Fun statistics on user growth as indicator for demand

In this post I want to do some fun, on the top of my head “statistics” on the supply and demand for Grin. Do not put to much value on this analysis, but perhaps it can be informative.

We are currently just past Grins 4th birthday :birthday: We have around 25% inflation or a stock to flow of 4.
Ignoring the influence of external factors like the Bitcoin price, stock market, general market sentiment etc., one would expect that for the price to reach the/a bottom you need a balance between demand and supply. In this case I want to use user growth as an indicator for growth in demand. If I put that in a formulate we get something like:

(Supply - Loss)/stock -Loss = Demand

The number of new user on the forum for Grin in the past year is around 25% compared to the existing user base. I think we can assume a loss rate of coins of around 2% (most coins are lost by forgetting passwords and losing mnemonics, not by sending to the wrong address).
So we have an approximately:

25% - 2% ≈ 25% (Approximately in balance)

I do not expect Grin’s price to explode, but if the user growth is any indication for real growth in demand, we might have reached a first balance point between demand and supply. Meaning we might have hit the bottom. More importantly, a 25% growth in users might be a indication of genuine interest in Grin as project based on its intrinsic value. Especially since these are people joining in a bear market! That is something worth celebrating if you ask me :tada:

Now hold your :horse: and do not FOMO in. This is a very rough analysis, but it might very well be an indication that the current lows we have seen might have been the bottom or at least close to it. If I look into my :fortune_cookie: :mage:, I do think there is a good chance Grin might after rising dump again to similar values and stay relatively stable for many more years. But still if the user growth in the forum is any indication, I think we are doing quite well as a project.

5 Likes

Grin was not made for people who want to use it as a store of value imo.

I honestly think it is close to impossible for grin to become money without this.

@phasnox
A good store of value should

  1. Be predictable. Grin is the epitome of simplicity and predictability with a supply of 1 grin/second

  2. Not depreciate (much). Grin still has a high inflation, but this is compensated by growth in adoption/users.

  3. Easy to carry, store and transfer. All digital Currencies have this property, they are much more convenient and secure to store and transfer than for example gold.

  4. A good long term security for transactions. Grin is really designed for the decades to come. Thx to Grins linear emission transactions will always come with decent security fees.

In summary, to me it appears Grin has the properties of a good store of value, especially as a long term store of value. Bitcoin might be more profitable, but it is less stable due to those horrible halvings and long term security is rather uncertain. As it stands now, transaction fees allone cannot yet provide proper security fees for Bitcoin. We can only hope in due time transaction fees will provide enough security with increased use of Bitcoin on layer 2 for payments. Arguably this makes Bitcoin less ideal as a long term store of value.

  1. Not depreciate (much). Grin still has a high inflation, but this is compensated by growth in adoption/users.

An asset with low inflation is always going to be preferable to an asset with higher inflation, given they have same or similar properties.

While Bitcoin exists Grin is a hard sell, but it is a harder sell when you know you will be able to still buy it cheap in the future.

It is a harder sell when you have a competing asset that you definitely know will be more valuable in the future.

I agree, not saying that anyone should exchange BTC for Grin. My bags hold primarily Bitcoin and I only gradually buy in and mine Grin and I do so without any short term expectations on return of investment.

Regarding the use of Bitcoin as digital cash, it’s appreciation makes Bitcoin less than ideal as digital cash. Bitcoin has a large insentive to hold (on average price always increases). Right now Bitcoin is still a superior store of value although it’s security weakens, but not superior as digital cash IMO. On the long run (decades), Grin will be both superior as digital cash and as store of value IMO.

For now true. But there is largely uncertainty if Bitcoin’s security will support an infinite increase in price. My guess is that the every 4 years pump will only hold true one up to perhaps three more cycles and god knows only what will happen after the promise of ever increasing price gets broken.

GRIN still generally has the same inflation as Bitcoin did in it’s first years. Also, BTC was not meant to be an investment, satoshi’s original plan for bitcoin was to be digital cash. GRIN comes a lot closer to what that means than bitcoin does.