[2018-10-30]What will Bitcoin be Worth in 5-10 Years Time

[Vladdirescu87]

The crypto market is right now in a tight range and is not able to gather speed. Regardless of this, the Bitcoin (BTC) giants have a positive stance for the future of the BTC. A popular digital currency maniac and venture capital billionaire, Tim Draper keeps his previous prediction that the crypto will cost almost a quarter of a million dollars by the year 2022.

Speaking at the Cryptocurrency Invest Summit in LA, Tim’s talk Is based on BTC not becoming as politicised as traditional currency which is backed by the government bodies.

Read the details in the article of Coinidol dot com, the world blockchain news outlet: https://coinidol.com/what-will-bitcoin-be-worth-in-5-10-years-time/

[1714269385]

1714269385

[1714269385]

1714269385

[1714269385]

1714269385

[BitHodler]

Tim Draper has always been a likable character, and I'm glad he doesn't burn himself on short term predictions like other perma bulls tend to do, which by now has done more harm than good for their reputation.

The better question is whether or not Bitcoin can scale enough to represent such valuations. Bitcoin last year by far wasn't worth $20,000 even though the price said otherwise, and we know what happened afterwards.

People who've been introduced to Bitcoin have a bad taste in their mouth, not only because of how many of them are burned, but the user experience was horrible, which might even be the worst part.

[Lucius]

Tim Draper is give this prediction in April of this year, how can this be the news now? Calling him a crypto maniac who did not give up of what he said a few months ago is really pretty stupid considering his past predictions or business moves. Unlike some of the "experts" who change their thinking on monthly basis, Draper give only long-term prediction - and he holds on that.

How much will 1 BTC worth in 5-10 years we can only speculate, even Draper prediction is for 2022 which is 4 years from now.

[Slow death]

A popular digital currency maniac and venture capital billionaire, Tim Draper keeps his previous prediction that the crypto will cost almost a quarter of a million dollars by the year 2022.

I found these parts:

" A popular digital currency maniac and venture capital billionaire "

" the crypto will cost almost a quarter of a million dollars by the year 2022 "

very interesting.

1 - he is a billionaire
2 - he bought bitcoin

by that I mean that he is advocating this prediction to encourage people to buy bitcoin so that he can have more profit in the future. Of course, his prediction is very exaggerated and impossible to achieve.

even Draper prediction is for 2022 which is 4 years from now.

his prediction is impossible to achieve.

[gentlemand]

People who've been introduced to Bitcoin have a bad taste in their mouth, not only because of how many of them are burned, but the user experience was horrible, which might even be the worst part.

They should've had the gumption to realise that they've arrived in the extremely early stages still. That's a very good thing in certain ways for them, alarming in others. It's not going to be smooth sailing for a long time yet.

his prediction is impossible to achieve.

If you'd told me where the price would be in late 2017 during 2015 I would've pooed in your salad. His prediction is possible. Maybe not hugely likely, but still possible. As time goes on Satoshi's prediction of it being vast or nothing in 20 years looks ever more prescient.

[squatter]

Tim Draper has always been a likable character, and I'm glad he doesn't burn himself on short term predictions like other perma bulls tend to do, which by now has done more harm than good for their reputation.

The better question is whether or not Bitcoin can scale enough to represent such valuations. Bitcoin last year by far wasn't worth $20,000 even though the price said otherwise, and we know what happened afterwards.

People who've been introduced to Bitcoin have a bad taste in their mouth, not only because of how many of them are burned, but the user experience was horrible, which might even be the worst part.

What do you mean by "scale?" It's not something that can be quantified into the price. If demand outpaces scaling optimizations, and usability of off-chain protocols like Lightning lag behind, transaction fees will just rise. Bitcoin doesn't need to be cheap to transact with -- in fact, its hash rate suggests it shouldn't be. And it also doesn't need to scale to include all the world's transactions.

People have been complaining about Bitcoin's user experience from the get-go. Nothing new there.

[Kemarit]

Tim Draper has always been a likable character, and I'm glad he doesn't burn himself on short term predictions like other perma bulls tend to do, which by now has done more harm than good for their reputation.

Well perma bulls like Mike Novogratz has already changed their tunes. Well its doesn't look on their reputations, but at least he has admitted his that we won't see any 5 figures at the end of the year so I think it's fair enough and won't really damage their positions.

The better question is whether or not Bitcoin can scale enough to represent such valuations. Bitcoin last year by far wasn't worth $20,000 even though the price said otherwise, and we know what happened afterwards.

I'm not sure though what "scale" you mean here, or maybe you are talking about mass adoption? But yeah, last year's madness was different, it was overbought and we all know that later it will burst.

People who've been introduced to Bitcoin have a bad taste in their mouth, not only because of how many of them are burned, but the user experience was horrible, which might even be the worst part.

Right, those noobs money are gone and got burned easily. I do believed that they left already when the price hits < $10,000 around June if I'm not mistaken. I'm sure that they will be back once the market once again show some sign of growth next year.

[Lucius]

I found these parts:

" A popular digital currency maniac and venture capital billionaire "

" the crypto will cost almost a quarter of a million dollars by the year 2022 "

very interesting.

1 - he is a billionaire
2 - he bought bitcoin

by that I mean that he is advocating this prediction to encourage people to buy bitcoin so that he can have more profit in the future. Of course, his prediction is very exaggerated and impossible to achieve.

even Draper prediction is for 2022 which is 4 years from now.

his prediction is impossible to achieve.

Some other people also share your thoughts when it comes to Tim Draper, but he is become very well known because of his accurate prediction back in 2014 that 1 BTC will reach the price of 10 000$ in next 3 years which of course happened. As far as we know he did not sell any coins after price go up to 20 000$, and as he said, he does not intend to sell.

You should know that it is not smart to put it in the same sentence bitcoin and impossible, four years maybe looks short time - but with the real development of events BTC could reach to 250 000$. Just remember last big pump, from 1000$ to 20 000$ in one year.

[BitHodler]

I'm not sure though what "scale" you mean here, or maybe you are talking about mass adoption? But yeah, last year's madness was different, it was overbought and we all know that later it will burst.

Scale as in scaling.

Bitcoin has to be able to process use on-chain in a much better way in order to prevent network congestion. SegWit isn't cutting it, and won't be able to gain much more adoption with nearly half of the ecosystem not upgrading.

I don't think we should expect SegWit to ever top 60% support, and from where we are today, SegWit usage is falling down back to 35% which isn't that much of a positive indicator to be honest.

Bitcoin won't be able to cope with another bull run without falling short. It may not be as bad as it was last year, but $10-$20 fees are not eliminated for good, that's the whole point. In other words, it all comes down to LN.

[1Referee]

As far as we know he did not sell any coins after price go up to 20 000$, and as he said, he does not intend to sell.

I wouldn't take that for granted. He has been in this market long enough to know that certain opportunities (such as last year's peak) are too good to pass on.

It also makes sense to sell peaks based on nothing but speculation, because you end up with more coins in the end, and let Bitcoin stacking be what we are here for. He surely won't be selling a whole lot of his stash, but 5-10% is a fantastic amount to hedge a correction with, which I did last year as well. Looking at how many coins suddenly woke up during last year's bull run, it's safe to say that more hodlers have done the same.

More coins flowing into the pockets of strong hands is always a plus for future growth.

[gentlemand]

As far as we know he did not sell any coins after price go up to 20 000$, and as he said, he does not intend to sell.

I thought he'd bought all those coins to provide liquidity to some exchange he had planned in the Philippines. Looks like he figured out sitting there and doing not very much with the would prove to be more profitable.

[squatter]

I'm not sure though what "scale" you mean here, or maybe you are talking about mass adoption? But yeah, last year's madness was different, it was overbought and we all know that later it will burst.

Scale as in scaling.

Bitcoin has to be able to process use on-chain in a much better way in order to prevent network congestion. SegWit isn't cutting it, and won't be able to gain much more adoption with nearly half of the ecosystem not upgrading.

I don't think we should expect SegWit to ever top 60% support, and from where we are today, SegWit usage is falling down back to 35% which isn't that much of a positive indicator to be honest.

That's how any backward compatible soft fork change will work. They're voluntary upgrades that no one is forced to use. We have to expect that some users and services will continue with the status quo. That's why we shouldn't put all the emphasis on Schnorr signatures or MAST or RSK or Lightning, either. I think people should brace themselves for higher fees, period.

Bitcoin won't be able to cope with another bull run without falling short. It may not be as bad as it was last year, but $10-$20 fees are not eliminated for good, that's the whole point. In other words, it all comes down to LN.

I wouldn't put everything on LN -- it's a different protocol with a different security model. You need to keep private keys online. Its usability can't compete with Bitcoin. Etc.

I also don't think there's evidence that high fees reduce demand for Bitcoin. If anything, there is a correlation between rising fees and rising price. I don't buy the argument that $10-$20 fees matter. In fact, I believe on-chain fees will be much higher than that in the future.

I see higher fees as a good thing, not a bad thing. In the future, there will be no block subsidy. If users won't pay what Bitcoin's security costs, there is little incentive for miners to honestly secure the blockchain. This need is much more important than the need for users to have cheap fees.

[BitHodler]

I wouldn't put everything on LN -- it's a different protocol with a different security model. You need to keep private keys online. Its usability can't compete with Bitcoin. Etc.

I also don't think there's evidence that high fees reduce demand for Bitcoin. If anything, there is a correlation between rising fees and rising price. I don't buy the argument that $10-$20 fees matter. In fact, I believe on-chain fees will be much higher than that in the future.

I see higher fees as a good thing, not a bad thing. In the future, there will be no block subsidy. If users won't pay what Bitcoin's security costs, there is little incentive for miners to honestly secure the blockchain. This need is much more important than the need for users to have cheap fees.

LN is the most important development that will complement Bitcoin in order to have it function as a currency, which as time goes by, becomes more expensive on-chain as the reward dependence on fees picks up pace.

Who are the users that are going to pay for the lack of block rewards? It won't be the mass, because they won't be bothering with Bitcoin anymore if there isn't anything else to use, which is why LN is so important.

People right now 'don't mind' spending $10-$20 on fees because there is a speculative incentive that makes it worthwhile to cough up these fees. What incentive is there when there is no severe volatility and upwards potential left anymore?

[gentlemand]

People right now 'don't mind' spending $10-$20 on fees because there is a speculative incentive that makes it worthwhile to cough up these fees. What incentive is there when there is no severe volatility and upwards potential left anymore?

Even if BTC had reached every user it was ever going to reach and block rewards were over, the currencies it's compared against will continue to inflate. All the while they won't be making any more bitcoins.

That's more than enough to keep most people on board. And that's before the independence from government and corporate meddling which is a huge deal in many countries, less so in more stable ones.

It all of course hangs on whether Bitcoin stays ahead. It's possible there'll be something that does a better job of being decentralised and independent that doesn't have any of the downsides. I've no idea what that would look like but we may find out.

[yugyug]

Tim's assumption seems to be true but that value will still be a short-term period if we try to pattern in a four-year cycle period during the first quarter event. Let's take a look back on year 2014 when the bitcoin price to almost 2k on the first quarter but sudden change happen when the Mt. Gox exchange collapse then the bitcoin price drops too.Then this year after 4 years, the bitcoin price reached to 20k on the first quarter which is a 10x fold 4 years after but suddenly price drops tremendously. So it is possible that the bitcoin will reach to almost a quarter million dollar in year 2022 but it will not stay that longer.

[squatter]

I wouldn't put everything on LN -- it's a different protocol with a different security model. You need to keep private keys online. Its usability can't compete with Bitcoin. Etc.

I also don't think there's evidence that high fees reduce demand for Bitcoin. If anything, there is a correlation between rising fees and rising price. I don't buy the argument that $10-$20 fees matter. In fact, I believe on-chain fees will be much higher than that in the future.

I see higher fees as a good thing, not a bad thing. In the future, there will be no block subsidy. If users won't pay what Bitcoin's security costs, there is little incentive for miners to honestly secure the blockchain. This need is much more important than the need for users to have cheap fees.

LN is the most important development that will complement Bitcoin in order to have it function as a currency, which as time goes by, becomes more expensive on-chain as the reward dependence on fees picks up pace.

LN is one of many possible complements. Altcoins, sidechains, and other offchain protocols/methods can offer other alternatives. The point is that the fee market is well equipped to deal with this problem. Too much demand per block = fees rise too high = users/services pushed to economize their transactions, use other protocols, etc. Then fees drop, although we should expect them to trend upwards over time given limited block space and growing demand. I just see no reason why we wouldn't see $10-$20 fees in the future. It's going to happen eventually. And we'll have plenty of options to avoid them too, for day-to-day transactions. If you don't need Bitcoin's level of security, other options are likely fine. The same goes for Lightning: It can't provide the same security guarantees that Bitcoin can.

Who are the users that are going to pay for the lack of block rewards? It won't be the mass, because they won't be bothering with Bitcoin anymore if there isn't anything else to use, which is why LN is so important.

Then perhaps price should fall, miners shut down and difficulty adjusts downwards. Less users, less fees, less security. It's all already built into the design.

People right now 'don't mind' spending $10-$20 on fees because there is a speculative incentive that makes it worthwhile to cough up these fees. What incentive is there when there is no severe volatility and upwards potential left anymore?

Security via honest mining. That was the design.

[mbbizzy]

Tim does not change his views on bitcoin, he firmly knows what will happen to the cryptocurrency in the next 5 years. I trust his predictions and invest in bitcoin and altcoins ...

[pixie85]

People who've been introduced to Bitcoin have a bad taste in their mouth, not only because of how many of them are burned, but the user experience was horrible, which might even be the worst part.

Those who came into the space in 2014 also had a bad taste in their mouth in 2015 and some of 2016. It didn't change anything for Bitcoin which rallied anyway. If this bad taste had any influence on market swings every bear market would be the last. What once came down would never come up again because the longer the fall would take the more scared and angry the investors would be.