Technical analysis is always trumped by fundamentals over the long run.
You are making a huge speculative assumption that bitcoin will achieve mass adoption. The question is what makes it superior to fiat that institutions and govt will support it?
Whats stopping govt from outlawing it as legal tender? At some point govt has to take a stance like China. Whats stopping a better crypto from replacing it? Did anyone think Facebook would kill Myspace
You don't even know if bitcoin will exist in the future.
All your points are valid issues but not relevant to my research. I want to understand the circumstances under which the exponential growth of bitcoin prices eventually slows down. So I assume a logistic adoption model. I assume that Bitcoin will replace fiat, and that the existing financial infrastructure will be disrupted.
My assumptions are plausible according to arguments posted earlier in this thread.
Let me address your issues . . .
1. From what I have seen so far, fundamental analysis of the Bitcoin economy supports the notion of exponential growth. The number of Bitcoin transactions, and the number of bitcoin addresses on the blockchain are both growing exponentially. I use some of the techniques of technical analysis, e.g. drawing trendlines through a historical price series in order to illustrate and understand exponential growth.
2. The assumption that Bitcoin will achieve mass adoption is plausible; namely Bitcoin is a deflationary digital virtual currency that avoids the need for a trusted intermediary thus it is much more efficient than existing banking infrastructure, and can plausibly reach vast numbers of unbanked consumers. Furthermore, Bitcoin is a platform upon which numerous value added services are being developed, e.g. Bitcoin is programmable money.
3. Government support of Bitcoin is best exemplified by the US Senate hearings this year in which powerful US politicians heard that existing laws were sufficient to deter virtual currency criminals. The chairperson stated that the US needs a balance between protecting the consumer and encouraging innovation. This point is very important. Bitcoin is innovation. I believe that the Chinese government feels the same way - but they are hamstrung by foreign exchange controls so they need to be sure that these cannot be circumvented by Bitcoin purchases transferred out of China. Bitcoin is currently not legal tender anywhere. Your issue actually could be stated as - under what circumstances would a government permit Bitcoin to become legal tender? Perhaps when a majority of that government's employees prefer to be paid in Bitcoin.
4. Economic network effects prevent an alternate coin from replacing Bitcoin - given that Bitcoin was first, is by far the largest, and is good enough. Any particular altcoin innovation can be adopted by Bitcoin if necessary. Many believe that altcoins provide a gateway into Bitcoin and thus add to its value.
5. I thought that Facebook would replace MySpace. The latter was simply not good enough.