Explain this to me: Why is it that the market doesn't trust Monero if it has so solid fundamentals? Why is it that 100% instamined PoW/PoS hybrids appear out of nowhere, and just by being based on the Bitcoin codebase are able to out-perform the marketcap of Monero in a few days or weeks? This shouldn't even be possible.
4 Darkcoin $ 34,537,954 $ 7.78 4,439,477 DRK
11 Bytecoin (BCN) $ 8,974,931 $ 0.000057 156,920,284,106 BCN
13 VeriCoin $ 7,597,613 $ 0.283679 26,782,417 VRC
15 XC $ 6,451,500 $ 1.17 5,515,507 XC
17 Monero $ 5,080,622 $ 2.72 1,867,647 XMR
4 Darkcoin $ 34,537,954 $ 7.78 4,439,477 DRK
11 Bytecoin (BCN) $ 8,974,931 $ 0.000057 156,920,284,106 BCN
13 VeriCoin $ 7,597,613 $ 0.283679 26,782,417 VRC
15 XC $ 6,451,500 $ 1.17 5,515,507 XC
17 Monero $ 5,080,622 $ 2.72 1,867,647 XMR
It is more helpful to compare the marketcaps with the total # of coins, which puts for example XMR in the $50M range, far above BCN.
It's a fair approach however one part of my mind doesn't like the underlying assumption that buyers are somehow guaranteed to buy the extra coin supply at something like current prices. There are too many PoW altcoins acting as a living example that marketcap is steady or declining as new pow coins are issued. Of course coin prospects are intertwined with buying interest, so a crap coin will naturally face a much larger problem finding buyers for the long-term sustainment of its inflation. Inflation is generally a huge issue with altcoins.
Explain this to me: Why is it that the market doesn't trust Monero if it has so solid fundamentals? Why is it that 100% instamined PoW/PoS hybrids appear out of nowhere, and just by being based on the Bitcoin codebase are able to out-perform the marketcap of Monero in a few days or weeks? This shouldn't even be possible.
4 Darkcoin $ 34,537,954 $ 7.78 4,439,477 DRK
11 Bytecoin (BCN) $ 8,974,931 $ 0.000057 156,920,284,106 BCN
13 VeriCoin $ 7,597,613 $ 0.283679 26,782,417 VRC
15 XC $ 6,451,500 $ 1.17 5,515,507 XC
17 Monero $ 5,080,622 $ 2.72 1,867,647 XMR
Because of the propaganda.
Those coins you mention have an army of people convincing noobs to what they want. All X11 coins are essentially a scam. Instamine aside, I think that most of the GPU miners of those coins didn't yet figured out that they are fighting against FPGAs.
That^
Big investors usually look for easy-quick-scam coins to pump and dump in an instant. All those coins, XC, Vericoin, Cloakcoin, Veilcoin, Supercoin, etc etc lol, are Pumps and Dumps only.
DRK has someone that that I call the "primary buyer". I estimate it's someone with vast BTC resources - probably 100k-500k BTCs or so. I don't know if these BTCs are legit or hacked, but he can spend them like no tomorrow. This guy has bought millions in DRKs. This same buyer (as I can see from his buying patterns) has also gone to diversify himself in XC, Vericoin and other "pumps & dumps"... however the money he used for Moneros is tiny compared to all other coins. I believe he was more actively engaged in the first run up to 0.007-8.
If pumping & dumping was his sole purpose in engaging with all these coins, it only makes sense that he would be better served pumping a coin which he can then "sell" to others based on its superior properties. Otherwise how can he dump without crashing the market and everyone running away from the "crapcoin"? He would need adequate hype that the coin is "solid" rather than crappy. So, Monero, in this regard, given what everyone is saying, should be better pump material. One can buy more and hype it as superior, actually convincing buyers that it's a good coin to have. Once that happens, he can dump in waves - if his intention was to profit from the p&d, instead of HODLing long term.
But this didn't happen. And it has sparked my curiosity as to why. What does the multi-million guy (who buys all anon coins except the bytecoin ones) know? Is it inflation that is the problem? Is it that he has somehow independently assessed the bytecoin coins as severely problematic in other areas beyond anonymity? What is it that makes him avoid them like the plague, creating market paradoxes where Boolberry is surpassed by bitcoin-based clones that only offer a whitepaper for anonymity and not even the features for it?
I have the answer to your question.
Simply, Monero and other Cryptonote coins lack like an Official GUI(there are unofficial ones you can use, but the dev team themselves havent gave an "official" one), without an Official GUI so that everyone, even newbies, can use easily, that big investor with millions of $ worth of BTC, won't try and pump it yet. Simply because he knows that most people involved with bitcoin and such, are not "techies", aka they are accustomed to having a GUI and etc laid out for them, but with Cryptonote atm, that is not the case.
And the reason coins like BBR hasnt gone up or been pumped/will ever be pumped by whales and those rich bitcoin investors, is because of it's severe instamine, probably over 40% of Boolberries are in the hand of that one guy. That guy with the private gpu miner is still making over 1,000 boolberry per day, or 2 BTC of BBR per day. He used to make 14k BBR per day....plus they have botnets.
When an "official" GUI comes out, you can expect major pumps etc from those rich bitcoin investors, simply because they know that once they get the ball moving, all the newbies and daytraders and other whales would join them, especially once Monero is easier to use.
It just matters on the GUI at this point.
It can also be intelligence agencies getting into everything. We saw something similar imo regarding the internet bubble.
If you have a large stake in most coins and the liquidity is low, it is possible to quell price movements up, at least temporarily.
Who knows, but since Intelligence agencies are basically all over and into everything, I would think it absolutely risky to their (States) well being to not heavily be into a VERY disruptive technology.
I sort of wonder as they peruse the boards, how much they themselves are being affected by the redefining of money, and more...
Its about sharing