No it doesn't it's the other way around.
I'm not calculating market cap. I'm calculating the max value of a fixed coin asset, not the current.
If their scarcity is the same then their value per share(token) should be the same.
Therefore the token price multiplied by the max number of tokens should be the same.
I'm ignoring the other metrics like utility and decentralization which most certainly will have effect.
Lol scarcity being the same does not imply value is the same, that only holds with equal utility.
Anyway read this from 2017 if you're interested in a well-argued case about relative max valuations of store of value vs utility tokens:
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/john-pfeffer/An+Investor%27s+Take+on+Cryptoassets+v6.pdfThanks it's going to be a good read.
Yes an asset is more than its scarcity. For Eth going from not-scarce to scarse should have a positive effect regardless...
That by itself is a positive event for intrinsic value but in the case of a 100x overvaluation right now it might not be reflected in a change of market price at all.
Further, aren't they switching from PoW to PoS? An extreme detrimental development wrt value as that leads to more centralization. As a centralized solution it's simply a terribly complex and expensive solution that is already done much cheaper and easier.
PoS discussion is the same as when Bitcoin mining pools had >50% of hashing rate.
With the banning of mining and the increasing need of cheap power for mining one could say that Bitcoin is getting more centralized too...
Eth needs validators which are currently centralized but should decentralize over time. The switch hasn't been made yet.
But let me state I have more faith in Bitcoin but Ethereum is a profitable investment at the moment.
I'd like to hear your proof for the 100x overvaluation...
I think you are quick to mix things up. Yes, some developments in Bitcoin increase centralization (eg. The effective block size increase sneaked in with segwit, I still consider that the largest permanent damage done to Bitcoin) while others decrease it. Temporalily or permanently.
Ethereum, however, is in another league altogether and has always been orders of magnitude more centralized than Bitcoin (in part unavoidable because it's inherently complex nature, also bringing down it's potential value by orders of magnitude and part because of bad choices, eg reverting the blockchain in the DAO even and starting out with pre-mine rather than a fair initial distribution like Bitcoin). But now on top of that they go to PoS which' end-state is j7st guarenteed to be fully centralized because of economic incentives.
It's like when I say the batter in your baseball team has never hit a ball ever and you reply by saying well sometimes yoyr batter doesnt hit a home run. Sure your comment is true but it does not counter the fact that your batter is terrible.