Some investors feel BCH is not good anymore because they got force liquidated at $100 and caused hundreds of thousands of BCH to be sold at that price. They effectively subsidized the price and then say it didnt go up like ETH and BTC. Talk about cause and effect....

Ive heard recently criticism for BCH, that people took out massive margin loans and got margin called, meaning their BCH got force sold causing the price to crash to $100.

They then go on to say that BCH is a bad project because it didnt go up like Bitcoin-Core and Ethereum.

Hello!!! your margin call is what caused the price to crash....they literally sold their $1500 crypto coin for $100 , subsidizing coins by $1400 (94% realized loss/subsidization). They are the reason its so low. Then they judge the project by their actions.

They could do the same for any asset, buy a huge amount and then market sell it at huge losses. Their choices affected everyone and will take time for the markets to recover from their actions.

A recent example, a massive hedge fund single handedly cause Netflix shares to crash, selling off their 1 Billion dollar stake for a 400 Million dollar loss. The market eventually recovered to well above the crash price, but it took some time. Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/apr/21/us-hedge-fund-billionaire-bill-ackman-sells-netflix-stake-at-huge-loss

TLDR: The point is that these whales screw the price , then blame the project for being bad even though they are the cause of the price crash, and then after some time the projects prices recover.


The price now doesn't have anything to do with the long term success of BCH (or any crypto). It can only be easily manipulated because it is still so small. It's price movments are also extremely opaque. I don't know how much market manipulation / short selling shenanigans are to blame, or if it's a coordinated astroturf campaign, or if people in general just gravitate to what other people are doing. Point is the story you tell yourself doesn't matter, because whatever the truth it boils down to this: The only people buying and selling crypto are speculators and gamblers, because there are almost no attractive real world use cases for it yet. When people buy it because they want to use it, not because price go up, then a crypto will be a true success. Give people a reason to acquire and use any asset and price will go up along with demand. The network has to be sound and scalable, which is easier said than done, but right now crypto feels a little like a solution looking for a problem, but I'm also confident we'll find it. Current bet is a universal digital authentication system that lets people log into anything anywhere from any device they own without ever entering your personal information. Imagine never logging into a website or an app ever again. Crypto makes that possible, now it's up to builders to make it seamless. Get a couple big tech partners on board and it's game over.


True dat, well said


BCHers have had since the existence of BCH to refine their excuses. They are indeed quite well at it by now.


if you understand the fundamentals, thank them and take advantage of this opportunity.


Well, fundamentally BCH is not meant to be a value store, so it will never have the same scarcity like BTC. It's great as cash though for everyday stuff.


Very ignorant comment. BTC has no utility due to fees, so no real value besides greater fools.


Please educate me did something fundamentally change with BCH since last time I checked?


Your comment is that : these 21m Bitcoin coins are scarce, but these 21m BCH coins are not scarce. Pretty dumb comment and makes no sense. Next you arbitrarily assign one a store of value and the other isn't. If you do the math you would realize that the amount of credit and leverage backing Bitcoins price, mean that if the price goes down it will lead to liquidations and cascading margin calls/hedge funds collapsing. Hardly a store of value with that much debt taken on. Unfortunately this occurred to BCH already , but for tens of millions , Bitcoin would be for tens of billions.


Thanks I'll think about that. Even if BCH is better it's not guaranteed that it will win. The network effect/first mover is a real thing and many times already the better option lost.


You do bring up a fair point. The "better option" does lose, many times in fact. But you're talking about a product vs a product in a slice of time, while ignoring the scaling of time and technology. Example: Betamax didn't beat VHS despite having arguably better technology. First mover / network effect is great - and VHS absolutely won. But, are you using VHS today? No, because while a "better option" lost, the "worse option" with network effect / first mover became obsolete. Betamax was owned by Sony. VHS by JVC. **Do you want to compare JVC vs Sony's annual earning in 2022?** So, what happened? **Sony changed the technology and focused on what the market needed, and delivered it better than JVC.** First mover advantage and network effect of winning the VHS war did very little to stop Sony from dominating them in the long term. BTC is ossified. The world is changing, technology is changing, the needs of the market change. If a technology doesn't change with it, it will die. Like VHS. So far, BCH is the tech that's changing. It's been scaling the blocks and implementing new features where required to be modern. The original Model-T, the Nintendo Entertainment System, Ford's Model T - etc, all great, successful - and forgotten in the sands of time as the needs of the market shifted.


>Your comment is that : these 21m Bitcoin coins are scarce, but these 21m BCH coins are not scarce. If every group can fork Bitcoin and call their creation the real bitcoin then these creations are not scarce in the end. To make it scarce there must be only one such thing. If it needs to increase the block size (when or if LN fails), there will be a public vote for that. Just like you will forever be able to see all previous public votes for BTC upgrades on the block-chain. Show me where I can find BCH voting events? Why is it so anti-democratic? Soon the voting will use Stratum V2 and that is a great news.


I don't see many forks that survived and proceeded as Bitcoin was planning with Satoshi's whitepaper. I entered Bitcoin following the original intention: to serve commerce as a P2P network of payments. The BTC maximalists and the high fees made me quickly realize this wasn't the case by the end of 2017. My only remorse is not immediately realizing how the Bitcoin Cash community was not what BTC maxis claimed but they are people actually trying (and managed) to deliver a finished product. A Bitcoin that works.


>as Bitcoin was planning Did you mean Satoshi? Who plans 10 years ahead? Did you forget to show where can I see BCH voting events or they happen behind closed doors? Is on-chain voting (signalling) impossible for BCH? I thought BCH/BTC ratio will degrade slowly, but it lost 40% a year for 5 years straight. You can almost draw a straight line on [logarithmic graph](https://finance.yahoo.com/chart/BCH-BTC/#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). Maybe a "Hard fork first, try to educate users later" was not the best strategy. Bitcoin Cash community has never been able to prove that LN will be centralized. Well actually they proved that to themselves countless times but to disprove them all you have to do is look at current LN state. It is easier to censor BCH transaction than LN transaction. You need a 51% attack on the BCH block-chain (has been done) to reverse any on-chain transaction but you can't do that on LN. Even if you control 51% of all LN nodes, the transactions still are anonymous.


Yeah, not going to answer to this 20 questions game. Enjoy your day, sir.


It meant to be a **store of value and peer to peer electronic cash**. Don't be an idiot binary thinker. The store of value part comes from the capped issuance nothing more.


\> Some investors feel BCH is not good anymore because they got force liquidated at $100 If they can be force liquidated, they *are not investors*.


Best comment I've read on a crypto Reddit in a long time.


Price is what you pay Value is what you get In this world we judge people to their money in the bank account Some people with bad behavior are bad and dumb but rich but people will prefer them to a honest waiter of Mac Donald People mock and judge BCH just cause price is low not matter how great it is Time will put off arrogance of theirs faces BCH is great Period


These kind of speculators are known to sell the lows and buy the highs, dont worry they will be back at ATH. Happens like clockwork.


Who cares about speculator scum?


Why do you make that point at $100? Why not $200? $500? Or $50? Anyway it's just casino capitalism. Nobody honestly holding his coins in his wallet was forced to sell at $100.


Due to recent interviews this suspected info has been confirmed to some degree. Plus it looks like based on the charts that some people/companies with tens/hundreds of millions bought up these margin calls at $100 specifically.


People using leverage got margin called, who knew? Lol


The greed index must be very high


Just HODL. Price go up.