What year will Bitcoin reach $250,000?

[samcrypto]

In my opinion 2025 will be a great year for cryptocurrency but I'm not sure if the price of bitcoin will become as expensive as $250k. We grow a lot every year despite of the dump since many countries and many good project are already working to give good services for all crypto users. Many are still bullish about the price of bitcoin, I listen to those who made a good insight about bitcoin because I know its going to happen in the future.

i can't vote but probably more than 2022, maybe NEVER!   

Never say never, it can happen at no specific time hoping for that and of course stay on track to monitor bitcoin.

[1714547344]

1714547344

[1714547344]

1714547344

[xvids]

The price of Bitcoin right now is too far from it so I am guessing maybe about 2028+.
When the whole supply is already mined and circulating in the market the price could provably boost up,
Who knows how much it could go up at that time but I am hoping by 2024+ we could see it hit around $100K+.

[vintages]

I can't give any predication now but I am very positive that this price will surely come.
We may predict the year 2025 or above and it might come sooner or sudden.
The price of Bitcoin is the most unpredictable price and its gives back what the investors gives in which is either dump or pumps.

[STT]

Bitcoin reaching 250k involves far wider adoption and also the decline of the Dollar Index vs alternatives such as BTC but also likely other rival FIAT currency.      So Dollar Index long term and I would also argue the 10 Year Bond rate is probably relevant as that relates to the trade balance which is helped by the debt stored and the price of that debt which is into many trillions.
    To get 250k I think we are talking about those trillions altering their placement in where they are currently allocated, in theory we got to bring in alot of factors but the simple take is the price reversal on a few big assets has to occur for BTC to also be gaining in this way both value and nominally.

Or the opposite view, but at least it gives a time frame of about 4 years :

[Rustamm]

In order for the price of Bitcoin to rise to $250,000, it is necessary that 20 times more money is poured into Bitcoin than now. I think this is real, but only after a couple of years, when Bitcoin gets more widespread, ETF will be adopted and other positive factors will be present. I expect such a price around 2024, but I hope that this will happen sooner.

[Bisbee]

It’s great that the author of the topic does not even doubt that the price of BTC will rise to $250,000, he only inquired about the opinions of other people about when exactly this will happen. In fact, it’s nice that there are many people who are positive about the rise in the price of BTC. I hope that the price will reach this mark, but I see how much the governments of different countries are resisting strongly, so I think it is unlikely that the price will rise much in the next few years.

[exstasie]

   To get 250k I think we are talking about those trillions altering their placement in where they are currently allocated, in theory we got to bring in alot of factors but the simple take is the price reversal on a few big assets has to occur for BTC to also be gaining in this way both value and nominally.

That's an assumption that's floated all the time around here, but I doubt it's correct. It doesn't account for Bitcoin's low velocity of money and lack of ask side liquidity. The rules that apply to fiat money and gold don't apply to Bitcoin, where so much of the supply is hoarded and lost.

Applying market capitalization logic to BTC is one of the ways early adopters will fool themselves into selling too early.

[sana54210]

Knowing the specific year that Bitcoin will reach $250,000 to me is just like playing gambling which you are very much aware that you are going to lose. One can say that in this particular year Bitcoin will increase in its value as a result of this particular factors but not to be optimistic on the exact amount that Bitcoin value will reach in a particular year.

When we are not computers, I know that even that would be difficult for any bot to even do that and any bot that is created to do that would be quite terrible at it. The market volatility is too high to give chances to knowing the straight movement of bitcoin, all any analyst or cryptocurrency believer would ever say is that they believe bitcoin will reach one big value in future like it has done in the past, but would never tell exactly when the value will touch a particular time.

I have understood bitcoin and it is because of its level of understanding that is making me believe that bitcoin may not really grow more than $100k, those who are calling millions for it knows that it is impossible, they are just here to create hype because of their own present investment in it.

[STT]

Millions is not impossible, I'm always a skeptic on just about every move Bitcoin makes but that target is possible because we are in a unique point in history.   If every government had zero debt, ran a balanced or budget in surplus not massive deficits.   If we had trade balance occuring or on trend towards balance not deficit then I would not agree with such a silly sounding target but massive inaccuracies are in the prices of many things and Bitcoin can alter dramatically.
   I still think BTC has to develop far more and be a simple 1 click type product for the millions who dont know and dont care especially about technology, they just want it to work for them.

Bitcoin's low velocity of money and lack of ask side liquidity. The rules that apply to fiat money and gold don't apply to Bitcoin

i thought BTC had a high velocity and hence why its worth more then people imagine it could be.  Maybe I'm just thinking of the trades done on exchanges because I'd agree actual business and price agreed in open market matters more.  
   I think the rules for the market will eventually apply to all, we have a distortion presently that benefits Government treasury debt so that its nearly paying nothing towards those who support it.   At some point these dead weight assets will have to float in open markets and support themselves like every product eventually must with plain supply and demand, either they will sink or find a way to survive with alot more effort then present near 0% rate returns.    
 

[stfN2128]

my vote goes to 2024, on one hand i dont think that btc will reach this price ever, on the other hand i see a scenario where bitcoin reach 200k and even 500k $. It depends on the global economy, if we see some more countries with hyperinflation within the next years, i think it could be a catalyst for btc to reach 250k very fast.

[exstasie]

Bitcoin's low velocity of money and lack of ask side liquidity. The rules that apply to fiat money and gold don't apply to Bitcoin

i thought BTC had a high velocity and hence why its worth more then people imagine it could be.  Maybe I'm just thinking of the trades done on exchanges because I'd agree actual business and price agreed in open market matters more.

Compared to fiat money I would assume its velocity is extremely low, since fiat money is the medium for most of the world's transactions. We're talking about supply chains, payrolls, everyone's day-to-day expenses.

Bitcoin is at the other extreme, with the majority of the supply never moving and 20% of the supply believed to be lost. If half the supply doesn't move and only a small fraction of circulating BTC are available on spot/OTC markets, this means its market capitalization (compared to fiat) is effectively exaggerated by at least an order of magnitude. That is why I think comparing the shear "size" of these markets is a dangerous approach that drastically sells Bitcoin's prospects short.

Liquidity vacuums (like we saw in the 2017 bubble) are powerful too. No ask side liquidity means price can spike to $1 million a lot easier than it can sustain it.

[STT]

Its a big subject, I might be getting over my a head a little which is why I'm always open to discussion but my basic take is illiquid value is not included in valuation such as market cap.   Satoshi's BTC is of no relevance, it hasnt been traded and wont be ever so it seems.    Those coins lost are not included in BTC value and I believe stock indexes ignore company stock not traded though I didnt find a link to back that up.

Seems BTC velocity is not changing greatly over the years but with a varation between years far more then the convential money supply which is obviously giant.   If they can compare BTC small as it is to US dollars used all over the world directly not having to scale it, seems to suggest the turnover for BTC must be far greater per coin.

https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-velocity/

[Dank14]

Bitcoin will reach that price when countries start swapping their USD reserve for BTC.
Right now a few have suggested it but nothing concrete yet, so I'd say 2030 or something like that.

[exstasie]

Its a big subject, I might be getting over my a head a little which is why I'm always open to discussion but my basic take is illiquid value is not included in valuation such as market cap.   Satoshi's BTC is of no relevance, it hasnt been traded and wont be ever so it seems.    Those coins lost are not included in BTC value and I believe stock indexes ignore company stock not traded though I didnt find a link to back that up.

In the stock market, market cap is calculated based on all outstanding shares, not just the float. And that's basically how everyone discusses the "size" of any market. People say the gold market is worth $7 Trillion because that's the spot price multiplied by the known supply. That's how everyone talks about Bitcoin too; nobody accounts for lost coins or static coins that are unlikely to be sold.

And maybe that's fine for visualizing the magnitude of value abstractly "held" in BTC. But it tells us very little about the real supply and demand that actually determines spot prices. Essentially, my theory is that Bitcoin is prone to dramatically less supply pressure than fiat money or gold, and this cannot be reflected by market cap.

If Bitcoin's market cap increases by $1 trillion, that doesn't mean $1 trillion in actual capital needs to be re-allocated from other markets. Market cap is much easier to inflate than that based on supply being withheld from market. If there is only 1,000 BTC of ask side liquidity between $10K and $11K, it only takes $10 million to increase the market cap nearly $20 billion.

Seems BTC velocity is not changing greatly over the years but with a varation between years far more then the convential money supply which is obviously giant.   If they can compare BTC small as it is to US dollars used all over the world directly not having to scale it, seems to suggest the turnover for BTC must be far greater per coin.

https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-velocity/

The chart doesn't actually show USD velocity. I don't understand why he plots BTC velocity against USD supply. It looks like curve fitting to make a currency vs. investment claim about Bitcoin. I also don't think his definition of velocity fits the conventional one. He's looking at total transaction value rather than controlling for change addresses.

[STT]

I dont agree with the measure is what it comes down to I guess.  I think its inaccurate to consider value like this and I know personally from small trading a market is easily saturated by excess supply, the active turnover relates to market cap and I found a link to justify this some.

   I was remembering this from a long time ago but its very relevant and quoted every day in in the S&P 500 stock index.  It was changed as of 2004 to reflect the actively traded stock which is correct and I agree with and should be considered for many markets imo.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sp-move-to-float-adjusted-indexes-will-create-turnover
  
The only asset I can think of where I would say its justified is gold assets, some of this stock has not changed location since the 1930's and in some cases the ownership has been the same that whole time too.    It still represents value because the issued notes of each central bank are in some way backed by the asset value deposited and left seemingly liquid.
    We are obviously very far into a FIAT money setup now but its still arguable this gold is due payable in exchange for the debt and notes of a country and could be placed in demand for exchange of goods traded.   Libya, Venezuela and I think Iran are the most recent examples of large transfers of gold for use in trade even when that gold had not been used in decades.

that doesn't mean $1 trillion in actual capital needs to be re-allocated from other markets. Market cap is much easier to inflate than that based on supply being withheld from market. If there is only 1,000 BTC of ask side liquidity between $10K and $11K, it only takes $10 million to increase the market cap nearly $20 billion.

Basically I agree with you, considering every BTC coin mined previously is not right.  Thats deliberate inaccuracy and exaggerates BTC size and something crooked imo like XRP or many alt coins are very off their official figures I guess.
   However I think some of those trillions in dollars contained in treasury debt for various countries will never come near crypto; hence we will need to see a larger move elsewhere to make waves of some magnitude in BTC.   Someone said in another thread, when central banks start buying crypto; they never will.   ECB, BOJ, FED and China will buy SDR which is still Fiat with some gold, they will never be buying privately controlled (as they see it) money.
 
  I have to mention QE programs themselves promote this thinking, most of the new debt produced is held by government itself in public pension schemes.  In thirty years when that debt is payable to pensioners who earnt that value, we will find out whats it worth or what was lost.  
 I feel obliged to say I think everyone should own at least a tiny bit of gold (for decades or pension like holds of value) because of all this incorrect thinking in economies and all of us will lose money from the failures and fallacies in QE.  
 I need to find a source because I'm not qualified its just my opinion all dollar prices are incorrectly stated hence BTC 250k can occur etc.     Its a house of cards waiting to collapse because stating value not openly traded is false, QE is a bad system and counting Satoshi's wallet as BTC market cap is wrong.

If there is only 1,000 BTC of ask side liquidity between $10K and $11K, it only takes $10 million to increase the market cap nearly $20 billion.

This explains why the price declines as supply comes online at the higher prices.    Its not available there initially but people will bring it to exchange as they observe the higher price.   Thats why I always expect some digestion in the price as we pullback we observe where it might start the next leg higher or hopefully notice if its not holding its ground.

[peter0425]

I believe this will happen around 2025-2030 as we are not ready year for worldwide adaptation and also the advertising wasn’t enough for this to become reality

But of course we all believe the possibility of achieving this soon depend on how the volatility will brings us

[Wilhelm]

I’d laugh my ass of if we get there next year 

[soxxx]

my wild guess in 2021.

in terms of fractals, the current chart looks like early 2016 to me. that suggests the next bubble top is 1.5-2 years away, and i think $250k is very possible in the next cycle.

I believe 2021 as well.

[Wilhelm]

my wild guess in 2021.

in terms of fractals, the current chart looks like early 2016 to me. that suggests the next bubble top is 1.5-2 years away, and i think $250k is very possible in the next cycle.

I believe 2021 as well.

I just hope you guys are right. Waiting for the next bubble sucks

[Andrews193]

my wild guess in 2021.

in terms of fractals, the current chart looks like early 2016 to me. that suggests the next bubble top is 1.5-2 years away, and i think $250k is very possible in the next cycle.

I believe 2021 as well.

I just hope you guys are right. Waiting for the next bubble sucks

Sorry but I feel the hopes and speculations of many people are quite childish, agree that the value of bitcoin can pump quickly and surpass many calculated brains but somewhere, it always needs real limits and prices that bitcoin can reach. $20k or $25k is a number that  I and many people will have no objections, however, $250k is a huge number, it breaks all the rules and the limited calculations, the market and many big investors will not accept this price when it can create huge war on dumping.