forcing people into crypto on their pump stage people could end up with 1000th of what they had before.
...

If that happens we might not end up with the assets / bitcoin and all the stuff in the most desirable hands, true. However what makes me have a positive long-term outlook (for humanity, I personally might be gone by the time we see the fruits of this) is the fact that we will then have transitioned to a sound money regime, which should have the effect of a fairer, more level playing-field and much a more efficient economy that puts much less strain on our human and natural resources than what we currently have (the fiat-fuelled continuous growth paradigm that keeps producing these cancerous escapades and keeps hurting us).

So even if entities that don't "deserve" it end up with the most wealth initially (by the way you described), after the transition is complete that wealth will dissipate from them if they make bad decisions towards the people that make good decisions. If they make "good" decisions on the other hand, they get to keep and grow their wealth, and rightly so. Noone will be bailed out by the taxpayer as is the case now (no more inflation tax) and everybody will suffer or enjoy the consequences of their actions, as should be.

I hope it'll work out and I hope I'll be able to see and live it, too. Crypto is our best shot at this.

This view may be simplistic or even naive, but for lack of better options I hold it (and bitcoin, too ;-) )

I agree molecular and am happy that the longer term will be free of the consequences of the weaponry fiat money has provided governments with to wield against the governed.  I'm beginning to think though that I have been naive in thinking it would all happen fairly smoothly.  I had previously been quite dismissive of the doom 'n gloom scenarios painted where disenfranchised fiat bag holders are literally up in arms against the new wealthy in a kind of apocalyptic scenario.  However I'm now thinking the transition may be rougher and with much more suffering than I had previously thought.

What got me dismayed just in reading Risto's 2 billion reference was the idea that though not a pyramid scheme, the timing and price of buying-in for the vast majority may end up that they lose out big time.

If Central Bank of nation N were to simply create currency and exchange it for Bitcoin, the effect would be (1) the price of Bitcoin would rise until CB stopped buying, and in no case could it buy all or even a significant portion of the BTC on the market (the more is bought the higher and faster it rises)  (2) the national currency of N would be devalued, instantly vs. Bitcoin, and gradually vs. other fiat currencies.

No CB would do that.  The Fed has stated (Yellen) that it has no authority or responsibiliity over Bitcoin, they are certainly not going to put the dollar at any further risk by pumping BTC. And no CB of any economy that counts, even tiny ones, is run without (a) independence from political pressure, (b) massive internal controls, (c) a clear mandate to protect its own currency. But if, per impossibile, some rogue CB starts trying to accumulate BTC, well, that's great for Bitcoin, see (1) above.

[BTCtrader71]

The 'final crash' idea is a new one to me and I would like to think it won't happen.  But:

If the big banks and central banks realise bitcoin is going to happen whether they like it or not;
If some of the world's wealthiest are beginning to put serious money into bitcoin both increasing its value and devaluing the fiat they're taking it out of;
If they are realising that it's game over for the fiat game as has been played for the best part of the last 100 years;
If they know they currently, but if they're not careful temporarily, have more buying power than anybody else;

...why they would not deliberately pump, forcing everybody out of fiat only to then diversify into pms and other assets at the top, deliberately dumping bitcoin to promote their new fiat currencies?  It will be their last chance to keep as much of their advantage (in terms of relative wealth) because the days of 'magicing' money into existence will be over.

Imagine if Janet Yellen and the rest of the top brass at the Federal Reserve woke up this morning and suddenly grokked everything there is to know about bitcoin, and decided to buy up as much as they could. They would print up some small sum -- 5-10 billion or so, just pocket change for the Fed -- and buy as many bitcoins as they could. Imagine they could get a significant percentage of all bitcoins -- one million or maybe several million. Can you imagine the long term consequences? I seriously doubt that they would do something that ballsy and smart at the same time. But it would be an interesting scenario!

[rpietila]

Thinks will end up getting complex very very quickly.

Build your supernode on time. Sign up for the Malla conference in June 27-29.!

Forgive my ignorance, but what is a supernode?

In this context it means a person with personal crypto holdings valued at least BTC100, plus other qualifications.

[uhoh]

Thinks will end up getting complex very very quickly.

Build your supernode on time. Sign up for the Malla conference in June 27-29.!

Forgive my ignorance, but what is a supernode?

In this context it means a person with personal crypto holdings valued at least BTC100, plus other qualifications.

Just BTC100 makes you a supernode now? things have changed!

[wachtwoord]

Thinks will end up getting complex very very quickly.

Build your supernode on time. Sign up for the Malla conference in June 27-29.!

Forgive my ignorance, but what is a supernode?

In this context it means a person with personal crypto holdings valued at least BTC100, plus other qualifications.

Wasn't it BTC1000 before? BTC100 is only $52k of buying power atm.

[BTCtrader71]

If Central Bank of nation N were to simply create currency and exchange it for Bitcoin, the effect would be (1) the price of Bitcoin would rise until CB stopped buying, and in no case could it buy all or even a significant portion of the BTC on the market (the more is bought the higher and faster it rises)  (2) the national currency of N would be devalued, instantly vs. Bitcoin, and gradually vs. other fiat currencies.

Risto calculated that $4 billion of new investment would drive the price to $7000. It would be interesting to calculate how much $$ it would take to accumulate one or two million bitcoins. At a constant value of $7000, it would take $ 7-14 billion, which is peanuts for the Fed, and would have virtually no effect on the value of the USD (other than the fact that the rest of the world might think the leaders of the Fed were all insane, lol). Of course that much investment would drive the price higher. But I think they could feasibly get a sizeable chunk of all bitcoin in existence, in principle at least. Maybe even enough to cover the entire US debt in a coupla years.

[2017orso]

Considering there has been an ongoing currency war for some time now with debt as one of the driving forces, seems overly simplistic to think that a nation would build such a position overtly. 

[BTCtrader71]

Forgive my ignorance, but what is a supernode?

In this context it means a person with personal crypto holdings valued at least BTC100, plus other qualifications.

Wasn't it BTC1000 before? BTC100 is only $52k of buying power atm.

Pretty soon it will only take BTC1. There goes the neighborhood ....

[sgbett]

The 'final crash' idea is a new one to me and I would like to think it won't happen.  But:

If the big banks and central banks realise bitcoin is going to happen whether they like it or not;
If some of the world's wealthiest are beginning to put serious money into bitcoin both increasing its value and devaluing the fiat they're taking it out of;
If they are realising that it's game over for the fiat game as has been played for the best part of the last 100 years;
If they know they currently, but if they're not careful temporarily, have more buying power than anybody else;

...why they would not deliberately pump, forcing everybody out of fiat only to then diversify into pms and other assets at the top, deliberately dumping bitcoin to promote their new fiat currencies?  It will be their last chance to keep as much of their advantage (in terms of relative wealth) because the days of 'magicing' money into existence will be over.

Imagine if Janet Yellen and the rest of the top brass at the Federal Reserve woke up this morning and suddenly grokked everything there is to know about bitcoin, and decided to buy up as much as they could. They would print up some small sum -- 5-10 billion or so, just pocket change for the Fed -- and buy as many bitcoins as they could. Imagine they could get a significant percentage of all bitcoins -- one million or maybe several million. Can you imagine the long term consequences? I seriously doubt that they would do something that ballsy and smart at the same time. But it would be an interesting scenario!

yes there are plenty of people with enough money to do this, and whilst they may push the price sky high, so it costs more to buy, all they are doing is increasing the market-cap-value of everything they already own (i.e. bought for less than the current price). If their intention is not to sell it but to own a big chunk of coin, then there is only so much selling everyone else can do at the higher prices, because FOMO keeps them from selling all, but damn they just have to cash something out....

For a player with enough cash to buy the entire order book 100 times over, its possible. The FED prints $85bn a month.... that we know of

It's in their interest to keep accumulating, to keep the price up (and thus the perceived value of their holding) and to continue to legitimise BTC as the new money in the eyes of the world. All the while devaluing the actual worth of the dollars they just put in everyone's pockets! When you are rich enough that you don't measure wealth in absolute terms, but in terms of what percentage of *all the money* is yours. This is a legit strategy.

Now, if somebody (or bodies) were doing this, then its likely that when they were buying the price would increase exponentially, until the natural (non whale actor) buying pressure represents a very small fraction of the natural selling pressure (everyone else cashing out their gains) at which point the whale can pull their buying, and allow the market itself to drive the price way back down again (perhaps assuring this buy selling a chunk at the 'top' to instigate the collapse) the market participants will do the rest.

When natural buying/selling returns to equilibrium, the cycle can repeat.

This sounds familiar.

[rpietila]

My fear is as the realisation dawns on the bigger players that Bitcoin is 'the one' that it will be pumped by banks and central banks who can magic large sums of fiat into existence with which to buy bitcoin (and who may even dump gold temporarily), creating the ultimate bitcoin megabubble so that billions of latecomer ordinary people and businesses buying their first bitcoins will be shafted as the great bitcoin dump starts, into pms, into land, artwork etc. into a 'better' crypto - assets that had been neglected for the period bitcoin was so attractive, even back into fiat (they could use this point to launch more 'stable' 'new crypto-dollar or new crypto-pound etc.) until bitcoin finds a stable long-term pricepoint well below (even orders of magnitude below) the hyped price the masses bought at.  Problem is of course nobody beforehand can know what this price will be.  We would still be in a much better world than today because with bitcoin established fiats (old or new) will not be that attractive but if central banks are deliberately hyperinflating forcing people into crypto on their pump stage people could end up with 1000th of what they had before.
...

I explored the final megabubble idea about 6 months ago in detail. AnonyMint was the opponent. We found it quite realistic, if TPTB wants to promote it, the supply and demand dynamics coupled with the rapid rate of price increase and the insane difficulty for any large holders to actually convert their stash to other assets in a short time (it took 3.5 months for me from selling the bitcoins to buying the castle, with the proceeds being in 3 different fiat currencies in the meantime, and at least 3 AML checks). The market cap of all the bitcoins may actually rise to a multiple of the rest of the world combined (BTC1 being equivalent to $10-$100 million in present dollars) if engineered such by TPTB.

About 14 months ago I calculated that if bitcoin were the anchor of a flexible monetary system with most of the circulating money provided by credit expansion and self-liquidating real bills, the price for one would be in the tune of $300k (bitcoins having the same market cap as gold). Dropping to this level from the unfathomable heights will hurt the ones that bought at 100 times the price, of course.

If bitcoins stay "hard" so that no (or very little) credit expansion is possible, the market cap can reach a significant % of the total sum of all liquid assets in the world. That figure is currently about $100T or more. So therefore $1-$5 million per BTC is realistic.

I would suggest you to buy bitcoins so that you will hold a target amount of them at the time when they reach $1 million. Because you want to sell periodically to cover your expenses and hedge bets, you need to buy 3-10 times the amount now. If your target is to have BTC2, which would allow a retirement in a nice country, a position of BTC10 or preferably BTC20 now ($5-$10k investment) is recommended. More details are in the SSS plan. The plan ends when bitcoins are $1M, because the world will be very different.

So even if entities that don't "deserve" it end up with the most wealth initially (by the way you described), after the transition is complete that wealth will dissipate from them if they make bad decisions towards the people that make good decisions. If they make "good" decisions on the other hand, they get to keep and grow their wealth, and rightly so. Noone will be bailed out by the taxpayer as is the case now (no more inflation tax) and everybody will suffer or enjoy the consequences of their actions, as should be.

Exactly. In absence of coercion in the Bitcoin regime, Satoshi is not causing any trouble to the rest of us, although he holds nearly 10% of the coins outstanding. If he starts spending them in goods and services, he is generating demand for the rest of society and dissipating his stash. If he invests them in the generation of goods and services, and makes profit, it improves the quality of life of others. If he makes a loss, then the coins move to the better entrepreneurs. If he does nothing, everybody's coins are worth more.

I had previously been quite dismissive of the doom 'n gloom scenarios painted where disenfranchised fiat bag holders are literally up in arms against the new wealthy in a kind of apocalyptic scenario.  However I'm now thinking the transition may be rougher and with much more suffering than I had previously thought.

Most of the people are net debtors in fiat terms. Whether fiat's value increases or decreases vs. their income, is more important to them than how they invest their free money that they can afford to lose. In the optimistic case, all debts are effectively cancelled. In the pessimistic case, all debtors are foreclosed (as the effects of the CB policy to pop the bubble by raising interest rates and causing unemployment), and bitcoin people get to buy their assets for cheap, but this may cause indignation. AnonyMint thinks that crypto holders will be declared enemies of state at this point and eliminated.