Join 63,094 users and earn money for participation

The Case For A Community Made Trinity: Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and Litecoin - Gold, Silver, Cash

0 91 exc boost
Avatar for JohnGaltsBrother
3 weeks ago

Recently, the world has started to be part of the awakening of blockchain technology, and its most famous expression is Bitcoin. Bitcoin (BTC) is now exposed and accepted like never before for widespread adoption by institutions, banks, businesses, and retail investors as the fiat monetary system collapses.

BTC (referred to by many as Bitcoin Core) had hard forks over the years, and the most successful of these is Bitcoin Cash (BCH). BCH acts as the monetary unit of exchange that BTC was originally intended to be. But, the history of money is not built on a forced intention by some arbitrator that decrees, “this is what you will except as a medium of exchange.”  

In fact, it has to be an organic, culturally agreed-upon adoption, or it does not last long. Salt was a great indirect medium of exchange, seashells, precious metals, all culturally accepted throughout the globe at different geographical regions and times. Fiat money was simply supposed to represent these types of actual physically scarce things. Those ties were removed, and so fiat places humanity in the dangerous position it is in today.

 The bright side is that cryptocurrency allows for actual stores of value, well, some of them. We have to exclude the meme coins such as Dogecoin and stick with those we know have a capped supply. BTC is a 21 million capped supply, as is BCH. It would appear that BTC has become the trusted Gold 2.0 as a store of value, which is not necessarily good at transacting quickly or cheaply. And if that is its adoption, so be it. BCH solves this problem by being quick and cheap to transact with. In addition, it does not necessarily have to reach a level of market capitalization as high as BTC to have useful value for humanity. BCH can still remain the cash it is titled. Moreover, the title and ticker people see for BCH are perfectly in line with the brand network effect we would need for this overall adoption strategy proposed in this essay. The weakest link is Litecoin.

Litecoin (LTC) was created by Charlie Lee in 2011 and was meant to be the “silver to Bitcoins gold,” as it has been said so many times. It is always part of the discussion of Blue-Chip Proof of Work (POW) cryptos, the top four being BTC, BCH, Ethereum (ETH), and LTC. But, LTC suffers from some huge problems. The number one problem being branding.

LTC cannot seem to get out of its own way when it comes to its ability to get its message across. BCH has Roger Ver (Bitcoin Jesus), the charismatic veteran of the crypto space, CEO of Bitcoin.com, and all-around champion of the liberation of mankind from robbery, which is fiat currency. LTC does have Charlie Lee and the Foundation – both of which are terrible at marketing.

To prove this, the greatest marketing LTC has pulled off was an April Fools joke. On April 1, 2021, the Litecoin Foundation announced that they were changing the name of the protocol/cryptocurrency to Bitcoin Lite.  This saw the price of the coin rally upon the Twitter announcement and articles that spread the change. If anyone read the press release on the change, it was pretty obvious that it was a joke. But I really, really wish it was not. This was the best thing LTC could have done.

Note: yes, there is already a cryptocurrency called BTC Lite (BTCL). It runs on the ETH network and does not even deserve mention for any reason other than its name.

The Bitcoin Trinity

If there was a trifecta of Bitcoins in the mainstream, BTC, BCH, and a proposal for Litecoin to become Bitcoin Ag (BTAG), there would be a brand network effect that would be beneficial to all three of these blue-chips. This would mean that there would be a long-term, high cost, store of value (BTC), an everyday medium of exchange (BCH), and an alternative to both, and can actually act like the “silver” it intended itself to be (BTAG). Ag is used because it is the atomic symbol for the element silver. This final name for this is not important, and I am only using BTAG for pedagogic reasons.

So, why are three better than two?

If we are to make the assumption that the world is going to digital mediums of exchange, it will not change the laws of economics. There will still be adjustments in the price level of things to tradable assets. In order to keep these different mediums in check, you need other assets to use as alternatives. Gold traditionally had silver and vice versa to balance the other out if one started to have too much buying power. Crypto will need that same balancing act going on (this is all done by market forces and the good old “invisible hand” with no need for outside interferences). So humanity benefits by having BTC and BCH balancing each other, but could also greatly benefit from a third option. By having gold, silver, and cash, the purchasing power of each can deflate and inflate as the market wills it (this is purchasing power inflation, not inflation of the underlying money supply).

When all three of these share a common brand, it is a heuristic connection which implants itself on the market. Anyone in the space with a shallow understanding of blockchains knows that these are three completely separate protocols, operating completely independently of each other's network.  However, that is immaterial to market sentiment for mass adoption. We see that now, as new purchases to crypto are buying Bitcoin Gold and shooting the price up 300% in one month.

While I would argue that BCH is the true heir to the “Bitcoin Title,” it only matters what the market accepts (even if it got there through shady means). BTC can be the Gold. BCH can be the Cash. And if we can get the Silver with a name branding effect, the idea is to push a system where people are storing long-term value on one, interacting daily on another, and semi-storing/semi-spending on the third.

It gives options to the price of items to be valued differently, keeping the overall buying power of one relative to the others over a long enough time span.

Conclusion

The chances are that this will not happen. LTC will continue on its own trajectory, as BCH and BTC on theirs. However, if at least two of these Blue-Chip POW cryptos can coexist, we at least have two of the three to help offset the issues touched on above. I know that others may simply say there are a thousand other cryptos, so one or more of them will come to the forefront. This may be true, but none will likely carry the “brand of bitcoin” with its name and make such a powerful heuristic impact or have as long of a chain dating back to 2011. This would put all three on a cooperative path which newcomers would simply adopt out of inertia and tradition.

2
$ 2.81
$ 2.81 from @TheRandomRewarder
Sponsors of JohnGaltsBrother
empty
empty
empty
Avatar for JohnGaltsBrother
3 weeks ago
Enjoyed this article?  Earn Bitcoin Cash by sharing it! Explain
...and you will also help the author collect more tips.

Comments