COIN will be a liquidity event at a magnitude far larger, relative to current market cap, than was the advent of exchanges - which precipitated the superbubble.
I reiterate my thesis that the larger this COIN event, the more coins that get locked up in a vault and never transact. All the buying and selling churn for COIN will occur off-chain. Thus it removes transactions from Peter R's Metcalf Law model of the market cap. Whether you believe that model is predictive is another issue. In short, COIN could make a lot of investors happy and boastful, but it has a cost to upside growth. It is expedient but destructive. It is top-down not decentralized.
My thesis is fairly simple. The network effects value of Bitcoin is the decentralized potential for every user to transact with any other user. For example, imagine two off-chain entities that refuse to interopt (we are then going backwards, i.e. analogous to paywalls on internet urls, e.g. subscription magazines). As that is taken away with too much investment focus and top-down off-chain activity, the headroom of Bitcoin's market cap is declining, i.e. log-logistic. The fascist bastardization of the internet is well underway too. We hackers have a lot of work to.
For me it is common sense. Bitcoin is being sought primarily as an investment, not as a tool. The internet was sought primarily as tool.
I think we need a crypto-currency that is sought by the majority of the population not as an investment, but rather as a tool. The investors will certainly follow, just they did for the internet or how Warren Buffet admires rapper Jay-Z. We shouldn't totally dismiss what was learned from Dogecoin.
I hope readers appreciate I have shared my secrets to a large extent. We will never know who copied and ran with them. Was it me? You will never know but I will.

lol. Peace. (it also helps to preserve my life I suppose, don't cha think 'Satoshi' is reading this)
P.S. In short, fuck the SEC! (and every other alphabet soup top-down molasses)