If Bitcoin becomes widely adopted and the Cambridge study is correct, we’re at 1993-4 in ‘Internet user adoption years.’ ​

Assigning value is fundamental human instinct. Fantasy Sports leagues allow anyone to bet on the exact monetary value of every participant in a market within a tight set of rules. As each player wins and loses games, over and underperforms, bettors update their value with new data. With the emergence of eSports Leagues, we have seen a market for young gamers emerge. Much like the sports market, there are some elite players that are dramatically better than most people.

Promising soccer, golf and tennis players enter the world market for their skills at 9 years old. We often see local crowdfunding campaigns to help them afford dedicated schools that will improve their skills. Their community know that they are the most promising players in the area. Supporters hope that big sports teams or sponsors will eventually agree and sign their local talent up for a specific amount of FIAT. These early backers are then cut off from their predictions. Could young, promising players raise money based on issuing credits? Could you allow scouts to be rewarded for finding promising players by buying up these credits?

Software developers apply to Y Combinator with the hopes of becoming the next Airbnb, Stripe or Dropbox. Sam Altman and Co. admit that they are really just looking for smart, determined founders. The ideas will mutate but they are betting that market demand for the efforts of motivated, young software developers will continue to rise. YC then lock this value into a mentorship/corporate structure. YC gives €120,000 to each startup for 7% of the company. They typically look for startups with 2-3 founders, so if each company has approximately 2.5 founders (guess), that values the average YC participant at about €685,000. They may have to wait many years to redeem any of this equity value.

Bitcoin Core developers are just one side of a network that includes users and miners. But if there is no major difference in market value from one user or miner versus the other, as they perform the same function, then the value of the network is a combination of the incentive structure, development team & network uptime. The longer BTC exists without being hacked, or another flaw being exposed, the more valuable it becomes. In probability terms the Lindy effect is a useful heuristic.

Will the importance of the developers in Bitcoin diminish over time as the protocol ossifies, like the internet protocols? Or will it continue to be an important factor like Linux or Mozilla? If Vitalik left Ethereum, what would it do to the price of ether? It seems strange today to value individual developers like athletes. We can’t just use metrics like Github contributions or association with promising startups as exact value signals. But markets like to uncover information. Would you invest in the future contributions of Peter Wuille or Vitalik if you could? Cristiano Ronaldo’s legs are worth £90m. What is Adam Back’s brain worth?

In new markets like cryptocurrency, the value of key participants is not yet clear because the rules and scope of the market are not clear. The token launch gold rush has been an attempt to capture the value of decentralized markets and strong teams. In uncertain, emerging markets, the quality of the team is the primary valuation metric, as the idea often mutates and changes. Ethereum was to be a world computer but so far its primary use case is token launches. Tokens represent a liquid, decentralized, if currently over-hyped version of a new Venture Capital market.

PIT’s

Today you apply for a job and the wage gives you a very rough idea of what your value to that job market is. Third parties set this, but they get it mostly right if there is plenty of competition in their market. Payscale.com helps give you an idea of what this is in advance. In the future, someone might launch 1 million John credits. This market could allow people to bet on or against my progress in uncovering and contributing useful market information. I wouldn’t need to share anything. John traders could profit from being right or wrong about what some or all my time is worth. Alternatively, I might decide to float a Personal Index Token, with associated consequences to my behaviour like sharing in the proceeds and being penalized for not doing so. There might emerge a standard for personal tokens. An individual version of ERC-20’s. Markets for promising participants would become liquid and widespread. An improved version of Upwork and other online marketplaces.

Your CV could become be a cryptographically provable calculation of your market cap or an estimation of your eventual net worth. If you did nothing in your career but join YCombinator at 18 you might jump from $0 to $680,000. If you left your co-founders and the YC mentorship structure to continue the company alone, this value would probably drop. If you worked at Google, Stripe, or came in the top % of people in a cryptography exam, maybe a value could be attached to this. We currently use mental shortcuts to put some value on these credentials. Most employers scan CV’s for keywords. Maybe more specific values will be attributed to them. Reid Hoffman advocates that you approach your career as a Startup. Personal Index Tokens would be an attempt to value you the Startup of You. Maybe you keep it privately, to be shared with trusted parties, or until you're ready to raise money for something.

If this comes to pass it is hard to think of the second order effects. Imagine seeing your floating value drop live after being fired, or your company becoming insolvent. Imagine a bad actor shorting your stock for some reason. Maybe you might dump your own tokens while claiming to be progressing in some capacity. Each company might have an exact ‘employee market cap’. Plenty of fodder for a dystopian future. Black Mirror have already produced a version of this idea based on social popularity.

Scaling

It may seem like there wouldn’t be enough resources to value every working person but much of the credentialing could be estimated and automated. As you add more metrics, you get clearer values or value ‘ranges’. In theory, an anonymous developer, who can consistently, cryptographically identify their achievements (hacks, patches, blogging etc.) could have a floating value based on their contributions. You could have a private and/or public PIT.

Conclusion

While we are all well accustomed to reading the Forbes 500 and other ‘Rich lists’ the average person would be initially uncomfortable with a ‘live value’. But it might also have positive effects. It might focus people on ethics and the long term value of their career versus short term wins like scammy articles, business practices and political moves.  Market based meritocracy seems to be coming.

This thought experiment brings up more questions than answers. It also may be not be welcome by most people. But if the history of technology tells us anything, it’s that eventually, technology for the wealthy often trickles down to everyone. Your market value is emerging, it’s just not liquid yet. ​
​

If Aliens came to earth and decided that Bitcoin was a type of independent intelligence, what might they conclude its intentions are? Kevin Kelly originally came up with this thought experiment in his book, What Technology Wants.  Aliens might observe that Bitcoin wants:

1. Divisive arguments and hacking which seems to improve its resilience.
2. Governments to keep inflating national currencies.
3. Many, geographically diverse nodes to verify its transactions.
4. Developers to spend wetware hours improving its codebase.
5. Humans to spend energy to secure it.

The aliens conceit allows you to stop trying to mould Bitcoin into what you want it to be and just observe its effect on people. Bitcoin is incentivising people to delay consumption, learn about digital security, study the history of money, revisit Austrian Economics & consider Game Theory. The first Bitcoin users understood the proposition quickly because they had studied many of these topics before it was introduced. They were in many ways waiting for Bitcoin. The rest of us now immerse ourselves in an attempt to catch up.
​

https://twitter.com/AriDavidPaul/status/879876453575389186

Bitcoin rewards long term thinking and punishes short term speculation. Those who jumped in during the mania phases with the hope of rapid, risk free profits have been punished quickly. Those who researched, gradually added and held have been greatly rewarded. The Aliens might go as far as speculating that Bitcoin highlights what humans want vs what they need. Many people want 'a blockchain that can do everything', but maybe we need it to do one thing very well. Many people think that they want:

1. Steady investment returns or a lottery win.
2. To relax in luxury.
3. To save the environment by not ‘wasting’ energy.
4. To invest in Stocks, Bonds and FIAT because they are historically safe.
5. Technology to leave their job alone.

And yet we know that humans thrive when they:

1. Face and overcome difficult challenges.
2. Delay gratification.
3. Learn new things.
4. Work with Technology.
5. Undergo stress and recover.

Saifedean Ammous has mentioned that humans didn’t ask for Bitcoin but they may ultimately be thankful for its long term effect on them.  When you start to accept that stressors will always be a factor as the protocol develops, you can start to enjoy the process of evolution. Gabriel D Vine is another advocate of this approach.

The experiment will run until it breaks or becomes increasingly unbreakable. When you start wishing bitcoin was less divisive, more ‘energy efficient’, less volatile etc. stop yourself and; Ask not what you want from bitcoin but what bitcoin wants from you.

​​twitter.com/btcbehaviour

I travelled 3179 miles from Ireland to go to the Tokensummit. Here are my main takeaways:
 
The cost to attend was 1/5th the cost of Consensus tickets. This led to a good mix of developers, investors, lawyers, hobbyists, researchers and startup founders.
 
Promising signs
 
Siacoin, Civic and Brave stood out to me as having a combination of strong development teams and an ability to execute. Juan Benet & Muneeb Ali also spoke with great clarity about IPFS & Blockstack.
 
0x was the most promising project that I hadn’t heard of. Its a peer to peer exchange for ERC20 tokens. You can learn more here. Prism, a portfolio management application from Erik Voorhees has the potential to be the first widely used smart contract application. Chris Burniske’s talk on valuations had every suit wearer in the room furiously scribbling notes.
 
Worrying signs
 
If there was a consensus on one thing, it is that ethereum is great. A number of people used the following logic: It has most of the new token sales so there is huge value in that. It is worth considering if the opposite is true, that this dependency creates a more fragile scenario for tokens. Interestingly Civic was the only company that discussed issuing their token on RSK.
 
There were very few dissenting voices on the viability of the token sale model. I would like to have seen more of a heated debate around the potential dangers inherent in this structure. Tone Vays, who was in attendance would have been useful on a panel.
 
Long term
 
The event was oversubscribed and benefitted from the small venue. Apparently some people were willing to spend 5x the ticket price to get in. I suspect the next version will be bigger and it will be hard to for the organisers to resist the big corporate sponsor invasion that Consensus suffered from.
 
My long term view on the current token model is neutral. Not a very satisfying conclusion but I’m trying to hold the ideas of the bitcoin maximalists, the token evangelists and the confused lay person in my head. Picking tech breakouts is very difficult so beyond Bitcoin and Stripe, I rarely do it.
 
Overall it was well organised and brought together some of the best people in the space. It will be interesting to look back on it in 5-10 years.

​

This is not investment advice

1. Every 12-24 months the number of bitcoin users doubles. Therefore, the majority of bitcoin/crypto owners have never known a bear market. This leads to recency bias and animal spirits.

2. Consider the possibility that there are unknown factors going on behind the scenes. This was the case in previous bitcoin bubbles, the housing bubble, the dot com bubble, the south sea bubble etc. Is this time different? Vinny Lingham and Chris Ellis have discussed information asymmetry before.

3. If you can break-even on your total FIAT investment and keep some bitcoin for the long term you will probably do better than most people. Don’t compare yourself to others who have done well recently, compare yourself to people like this guy who lost major amounts when MT Gox collapsed.

4. Listen to people with a strong, long term tech investment track record. Most people in Crypto have a very short track record & tend to make specific predictions. Clear vision may be comforting, but it is unlikely to be correct. It is worth reading Benedict Evans recent post on this common mistake. (TLDR; The bitcoin breakthrough is trustless value exchange. The exact applications are harder to call.) @Naval or @wences for example believe that the technological discovery is important, but accept some uncertainty in how cryptocurrency will play out.   

5. When a major correction happens, there will be a rush to the door at exchanges. This will slow down processing speeds and will make you panic if you haven’t experienced it before. You will be tempted to sell at any level.

6. In moments of rational thinking, take out your initial investment capital and put it in a savings account that heavily penalizes withdrawals. It will hurt in the short term.

7. Fantasize about potential losses. Picture telling a spouse or dependent that there isn’t as much cash as you thought there would be because you thought you could call the top of the boom, even though seasoned investors agree this isn’t possible. 

8. Avoid Leverage. It will work 9 times out of 10 in a bull run and you will think that you are getting better at it and put in more. You will lose the first 9 and more on the 10th go.

9. Read about the dot com bubble stories here. Many investors were too young to participate in the dot com bubble and so have no memory of losing lots of their own money on technology bets.

10. Separate your holdings into 2 or 3 pots. One small one that you will speculate with and probably lose. One that you will sell off to break even in FIAT (if you haven’t already). And a small amount that you will hold for the long term, that you can afford to lose.

​11. Read other articles about common bull market mistakes. Here is one from Bread wallet. Robert Shiller recently wrote an article about how the idea of flipping houses spread like a virus. Today its 'Crypto Millionaires', trading from their parents basement.

12. Consider the timing of when you are getting involved. Is it after a long decline and partial recovery, or when Dan Bilzerian got involved, search volumes are at an all time high and the mainstream media say this time its different.

If crypto is very promising over 10 years, but highly risky over 2, the question is not whether you should buy a small amount, it is whether you are capable of buying some and holding for 10 years. If you do decide to, hopefully some of these ideas might help.
 

​In March, Vinny Lingham tweeted his alarming message:

Andreas Antonopoulos retweeted this on 25th April. Contrast this with a quote from Fred Wilson. 'Nothing important has ever been built without irrational exuberance'. ICO mania is indeed getting worse, but is it cause for long term concern, or a promising sign?

In a previous essay I discussed in my conclusion that speculative bubbles:

1. Are inevitable and unpreventable.
2. The crashes that follow serve important, useful functions like exposing cracks, protecting novice investors and preventing future scams.

I’m not exactly sure what alternative ending they both expect in a largely unregulated market that is beginning to pull in novice investors.  Let’s look at some historical examples in reverse order:

Dot Com Bubble -

Post-crash regulations have disincentivized tech companies from going public early, but they did not stop the march of the internet. I have argued that an overly heavy hand may be contributing to the current frenzied speculation around cryptocurrencies. But when the dust settles, the backbone will be built. Unlike the Dot Com Bubble, this backbone is investable.

Mississippi and South Sea Bubble.

To quote Paul Graham ‘The same thing [wild speculation] happened during the Mississippi and South Sea Bubbles. What drove them was the invention of organized public finance (the South Sea Company, despite its name, was really a competitor of the Bank of England). And that did turn out to be a big deal, in the long run.’


Early US Stock Market Bubble -

In February Chris Burniske posted some good tweets that highlight the scams that occurred in the early days of this market. Once scam protections were implemented, the US stock market created an unprecedented amount of wealth for investors.

​

Protections for investors and other regulations will follow this speculative cycle, or whichever one gets big enough to affect a mainstream audience. Ultimately the government will provide tighter regulations for how businesses can operate in the US. If the regulations are too strict, cryptocurrency businesses will move abroad. I’m not sure that constitutes ending badly. It may delay the growth of the industry, but it is unlikely to destroy it.

Nick Tomaino has suggested that we need industry standards for ICO’s and I agree. But there is no strong incentive for everyone to follow them until there are severe consequences for not following them. To quote Charlie Munger. 'Never, think about something else when you should be thinking about the power of incentives'. Regulation comes after speculative frenzy. Not before or during it.

If you hoped that bubbles, crashes and regulation could be avoided, it is worth going back to study the history of markets. I suspect that what Vinny meant is that it will be bad in the short term for new market entrants. While this may be the case, there has never been a way to stop speculation on a new technology from happening in advance. 

I’ll let Naval represent my opinion on whether it is worth bouncing in and out in uncertain times.

​

Disclaimer: This is not investment advice.

Here are some of the metrics that prominent bitcoiners use for valuation (there are lots more).

1. Cost to Mine - Vinny Lingham
2. Transactions on the network - Dan Morehead
3. User growth rate- Jeremy Liew
4. 200 Day Moving Average - Trace Mayer
5. POW equivalent days -Tuur Demester
6. Dilution Adjusted Price. Willy Woo

Both Vinny and Dan have recently indicated that the fair value of bitcoin has departed from what their respective metrics indicate to them. Vinny calculated that the cost to mine, which he sees as a huge indicator of what the value of bitcoin is, stands at around $800. For Dan Morehead, a fair value was $986 in March 2017.

Growth

Bitcoin has grown 5-6x in value over the last 2 years. In that time user growth seems to be somewhere between 2x and 4x, though it is hard to tell. Vinny has mentioned that people need to understand the economics to estimate a fair value for bitcoin.

​

I see little evidence to suggest that new entrants are concerned with fees. The price has risen for two years and that is enough reason for them to believe that it will continue in the same direction. If you have never used a low fee bitcoin, and you are just speculating on higher prices, higher fees are no deterrent.

Tuur DeMeester recently mentioned Peter Wuille’s metric ‘POW equivalent days’ as an important signal of how secure the network is. Its worth listening to his full interview with Adam Meister. This measure is not widely known though and so is unlikely to be a primary reason for recent enthusiasm.

Now you might say that compared to the early adopters and the whales, new entrants don’t hold anywhere near what the bigger players have. But the smart money historically won’t sell much of their long term holdings, unless the price goes parabolic (doubling within a month). Supply is constrained, so new entrants bid up the remaining limited number of coins.

Excitement Masks Problems

In the last boom, we know that MtGox stayed solvent for longer because the price was rising. When it crashed, Willybot was exposed. The price eventually settled on a value that long term holders were not willing to sell below.

It was only after the 2008 property crash that the wider public realised the extent to which subprime loans had been mixed with more secure loans to create a leveraged disaster. Cryptocurrency is much more volatile and much less regulated than the US property market. What are the chances that there is nothing unusual going on behind the scenes in bitcoin today?

Conclusion

In a bull market, these metrics are not accurate indicators of what the current price will be tomorrow. They may be useful for estimating where bitcoin lands when the current euphoria passes. These will of course change over time.

Like Mike Casey, I don’t think a peak can be predicted. Certainly a doubling within a month has been a bad sign, but we are not there yet. In the long term none of this should matter, but it’s no harm to be able to see the ground every now and then, in case you are forced to land.

twitter.com/btcbehaviour



​

Src: https://site.warrington.ufl.edu/ritter/files/2017/03/IPOs2016Statistics_Mar29_2017.pdf

It has been well documented that tech companies have remained private for longer to avoid the scrutiny, short term earnings pressure and regulatory burden that comes with public markets. Retail investors have been left out of the high growth stages that previous generations enjoyed with the likes of Apple, Intel, Microsoft and Dell. We can also see from the above chart that the last year for 100+ tech IPO’s was 2000. A latent demand has been building for high risk, fast growth, early stage technology stocks. Bitcoin and Altcoins may have opened this door again, after 15 years.  Brock Pierce discusses this transition in more detail on a recent Crypto Show episode.

Valuation metrics

People value bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in many different ways. I won't list them all, but between Coingecko.com, coinmarketcap.com and Blockchain.info you will find most of the main ones. As the Bitcoin protocol is just 8 years old, it's not clear yet what objective values people will broadly agree on in the long term. My interview with Vinny Lingham revealed that the price to mine a coin is his primary metric, among others. Dan Morehead of Pantera Capital believes that transactions per day is the best model to use. ​

And yet we know from the exchanges that an increasing number of transactions occur off-chain. We can’t even be sure if the user numbers in the first two charts in this article are reliable.

Bubbles occur in well established markets when a large portion of investors depart from historical valuation methods. In the dot com bubble, focus shifted from profit to eyeballs. In the housing bubble from yields to leveraged capital appreciation.

Dot Com Lessons - Bubble indicators
​

1.Rapid price appreciation

Apart from 1996, the first chart above shows steady, but slowing growth of internet users each year from then onwards. Contrast this with 3x growth in Nasdaq composite index from 1600 in aug 1998 to 5000+ March 2000. The value of the Nasdaq was growing exponentially, as the user base growth rate was slowing.  

In the short history of bitcoin we have regularly seen the price depart from user/transaction growth levels. Very rapid price appreciation has been a precursor to crashes in both bitcoin and the Nasdaq. For instance, in the last two bitcoin bubbles, once the price doubled within a month you could start your timer.  There was a 40% or more crash coming within 30 days.

2.Media endorsements

During the dot com bubble, a number of mainstream articles encouraged retail investors to get involved in the late 1990’s. Smartmoney magazine predicted AOL was a sure thing in 1999.
In the cryptocurrency world we have had a number of endorsements from mainstream media. This article contains many worrying elements such as blockchain hype, ‘getting in early’ and descriptions of small companies in the space as ‘penny stocks’. For the time being though, there remains a balance of cautionary warnings as well. Bitcoin has died 100+ times.  Many mainstream economists have been consistently dismissive of it. The tide has not yet swung into widespread FOMO yet. I suspect if certain prominent naysayers change their opinion, this might begin the swing.

3.Exponential growth predictions

There is no shortage of these in bitcoin. From Wences Cesares, Rick Falkvinge, Jeremy Liew and Tim Draper. I am aware that even writing something like this can contribute to FOMO. I can safely say that don't know where the price is going.

4. Mobile wallets become as easy to use as Netscape

Mobi wallet from BTCC already makes it easy to buy and sell bitcoin in any currency. I suspect that this or another wallet will eventually catch on and lead to much wider adoption. Whether we need to wait till 2019 as per Willy Woo’s volatility prediction remains to be seen.

5.New Narratives

In the 1990’s we had eyeball mania, today it's the altcoin/blockchain hype. Whether this is the narrative that carries into the mainstream bubble, or something else about central bank bailouts, disrupting Wall street, the IoT or some other buzz word also remains to be seen.

What the bubble got right

In his article entitled ‘What the Bubble got Right’ Paul Graham has noted that the beginnings of the dot com bubble were rooted in rational thinking. The internet really was a big deal. The crash occurred because it took much longer than people expected to disrupt incumbents. ​

The consensus among prominent technologists, with a strong record outside Bitcoin is that it really is a breakthrough technology. Misguided Euphoria emerges when people forget that it may take 30 years for the full value to be realised. Willy Woo has touched on this in his article Woo’s law of bitcoin user growth. Suffice to say that very few people think on this long term time horizon when it comes to something that is appreciating rapidly in value.

So when can we expect the next boom to happen?

Based on Bitcoin's short history, is not unreasonable to expect another bubble to grow and pop in the next 2 years but it may not be ‘the big one’ that involves people with no technical or even basic understanding of the protocol. If and when it comes, we may see some or all of the following:

1. The storage scammers - Mom and Pop investors struggle to understand how to store their bitcoins. There will be no shortage of fake hardware, cold storage, and hot wallet scams to take their money.

 2. More hacked exchanges - Even legitimate exchanges will come under much more pressure from sophisticated hackers. Many new investors won't have even heard of Mt Gox and will happily leave their fiat money and bitcoin in exchanges.

 3. ICO scams - It hasn’t been hard to sell some technical people on the idea that bitcoin is old news and they are about to miss out on the latest coin/token offering. Imagine a scenario where 1000’s of tokens have launched on the Ethereum Blockchain and it suddenly ceases to function for some unforeseeable reason.

 4. Other tech gets pulled into ‘blockchain’ - ICO’s for VR, AI, Drones, Autonomous Vehicles ramp excitement up to another level.

 5. Taylor Swift ICO’s an album - This is the peak.

The aftermath - Regulation

After the dot com bubble, greater regulation followed soon afterwards and this time will probably be no different. It will become harder to invest in bitcoin without getting advice first and the government will most likely track and regulate industry practices much more carefully.

Can this be prevented?

Due to the enormous latent demand for early stage tech investment, the new narratives, high growth predictions, lack of regulation and long history of speculative cycles, I don’t think that it can be stopped. For novice investors, it is only through individual psychological tricks that you can prevent FEAR and FOMO. Here are a few that have worked in the past.

Making it hard to over-invest at the peak of a cycle or sell at the bottom of one.

Bitcoin Pensions - Government regulated pensions essentially incentivise delayed returns and punish those who withdraw early. This would protect those who don't have the expertise to assess the short term risk.  An ETF would probably be needed for this to happen on a wider scale.

CheckLockTimeVerify or CLTV. Merged into Bitcoin Core in 2015, this feature should in theory allow parents to create a trust for their kids or savers to restrict their own ability to sell in a panic. As of yet, no service or wallet has integrated and promoted it in a meaningful way. Tom Nguyen has implemented a version of this using Solidity.

Leverage - Ensure leverage is hard to get in relation to bitcoin. I don’t think there is a practical way to prevent this. The market will demand it and ultimately it will be probably be limited in government regulatory crackdown on Wallets and Exchanges.

Savings schemes In the 1990’s in Ireland, the SSIA savings scheme allowed consumers to get a very high rate of return on their saved cash by putting it into a government backed high interest scheme for at least 5 years. This was an attempt to try to incentivise them to save during the property boom. The problem was that the money was released in 2007 at the height of the boom which exacerbated to problem. The potential for this to work in bitcoin is probably limited given the untested nature of bitcoin and the potential reputational damage for politicians who get this wrong.

Examinations for advisors. So many people fall down on the basic facts of the protocol that it would be a useful starting point if you want to advise new entrants to the market on bitcoin/blockchain investment.  Post ‘big crash’ this will be imposed anyway so it's no harm to get ahead of them and create something that the community can discuss.

Public Index Fund for total Cryptocurrency Market Cap

This will of course fluctuate but might save individuals from trying to bet on what the ‘next bitcoin’ will be. For more data on this check out this post by none other than Willy Woo. A number of index funds are in the pipeline as of today's date.

Split your coins into 2 separate pots

One that you will never sell and can afford to lose. I actually use 3 pots as explained in this article.

Conclusion

Bitcoin has grown in hype cycles to date. There is no reason to expect this to change. Bubbles and crashes may serve some useful functions. They weed out the temporary speculators or ‘weak hands’. They force the industry to create new standards around the mistakes of the last cycle. They expose false narratives and cracks in the system. The incentives to self-regulate do not exist until these cracks are exposed. There are probably lots of unexposed cracks in the system at the moment. If the damage radius gets wide enough to affect unsophisticated investors, regulation will come in from the outside.

The next crash may also have the unintended consequence of solving the scaling debate. A subsequent crash and trough may lead to a better environment for compromise in that miners fees will be relatively lower again. Alternatively, exchanges may route around the problem with off chain scaling solutions as suggested by Jimmy Song.

That is all. https://twitter.com/btcbehaviour

I just finished Nathaniel Poppers book Digital Gold. Here are a few of my main takeaways:

1. Digital currency discussions have always been contentious. People like to note that Hal Finney and Gavin Andreessen were civil in the early days and things have fallen apart in the scaling debate. In fact Popper reports that the Cypherpunk mailing list was full of sniping comments from Nick Szabo and others. Heated debate is the norm.

2. Very easy and well written narrative of the early days of bitcoin. I had no idea about Marti Malmi or that Hal Finney was a bit of jock.

3. In the history of digital currencies bitcoin is still young. If it goes away and gets replaced its not the end of the world. It has started something important.  Wences Cesares prediciton sums up my subjective thinking on this uncertainty.  30% chance of failure but more than 50% of big success. It is an asymmetric bet. The asymmetry is due to lack of understanding about its potential.

4. Listening to those who have remained calm the longest may be a useful strategy. e.g. Wences Cesares, & Dan Morehead.  

In a previous report, I posited that that the price of bitcoin was not predictable, but that euphoria and disillusionment may be identifiable. There has been a short boom and bust cycle since I wrote the report but nothing like the 2013 crash. I pointed to two things that occurred before the last 2 major crashes, (which I defined as 40% drop or more within a month):

1. The price had doubled within 15 days.
2. Search for 'bitcoin bubble' dramatically increased in volume.

Neither has happened yet, and both may not preceed the next big crash, but some euphoria seems to be back. Is there someone with a good track record of predictions who can help if we are returning to animal instincts? I decided to focus on longer term predictions with three key characteristics as influenced by Philip Tetlock's book, Superforecasters:

1. Six months or more in advance
2. Specific dates
3. Specific prices or price ranges.

Below are all of the more specific predictions I could find. Please point me to more if they exist. I will ultimately compile them into an excel type scoreboard. As of now, Vinny Lingham is the only person I can find with a strong track record.

2014

March 2014 - Vinny Lingham - $350-500 by year end (correct)

Feb 2014 - Alena Vranova - $50-10,000 = ( very wide but correct)

2016

May 2016 - Vinny Lingham - $1000 by year end (ended about $970)

bitcoinprice.tech= $2000 by year end ($1000 off)


2017

1 - Sept 2016 - Willy Woo - currently is $680 should be $2500. Target for in 2017

​2 - Dec 2016 Vinny Lingham - Will hit $3000 in 2017

3 - Dec 2016 Cancord Genuity $1200 - by end of 2017

4 - Tim draper $1000-1400

5 - Daniel Masters, bitcoin will hit $4,400 by the end of 2017.

6 - http://bitcoinprice.tech/bitcoin-price-prediction/ = $5000 by 2017.

7. Petar Zivkovski - $2000

Less specific times within the year.

Joe Lee - Over $1500

Ryan Rabiglia - Over $1400

Alex Tapscott - $2000

2018

Tim Draper - $10,000 by 2018


2020

http://bitcoinprice.tech/bitcoin-price-prediction/ - $10,000-$50,000

2025

Cancord Genuity - $5300 by 2025. (link above)

Wences Cesares - $500k+ in 2024 (20% chance it could be 0)

2029

Rick Falkvinge - $2-5 Million

This report does not constitute investment advice. Always seek professional advice. I am not an accredited investor.

​

Euphoria, Disillusionment and the Wisdom of Crowds


This report proposes that the fluctuations in the bitcoin price are not predictable. That the price movements are driven by behaviors and phenomena that collectively, are too complex to model. I propose that those who claim to predict the future price have been vague in their predictions, following none of the ‘Superforecaster’ guidelines outlined by Philip Tetlock. I further propose that they are mostly attaching the movements to macro factors, after the fact.

I would preface this report by saying that I’m not an economist, programmer or mathematician. This report is heavily influenced by Scott Adams, Nassim Taleb, Philip Tetlock, Naval Ravikant and Robert Shiller. The evidence that will convince me that I’m wrong is a public, specific, track record of correct price predictions. To my knowledge there aren’t any like Gurufocus, even in a range of prices.

So how is this an investment report? I do think there is a potential leading indicator of something, but I could also be Fooled By Randomness. Part of the reason for this report is to see if I can be shown to be incorrect, so I can learn from it.


Specifics Matter - The Wisdom of Crowds

In the following article , written February 2014, 50 people involved with Bitcoin in some way were asked what the value of BTC would be in 12 months time. It was about $650 at the time and would be $420 a year later. This is a useful survey because it is so specific. I thank the author for leaving it up. Out of the 50 asked, very few showed a measured analysis. Many prefaced their comments by saying it's very tough to predict, but still predicted at least a doubling in value. One of the key factors may have been confirmation bias, in that their businesses would probably benefit from a big uptick in the price. Only one person predicted the right range. By simply saying they didn't know, two others were more accurate than all of the other bullish predictions.

Alexander Lawn admitted he simply didn’t know
Frederick Thenault didn’t know either.
Alena Vranova of Trezor predicted a range from $50 to $10,000. The only correct range. Even with it she admitted that it was a rough guess.

Alena emerges as a voice of sanity here. A very wide range but nonetheless someone who could identify that a wide price range for bitcoin in 12 months time is barely predictable, if at all.

Other reports

Tuur Demeester -  I find Tuur to be one of the more knowledgeable bitcoin commentators. In his Adamant Research - November 2015 Report  he outlined the reasons why the price of bitcoin might go higher. There is no specifics about when this rally will happen, and how much bitcoin will appreciate. It is nonetheless, a compelling summary of the potential for bitcoin and I encourage anyone interested to read it.


Barry Silbert has a strong inside track with many investments in the cryptocurrency space and posts lots of content on Twitter, claiming to have sold all stocks and bonds in December. He predicted a rally of ETC against ETH but like Tuur he hasn’t made any specific price predictions with any exact future time horizon.  


Bitcoin undervalued by $200

This report is only partially useful, in that it is specific about values, but is vague about time. It says that BTC is undervalued by $200. It has since passed that value which makes it broadly correct but there was no indication that this would take 3-4 months. It could have been 3-4 weeks or 3-4 years or any other time horizon you can think of. Time and price are essential for specific predictions.

Cancord Genuity - This recent report is useful because they are giving specific price. In November 2025  bitcoin will be worth $5739. They have laid out the reasons they think this might happen and in Figure 19, they see a strong correlation between the bitcoin price and the rise in transaction volume, with departures from it in times of mania. It also splits this transactional volume away from the Perception Value which may be attached to Gold. Again this could be wrong but it is very specific and therefore, crucially, disprovable.

Richelle Ross in 2015, predicted correctly that Bitcoin would pass 650 in 2015. She claims to have predicted On 23rd July 2014 on Quora that the price of bitcoin at the end of the year would rest around $420. Although no link is inluded in the article. I don't see any record of it here either.



Is Euphoria and Disillusionment more identifiable?

Disillusionment

Fred Wilson - We are in the trough of disillusionment - Sept 2014.
But Bitcoin is resilient  - July  2015.
“It goes up, it gets knocked down, but it hangs in there, and then it goes up again.”

Fred continued to show faith in the technology through blog posts as it declined and then rebounded in value. His prescription was just to buy the same amount each month throughout this period. That would have been a wise strategy that would already have reaped rewards. Alena and Fred are useful because they are measured in their approach. Freds leading indicator about bitcoin is transaction volume on the network and developer adoption.


Euphoria

Here are two potentially useful facts:

There has never been a bitcoin crash (40% or more devaluation in a month) without a spike in the search volume for the term ‘bitcoin bubble’. By spike I mean 10x or more increase in search volume from previous 6 month or more trough.

In the last 5 years, there has always been a crash within 30 days of the price doubling in 15 days or less. So should you sell out when this happens? I don’t think so, but I do think that you should consider reducing your position by a small amount (lets say 10%) in order to bank some of the gains. I think that bitcoin potentially has long term value, but if you have a lot invested in it it's prudent to have some liquid assets for long periods of decline or slow growth. During these periods it may be a good idea to follow Fred Wilson's system as outlined above.

But wait! You say. How can I know when to sell out? The answer is that you can’t. You can only try to listen to people with a good record who have predicted when greed and fear are taking off again.


Here are 3 predictions:

1. Taking a lead from Alena Vranova I predict the price of bitcoin will be between $200-$20,000 in 12 months time. I predict this with about 70% certainty. There is a 30% chance it could be lower or higher.
2. I also predict that if and when it hits a new high, within 3 months of this, lots of predictions from prominent bitcoiners (10+) will emerge saying that it will go higher soon.
3. Finally I predict an increasing number of vague analyses from Bitcoin Analysts with specific or vague price predictions over vague time horizons.

But I could be wrong.

22 December 2016

https://twitter.com/BTCBehaviour

Disclaimer: Always seek professional advice before making an investment. This report may be wrong.