You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Thoughts on the stabilization of the Steem price - Stabilisierung des Steempreises
Interesting post. I agree with @freiheit50 that STEEM is not the typical hodler asset where liquidity, stock-to-flow, and security (i.e. cost of 51% attack) counts. In many ways STEEM is ahead of its time and hopefully will survive until its time has come. Despite the various dapps running on steem I still perceive it as the social blogging and sharing application. As such it will live from user count rather than large investments. It needs 100'000 users who invest 40$ each - at current price, a single dude dropping $4M per year would actually destroy the platform due to centralization. A good bull run for the top 20 cryptos will fix things also for STEEM as some of those gains will be re-invested.
Not once have I read recently this point of view regarding big cap alts being favored at first during a bull run and somehow I tend to believe it is true. The most X gains that one could have though is still possible through some "cheap and hot" altcoin that gets a bit of advertising at the right time. Steem at the moment, in my opinion, has a weak to almost no professional advertising. People like Ned sold and continue selling at probably the worst time in Steem's history while leaving somehow the project behind. The work is still on the backs of the blogging ants that are still active over years.
Thanks for your comment.
I agree.
One amendment: One guy dropping 4 million $ on Steem could only (perhaps) destroy Steem if he had bad intentions. A guy with good intentions good improve many things and incentivize good authors and good behaviour.