RE: Some crypto perspective... an antidote to the FUD.. there is no bubble, it did not pop, and this is no crash 'yet'!
I would have to disagree here with you Dwin. Cryptos experience microbubbles. I mean you are right that overall they are not going anywhere and if you are a long-term investor and believe in blockchain as technology then you shouldn't pay to much attention on the short-term price fluctuations. However, this was a bubble and it did in fact pop. Bitcoin's price even in these levels isn't justified, let alone prices of altcoins that still have no use - they should be worth nothing. Many of the ICOs that hit the market don't even have a working product and their market cap can even be in billions. And that's why the bubble popped. People who don't need these coins are pulling back their money. They were buying them only to make gains, not to use them.
I wrote an article today regarding these things with some technical analysis to back up my views. Check it out if you are interested, cause I think bitcoin is going all the way down to 3000$
https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@drumsta/ta-is-bitcoin-falling-to-3000usd
I find this amusing. Microbubbles? So who get's to set the time periods? IF it is arbitrary then everything experiences 'microbubbles' as everything has ups and downs. So what is the point?
Political agenda? To say "See I told you" when based around some arbitrary short time period?
What's the point? Who cares?
When traditional investments, taxes, everything else are compared on an annual basis then to me that makes sense to use that as the litmus on whether a true crash or bubble has occurred.
Anything else I picked would be arbitrary, and due to not being very standard wouldn't be that useful and I could use it to paint any image I want, I could terrify, or fortify.
Even if bitcoin fell to $3000, so what? That is still a 300% increase since last year.
EDIT: Also I am not invested heavily in bitcoin. I believe its miner fees are its biggest flaw. It is slow, but the slowness is secondary to ridiculous fees for actually trying to use it for something.
On what basis to you proclaim this as fact? I hear this a lot, but never see sound fundamental arguments.