Quote from: NotLambchop on September 11, 2014, 12:56:01 PM

Quote from: inca on September 11, 2014, 12:28:37 PM

Quote from: NotLambchop on September 11, 2014, 12:10:47 PM

Quote from: inca on September 11, 2014, 11:51:26 AM

...
You do understand that consumer adoption follows media exposure, right?

So, just to eliminate any doubt in my mind, since last year we had:
1. Increasing media exposure.
2. Increasing adoption.
3. Falling exchange rate.

∴ If (1) and (2) continue, the exchange rate is going to continue on its present trajectory, i.e. falling.

Huh

I don't remember using the word price in that sentence.

I don't remember using the word "price" in this entire thread. What made you bring it up?

Quote

I would say personally that adoption is lagging compared to merchant integration, and speculators are selling more than buying resulting in us being at the bottom of a bear market. I think merchant adoption is actually largely irrelevant to the price at current levels of trade.

User adoption is rising and once the price turns and heads back up past 800 a new larger tranche of users will discover how easy it is to buy, save and use bitcoin. They and you will drive the next bubble. As you well know it is a price cycle - not a strict mathematical formula.

Are you saying that user adoption is driven by the price (higher BTC exchange rate will cause greater adoption), and not vice versa? If so, I'd say you're in the minority.

Quote

Your points would have been equally valid last year after the run to 266 and dive to 60, for a time. Shortly afterward they became very wrong indeed, as I suspect they will again.

I posted a list of [what I believe to be facts], (1) through (3), and a conclusion following from the premise that BTC exchange rate was in a causal relationship with (2).

Like so:
A -> B
~B
A
∴ ~(A -> B)

...so not sure what you mean by "your point." What point do you think I'm trying to make?

I am posting this from an ipad so apologies for formatting.

Exchange rate = price. Hence the mention.

Your argument seems to be: continued bitcoin media exposure together with rising adoption equals a falling price. Therefore bitcoin is going to continue falling.

Now since the price previously topped that correlation exists. Correlation does not equal causation. Simply widening your timeframe tells a different and opposite story where the price has risen instead.