The companies (probably most companies who accept BTC) using payment processors to instantly convert to fiat and tank the markets by oversupply are not "the Bitcoin economy". They fucked the Bitcoin economy by putting everyone who bought at higher prices in the position of having to spend/sell at a loss, or hold so as not to lose money. Not spending BTC on fuckers.
What would you have them do? Bitcoin is volatile, and their operations run on paper money.
One would presume a company wouldn't be running in the red or such razor thin margins that it would go bankrupt by not dumping (holding)
BTC, with
BTC conversions only a single digit or decimal percentage of their gross income, and they especially wouldn't if most other companies did the same. But see the asterisk below.
The companies (probably most companies who accept BTC) using payment processors to instantly convert to fiat and tank the markets by oversupply are not "the Bitcoin economy". They fucked the Bitcoin economy by putting everyone who bought at higher prices in the position of having to spend/sell at a loss, or hold so as not to lose money. Not spending BTC on fuckers.
The payment processors who are selling bitcoins are doing you a favor by keeping the prices low while you can still accumulate.
Anyone can accumulate at any price point with an infinitely divisible currency, but they shouldn't, if they are effectively guaranteed to lose value because of fuckers.
They are also widening the liquidity channels that allows value to flow from the legacy economy into the Bitcoin economy.
And right back to the legacy economy, with almost no exceptions (Amagi Metals 100%, one other one recently 100%, Overstock 10% - though considering their lackluster
BTC earnings reports, they might have dropped the percentage).
AFAIK, all the major payment processors give their customers the option to adjust the btc/fiat percentages of their payout.
But how many actually do, that aren't publicly announcing it (legally required to, or not)? Can that data be aggregated from accounts without violating privacy policies?
This means that once a merchant is set up, their sales volume becomes a potential source of liquidity in the future.
* Potentially, but they'd have to be time travelers, optimists or morons to be the first or amongst the first to say "hey, this asset that keeps losing value, we should convert less of that!"
Value flowing into Bitcoin via commerce (products and services) is much less subject to chokepoints than value flowing into Bitcoin via exchanges and the legacy banking system.
Supply & wholesale for fiat only is a pretty big chokepoint. Don't see much end-to-end bitcoin value flow.
In a world where many merchants are set up to accept btc, even if they immediately sell 100% of it, you should be able to envision a positive feedback loop in which some merchants start taking a greater percentage of their payouts in btc, which causes a positive change in the exchange rate, which causes more merchants to increase their btc percentage, which causes more positive change in the exchange rate...
Right now there is a self-reinforcing negative feedback loop (present $10 daily rally insignificant enough to not be included) that requires the type of people above to break it, and enough of them to cancel out the dumpers.
