2012-06-22 forbes.com - The Bitcoin Richest: Accumulating Large Balances

[julz]

The Bitcoin Richest: Accumulating Large Balances

Jon Matonis
2012-06-22

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/06/22/the-bitcoin-richest-accumulating-large-balances/

...
What can we learn from this list? First, it demonstrates that a broad group of people are comfortable enough with the bitcoin crypto to exit the traditional banking system and leave significant value on the blockchain for extended periods.
...

[austonst]

Forbes seems to do a good job of not reposting the same Bitcoin story that everyone's already posted a hundred times over. It's a nice, positive article that approaches the topic from a bit of a different viewpoint.

[hazek]

Forbes seems to do a good job of not reposting the same Bitcoin story that everyone's already posted a hundred times over. It's a nice, positive article that approaches the topic from a bit of a different viewpoint.

Thanks to Jon Matonis!

[Stephen Gornick]

Forbes seems to do a good job of not reposting the same Bitcoin story that everyone's already posted a hundred times over. It's a nice, positive article that approaches the topic from a bit of a different viewpoint.

Thanks to Jon Matonis!

Doesn't it strike anyone odd that this little crypto currency experiment (currently valued, in sum, at less than $60 million USD) is getting so much attention from this one media publisher (especially when compared to how little any others cover it?)

It is almost like ... Forbes wants to have it publicly known that they (and they alone among their peers) had the foresight to recognize Bitcoin as being "a big deal" and as a result gave it more than its share of real estate in their online and print publications?

Before the global financial crisis started in 2007 certain people like Meredith Whitney, Nicholas Taleb, and Nouriel Roubini wrote not just on the troubled future they saw but on paths that would either protect or bring profit when the crisis took shape.  The publishers that featured their work gained credibility once it became evident how spot-on they were.

[BoardGameCoin]

Doesn't it strike anyone odd that this little crypto currency experiment (currently valued, in sum, at less than $60 million USD) is getting so much attention from this one media publisher (especially when compared to how little any others cover it?)

It is almost like ... Forbes wants to have it publicly known that they (and they alone among their peers) had the foresight to recognize Bitcoin as being "a big deal" and as a result gave it more than its share of real estate in their online and print publications?

I agree its odd, but I also agree that its insightful of Forbes. I think there are a few traders who are going to make an absolute killing on bitcoin. I hope there will also be many comparatively lower-net-worth people that are able to maintain and increase their wealth through participation in the bitcoin economy.

-bgc

[Spekulatius]

Forbes seems to do a good job of not reposting the same Bitcoin story that everyone's already posted a hundred times over. It's a nice, positive article that approaches the topic from a bit of a different viewpoint.

Thanks to Jon Matonis!

Doesn't it strike anyone odd that this little crypto currency experiment (currently valued, in sum, at less than $60 million USD) is getting so much attention from this one media publisher (especially when compared to how little any others cover it?)

It is almost like ... Forbes wants to have it publicly known that they (and they alone among their peers) had the foresight to recognize Bitcoin as being "a big deal" and as a result gave it more than its share of real estate in their online and print publications?

Before the global financial crisis started in 2007 certain people like Meredith Whitney, Nicholas Taleb, and Nouriel Roubini wrote not just on the troubled future they saw but on paths that would either protect or bring profit when the crisis took shape.  The publishers that featured their work gained credibility once it became evident how spot-on they were.

Either this, or they dont really care and have confidence in Matonis' gut felling on what readers like to read, so they basically let him write whatever tickles his fancy as long as they get their pages filled with content.

Just say'n

[Raoul Duke]

Either this, or they dont really care and have confidence in Matonis' gut felling on what readers like to read, so they basically let him write whatever tickles his fancy as long as they get their pages filled with content.

Just say'n

Even if that is indeed the reason, we must praise Forbes the same way. It's refreshing to see a publication who doesn't put a gag on writers because of political or other biases and/or influences.

[Kluge]

Hmm. Does Mantonis have a known forum handle? Pro-BTC bias aside, his writing style is very engaging.

[Raoul Duke]

Hmm. Does Mantonis have a known forum handle? Pro-BTC bias aside, his writing style is very engaging.

matonis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1986

[Kluge]

Hmm. Does Mantonis have a known forum handle? Pro-BTC bias aside, his writing style is very engaging.

matonis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1986

Thanks.

[nimnul]

the total bitcoin market capitalization [is] at approximately $60 million

It's amazing how this multiplication of best available price by order book size persist. How did he get the 60M figure?

[Foxpup]

the total bitcoin market capitalization [is] at approximately $60 million

It's amazing how this multiplication of best available price by order book size persist. How did he get the 60M figure?

Market capitalisation is calculated by multiplying the current trade price by the total number of shares that have been distributed. It is by no means an accurate representation of the total value of a particular market, but it's the best we've got.

[nimnul]

The definition only says "it is equal to the share price times the number of shares outstanding". I was only laughing at how coins hoarded by miners are considered outstanding shares and how last trade price is considered share price. Is there any better place to discuss this as it doesn't related to this particular news post.

[MaxSan]

$60m could buy all of bitcoin though, I doubt it would even purchase 35% by time the ask price would shoot waay up.

[nimnul]

800k is enough to close all current orders on USD and EUR exchanges

[Foxpup]

There seems to be some confusion of the meaning of the term market capitisation as it applies to Bitcoin. It means exactly the same thing as it does in any other market. In particular, it does not represent the amount of money needed to "buy out" the entire market, which is impossible to measure by any means.

The definition only says "it is equal to the share price times the number of shares outstanding". I was only laughing at how coins hoarded by miners are considered outstanding shares and how last trade price is considered share price. Is there any better place to discuss this as it doesn't related to this particular news post.

I don't think the term outstanding shares means what you think it does. Outstanding shares are shares which have been acquired by, and are currently owned by, members of the public, as opposed to the issuer. Outstanding shares are not limited to those which are actively being traded, they also include those which are being hoarded and those which have been lost (since the owner of lost shares could (theoretically) find them again). In the case of Bitcoin, outstanding shares are all the bitcoins that have ever been mined (currently a little over 9 million) out of the 21 million bitcoins "issued". There's nothing more to it than that. Feel free to PM me if you want to discuss this further, but I really don't see how there's anything further to discuss. Market capitalisation is a simple concept, perhaps too simple, since people seem to want to draw some kind of deeper meaning from it that just doesn't exist.

[Technomage]

For something like Bitcoin there is no "buy out" price. It's infinite. I for one would save some amount of bitcoins regardless of how high the price shot up, they're simply not for sale. Buying everything from the exchanges right now is like buying a grain of sand from the beach. It does nothing in regards to "buying out" the entire market.

The market cap is pretty much the best indicator of Bitcoin usage. It illustrates the fact that even staying at a certain price level means growth for Bitcoin at this stage. Long term, excluding the mega bubble, the market cap is on a huge growth trend.

[finkleshnorts]

To get slightly back on topic, I highly recommend Matonis' tweets.

[Stephen Gornick]

It is almost like ... Forbes wants to have it publicly known that they (and they alone among their peers) had the foresight to recognize Bitcoin as being "a big deal" and as a result gave it more than its share of real estate in their online and print publications?

Or ... they just like bloggers on the edge who drive traffic:
 - http://www.forbes.com/sites/lewisdvorkin/2011/07/18/disruptive-change-creates-noise-heres-the-equation-that-sets-forbes-apart-from-others/