Tulip Mania 2.0

[Silberman]

~
The only people who keeps repeating, and keeps making us believe in the narrative that NFTs are “here to stay” are those same people who have invested much of their coins in them. Why would I convert my precious Bitcoins to a shitcoin, to invest in an NFT?

Even i was confused in the beginning when people were spending huge amount for basically small pictures in digital form, Everydays: The First 5000 Days of an artist sold for $69 million which is crazy and some of the CryptoPunk collections sold over multiple million dollars. I started venturing into the NFT market with a team who sells aNFT and there are many users that are new to the cryptocurrency market who are there just to purchase the aNFT of their favorite sports person and Lionel Messi was a huge success.

Will see how the NFT market would be in the next couple of years and then i will make a comment  .

The problem with the NFT market is precisely their non-fungible nature, when it comes to bitcoin there is a very clear indication on how much interest the market has thanks to the volume, and since all bitcoins are in theory the same then you know exactly how much interest there is in the bitcoin market, however when it comes to NFTs even if we assume there will be a huge market in a few years there is no guarantee there will be any market for the NFTs you bought and you will not know this is the case until you try to sell them and no one wants them.

[1715096621]

1715096621

[1715096621]

1715096621

[STT]

NFT are a sign of the boom because they cannot stay liquid under any monetary deflation which requires the sale of assets.   Doesnt mean they have to be worthless then but without a price for years might occur because there isnt an effective market for them at that time.   I dont think NFT is far off the rare pepe meme where people just make some iteration I always thought it was a joke but life imitates art perhaps

[cafucafucafu]

This is 100% the case.

I believe that people are even neglecting regular cryptos that will actually decentralize the landscape we live in for these short term fads.

There are so many stories of people that are making millions of dollars in a short period of time and that is acting as the stimulus to get new money in. When new money stops flooding in and regulators jump on board, this mania will be over in dramatic fashion.

[Wind_FURY]

I believe it would help give NFTs “value” if they were issued in the Bitcoin blockchain. The NFTs themselves might be a victim of bull-bear/mania-depression cycles, but they will be encased in a multi-generational protocol in Bitcoin. Shitcoin blockchains will die, Bitcoin chugs along.

Is that even possible? I did not know that NFT's could be in bitcoin blockchain as well, I assumed that the blockchain of bitcoin doesn't allow such things to happen. I am fine with ETH by the way, their blockchain is fine and their price is fine as well and certainly do not consider it a shitcoin. The NFT's in ada, sol and similar stuff would be bad in the future, those are still not "shit" coins as we can see from their rank but just because something is top 10 doesn't mean it will stay in top 10.

I’m technically very stupid, but I believe it is through the Mastercoin/Omni protocol, and the Counterparty protocol. The Ethereum shitcoin blockchain can’t be trusted because it’s not on a path to ossification. It wants changes, revolutionary changes which is bad for stability.

[Betwrong]

~

How are NFTs different from Bitcoin at all? The value of each is based only on speculation, they're premised on a manufactured scarcity to give the impression of being valuable because they are somewhat rare, people are only interested in them as a get rich quick vehicle... the comparison is perfect. I see no difference between NFTs and Bitcoin, so for someone to criticize NFTs as an investment vehicle and not crypto is the peak of cognitive dissonance to me.

Well, to give you a short answer, Bitcoin is a payment method, and NFTs are far from it.

You can buy BTC for $48k apiece, and since Bitcoin is accepted by 15,000 businesses worldwide, including major companies like PayPal, Microsoft, AT&T, Starbucks etc., the same day you can pay for their goods and services at more or less the same rate. Theoretically, we could be doing the same thing with NFTs using barter system, but good luck with buying an NFT for $48k and expecting provision of goods and services for this amount.

Kinda missed my point.
~

No, I didn't. I'm sorry to have made that impression on you, but I didn't miss your point. The thing is that I'm always trying to write posts that aim not only to someone I'm replying to, but to other people who might read my post also.

I'm not talking about the literal differences between bitcoin and NFTs, I'm talking about what makes each "valuable."  You probably should have been able to pick that up from the context of the rest of the post.  Your post didn't address the substance of my post, which is how are you drawing an arbitrary line between NFTs and Bitcoin and trying to pretend they're different when it's the exact same thing that makes each valuable- large groups of people who arbitrarily agree they are.

If you think of it, it could be said about almost anything. Take gold, for instance. We all know that gold is highly efficient and, at the same time, corrosion-free conductor which makes it irreplaceable in electronics. But do you know that today 80% of the newly obtained gold is used in jewellery manufacture? So, the main demand is coming from that field, jewellery, and thus it's the main factor that affects the price. Now, why do people think that gold jewellery is valuable despite the fact that gold can be replaced by materials that look absolutely the same but thousand times cheaper? Maybe because, using your words, there are large groups of people who arbitrarily agree it is? 

[jaysabi]

That's my argument too when someone says that bitcoin or worse, cryptocurrencies are like the Tulip Mania, I always say to them that how come bitcoin's going to be the same when it has been a decade since the genesis block and the original Tulip Mania only lasted for about 2 or 3 year iirc.

It sounds like you're mistaking what makes mania. It's not duration, it's severity of the bubble.  Nobody ever knows they're in a bubble until after it pops, otherwise you'd never have bubbles.  People buying tulips during the tulip bubble didn't know they were buying into a bubble, just like the people buying houses in 2007 didn't know they were buying into a bubble, just like (for all you know) the people buying bitcoin now don't know they're buying into a bubble.  It is impossible to dispel the non-existence of a bubble contemporaneously, it's something that can only be known after-the-fact.

[Silberman]

This is 100% the case.

I believe that people are even neglecting regular cryptos that will actually decentralize the landscape we live in for these short term fads.

There are so many stories of people that are making millions of dollars in a short period of time and that is acting as the stimulus to get new money in. When new money stops flooding in and regulators jump on board, this mania will be over in dramatic fashion.

Correct, this is a bubble, people hear stories about people earning a fortune with NFTs and they want the same for themselves, they do not stop to ask themselves where that money is going to come from, and while maybe there are a few NFTs that have the chance to maintain their value and maybe they could even go up, the vast majority of the NFTs will never go through something like that so in my opinion most people are effectively throwing their money away.

[hello_good_sir]

There are many nocoiners that claim that Bitcoin is “Tulip Mania 2.0”, but it has been 10 years. How long must the protocol keep running before the rest of the world accepts that Bitcoin is not going anywhere. In fact, it opened a Pandora’s Box of new possbilities. BUT, I believe the next “Tulip Mania” for this bull cycle are, NFTs.

NFTs are the ICOs of this bull run.

There are simply way too many projects that can be created for virtually no cost for the current price tags on these things.

The people who have levered up to "flip" NFTs as a lifestyle will see their capital get wiped away fairly quickly when things go south in my opinion. It is truly a mania right now.

[Wind_FURY]

There are many nocoiners that claim that Bitcoin is “Tulip Mania 2.0”, but it has been 10 years. How long must the protocol keep running before the rest of the world accepts that Bitcoin is not going anywhere. In fact, it opened a Pandora’s Box of new possbilities. BUT, I believe the next “Tulip Mania” for this bull cycle are, NFTs.

NFTs are the ICOs of this bull run.

There are simply way too many projects that can be created for virtually no cost for the current price tags on these things.

The people who have levered up to "flip" NFTs as a lifestyle will see their capital get wiped away fairly quickly when things go south in my opinion. It is truly a mania right now.

During the crash, was there a stop-loss for NFT? NO! Because that market is not like the cryptocurrency market, or the stock market/commodity market where LIQUIDITY can protect you from big losses. A price of a $1,000,000 NFT can crash to $10,000 during an economic depression.

[RealMalatesta]

During the crash, was there a stop-loss for NFT? NO! Because that market is not like the cryptocurrency market, or the stock market/commodity market where LIQUIDITY can protect you from big losses. A price of a $1,000,000 NFT can crash to $10,000 during an economic depression.

There is no swap or exchange for NFT that puts in that type of situation, which is why there is no stop-loss. It is an asset and not a currency, there will be 21 million bitcoins, all are the same bitcoin, does the same thing, it is just one bitcoin. NFT's are all different, all worth differently, you can't have a market like that for a stop loss.

You decide on the value, the buyer and the seller decides it, and for each single individual one as well. What can you do? You can always put it for sale for a million dollars, and one day if it actually worths that then it will be bought, but that is for going up, for going down if you put it on sale for cheap then it will be sold right away and you will lose. You need to be constantly active and constantly checking the prices to decide how much it worths at that point, which many won't do.

[jaysabi]

~

How are NFTs different from Bitcoin at all? The value of each is based only on speculation, they're premised on a manufactured scarcity to give the impression of being valuable because they are somewhat rare, people are only interested in them as a get rich quick vehicle... the comparison is perfect. I see no difference between NFTs and Bitcoin, so for someone to criticize NFTs as an investment vehicle and not crypto is the peak of cognitive dissonance to me.

Well, to give you a short answer, Bitcoin is a payment method, and NFTs are far from it.

You can buy BTC for $48k apiece, and since Bitcoin is accepted by 15,000 businesses worldwide, including major companies like PayPal, Microsoft, AT&T, Starbucks etc., the same day you can pay for their goods and services at more or less the same rate. Theoretically, we could be doing the same thing with NFTs using barter system, but good luck with buying an NFT for $48k and expecting provision of goods and services for this amount.

Kinda missed my point.
~

No, I didn't. I'm sorry to have made that impression on you, but I didn't miss your point. The thing is that I'm always trying to write posts that aim not only to someone I'm replying to, but to other people who might read my post also.

I'm not talking about the literal differences between bitcoin and NFTs, I'm talking about what makes each "valuable."  You probably should have been able to pick that up from the context of the rest of the post.  Your post didn't address the substance of my post, which is how are you drawing an arbitrary line between NFTs and Bitcoin and trying to pretend they're different when it's the exact same thing that makes each valuable- large groups of people who arbitrarily agree they are.

If you think of it, it could be said about almost anything. Take gold, for instance. We all know that gold is highly efficient and, at the same time, corrosion-free conductor which makes it irreplaceable in electronics. But do you know that today 80% of the newly obtained gold is used in jewellery manufacture? So, the main demand is coming from that field, jewellery, and thus it's the main factor that affects the price. Now, why do people think that gold jewellery is valuable despite the fact that gold can be replaced by materials that look absolutely the same but thousand times cheaper? Maybe because, using your words, there are large groups of people who arbitrarily agree it is? 

But now you've given an example of gold's intrinsic value- use in jewelry.  The value comes from it's intrinsic properties; not people speculating on it's value, but actual use.  That's not where bitcoin's value comes from, nor NFTs.  In both cases, that value comes exclusively from speculation on the future value of them, based solely on a mass assumption of future worth.  To differentiate, gold as a store of value is completely arbitrary, just like bitcoin.  But gold still has a demand outside of store of value (the intrinsic value of gold) and bitcoin and NFTs do not.  That's the difference between bitcoin and gold and why there's no difference between bitcoin and NFTs.

[SoeNan89]

Many experts believe the virtual currency is set to dominate financial transactions which has led to substantial trading in the bitcoin domain. The digital currency strengthened to an all-time high. The ease of cross-border operations without the need for central bank support attracts many people to park their funds in Bitcoin investments.  Scarcity is considered one of the main causes of the rally, only 21 million bitcoins are in existence, currently, 90% in circulation. The price of Bitcoin is determined in a free market regime and is not affected by monetary policy. Although Bitcoin enthusiasts believe that the rise of virtual currencies is inevitable, history offers a word of warning.

[imstillthebest]

it will be the same and no matter how many years it would take for btc to live , they will still call it a tulip because they are nocoiners or btc haters .

How long must the protocol keep running before the rest of the world accepts that Bitcoin is not going anywhere

bitcoin is going somewhere , not because it will take the money of the investors and scam them but because it is successful and have alot of achievements  .

I believe the next “Tulip Mania” for this bull cycle are, NFTs

nft's real purpose are for collection and not to expect anything in return so i dont consider them as a bubble but if there are bubbles in here , they can be the scam projects like the meme coins , ico's , defi  .

[Silberman]

But now you've given an example of gold's intrinsic value- use in jewelry.  The value comes from it's intrinsic properties; not people speculating on it's value, but actual use.  That's not where bitcoin's value comes from, nor NFTs.  In both cases, that value comes exclusively from speculation on the future value of them, based solely on a mass assumption of future worth.  To differentiate, gold as a store of value is completely arbitrary, just like bitcoin.  But gold still has a demand outside of store of value (the intrinsic value of gold) and bitcoin and NFTs do not.  That's the difference between bitcoin and gold and why there's no difference between bitcoin and NFTs.

The value of bitcoin comes from the network effect and it is described in the Metcalfe’s law, as an example if you had a telephone that could only call your own number then that network is useless as you are the only member of it, but if the network has millions and millions of numbers you can call then the network becomes very valuable due to its size, this is why social networks like Facebook and others have value and it is the reason bitcoin has value as well.

[jaysabi]

But now you've given an example of gold's intrinsic value- use in jewelry.  The value comes from it's intrinsic properties; not people speculating on it's value, but actual use.  That's not where bitcoin's value comes from, nor NFTs.  In both cases, that value comes exclusively from speculation on the future value of them, based solely on a mass assumption of future worth.  To differentiate, gold as a store of value is completely arbitrary, just like bitcoin.  But gold still has a demand outside of store of value (the intrinsic value of gold) and bitcoin and NFTs do not.  That's the difference between bitcoin and gold and why there's no difference between bitcoin and NFTs.

The value of bitcoin comes from the network effect and it is described in the Metcalfe’s law, as an example if you had a telephone that could only call your own number then that network is useless as you are the only member of it, but if the network has millions and millions of numbers you can call then the network becomes very valuable due to its size, this is why social networks like Facebook and others have value and it is the reason bitcoin has value as well.

I don't believe this is applicable at all.  Relatively no one uses bitcoin as a currency, so the network effect of a currency that no one is actually interested in using as a currency isn't applicable.  Bitcoin's real-life use case (not the theoretical one as a currency) is in speculative trading, and the primary driver of that is a good economic environment so people are confident enough to gamble on a speculative asset and excess capital to do so.  This is why you see bitcoin drop so harshly when there is bad macro economic news.  If the value wasn't tied specifically to speculation and was indeed a function of Metcalfe's law, you wouldn't see the price correlated so closely to macro economic trends.

[LUCKMCFLY]

This is 100% the case.

I believe that people are even neglecting regular cryptos that will actually decentralize the landscape we live in for these short term fads.

There are so many stories of people that are making millions of dollars in a short period of time and that is acting as the stimulus to get new money in. When new money stops flooding in and regulators jump on board, this mania will be over in dramatic fashion.

I think this is very normal, where there is money there are many people, where there is a business model that you can take advantage of, only those who have the money for investment and knowledge are the ones who always get a higher cut, however this is different, because only those with more money enter large businesses, in the case of NFTs anyone can enter, and it is not difficult, everything lies in entering the pre-sale, public sale and deciding whether to enter or not depending on the type of project If it is games or not, if it is games they have options to generate passive income, I think it is somewhat difficult for models like this to stop working, for me, this is something like "fashion" that I am still not sure if it will have valid throughout the years.

[Hyperechos]

Ponzi schemes like Tulip Mania, etc. all have one thing in common, that is, information is not equal. As for a completely open source system of Bitcoin, its operation mode, distribution of currency holdings, etc. can all be queried on the browser of the blockchain.

Of course, if you just want to talk about price increases similar to the tulip mania. Maybe investing in other projects such as DEFI, NFT, etc. can make you profit, but buying Bitcoin is a safer way.

[Betwrong]

~

But now you've given an example of gold's intrinsic value- use in jewelry.  The value comes from it's intrinsic properties; not people speculating on it's value, but actual use.  That's not where bitcoin's value comes from, nor NFTs.  In both cases, that value comes exclusively from speculation on the future value of them, based solely on a mass assumption of future worth.  To differentiate, gold as a store of value is completely arbitrary, just like bitcoin.  But gold still has a demand outside of store of value (the intrinsic value of gold) and bitcoin and NFTs do not.  That's the difference between bitcoin and gold and why there's no difference between bitcoin and NFTs.

And this time I'm really missing your point. Didn't I show that gold is considered valuable in jewelry only because many people believe so? Now, if many people believed that possessing  1 Bitcoin was necessary for your high status, the price of BTC could rise to hundreds of thousands USD only because of that. Why? Because there are more millionaires in this world than Bitcoin max supply. Wouldn't this be an intrinsic value of Bitcoin?

[Timelord2067]

But now you've given an example of gold's intrinsic value- use in jewelry.

You forgot gold is used in circuity and motherboards etc and is a better conductor than either copper or silver from the same group of the periodic table.  Gold (unlike silver or copper) does not corrode so it's use in electronics is more preferred.

Scrap metal recovery from circuit boards is a thing now and may not make a person rich, but is far from being cost prohibitive (and usually only involves chemicals, not power consumption - a far cry from the labour intensive cultivation of crops, harvesting and transport to market that were needed for the manufacture and sale of Tulips)

[TheGreatPython]

But now you've given an example of gold's intrinsic value- use in jewelry.  The value comes from it's intrinsic properties; not people speculating on it's value, but actual use.  That's not where bitcoin's value comes from, nor NFTs.  In both cases, that value comes exclusively from speculation on the future value of them, based solely on a mass assumption of future worth.  To differentiate, gold as a store of value is completely arbitrary, just like bitcoin.  But gold still has a demand outside of store of value (the intrinsic value of gold) and bitcoin and NFTs do not.  That's the difference between bitcoin and gold and why there's no difference between bitcoin and NFTs.

And this time I'm really missing your point. Didn't I show that gold is considered valuable in jewelry only because many people believe so? Now, if many people believed that possessing  1 Bitcoin was necessary for your high status, the price of BTC could rise to hundreds of thousands USD only because of that. Why? Because there are more millionaires in this world than Bitcoin max supply. Wouldn't this be an intrinsic value of Bitcoin?

It all comes down to holding it in your hands and the community belief. Gold has been around as a symbol for 2000+ years minimum, probably longer but I am not really well versed in history so it is probably 3000 years or even more. So, that means gold has been around for millennia and we are talking about bitcoin which has been here for a little over one decade and it of course doesn't get to be as valuable as gold for now.

It may become one in the future but we just do not see it for right now. Do not compare things that are physical and digital because people will always say "but can I hold it" as an argument.

I know that never makes sense and something that you end up trusting more digitally could be more fragile physically so it is better digitally. However that doesn't mean that people will not keep saying the same thing over and over again.