I very much agree with you we may end up with more chains being a store-of-value. If BTC will keep that value for the next decades to come, there is simply not enough BTC around to hold all the money people and companies want to store in a safe. But I sometimes think BTC will not survive two or three decades. Sure, BTC will be there, but after it'll hit some ATH in 1, 2 3 years from now, slowly its value will be lost. Its simply too expensive to transact, and too slow for anything else than store-of-value. Lightning network and all should make this chain faster, but they don't have the right marketing at their sides. Other chains will have the benefit over BTC wrt fast and may also inexpensive transaction costs.
Regarding transaction costs and your statement, nobody seems to want to sell LEO. Don't you think the recent successes of LEO (an increase of token value) and the low liquidity at LeoDEX and the large transaction costs when swapping at the LEO/ETH pool combined result in people buying LEO and holding on to it, for now?
Sure, I follow what you are saying, and maybe LEO can become a store of value, who knows. Interestingly, when LEO does become a store-of-value, BTC will be out of the game completely {LOL}. Since the reason why BTC is store-of-value because it is (or at least almost everybody thinks so) the safest chain around. This can't be said about HIVE and with HIVE about LEO. So, when HIVE and LEO become a store-of-value, the market-determined level of safety of BTC chain is not required to be a store-of-value.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Not sure how things will unfold for BTC. I think it will always be around in some capacity because it is a very safe chain. That will hold value in addition to the capped amount. It will always, in my opinion, the mecca for bigger players, serving as that store for those who presently dominate the fiat world.
However, that will not be for everyone. Most will be drawn to where their activity takes them. The monetary component of building value, ie people buying it with fiat, is going to be reduced. Instead it is going to be based upon activity (data whatever). This is where Leo and some of the apps that are being developed could enter the picture.
I think this is reasonable and a good analysis as to why people are hodling LEO. However, the more that is added to the road map, the greater the likelihood of the excitement continuing. Thus, LEO as a transactional token could end up being completely wiped out. Just like the future idea of BTC being "Internet money" is passe in my opinion at this point.
We are already conditioned to hold those tokens for higher values in the future. And unlike ETH, LEO is not required to use for transactions (at least not at this point).
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
You have some good points. BTC for the big players. Other chains for the mass. That I can see somehow happening. The danger to BTC is still, how safe a chain needs to be, even for the big players. Safety can be created in other ways as well, even for the big players. Like distributing funds over many different chains limiting theft of funds through hacks or whatever, to the small percentage of total value across all chains and wallets. In the end, I think what works out being the cheaper option under similar risks to loose some funds, will be the winner. Time will tell what that's gonna be.
As to LEO. As a second layer token, it is a token for rewarding the social network service and at the same time it can give owners power over the LEO distribution. Is this what you mean with the transaction function of LEO? I suppose any coin/token can change its purpose over time. In the end this is dynamic and based on what the 'community' - or better said - the stakeholders decide. Since the world is dynamic by nature, also the future of anything is dynamic by nature :)