What would happen if there was only one cryptocurrency, which is Bitcoin?

[Upgrade00]

How would the price of Bitcoin change if there were no other cryptocurrency than Bitcoin?
Would Bitcoin develop faster without a competition?

I dare say the price will not be affected by it at all. The investments going into altcoins will have it entirely gone to Bitcoin and a number of people discovered Bitcoin as a result of the relentless marketing by altcoin projects. I believe both factors balance themselves out very nicely.

Bitcoin does not have a competition and it's development is independent of external factors.

But, in my opinion, the price of Bitcoin is lower if it does not have a competition. Why? Because if there is no competition, the buyer's thinking is "should I buy this or not?" however if there is competition, the buyer's mind is "should I buy Bitcoin or these alts?"

The latter does not benefit bitcoin at all.

[1714514355]

1714514355

[1714514355]

1714514355

[1714514355]

1714514355

[1714514355]

1714514355

[BlackHatCoiner]

I don't know with certainty if that'd help it financially, but it doesn't matter; this whole topic misses the essence of cryptocurrency, which is freedom of action. Bitcoin is an implemented idea, and ideas are bulletproof.

Altcoins are not as harmful for Bitcoin as people think. Sure, get-rich-quick schemes make bitcoin look inferior, but we ought to respect the part where testing firstly comes out in altcoins. Check out Litecoin for instance. Last year they tested Mimblewhimble. Lightning and segwit were also implemented there. You can make testing of new features cost less with altcoins.

[Lorence.xD]

Something came out in my mind recently:
How would the price of Bitcoin change if there were no other cryptocurrency than Bitcoin?
Would Bitcoin develop faster without a competition?

In my opinion, the development of the cryptocurrency world would slow down if there were no altcoins. Why is that? because altcoins also help promote the concept of blockchain and cryptocurrency, whether they admit it or not, altcoins have contributed to the popularity of bitcoin

Although altcoins do not compete directly with bitcoin, they play a big role. If we talk about competition then it occurs between altcoins, such as ETH and BNB. As in the business world, the more product competition there is, the more people will promote the product, consumers just have to choose which product is the best. This also applies to bitcoin, and bitcoin is the best so no matter how many altcoins there are, nothing will be able to shift bitcoin's position.

Same thought on this one, Bitcoin alone can probably survive as it was the digital currency that survived and reached peak price in long term. But the adoption of crypto currency worldwide and also the development. These altcoins actually existed due to Bitcoin, which is the root of any other coins/tokens in the crypto industry. It's like in business, you have the original and your own signature of business for example for the food, as it gains popularity some people would try to copy it since people are acknowledging it. It's like a rip off, it can be cheaper and the quality is just fair unlike to the original ones, which we can compare to Bitcoins to altcoins. These altcoins also helped a lot of people as they also invested to it as long as you would not expect too much from it like in Bitcoin.

[tabas]

It's possible that the growth of Bitcoin could have been faster if there's no other cryptocurrencies in the market. But I think I'll go by that it has been better with all of these altcoins that have been made throughout time because it just shown on how valuable Bitcoin is. We have understood on how Bitcoin is important in the market and how it's making the move for majority of the cryptos in the market. If it's not about other cryptocurrencies, we can't determine on what actually Bitcoin is but because of them, we can say that Bitcoin is the OG of the cryptos and the king of this market.

[danadc]

If bitcoin were the only crypto, for me it would be something much better, the rest is Known that they do not have the same functionality as bitcoin, because bitcoin is what makes all the other Cryptocurrencies exist, there is no way that another Cryptocurrencies would be more Stronger than bitcoin, for me there will come a time where all cryptocurrencies will die and the only one that will survive will be bitcoin, because that is the trend, there are a large number of cryptocurrencies, where the majority end up being frauds, they fall and never again They rise up, and this is because they do not do what they should do, they are afraid of centralized Exchanges and all the developmen t, if bitcoin were the only currency it would have a higher price.

[avikz]

Something came out in my mind recently:
How would the price of Bitcoin change if there were no other cryptocurrency than Bitcoin?
Would Bitcoin develop faster without a competition?

Many people believe that if there is no alternative cryptocurrency, the price of Bitcoin will rise because it has no competition.

But, in my opinion, the price of Bitcoin is lower if it does not have a competition. Why? Because if there is no competition, the buyer's thinking is "should I buy this or not?" however if there is competition, the buyer's mind is "should I buy Bitcoin or these alts?"

As a result, not just Bitcoin but other altcoins will benefit. So, rather than being upset or sad because there is a competition, we can look at it in a positive way.

I don't think that we wouldn't have any issue if there is no alt coins. Bitcoin truly has no competition. Also majority of the users use USD value to derive the price of a bitcoin. So honestly it doesn't matter whether there are altcoins in the market or not.

But having one or two altcoins sometimes help. But certainly we don't need thousands of altcoins in the market where majority of the coins are dead. One strong Bitcoin is preferred over a crowded market.

[famososMuertos]

Hi OP,
 First of all, it is an #TBT question, which has the potential for discussion only in the idea of allowing new generations or those who perhaps learning about bitcoin to ask it.

Bitcoin will be bitcoin, and any other cryptocurrency that brings something unique and new, as bitcoin did, has its unique existence.

It happens with the minerals that we know, a comparison that is only equitable than not equal as some sometimes want to make it seem, such as gold, e.g.. In that idea, gold is a mineral but it is unique, there are other valuable minerals that are compared.

Minerals are categorized according to their usefulness, value, importance, etc.  Cryptocurrencies are the same equitable, but regardless of that, each of them is represented in its usefulness, value, importance, etc. as happens with bitcoin.

Same:(I repeat I have used the equivalence of minerals, but the examples can be transferred to other items)

[OgNasty]

There were always going to be multiple cryptocurrencies, but none of the others were ever taken seriously since they were mostly rip offs of Bitcoin. However, once the block limit was forced down our throats there were needs that Bitcoin could no longer fill, causing people to have to support other rip off currencies to keep their businesses running.

[Amphenomenon]

But, in my opinion, the price of Bitcoin is lower if it does not have a competition. Why? Because if there is no competition, the buyer's thinking is "should I buy this or not?" however if there is competition, the buyer's mind is "should I buy Bitcoin or these alts?"

Bitcoin price would have actually been higher because bitcoin price is not determined by the price/no of altcoins existing but how people sees it and more people would have invested more on and so there won't be any such thing as diversifying investment.

As a result, not just Bitcoin but other altcoins will benefit. So, rather than being upset or sad because there is a competition, we can look at it in a positive way.

There is really not any much positivity because altcoins have been filled with too many scams projects and this has affected the world judgements as a whole, market manipulators easily control the altcoin market and all this are among reasons SEC still have a reason not to accept bitcoin ETF

[darkangel11]

I don't know with certainty if that'd help it financially, but it doesn't matter; this whole topic misses the essence of cryptocurrency, which is freedom of action. Bitcoin is an implemented idea, and ideas are bulletproof.

Altcoins are not as harmful for Bitcoin as people think. Sure, get-rich-quick schemes make bitcoin look inferior, but we ought to respect the part where testing firstly comes out in altcoins. Check out Litecoin for instance. Last year they tested Mimblewhimble. Lightning and segwit were also implemented there. You can make testing of new features cost less with altcoins.

That's the only negative aspect of altcoins. Many of them are scams and those that want to stop bitcoin use this fact to mix them all together.
The way they see it, bitcoin is a cryptocurrency, bitconnect also was a cryptocurrency. If bitconnect scammed people who will bitcoin, so we have to stop bitcoin.
Also it affects crypto newbies who think that buying bitcoin is risky because you can get scammed, or "someone" will run off with your money. They don't know who that will be, but hey, every project has its author, owner, creator, that's pulling the strings.
I don't think that bitcoin would develop any faster with or without altcoins, but it would develop faster without governments trying to slow it down. They've regulated a number of crypto companies into nonexistence.

[Gozie51]

I believe altcoins is what has made bitcoin adoption and investment still in doubt by those who are yet to see through their eyes where bitcoin is going. People have misplaced altcoins for bitcoin and have invested wrongly in altcoins which either have be delisted or have reduced in value, so they still feel bitcoin is same with altcoins and would be a bubble and suddenly disappear. So I believe if bitcoin was the only cryptocurrency, then their won't be another version of something looking like it for comparison and it will be in its world just as the only visual currency and the value will of course be more appreciated.

[fzkto]

It's possible that the growth of Bitcoin could have been faster if there's no other cryptocurrencies in the market. But I think I'll go by that it has been better with all of these altcoins that have been made throughout time because it just shown on how valuable Bitcoin is. We have understood on how Bitcoin is important in the market and how it's making the move for majority of the cryptos in the market. If it's not about other cryptocurrencies, we can't determine on what actually Bitcoin is but because of them, we can say that Bitcoin is the OG of the cryptos and the king of this market.

Perhaps if there weren't so many altcoins, there wouldn't be so many exchanges appearing. Interest in cryptocurrencies would not have arisen because of the hype. Bitcoin could be worth much less than it is now and not be so popular. The hype around altcoins attracts new users.

[Bananington]

Something came out in my mind recently:
How would the price of Bitcoin change if there were no other cryptocurrency than Bitcoin?

If bitcoin is the only cryptocurrency there is, as bitcoins becomes more known, and more people start to want to purchase bitcoins, there will be high demand for it and that will increase the value bitcoin has because many people want it. When people hear of cryptocurrency, altcoins give them an option against bitcoins. The mistake is often made to invest in altcoins because many of them may think that they are late to bitcoins and no longer will be able to profit from it.

[thecodebear]

There would be positive and negative effects on Bitcoin if no other cryptocurrencies had yet been created.


Positive effects:

1. People wouldn't associate Bitcoin with Crypto and therefore wouldn't associate it nearly as much with scams, useless tokens, useless NFT pictures, etc. People also wouldn't be under the mistaken idea that newer cryptos are "better, more advanced, etc" and that Bitcoin is "outdated old slow tech".

2. Anyone interested in cryptocurrency would be buying Bitcoin, not buying Ethereum or meme tokens or any other random token. Tons of people wouldn't be under the mistaken impression that X-random-token is the "next bitcoin" and will replace bitcoin. People wouldn't be under the mistaken impression that the future of crypto is app tokens and bitcoin is just money so its not as useful as an app.

3. In 2021 we saw a lot of noobs who didn't know what they were doing flood into the market buying useless meme tokens to try to get rich quick, whereas in previous bull runs these people would have been buying Bitcoin. Bitcoin has lost its get rich quick appeal in favor of random meme tokens. This isn't necessarily bad, cuz nobody should think of Bitcoin as a get-rich-quick-scheme, though you could certainly get rich quick from it up until 2017, but it just means the bull markets are going to be smaller for Bitcoin because even the people who aren't interested in throwing their money at smart contract stuff or random crypto app tokens, their money gets diluted away from Bitcoin during bull runs to pile into an assortment of useless meme tokens.

4. There would be so much regulatory / legislative problems toward the industry because there wouldn't be so a wide and questionable variety of assets to make rules about. There would just be Bitcoin, which is just a currency. The govt problem in relation to crypto would be far far simpler and easier for govts to implement basic rules.

5. A thousand times less noise in the space, and therefore a lot easier to educate people on the value of Bitcoin and what it is and what it isn't.


Positive or Negative effects:

1. The fact that there are tons of different things happening in the crypto industry including smart contracts, NFTs, all sorts of apps and crypto companies, brings in a lot of big money investment and wider interest than if it were just Bitcoin. Of course, ultimately these VCs and firms and regular people generally end up losing their money cuz they are throwing money at questionable tokens. So this could be seen as either good for getting more people interested in the space who will probably eventually get some Bitcoin, or bad cuz the vast majority of those people get burned on tokens and might even become critics of the cryptocurrency space because of it and it just makes the industry look bad when all these things collapse and people and firms and companies lose money.

2. Different kinds of consensus mechanisms besides PoW make the cryptocurrency-uneducated people all think PoW and Bitcoin are terrible, but for the educated it makes everyone realize how much better Bitcoin's PoW is compared to all the alternatives. Lots of people push for PoS cryptos to replace Bitcoin or for Bitcoin to convert to PoS, but these are people who aren't educated on Bitcoin or the space in general. So this could be a negative or a positive, it'll be either one based on crypto-education level.


Negative effects:
1. All the different things people are trying, like smart contracts, can give the Bitcoin community and creators ideas for how to expand Bitcoin for future upgrades and higher layer networks to allow Bitcoin to do more things, but in a way that preserves the security/decentralization core of Bitcoin, instead of leaving that behind for features like the rest of the crypto world has done. Without all these crypto experiments there may be less ideas for innovation.

2. The fact that so many cryptocurrencies have been created and none of them come close to doing what Bitcoin does allows us to make the very strong argument that creating a Bitcoin replacement, even with "better" future tech, may not even be possible. The fact that people have been trying to do this for a decade and every single one has failed to get remotely close to the strengths of Bitcoin proves Bitcoin's unique value. If no other cryptos had been made the crypto-uneducated could still be making a reasonable argument that other cryptocurrencies could be made to challenge or replace Bitcoin. But because this has been done and has been a failure, anyone educated on the space can easily ignore these claims as absurd and naive.




Overall, in some way it would be better for Bitcoin, in some ways worse. Less noise, less scams, less associating Bitcoin with other cryptos/scams, less govt intrusion/problems, easier to educate people about the space, fewer disaster stories of people losing their money (though still certainly plenty of people would lose money on Bitcoin by now holding long term and selling during crashes, or even just complaining for a couple years during crashes), and everyone who wants into the space would just be buying Bitcoin. But also less innovation, far less proof of Bitcoin's unique importance and value, and perhaps an overall smaller interest in the space in general, which if Bitcoin was the only one that means less interest in Bitcoin. Honestly hard to say if the overall net effect would be positive or negative for Bitcoin. I would say probably mildly positive for bitcoin, and overall positive for society due to much less noise and scams and losses and collapses and easier for govt and the populace to get educated about.

[EL MOHA]

I don’t feel that bitcoin has any competitor to be honest and if they were no Altcoins the adoption of bitcoin doesn’t look like something that would be affected because even now the number of people that go into cryptocurrency are through bitcoin, so even without the other coins they will still come.

All blockchain project is Bitcoin competitor because all other blockchain exists because Bitcoin can’t handle scaling problem before way back when there’s no other popular blockchain alternative such as Ethereum.

And this is why i state that bitcoin blockchain or any of its kind are not it’s competitors. When we say they are competitors then they could solve the problem surrounding bitcoin and better it. But if they don’t solve the problem and people still prefers it than those coming to solve the problems like bitcoin cash proclaimed with scalability then it is no competition to me. Competition is only when people move to the other side but no bitcoin still remains without any

[coolcoinz]

Since I'm a bitcoin maxi, I'd say that there would be more positive than negative things happening.

Of course there's always that rare positive feature when someone hears about an altcoin, tries to invest, gets burned (or not) and learns about bitcoin in the process. Later these people become bitcoiners and abandon shitcoins of their own free will. Even if this happens to 1% of shitcoin investors, this can outweigh the negative aspects of the existence of these shitcoins.

[tabas]

It's possible that the growth of Bitcoin could have been faster if there's no other cryptocurrencies in the market. But I think I'll go by that it has been better with all of these altcoins that have been made throughout time because it just shown on how valuable Bitcoin is. We have understood on how Bitcoin is important in the market and how it's making the move for majority of the cryptos in the market. If it's not about other cryptocurrencies, we can't determine on what actually Bitcoin is but because of them, we can say that Bitcoin is the OG of the cryptos and the king of this market.

Perhaps if there weren't so many altcoins, there wouldn't be so many exchanges appearing. Interest in cryptocurrencies would not have arisen because of the hype. Bitcoin could be worth much less than it is now and not be so popular.

Well, one thing that's for sure is we don't know what it would be but every speculation on how it went if it's only Bitcoin, it's possible that there's not that much growth as it looks like that there's no competition. We can realize from this point of view that competition is healthy.

The hype around altcoins attracts new users.

And from there, they're also attracted to Bitcoin at some point because they will realize on how valuable Bitcoin is on this market and why everyone is holding it and tells them that whenever they are in profit, it's best to just put that stack on Bitoin.

[The Cryptovator]

How could we imagine that something doesn't exist or will never exist? What if there weren't bitcoins? Then there's no altcoin there either. With altcoins together, we have a cryptocurrency industry, so without altcoins, the industry can't stand; otherwise, there will be only the bitcoin industry. There is an altcoin; hence, investors know the value of Bitcoin. For example, we sometimes hate centralised exchanges, but these centralised exchanges make Bitcoin popular because you can trade and make money with alts. So alts are playing a major role in the crypto industry.

[_BlackStar]

How could we imagine that something doesn't exist or will never exist? What if there weren't bitcoins? Then there's no altcoin there either. With altcoins together, we have a cryptocurrency industry, so without altcoins, the industry can't stand; otherwise, there will be only the bitcoin industry. There is an altcoin; hence, investors know the value of Bitcoin. For example, we sometimes hate centralised exchanges, but these centralised exchanges make Bitcoin popular because you can trade and make money with alts. So alts are playing a major role in the crypto industry.

I also asked the same thing - but your question already represents what I want to say. Bitcoin is not essentially competing with altcoins for a bigger market - but altcoins are creating competition and that has made bitcoin increasingly popular in its own right.

About centralized markets - I agree they have a good role to play in helping bitcoin users grow. Bitcoin is more popular because of it, especially with the convenience it offers. However – centralized markets should be considered a legitimate place to trade, not a safe place to store assets long term.

[mirakal]

Something came out in my mind recently:
How would the price of Bitcoin change if there were no other cryptocurrency than Bitcoin?
Would Bitcoin develop faster without a competition?

Many people believe that if there is no alternative cryptocurrency, the price of Bitcoin will rise because it has no competition.

But, in my opinion, the price of Bitcoin is lower if it does not have a competition. Why? Because if there is no competition, the buyer's thinking is "should I buy this or not?" however if there is competition, the buyer's mind is "should I buy Bitcoin or these alts?"

As a result, not just Bitcoin but other altcoins will benefit. So, rather than being upset or sad because there is a competition, we can look at it in a positive way.

Even if we try to assume that bitcoin has no competition in the crypto market, but people will still be comparing it into other types of investment like gold, stocks or real estate. So the competition will still be possible.

However, if only bitcoin will exist in the market without altcoins and shitcoins that will deceive the people, I would say the crypto market will be boring and bitcoin price will never be exciting. I would not even expect for faster adoption of bitcoin since people will more likely to favor gold or real estate. But if there are altcoins on the side that are seeing bitcoin as their model, then people will be more wise to chose which crypto is capable to give them decent profits, or they could have invest in both cryptos for investment diversification, and jut learn from their outcome which coin deserves higher allocation the next time they decide to invest again.