3 reactions
Why will utility coin adoption result in higher coin prices?
I have a large investment in utility tokens (XRP, XLM, ETH, etc.), so please understand that this is not FUD, it is just a healthy test of my thesis as all investors should do with all investments.
Last year I belonged to a paid discord run by a reputable and knowledgeable host, with a lot of people who seemed educated in what they own and 100% committed. I asked a few questions regarding why mass adoption by institutions was guaranteed to make the value of the coins go to the moon and I never did receive a logical and adequate response that satisfied me. I assumed it was so clear and simple that no one wanted to take the time to explain it to me, and I assumed that they just have a much deeper understanding than me, and stayed heavily invested. Fast forward a year, every day I'm seeing youtube videos talking about all these major financial and industrial institutions adopting utility coins as the backbone of their processes, yet the value of the coins does not move at all, just sideways near-term and continuing slowly downward long-term. "Experts" now explaining the golabal money supply, saying crypto is next after money rotates out of prescious metals, there's an issue with the yen carry trade, etc. It brings me back to my original questions and I'm wondering if they did not explain to me because they did not know either. Here goes:
Financial institutions are adopting utility crypto networks as a tool to move value, this is clearly happening at a fast pace. The value is not in the tool itself, it is still in the old-school non-fiat hard assets like precious metals, real estate, bonds, etc. that are being moved on the network. If I'm an institution using a tool, why would I want the tool itself to appreciate substantially in value, wouldn't this be counter-productive in that it increases the cost of me using the tool? If the tool gets cost-prohibitive, wouldn't I seek another similar but less-expensive tool? (there are many options and new ones could be created out of thin air if there is demand for new cheaper ones). If the current tool I'm using knows I have this option, wouldn't they just create more coins to reduce the scarcity factor to keep the price of the coins lower so I don't move to another one as a means to self-preserve the company/entity/business that has the business interest in me using that tool? (Ripple, Hedera council, etc.).
Similiar example from the past: It is said that during the gold rush out west the people who made out the most were those selling the shovels. After you bought a shovel the "shovel dealer" just restocked from suppliers in the East. Once people noticed this, more "shovel dealers" popped up and the cost of shovels went down. Once you bought a shovel and the market was flooded your shovel became pretty much worthless, no way to get your money back if you didn't find enough gold. What is different with utility coins?
#cryptocurrency
source
I have a large investment in utility tokens (XRP, XLM, ETH, etc.), so please understand that this is not FUD, it is just a healthy test of my thesis as all investors should do with all investments.
Last year I belonged to a paid discord run by a reputable and knowledgeable host, with a lot of people who seemed educated in what they own and 100% committed. I asked a few questions regarding why mass adoption by institutions was guaranteed to make the value of the coins go to the moon and I never did receive a logical and adequate response that satisfied me. I assumed it was so clear and simple that no one wanted to take the time to explain it to me, and I assumed that they just have a much deeper understanding than me, and stayed heavily invested. Fast forward a year, every day I'm seeing youtube videos talking about all these major financial and industrial institutions adopting utility coins as the backbone of their processes, yet the value of the coins does not move at all, just sideways near-term and continuing slowly downward long-term. "Experts" now explaining the golabal money supply, saying crypto is next after money rotates out of prescious metals, there's an issue with the yen carry trade, etc. It brings me back to my original questions and I'm wondering if they did not explain to me because they did not know either. Here goes:
Financial institutions are adopting utility crypto networks as a tool to move value, this is clearly happening at a fast pace. The value is not in the tool itself, it is still in the old-school non-fiat hard assets like precious metals, real estate, bonds, etc. that are being moved on the network. If I'm an institution using a tool, why would I want the tool itself to appreciate substantially in value, wouldn't this be counter-productive in that it increases the cost of me using the tool? If the tool gets cost-prohibitive, wouldn't I seek another similar but less-expensive tool? (there are many options and new ones could be created out of thin air if there is demand for new cheaper ones). If the current tool I'm using knows I have this option, wouldn't they just create more coins to reduce the scarcity factor to keep the price of the coins lower so I don't move to another one as a means to self-preserve the company/entity/business that has the business interest in me using that tool? (Ripple, Hedera council, etc.).
Similiar example from the past: It is said that during the gold rush out west the people who made out the most were those selling the shovels. After you bought a shovel the "shovel dealer" just restocked from suppliers in the East. Once people noticed this, more "shovel dealers" popped up and the cost of shovels went down. Once you bought a shovel and the market was flooded your shovel became pretty much worthless, no way to get your money back if you didn't find enough gold. What is different with utility coins?
#cryptocurrency
source
| 11,000 mlx | |
| 6 | |
| 3 |
would you be surprised if i say there's no difference between cryptocoins and spoons?
both simply are goods.
the spoon have higher value than BTC but it's cheaper , phenomenal adoption and utility .
networks ar different story, bcze they do not trust traditional ways anymore.
all about money and security, ether should be more expensive than BTC.
both simply are goods.
the spoon have higher value than BTC but it's cheaper , phenomenal adoption and utility .
networks ar different story, bcze they do not trust traditional ways anymore.
all about money and security, ether should be more expensive than BTC.
