

Bitcoin plummets 32% in two days, threatens mainstream adoption - ilamont
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-14/bitcoin-s-2-day-plunge-threatens-mainstream-adoption.html

======
satellitecat
I wonder if Bitcoin's recent adoption by some big sites is actually what is
bringing the price down as people with stored up BTC are sending them to
merchants, who are instantly converting them to their preferred currency?

~~~
CoderOnWelfare
THat's an interesting thought, - I vector toward thinking that there was a
chokehold on new money coming into the system. It was really hard to acquire
bitcoins by a wide base of people.

It got tons of press - but at the end of the day Joe Schmoe who has a desire
for it has no idea how to purchase it.

------
Scoundreller
I've always thought of it like this:
Bitcoin:Cryptocurrency::Yahoo:InternetSearchEngines

Cryptocurrencies have a strong future, but I don't think Bitcoin has much of
one. Yahoo had its early glory, but it declined as other search engines solved
its problems.

~~~
shittyanalogy
Yahoo is doing just fine

~~~
Scoundreller
As of early/mid-2014, their share of the search market hit its lowest ever of
10% of the market. My stats for my web properties paint an even worse picture.

As a company they're doing fine because the market size is growing and they're
getting aggressive about paid search, not by being technically superior.

------
debacle
For anyone watching bitcoin technicals, has the volume been driving the
volatility or has the volatility driven the volume? The volume spikes seemed
to coincide directly with the price drop, so I am assuming this is someone
just trying to divest themselves of a lot of bitcoin over the course of a few
days.

------
hellbanner
I don't think cryptocurrencies long term value is in their USD amount. It's in
their other features like being able to send money across the world with
minimal transaction fees and certianity the transaction will not be
interrupted.

~~~
shittyanalogy
If the value of bitcoin is so low that you can't buy enough of them to pay for
your purchase without drastically changing the value of the currency then
they're not particularly useful as a method of payment.

~~~
jarfil
At the moment of this writing, there are 13725450 Bitcoins in existence [1],
with a value of $195.30 each [2]. That makes a grand total of $2,680,580,385
(2.6 billion).

How low would they have to fall for there not being enough of them to perform
a transaction?

[1] [https://blockexplorer.com/q/totalbc](https://blockexplorer.com/q/totalbc)
[2] [https://www.coinbase.com/charts](https://www.coinbase.com/charts)

~~~
shittyanalogy
2.7 billion market cap, not available to you. Say you needed to make a
$10,000+ purchase. If you can't buy or sell that much bitcoin without
considerably altering it's price it becomes a hassle of a currency.

------
anonbanker
This means it's another time to buy in. I made a ton of money off the last
debasement; I bet this one will be incredible.

I still consider the coins undervalued at $800/btc.

~~~
Igglyboo
How can you put a value on an intangible good that is backed by nothing?

~~~
anonbanker
Godaddy.com must blow your mind.

~~~
Igglyboo
Perhaps "intangible" was the wrong word. But domain names, unlike bitcoins,
are actually useful for something. Bitcoins are just placeholders for value or
wealth, like any other currency. The only reason they are useful is because we
say a bitcoin is worth x dollars. We don't have to make an artificial
distinction like that for a domain name because it is obvious what it is used
for.

Even if domain names were free they would still have value, if bitcoins were
free they would have 0 value.

~~~
deeviant
Eh, I can trade a bitcoin for +/\- 200$ bucks, currently. That seems like a
example of "good for something".

I can also transfer currency of any type, via the internet, without
interacting with a financial institution(buy bitcoin using your preferred
currency, trade bitcoin, the received converts bitcoin into their preferred
currency), this capability also seems like it could be "good for something".

I feel like the "it's internet funny money!" claims are just as wrong as the
"bitcoin will change everything about currency" claims.

~~~
wodenokoto
That's not what the intrinsic value argument is about. The "good for
something" (as intrinsic value was put here) is the question if something is
still useful if its use as a placeholder for value collapses.

If the price of rice collapses, I can still eat it. If the price of cars
collapses I can still drive mine to work. If the price of web domains
collapses, people can still use it to visit my web page. If the price of
Bitcoin collapses to zero, you can still do what with your coin?

~~~
deeviant
US Dollars have no intrinsic value either, this does not stop anybody from
using them.

Talking about rice is silly, we are talking about currency. No major economies
currencies are based on anything with intrinsic value.

~~~
Igglyboo
Technically they do because the paper and metal cost money. Other than that,
they are actually backed by something.

~~~
deeviant
Backed by what? Faith? Confidence? You can't trade your US dollar in for gold.
The note literally just says, "You must accept this for any debt(Because)".

Are we really going to go down to that intrinsic value _of the paper it 's
printed on_??? To be honest, I actually have little faith in bitcoin myself,
but I can at least see the reason why it has taken off as far as it has, and
it did earn me a pretty penny when I got out(I mined all my own bitcoins and
just to experiment with a new technology, right from the beginning).

I just get tired of hearing extremophile arguments this way or that.

