Correct, its .2%. My mistake. Debit card transactions. .3% for CC. As per article, its an attempt to combat lack of demand, deflation in EU. Most bitcoin payment processors are already facing margin compression (at or near 0% fees anyway). As Cypher & yourself noted, imaging being a legacy payments processor when this is implemented.

The low fee argument is weakest while Bitcoin is relatively small; that's why exchange fees factor in (people need to buy in and cash out. Volatility, PoW has been done to death). But it is also only weakest in selected areas. I wouldn't say an area that has an average 12% remittance fee is not ripe to be picked by bitcoin remittances (especially if bitcoin operates behind the scenes as company develops their own avenues / relationships at both ends).

This new European cap is good for everyone and high time the financial sector stopped the gouging. But if bitcoin gets a proper foothold, a 2% seawall won't stem the tide. In the upside-happens for bitcoin possibility, btc can limbo lower than the legacy sector. Until then though, your point stands.

As (or perhaps 'if', considering your perspective) bitcoin matures enough that users can stay within a bitcoin economy, then low fees are a positive. So, the more it expands, the more relevant the argument.

The article itself has a 'conclusion'. The author first sets up a theoretical framework for valuation and then applies it to Bitcoin. My interpretation is that reasonable price expectations  until 2014 are between $10k and $300k, assuming the network continuous to grow exponentially.

ETFs are evil and a tool of the Corpo-fascists to destroy the true value of commodities. Case in point. Look at what they have done to precious metals.

The thing I don't like about the graph is the shape of it, where the true growth never reaches the hype. Sure that happens, but there are many technologies that go through a hype phase and a bust, but then the real growth on the right side eventually eclipses the original hype.

It is possible that Bitcoin is doing that (with the peak in late 2013/early 2014) and will indeed, eventually grow to something on the scale of trillions far exceeding the previous peak, but somewhat more slowly.

Also, I don't believe it is really possible to position/rank/value technologies on the left side of the peak. You only know the peak in hindsight.

Bitcoin is money - I am with cypher on this one.

Speaking of currencies, this good article suggests the yen is the first to go, of the big currencies. I see no flaws in this article:

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/bojs-yen-trashing-will-ignite-a-tital-wave-of-asian-devaluation-and-deflation/

Seriously, here is one of the reasons why I can't take most TA seriously:

An n-day moving average (MA_n) is the average of n consecutive prices.  Charting the moving average instead of the price reduces the random day-to-day noise while preserving the longer-term variations.

An exponential moving average (EMA) is  similar, but gives more weight to the recent behavior -- and is easier to compute if you are using pencil and paper or a slide rule. 8-)

The difference between two MAs with different periods -- say, 7 and 21 days -- is basically a smoothed version of the second derivative of the price.  If MA₇ is higher than MA₂₁, the trend of the price is bearish, curving downwards: it is braking while going up, then accelerating down.  Conversely, if  MA₇ is lower than MA₂₁, it means that the trend is bullish, curving upwards: braking while going down, then accelerating up.   When the two graphs cross, then, the trend is changing from one mood to the other.

Good so far. However, the average of the last 21 prices tells what the price was 10 days ago, not today.   But analysts always plot the MA₂₁ value at the final date of the 21-day interval, not at the central date.  So, the traditional MA₂₁ plot is displaced 10 days to the right relative to its logically correct position (and you can see that clearly when it is plotted over the daily price chart).  Similarly, the  MA₇  chart is shifted 3 days to the right.  Therefore, the two plots cross at the wrong dates; if they were drawn at the correct dates, crossings might appear or disappear.

TA folks even understand this problem, but they have been plotting their MAs and EMAs that way since the lower Paleolithic, and cannot be convinced to change their habits.  There may also be a psychological factor: plotting the MA_n values at the correct dates makes it obvious that the analysis is based on information that is 10 days old; whereas plotting it the traditional way gives the impression that the analysis is hot from the ticker's mouth.

There is also the problem that the crossings depend on the arbitrary choice of the MA periods.   It is like computing the ROI of bitcoin investment: one gets completely different results depending on the time scale considered.

Finally,  this MA-crossing analysis depends on the hypothesis that there is an underlying price trend that can be revealed by smoothing the price.  That may be true in ordinary stocks, where the price is partly determined by fundamentals that change slowly with time (such as the overall economy and product sales).  It is rather questionable with bitcoin, since its "fudamentals" are isolated unpredictable events (like PBoC decrees and rumors).  We see that in the charts, where rallies and crashes often start suddenly, out of nowhere.

When people realize that much of their gold portfolio is tungsten, fractional reserve, or stolen, then they will see that Bitcoin is 100% verifiably genuine.

This article (pointed to me via zerohedge) describes the current bitcoin market exactly.

A Game of Sentiment

http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilontheory/post/2013/11/03/A-Game-of-Sentiment

"who will get the most votes when all the voters are basing their votes on who they think will get the most votes? This is the Sentiment game!"

and

"We have reached the third degree where we devote our intelligences to anticipating what average opinion expects the average opinion to be. And there are some, I believe, who practice the fourth, fifth and higher degrees." (originally Keynes).

interesting insights, thanks for the link

Yup. Bitcoin up 21% since he recorded that aka capitulated.

 Most ppl investing in cryptocurrencies are going to lose money-cypherdoc

David is no exception.

listen to David Seaman's despair and anger.  this is called Capitulation.  sad, but this is no market for the naive and weak minded:

http://davidseaman.libsyn.com/bitcoin-crash-analysis

Why it wouldn't be the dominant crypto in the distant future, tho?
What is Bitcoin doing wrong that another coin would do better?
Thats what should be asking, not some psychic stuff.

I don't use an I phone but was informed that the send payment function had to be disabled to qualify under the ToS, if that is still the case Apple obviously feel they can't compete on functionality.

yes, and ApplePay just served to further legitimize that trend.  i find it interesting that they reopened their app store to Bitcoin wallets only 1-2 mo before their announcement.

that's clearly a factor as well as even i stated in this thread before.  the reasons are multifactorial no doubt.  this thread is long b/c there are lots of different ideas as to why it is happening and we are just trying to flush them all out in different ways and with different nuance.

i still think digital dollars and the speed with which they can be teleported to a crisis region to prevent massive dollar debt defaults is clearly a reason that enhances stability and recovery.  gold can really only go up when there is instability and fear.  whether you call it foul play, manipulation, or moral hazard doesn't matter.  the main point being that it has defeated any significant advancement in the gold price by stopping any normal gold flows b/c gold is just too slow.

furthermore, i still think this dollar digitalization, or dollar hegemony if you prefer, is causing deflation on a broader scale.  commodities continue to fall in price reflecting declining demand.  the lack of wage increases for the broader population makes things too expensive for most.  

how can Bitcoin help in deflation?  by bringing fairness and mathematics to the table and by removing corruption and a small, elitist group of counterfeiters.