[XMR] Monero Speculation

[h3speros]

Not to be a spoilsport, but I don't think Monero is in a position yet where it can completely decouple from the larger Bitcoin price trend (no alt can, except for intermediate fluctuation, imo). Which means constant, or only slightly decreasing XMR prices in the next 6 months might be conditional on BTC performance during that period, which I'm pretty pessimistic about.

I'm trying to find where you posted the analysis on which you base your current bearish sentiment, I usually enjoy looking at your interpretations.
I agree about the correlation between BTC and XMR but why so pessimistic about the next 6 months? That's quite a long time in BTC-world and even longer in alt-space.

(Disclaimer: the following is mainly BTC speculation, so potentially off-topic, but by my assumption that BTC trends influence XMR trends, it should be considered on-topic)

Yes, you're right. Didn't post anything "substantial" on that topic for a while. Pretty time consuming, and Ryn is doing a fantastic job on the technicals in his EW thread and is a lot more dedicated (and experienced, and most likely also profitable) than I ever was.  Aside from the effort, I prefer posting at least somewhat optimistic observations. Like I did in mid May, before the rally. And again in late June when I tried to put my "reversal indicator" to use to figure out if and when we'd rally again... what I'm getting at is that I don't feel like pouring oil on fire too much in an already somewhat bleak situation.

The short version is that I see a lot of similarities between the current market and the end of the 2011 bear market. Note: I'm talking technicals, not fundamentals. Worse, we fail to overcome even the earliest resistances. Selling pressure during additional capitulation events is in fact decreasing, as has been pointed out correctly, but very little buying pressure follows. Add to that what appears to be relentless low level selling pressure (either from miners directly, or from off-exchange accumulators keeping a lid on market price), and we don't appear to be getting out of this rut.

I'm not really expecting a new capitulation event going below the previous $340 bottom, but at the very least I am willing to entertain the idea that the way out of this bear market will be slower than most are comfortable with. Leading to the occasional smaller capitulation event along the road. That's where my 6 months figure came from: I consider that a realistic time frame long enough for the market to regain confidence after a period like this.

Note please what I am not saying: that this is the only possible, or even the most likely scenario in my books. My "pessimistic for 6 months" remark was in response to a statement about XMR price, and I pointed out that, in my opinion, XMR price is (still) linked to larger BTC trends, so I don't believe the former can be described or predicted in isolation from the latter. Which means that if I have doubts about BTC recovery, I must have doubts about the mid term XMR development as well.

Does that make some sense?

if you're going to post that you're pessimistic about 6 months price of btc (without backing it up), then it should be your most likely scenario

[oda.krell]

if you're going to post that you're pessimistic about 6 months price of btc (without backing it up), then it should be your most likely scenario

Not really. The total weight of mostly bearish scenarios is probably higher at the moment in my mind than the bullish ones, for a 6 month time frame. Which doesn't necessarily imply that a single bearish one is the most likely. And even then, you'd be a fool to trade (solely) on such a vague prediction. I know I don't. But I guess the notion "everyone in here purely talks book" is so deeply entrenched, it's hard to get out of people's heads.

[Ultros]

Does that make some sense?

It does, and thanks you for that dedicated answer. I always enjoy your cautiousness.  
I have similar bearish sentiment except for the time-frame, 6 months seems too long in such an evolving market with all the institutional money allegedly about to enter the game (which has an impact no matter what).
I expect price surges when the market decide to react to the news... or to the absence of reaction. It lags surely, but not for 6 months with such an already long correction behind us. Might take 2-3 months for a clear breakout, maybe faster if a capitulation occur when we retest the 442 resistance. I'd love to go further but I don't want to derail that thread too much.

Either way even if XMR follows BTC it might be able to outperform it aka tank less if down/skyrocket more if up. I like that some people are buying large sum of XMR though they never touched Bitcoin.

[oda.krell]

Does that make some sense?

It does, and thanks you for that dedicated answer. I always enjoy your cautiousness.  
I have similar bearish sentiment except for the time-frame, 6 months seems too long in such an evolving market with all the institutional money allegedly about to enter the game (which has an impact no matter what).
I expect price surges when the market decide to react to the news... or to the absence of reaction. It lags surely, but not for 6 months with such an already long correction behind us. Might take 2-3 months for a clear breakout, maybe faster if a capitulation occur when we retest the 442 resistance. I'd love to go further but I don't want to derail that thread too much.

Either way even if XMR follows BTC it might be able to outperform it aka tank less if down/skyrocket more if up. I like that some people are buying large sum of XMR though they never touched Bitcoin.

Agreed mostly on both points. The time frame is the vaguest part of my already vague post Rallies can pick up unbelievable speed in almost no time, I should be getting used to that by now. Agreed as well on the second point: vastly smaller market cap, liquidity and thinner order book means similar action can have greater impact on Monero. The emission curve puts a bit of a damper on that, though. Even the most dedicated (group) of buyers will need to spend some real effort to overcome that pull.

[OrientA]

Thing is, Monero have high emission inflation, so even keeping same  price, is making market cap higher every day. Close to 10 milions USd, till end of year.

Right this is what I meant about not being able to move up based on emission alone. 10 million USD with all prices constant and we're still #10 at the end of the year. NMC (current #9) has emission too but I'm not sure what it is.

The emission should keep us comfortable in #10 though, against assuming constant prices (or declining or even slightly increasing prices) for #11+

I am happy if the price does not drop and XMR gets used by some merchants by the end of the year.

[rpietila]

Even the most dedicated (group) of buyers will need to spend some real effort to overcome that pull.

This basically ensures that no artificial pump on Monero will be profitable. If it pumps, the reason must be real outside investment entering in (current holders are already used to these prices and not likely to buy in higher  - same as with BTC by the way).

I believe the right course of action is to enable the said investment, by several ways, of which I am also involved in some.

[oda.krell]

Even the most dedicated (group) of buyers will need to spend some real effort to overcome that pull.

This basically ensures that no artificial pump on Monero will be profitable. If it pumps, the reason must be real outside investment entering in (current holders are already used to these prices and not likely to buy in higher  - same as with BTC by the way).

I believe the right course of action is to enable the said investment, by several ways, of which I am also involved in some.

Not disagreeing here. I still would have preferred if the outcome of the April vote would have elected a curve closer to that of Bitcoin, but what we have is what we have. And one of the advantages is the one you bring up.

[rpietila]

Even the most dedicated (group) of buyers will need to spend some real effort to overcome that pull.

This basically ensures that no artificial pump on Monero will be profitable. If it pumps, the reason must be real outside investment entering in (current holders are already used to these prices and not likely to buy in higher  - same as with BTC by the way).

I believe the right course of action is to enable the said investment, by several ways, of which I am also involved in some.

Not disagreeing here. I still would have preferred if the outcome of the April vote would have elected a curve closer to that of Bitcoin, but what we have is what we have. And one of the advantages is the one you bring up.

Exactly. I also lament the outcome of the April vote, but I wasn't there to influence it

[h3speros]

if you're going to post that you're pessimistic about 6 months price of btc (without backing it up), then it should be your most likely scenario

Not really. The total weight of mostly bearish scenarios is probably higher at the moment in my mind than the bullish ones, for a 6 month time frame. Which doesn't necessarily imply that a single bearish one is the most likely. And even then, you'd be a fool to trade (solely) on such a vague prediction. I know I don't. But I guess the notion "everyone in here purely talks book" is so deeply entrenched, it's hard to get out of people's heads.

so you are thinking that most likely scenario for 6 months is pessimistic, you are starting to sound like politician =D

EDIT. you have to realize that we did not talked about one single pessimistic outcome

[dnaleor]

Even the most dedicated (group) of buyers will need to spend some real effort to overcome that pull.

This basically ensures that no artificial pump on Monero will be profitable. If it pumps, the reason must be real outside investment entering in (current holders are already used to these prices and not likely to buy in higher  - same as with BTC by the way).

I believe the right course of action is to enable the said investment, by several ways, of which I am also involved in some.

Not disagreeing here. I still would have preferred if the outcome of the April vote would have elected a curve closer to that of Bitcoin, but what we have is what we have. And one of the advantages is the one you bring up.

Exactly. I also lament the outcome of the April vote, but I wasn't there to influence it

well, just consider the fact that some people already bought a few thousand XMR and that their balances would be halved with the changing of the emission scheme...
So if you bought 18000 XMR (called BMR back then) because you wanted to own 1/1000th of the total supply, you would have 9000 XMR after the change, while the total supply remained 18 million.

Not very fair, imho

[rpietila]

Even the most dedicated (group) of buyers will need to spend some real effort to overcome that pull.

This basically ensures that no artificial pump on Monero will be profitable. If it pumps, the reason must be real outside investment entering in (current holders are already used to these prices and not likely to buy in higher  - same as with BTC by the way).

I believe the right course of action is to enable the said investment, by several ways, of which I am also involved in some.

Not disagreeing here. I still would have preferred if the outcome of the April vote would have elected a curve closer to that of Bitcoin, but what we have is what we have. And one of the advantages is the one you bring up.

Exactly. I also lament the outcome of the April vote, but I wasn't there to influence it

well, just consider the fact that some people already bought a few thousand XMR and that their balances would be halved with the changing of the emission scheme...
So if you bought 18000 XMR (called BMR back then) because you wanted to own 1/1000th of the total supply, you would have 9000 XMR after the change, while the total supply remained 18 million.

Not very fair, imho

I don't think that would be the outcome (or even possible). Existing balances and total number of coins stay intact, only the formula how quickly the future coins are generated, changes.

It could still be done, since XMR is only 20% mined. And should, imo. The current schedule is inhibiting people from investing in XMR because they believe the coin has no future once it starts to be 70-80% mined, which happens too soon.

[aminorex]

The current schedule is inhibiting people from investing in XMR because they believe the coin has no future once it starts to be 70-80% mined, which happens too soon.

The opposite is more nearly true.  The future begins when the mining depletes.

[ArticMine]

I am far from convinced that the fast emission curve of Monero relative to Bitcoin is a negative. In fact the market may be saying the exact opposite. If the XMR/XBT rate remains relatively constant or rises slightly this would indicate that the emission curve is about right particularly during the early stages of Monero when it is the most critical. Ideally during the early stages one wants to see a small steady rise in price rather than a speculative boom bust cycle, and an emission curve that matches demand is close to ideal. In this respect a slightly bearish XBT/USD market over the next few months may actually also prove positive for Monero in the long run, as this would delay a speculative bubble in the XMR/XBT rate driven by a speculative bubble in the XBT/USD rate.

I would like to see critical fundamental work such as the database and also a reference GUI completed before there is a sharp speculative spike in the XMR/XBT rate.

[oda.krell]

Even the most dedicated (group) of buyers will need to spend some real effort to overcome that pull.

This basically ensures that no artificial pump on Monero will be profitable. If it pumps, the reason must be real outside investment entering in (current holders are already used to these prices and not likely to buy in higher  - same as with BTC by the way).

I believe the right course of action is to enable the said investment, by several ways, of which I am also involved in some.

Not disagreeing here. I still would have preferred if the outcome of the April vote would have elected a curve closer to that of Bitcoin, but what we have is what we have. And one of the advantages is the one you bring up.

Exactly. I also lament the outcome of the April vote, but I wasn't there to influence it

well, just consider the fact that some people already bought a few thousand XMR and that their balances would be halved with the changing of the emission scheme...
So if you bought 18000 XMR (called BMR back then) because you wanted to own 1/1000th of the total supply, you would have 9000 XMR after the change, while the total supply remained 18 million.

Not very fair, imho

You're referring to the April proposal, where miners were supposed to "give back" a number of coins depending on which curve (other than the original) would have been chosen, right?

I'm not completely sure why that would be the only option. Is it absolutely necessary to have a continuous function generating the coins over the entire lifetime of a currency? Would it break something I cannot think of right now making a clean break and saying: before coin N, emission was according to curve 1, after coin N, emission will follow curve 2?

[dnaleor]

Even the most dedicated (group) of buyers will need to spend some real effort to overcome that pull.

This basically ensures that no artificial pump on Monero will be profitable. If it pumps, the reason must be real outside investment entering in (current holders are already used to these prices and not likely to buy in higher  - same as with BTC by the way).

I believe the right course of action is to enable the said investment, by several ways, of which I am also involved in some.

Not disagreeing here. I still would have preferred if the outcome of the April vote would have elected a curve closer to that of Bitcoin, but what we have is what we have. And one of the advantages is the one you bring up.

Exactly. I also lament the outcome of the April vote, but I wasn't there to influence it

well, just consider the fact that some people already bought a few thousand XMR and that their balances would be halved with the changing of the emission scheme...
So if you bought 18000 XMR (called BMR back then) because you wanted to own 1/1000th of the total supply, you would have 9000 XMR after the change, while the total supply remained 18 million.

Not very fair, imho

You're referring to the April proposal, where miners were supposed to "give back" a number of coins depending on which curve (other than the original) would have been chosen, right?

I'm not completely sure why that would be the only option. Is it absolutely necessary to have a continuous function generating the coins over the entire lifetime of a currency? Would it break something I cannot think of right now making a clean break and saying: before coin N, emission was according to curve 1, after coin N, emission will follow curve 2?

the disadvantage is that monero could be accused of ninjamine/premine... The early adopters would have gotten twice the ammount from mining...

[rpietila]

The opposite is more nearly true.  The future begins when the mining depletes.

before there is a sharp speculative spike in the XMR/XBT rate.

The market should be able to price the emission schedule in, when determining the price. At this point in the cryptoworld, having shart speculative spikes in a new coin's valuation is far from certain anyway.

What IS reality, however, is that some people such as me, automatically reject coins that are too much mined, unless the coin has exceptional merits. This leads to such coins not receiving any investment from the likes of me.

If Monero had been 70% mined when I heard about it, and otherwise same coin, same community and all, I would hardly have been interested.

[dnaleor]

The opposite is more nearly true.  The future begins when the mining depletes.

before there is a sharp speculative spike in the XMR/XBT rate.

The market should be able to price the emission schedule in, when determining the price. At this point in the cryptoworld, having shart speculative spikes in a new coin's valuation is far from certain anyway.

What IS reality, however, is that some people such as me, automatically reject coins that are too much mined, unless the coin has exceptional merits. This leads to such coins not receiving any investment from the likes of me.

If Monero had been 70% mined when I heard about it, and otherwise same coin, same community and all, I would hardly have been interested.

the advantage of a faster emission is that people are convincing other to buy early on, because now the inflation is still high... adoption goes faster it seems.

Again, I think an emission based on the S-curve of adoption is the best emission scheme for any coin.

[nakaone]

what incentive should an early buyer have tohold a coin when a S-cure is used?

S-curve emmission is in my opinion only possible with a central institution (call this a weakness or a strength of a social contract in cryptocurrencies)

[oda.krell]

the disadvantage is that monero could be accused of ninjamine/premine... The early adopters would have gotten twice the ammount from mining...

I see. And here I was worried it would be a bad idea for some mathematical reason ("No tx propagation! Without integration!" /chant).

Don't really see the risk of ninjamine accusation as that likely tbh. After all, it would ideally be a community vote deciding on the change of emission, not a top down decision by the devs.

[ArticMine]

The opposite is more nearly true.  The future begins when the mining depletes.

before there is a sharp speculative spike in the XMR/XBT rate.

The market should be able to price the emission schedule in, when determining the price. At this point in the cryptoworld, having shart speculative spikes in a new coin's valuation is far from certain anyway.

What IS reality, however, is that some people such as me, automatically reject coins that are too much mined, unless the coin has exceptional merits. This leads to such coins not receiving any investment from the likes of me.

If Monero had been 70% mined when I heard about it, and otherwise same coin, same community and all, I would hardly have been interested.

Yes, but there is a critical difference. By the time Monero reaches a 70% mined rate it will a fundamentally different investment than it is today, for better or for worse. This means a vastly different risk vs return consideration for any investor. We are talking 8 or more years since the start of crypto currencies in 2009.