Bitcoin has emission of 3600 btc/day and it is in bearish trend (obviously the emission is too high to support rising trendline at given rate of adoption/disadoption.
On the other hand, Unobtanium has emission of 15 UNO/day and it has been in the bullish trend since summer 2014.
Monero has emission of 16000+ XMR/day and it has bearish trend since summer (lower highs - although the bearish trend was not that obvious back then due to higher lows which were broken, too).

When XMR's emission is less than 100 XMR/day I call it low emission coin and it has chances to reach pretty high price with the condition that there are people willing to buy the emission + bail the current owners and future sellers out.

You can smoke it?! brb

You're super cool hawking your UNO bags in another coin's thread.

The part of bitching was not serious. I attempted to point to the fact that in USD terms, the current price of Monero is only twice what it was when the coin started trading and some of the current devs had not even heard about it. So that it is probably a good time to buy now, as certainly most of the week-old projects have already died by this age, and since XMR has not, the risks and uncertainties are now lower.


Here I am being totally serious. My 17-year successful online investing career suggests that this kind of opportunities are best tackled with a Venture Capital approach to wealth management (as described in enough detail in the post where the above quote is). In a prior post just 2 pages ago in the same thread, I presented a framework for the EV scenario analysis, including the probability calculation of how likely it is to reach each of the figures above, including that most likely none of them is ever reached. This leaves the possibility that some of them may be reached.

Also my intention was to make the reader realize, indeed, have an epiphany, that if crypto would ever become the dominant monetary system of the world (which is a commonly held belief among many respected cryptopeople, and has to be, since denying it would mean to hold the belief that crypto does not have any chance ever to become dominant), the market cap of the #1 coin has to rise to trillions of dollars at minimum, lest they could not act as the dominant money due to the lack of liquidity.

Unless you completely disregard the possibility of crypto changing the monetary paradigm, or the possibility for XMR to be the #1 crypto, the table above makes complete sense.
 
Note: I am not saying it is likely that you will need to sell your XMR at $200,000, ever. It does not need to be likely to be a +EV. Even if the chance for that happening were 1 in 100,000 (which is a low chance, the probability that a young person dies by accident is much higher per month), it still makes it worthwhile to buy, if Expected Value is what you are after.

A lecture in math & logic is always worth giving. How I wish I would have had access to this information when I was young  


Edited: only 17 years of my investing career is online.

Introspection: I am starting to sound very much like what I felt towards Bitcoin in March, 2013, as it crossed its all-time-high of $32 and relentlessly took new ground.

What foolishness to think that BTC could reach $2,000! The assurance of this possibility led me to buy them and now I have this castle  

I get that.  I really do.

The problem is

A - Economics.  Is the world really going to adopt somethign that is going to make the rest of us rich for doing ... pretty much nothing?  With something that can be easily cloned to a different codebase (not something you can do with gold or silver), has no tangible uses (Gold and silver does), produces nothing (stocks own farms that create food or rent houses or make technology.

B - Technology.  By definition economic adoption needs stability (fiat dollar, gold, shekels, whatever) in order to be productive.  Technology in order to improve by definition needs to be disruptive.  Ethereum will be able to do everything bitcoin can do transaction wise with a fraction of the space and bandwidth (because they plan on doing so much other stuff they HAD to optimize).  When polotics gets in the way of technology - another coin will move in to wipe an old one out.

Monero will wipe darkcoin out.  Ethereum will wipe litecoin out.  Etc

This inhibits adoption

Bitcoin had the advantage of having first mover only mover.  The entire landscape has changed.  I have heard you say you have the same type of feeling (several months ago).  I've seen you think that bitcoin was going to 100,000 per.

I'm not trying to be rude - only state that no one knows.  

I do love all the progress that's been made on XMR.  It really is one of the few interesting nonscam projects out there.

Hypothetical Question:

Not taking into consideration current adoption or first mover advantage but comparing two crypto currencies hypothetically conceived at the same time with the same particulars (emission, etc.) one with a public ledger such as bitcoin and one with a private untraceable one which one would be valued higher and why?

1. Code can't really be cloned (see below)

2. There is a tangible (sort of) use



I agree with you that better technology can sometimes replace worse technology, though not always. I disagree that merely cloned code can do much of anything, otherwise LTC would be more than a pimple on BTC's ass.

As for obsolescence, that will have to play out in the market. Eventually a technology matures to the point where it is good enough and dominates a market not because it is the best possible solution but because anything better is not better enough.

What people think is important changes constantly. Decentralized and trustless systems are interesting right now because people are starting to get weary of being subject to the whims of banks and government bailouts. However, future events may increase demand for centralized banking and trust-based systems in general.

Privacy is no different. It's a hot topic right now, but who knows what we will find important down the line.

The main takeaway here is that even if these technologies fall out of popularity, we will always have them in our back pocket should the need arise.