LTC

Acrobatic-Soup-8862

Price discovery is complete re LTC. You’re 10 years late on this one.

Acrobatic-Soup-8862

LTC did take off. The its price discovery phase ended and it stabilized. But its returns were great.

jawni

Part 2 >Actual users are benefitting from the things that I've noted because they do matter. USERS 👏 WILL 👏 SHOW 👏 YOU 👏 WHAT 👏 THINGS 👏 ARE 👏 BENEFICIAL 👏 BY 👏 USING 👏 THEM Just saying it's a benefit because you say it matters means absolutely nothing. Tell me specifically when a user goes to make a transaction on Litecoin and Solana, what things will they notice? And how would they actually notice them? At least in my experience, no matter what type of transaction you make, you'll notice the speed and the cost. How is a user going to notice the things you think matter? >If the VCs and others promoting new chains validated this narrative, they couldn't dump their insider bags on the market at a profit. If it was a real narrative, you wouldn't need people to validate it for you, it would come about naturally. Also, you need to stop treating VCs as anything other than early stage investors. This sub seems to think VC is a code word for some type of inherently nefarious group, rather than just a group of connected investors who have a lot of funds to employ... >I'm trying to understand your criticism of Litecoin - I could not care less about selling you on it. It all seems to boil down to: I don't believe number will go up as much If you haven't figured it out by now, there isn't much hope, but I'll spell it out as simply and plainly as I can for you: Blockchains need to sustain themselves -> they use block rewards to bootstrap the network and subsidize network operator pay temporarily -> generally block rewards asymptotically approach zero(aka they get smaller and smaller due to things like halving for LTC or in Solana's case disinflation) -> if the network does not have enough users paying for blockspace then the network operators won't get paid enough to keep operating -> chain dies. I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but far less people use LTC than Solana, so when I say users aren't benefitting from those, it refers to the lack of usage on LTC, despite it having those qualities. If it has those qualities and users choose something else, they likely see no benefit in those things, or higher relative benefit elsewhere, like Solana (or in the case of payments, often Tron). You also haven't been able to quantify how a user would have any indication of which networks had a fair distribution, while it's extremely easy to quantify how a user would have immediate indication of what network is cheaper or faster. Litecoin *used* to have a fundamental advantage when it came to the area of payments or transfers, now it objectively does not with respect towards blocktimes(speed) and fees(cost). If Litecoin isn't the best coin for payments or transfers anymore, then how is it going to sustain itself? Where is litecoin going to generate it's revenue from? >Market doesn't have to care about what I see as fundamental in the short term. Current stats suggest that 99% of crypto investors not buying BTC will be bagholders and lose over the long term. The odds are worse than a slot machine at a casino. Winners in the short term must time their exits and avoid emotional attachment to their investment. Most won't be capable of doing this and it will leave a bad taste in their mouth about crypto. ok? My point was just that price movement, although an imperfect measure, is often an indicator of fundamentals and also future expectations. Because it seems like you have trouble identifying what is and isn't getting traction from more direct indicators, so instead of being confident in an inherently limited view thinking "Am I wrong? No it's the market who is wrong!" you might have a bit of reflection. But if you just dismiss all price movement it can lead people to assume their thesis is fine despite it being the opposite. >Seems like we agree that these new chains are not really sustainable. Bit of specificity needed here. They are sustainable, they generally aren't self-sustainable at launch though, but they can become self-sustainable over time. Keep in mind this is why I'm bearish on Litecoin, it hasn't proven a good path towards self-sustainability. And obviously Litecoin also subsidizes block production as well to provide a better chance at long term sustainability. >They require marketing to grow and every person who buys a memecoin on the chain and proceeds to lose most of the value of their investment is not going to come away with a flattering outlook on that chain or the market it provides access to. In the case of Solana, there are thousands of projects that call it home, they market for themselves which in turn acts as marketing for the chain they use. Solana is the \#1 chain for revenue generating apps and has been for 14 straight weeks now. As it is, Solana does need to grow, but is on a good pace. Seems like growth is going fine for them, but what is Litecoin's plan for growth? Litecoin generated ~500 blocks a day and ~$500 worth of LTC every block, for a total of $250,000 worth of minted LTC per 24H but it only generated ~$700 in fees in that same time. ([source](https://bitinfocharts.com/litecoin/)) How do they increase that number when people seemingly don't value the things that you think are so important? >So do you see Solana through a "better Ethereum" narrative? Not necessarily, I just see it as a blockchain that can facilitate enough transactions to sustain the network while keeping individual fees low. I see it as better for certain purposes, but they really only compete in the sense that both of them are head and shoulders above everyone else when it comes to the activity of their respective ecosystems. >Long term, I think the market has always been triangulating on the story of value + scarcity and when BTC becomes too expensive for the smallest fish, there will be very few blockchains with a narrative that can sustain the demand without getting dumped by bagholders who have been trained to watch and wait for their exit signal. Yeah, and judging by usage, by the proxy of revenue, Solana seems to be one of the few that will sustain. You've now vaguely referenced "dumping" as a threat to Solana, not sure how tangible that threat is, especially considering the 2022 bear market and FTX fallout are lows that will likely never be reached again, as well as considering that making it through that inspired a lot of confidence in Solana. So I'm really not sure what you're insinuating here. Considering the supply is 99.99% unlocked I'm not sure what "bagholders who have been trained to watch and wait for their exit signal." is in reference too. Do you somehow think Solana is more vulnerable... to people selling coins? >I agree that the narrative for short term speculative gains is easier to understand and believe in than the fundamental long term value proposition of a coin towards its designated purpose. I think every blockchain with a rational long term narrative does not require timing the market or a marketing team to continue growing. Like I already mentioned, I'm a long term holder and every investment inherently requires timing the market to some degree, you have to enter and you have to exit and that is the only timing my long term narrative requires, just like literally any other type of buy and hold investment.

jawni

Part 1 >It screens out a well-distributed network of node validators just like Solana. The algorithm depends on a centralized and arbitrary criteria that is determined by Ripple Labs. At best, XRP holders could fork the chain if Ripple decides to pull some shit on them. I was talking about Solana, which uses currently uses Tower BFT and it doesn't "screen out" validators, every validator can produce blocks. Take a look for yourself and watch in real-time: https://fd-mainnet.stakingfacilities.com/leaderSchedule >The algorithm depends on a centralized and arbitrary criteria that is determined by Ripple Labs. Again, I was talking about Solana, for which this is not true. In fact Solana is switching to a new consensus called Alpenglow that will cut block times in half and lower the amount of SOL needed to run a validator, which should increase performance and decentralization simultaneously. https://www.anza.xyz/blog/alpenglow-a-new-consensus-for-solana From here on out, if you make a claim about Solana you should at least source it so I don't have to correct you so often. >However you like to describe it, PoS doesn't require a premine and never has. It's a convenient story for VCs that are not really in it "for the tech" and that understand they need to get profits while the getting is good. I mean... it should be pretty obvious and it literally *always* has essentially been a necessity. You know you can just ask AI these things and they'll provide the reasoning and sources to show how they came to the answer? Just to check myself I asked Gemini and it backed me up: "have any layer 1 proof of stake blockchains launched without a premine?" "To the best of my knowledge based on the provided search results, there is no direct confirmation of any Layer 1 Proof-of-Stake (PoS) blockchains that definitively launched with absolutely no premine. Here's why: Necessity of initial tokens for PoS: In a PoS system, validators need to stake their own cryptocurrency to participate in network validation and consensus. This implies that some initial amount of the native token must exist at launch to enable this staking mechanism." You literally never thought to wonder how a proof of stake network would work... with **zero** stake? lol dude, you need to apply some critical thinking here before confidently asserting something completely wrong. >Users have been complaining about XRP for over a decade. Insider dumping, downtime and lack of reliability should be four-alarm bells that one is betting on a service that could go up in flames at any moment. Litecoin has proven that it will not. I haven't been talking about XRP at all, I've been talking about Solana. Anyone besides the public, who could also take part in the initial token sales, were subject to vesting periods, and if they did dump, good for them, they had extra restrictions compared to average folks and they had a hand in improving and galvanizing the network so they should feel free to "dump" aka sell their coins... like normal people constantly do with every coin. People generally have been very happy with Solana Foundation's stewardship, they obviously put those resources towards things that would strengthen the network, like dev rel and biz dev. Causes of downtime and lack of reliability have been fixed promptly and people continue to choose Solana, so maybe you should go on a visibility campaign to bring awareness to this. Maybe people just don't know about the downtime and if you informed that, they would all stop. But my guess is that people are aware and they value things like cost and speed over a blockchain maybe being down for .01% of the time. >You're right, they're not use cases so much as basic requirements for a sustainable payment system. You can drone on about what is "basic requirements" all you want, but if people overwhelmingly choose to use something else... those things aren't as requisite as you think. >And most chains are vulnerable to wealthy insiders cashing out their value proposition before the bagholders even know what happened. "vulnerable to wealthy insiders cashing out their value proposition" ???? What the hell is that supposed to mean? You mean... people... selling their coins? How does that make a network vulnerable? Especially considering like I just said, all insiders were subject to lockups anyways, so by the time they could cash out it made no difference to the security of Solana... This is just bad FUD. Again, please provide sources or provide much further elaboration. And if you want sources for anything I've said, I can easily provide. >Bitcoin was released in a context of history also and that narrative is still playing out - loss of confidence and value for USD. Stablecoin providers are betting on the Federal Reserve, or perhaps the EU, to be their benevolent protector of value...except the track record since 2009 tells us what the market won't advertise. Values will continue to deteriorate from inflation, just like every coin not named BTC. Yeah, it was born as a form of unsovereign form of money, but haven't you seen the narrative shift towards store of value? Which would suggest that it can no longer compete as a payment method, especially relative to newer competitors. Clearly people care about preserving value, but when it comes to paying, they've moved beyond BTC and LTC. And USD is a popular form of fiat and everyone know the Fed keeps printing more. Clearly the USD value has been deteriorating the whole time that stablecoins have become popular, but even if stablecoins go away, that still leaves Litecoin at a massive disadvantage because unless LTC, the asset, is the preferred payment asset, anything else can just be tokenized on Solana and take the place of stablecoins. Clearly you're in the minority here, stablecoins seem here to stay and users of stablecoins and issuers of stablecoins are well aware of how the value of USD will decline over time, but again, if this mattered to people, it wouldn't be as popular as it is and if there were fears about it's longevity, I doubt you'd be seeing every single possible company that can use them, trying to use them. >Well good that we've got that out in the open. I try to be objective about every blockchain I buy into. Same. We all have biases but we can't let that distract us from the substance of salient points. Assuming bias does nothing, I address things based on their merit. >We know this isn't true. Bitcoin does even less than Litecoin. Every halving cycle, most new buyers are looking for the next Bitcoin instead of just buying Bitcoin. What the chain can do is ancillary to the potential for "gainz" but it makes for good marketing to the newbies. Yeah, and the issue of the chain not generating enough revenue is also an issue for Bitcoin. I think Bitcoin is likely to retain enough popularity to eventually overcome it though but that does concern me as well and I really don't know how they'll get it done. Inscriptions helped, but that seemed to divide the BTC community.

CounterAdmirable4218

I’d go for LTC as first.

_Hpst_

I guess you might be right. LTC problably wont drop below $70 and I can afford that loss anyway :P

BsdFish8

> Can you be a little more clear? The consensus algorithm itself is centralized? It screens out a well-distributed network of node validators just like Solana. The algorithm depends on a centralized and arbitrary criteria that is determined by Ripple Labs. At best, XRP holders could fork the chain if Ripple decides to pull some shit on them. > And "insider genesis block distribution" what is that supposed to mean? Genesis block is the first block validated, and any validator would have had a fair shot at it. Maybe you meant premine? But if that's the case, you should probably read up more on PoS systems to understand why that's essentially a necessity for new chains. However you like to describe it, PoS doesn't require a premine and never has. It's a convenient story for VCs that are not really in it "for the tech" and that understand they need to get profits while the getting is good. > And if these things were really issues, users of the chain would be complaining about them, not bagholders of other projects. Users have been complaining about XRP for over a decade. Insider dumping, downtime and lack of reliability should be four-alarm bells that one is betting on a service that could go up in flames at any moment. Litecoin has proven that it will not. > Biggest use cases... to you.(and those aren't use cases, those are value propositions) You're right, they're not use cases so much as basic requirements for a sustainable payment system. And most chains are vulnerable to wealthy insiders cashing out their value proposition before the bagholders even know what happened. > the market and the users feel differently than you, they seem to value stablecoins...and the builders who make stablecoins and the infrastructure, tend to value programmatic token standards and general programmability offered by Solana. Bitcoin was released in a context of history also and that narrative is still playing out - loss of confidence and value for USD. Stablecoin providers are betting on the Federal Reserve, or perhaps the EU, to be their benevolent protector of value...except the track record since 2009 tells us what the market won't advertise. Values will continue to deteriorate from inflation, just like every coin not named BTC. > Not sure what indication you got that made you think I've been ignoring Litecoin, typically people who ignore things don't have any strong feelings towards them, I clearly have strong feelings about Litecoin in this respect. Well good that we've got that out in the open. I try to be objective about every blockchain I buy into. > Because you think decentralization and "fair distribution" and a long history of uptime are the top priorities for people, but that's wrong. Clearly there is value in those things, but it gets trumped by what the chain can actually do. We know this isn't true. Bitcoin does even less than Litecoin. Every halving cycle, most new buyers are looking for the next Bitcoin instead of just buying Bitcoin. What the chain can do is ancillary to the potential for "gainz" but it makes for good marketing to the newbies. > Users aren't benefitting from the things that you think matter, because if they were, they would be using LTC more heavily, and if they were using LTC more heavily the market would notice, and if the market notices, then the price wouldn't be doing what it's been doing for the last half decade. Actual users *are* benefitting from the things that I've noted because they do matter. If the VCs and others promoting new chains validated this narrative, they couldn't dump their insider bags on the market at a profit. I'm trying to understand your criticism of Litecoin - I could not care less about selling you on it. It all seems to boil down to: I don't believe number will go up *as much* I acknowledge, maybe number *won't* go up as much for Litecoin - it will still work. > I understand your type likes to go with the "market doesn't care about fundamentals" flavor of cope, and you're half right, but more accurately they don't care about your fundamentals. Market doesn't have to care about what I see as fundamental in the short term. Current stats suggest that 99% of crypto investors not buying BTC will be bagholders and lose over the long term. The odds are worse than a slot machine at a casino. Winners in the short term must time their exits and avoid emotional attachment to their investment. Most won't be capable of doing this and it will leave a bad taste in their mouth about crypto. > Well first off, transaction count and revenue are at fairly standardized and make for good comparisons, because after all these chains need to be self-sustaining at some point Seems like we agree that these new chains are not really sustainable. They require marketing to grow and every person who buys a memecoin on the chain and proceeds to lose most of the value of their investment is not going to come away with a flattering outlook on that chain or the market it provides access to. > I'm very bullish because on the fundamentals that matter to me, the same fundamentals that have been increasing as Solana moved into the top 10 and the same fundamentals that Litecoin has lacked as it slid out of the top ~5~ ~10~ 20. So do you see Solana through a "better Ethereum" narrative? Long term, I think the market has always been triangulating on the story of value + scarcity and when BTC becomes too expensive for the smallest fish, there will be very few blockchains with a narrative that can sustain the demand without getting dumped by bagholders who have been trained to watch and wait for their exit signal. I agree that the narrative for short term speculative gains is easier to understand and believe in than the fundamental long term value proposition of a coin towards its designated purpose. I think every blockchain with a rational long term narrative does not require timing the market or a marketing team to continue growing.

BsdFish8

> Can you be a little more clear? The consensus algorithm itself is centralized? It screens out a well-distributed network of node validators just like Solana. The algorithm depends on a centralized and arbitrary criteria that is determined by Ripple Labs. At best, XRP holders could fork the chain if Ripple decides to pull some shit on them. > And "insider genesis block distribution" what is that supposed to mean? Genesis block is the first block validated, and any validator would have had a fair shot at it. Maybe you meant premine? But if that's the case, you should probably read up more on PoS systems to understand why that's essentially a necessity for new chains. However you like to describe it, PoS doesn't require a premine and never has. It's a convenient story for VCs that are not really in it "for the tech" and that understand they need to get profits while the getting is good. > And if these things were really issues, users of the chain would be complaining about them, not bagholders of other projects. Users have been complaining about XRP for over a decade. Insider dumping, downtime and lack of reliability should be four-alarm bells that one is betting on a service that could go up in flames at any moment. Litecoin has proven that it will not. > Biggest use cases... to you.(and those aren't use cases, those are value propositions) You're right, they're not use cases so much as basic requirements for a sustainable payment system. And most chains are vulnerable to wealthy insiders cashing out their value proposition before the bagholders even know what happened. > the market and the users feel differently than you, they seem to value stablecoins...and the builders who make stablecoins and the infrastructure, tend to value programmatic token standards and general programmability offered by Solana. Bitcoin was released in a context of history also and that narrative is still playing out - loss of confidence and value for USD. Stablecoin providers are betting on the Federal Reserve, or perhaps the EU, to be their benevolent protector of value...except the track record since 2009 tells us what the market won't advertise. Values will continue to deteriorate from inflation, just like every coin not named BTC. > Not sure what indication you got that made you think I've been ignoring Litecoin, typically people who ignore things don't have any strong feelings towards them, I clearly have strong feelings about Litecoin in this respect. Well good that we've got that out in the open. I try to be objective about every blockchain I buy into. > Because you think decentralization and "fair distribution" and a long history of uptime are the top priorities for people, but that's wrong. Clearly there is value in those things, but it gets trumped by what the chain can actually do. We know this isn't true. Bitcoin does even less than Litecoin. Every halving cycle, most new buyers are looking for the next Bitcoin instead of just buying Bitcoin. What the chain can do is ancillary to the potential for "gainz" but it makes for good marketing to the newbies. > Users aren't benefitting from the things that you think matter, because if they were, they would be using LTC more heavily, and if they were using LTC more heavily the market would notice, and if the market notices, then the price wouldn't be doing what it's been doing for the last half decade. Actual users *are* benefitting from the things that I've noted because they do matter. If the VCs and others promoting new chains validated this narrative, they couldn't dump their insider bags on the market at a profit. I'm trying to understand your criticism of Litecoin - I could not care less about selling you on it. It all seems to boil down to: I don't believe number will go up *as much* I acknowledge, maybe number *won't* go up as much for Litecoin - it will still work. > I understand your type likes to go with the "market doesn't care about fundamentals" flavor of cope, and you're half right, but more accurately they don't care about your fundamentals. Market doesn't have to care about what I see as fundamental in the short term. Current stats suggest that 99% of crypto investors not buying BTC will be bagholders and lose over the long term. The odds are worse than a slot machine at a casino. Winners in the short term must time their exits and avoid emotional attachment to their investment. Most won't be capable of doing this and it will leave a bad taste in their mouth about crypto. > Well first off, transaction count and revenue are at fairly standardized and make for good comparisons, because after all these chains need to be self-sustaining at some point Seems like we agree that these new chains are not really sustainable. They require marketing to grow and every person who buys a memecoin on the chain and proceeds to lose most of the value of their investment is not going to come away with a flattering outlook on that chain or the market it provides access to. > I'm very bullish because on the fundamentals that matter to me, the same fundamentals that have been increasing as Solana moved into the top 10 and the same fundamentals that Litecoin has lacked as it slid out of the top ~5~ ~10~ 20. So do you see Solana through a "better Ethereum" narrative? Long term, I think the market has always been triangulating on the story of value + scarcity and when BTC becomes too expensive for the smallest fish, there will be very few blockchains with a narrative that can sustain the demand without getting dumped by bagholders who have been trained to watch and wait for their exit signal. I agree that the narrative for short term speculative gains is easier to understand and believe in than the fundamental long term value proposition of a coin towards its designated purpose. I think every blockchain with a rational has a long term narrative does not require timing the market or a marketing team to continue growing.

Responsible_Taro_735

No don’t. You can think of me as your guardian angel. These bitcoin maxis are like mini “devils” trying to diminish your returns. Bitcoin will max out this sucker at around $150k which is only roughly a 1.5x. My friend, I can guarantee that when the rotation happens, LTC will see 5x+. Be safe young squid. I’ll be back to check on this comment when alts inevitably rip.

jawni

>XRP is #4 in market cap and has a whole plan to support international payments. And I've got bags. Its problem is the same as Solana - centralized consensus algorithm and insider genesis block distribution. Can you be a little more clear? The consensus algorithm itself is centralized? That doesn't make any sense, consensus algorithms are for consensus, which literally means it relies on the whole network. BFT is a very popular consensus algorithm used by many blockchains. And "insider genesis block distribution" what is that supposed to mean? Genesis block is the first block validated, and any validator would have had a fair shot at it. Maybe you meant premine? But if that's the case, you should probably read up more on PoS systems to understand why that's essentially a necessity for new chains. And if these things were really issues, users of the chain would be complaining about them, not bagholders of other projects. Tons of people using Solana and obviously liking it enough to continue using it, but according to all the people that don't use it, it's got too many problems! >The market cap trend is always a trailing indicator. You could have said the same thing in 2018 or 2019 about Litecoin. All trends are trailing because you can't have a trend without looking into the past lol and I did have these same concerns about LTC at that point and said these same things on this subreddit back then too. >Security and reliability are the biggest use cases for any payments system and most blockchains do not measure up. Biggest use cases... to you.(and those aren't use cases, those are value propositions) My point, which you're failing to grasp, is that the market and the users feel differently than you, they seem to value stablecoins, that are fast, cheap, and widely accepted, and the builders who make stablecoins and the infrastructure value programmatic token standards and general programmability offered by Solana. Don't take my word for it, take it from a payment provider that's just a *teeeny* bit bigger than BitPay: https://developer.paypal.com/community/blog/pyusd-solana-token-extensions/ >As long as you understand the rationales and make your choice with eyes wide open, I'm all for you ignoring LTC. I've been aware of LTC forever, which is why I'm so bearish on it. I remember a time when you could only buy BTC, ETH, and LTC on Coinbase. Litecoin actually had a chance back then, it was literally the coin with the best fundamentals when it comes to payments. Then Ethereum got traction with DeFi and faster and cheaper competitors came in elsewhere to eat Litecoin's lunch. Not sure what indication you got that made you think I've been ignoring Litecoin, typically people who ignore things don't have any strong feelings towards them, I clearly have strong feelings about Litecoin in this respect. >This thread was about which coin is fundamentally better and I think that was proven long before you validated that this is really about "gainz" for you. Another point you failed to grasp is that I mentioned the gains should be an indication of growth in fundamentals. Or more accurately the fundamentals that matter to the most people. Because you think decentralization and "fair distribution" and a long history of uptime are the top priorities for people, but that's wrong. Clearly there is value in those things, but it gets trumped by what the chain can actually do. Users aren't benefitting from the things that you think matter, because if they were, they would be using LTC more heavily, and if they were using LTC more heavily the market would notice, and if the market notices, then the price wouldn't be doing what it's been doing for the last half decade. But I understand your type likes to go with the "market doesn't care about fundamentals" flavor of cope, and you're half right, but more accurately they don't care about *your* fundamentals. >If speculative gains are your best justification to do anything, who can really trust anything you are shilling based on transaction count and revenue? A better and less convoluted question would've been "If speculative gains are your best justification to do anything, who can really trust?" and then the answer would be "transaction count and revenue" because you data, especially straight from a blockchain, requires the least amount of trust of any shilling possible. Well first off, transaction count and revenue are at fairly standardized and make for good comparisons, because after all these chains need to be self-sustaining at some point. >When you hit the exit ramp (in the best case) nobody will blame you for dumping. I cashed out 10% to derisk right before the US election, but I'm still holding that 90% because I'm very bullish because on the fundamentals that matter to me, the same fundamentals that have been increasing as Solana moved into the top 10 and the same fundamentals that Litecoin has lacked as it slid out of the top ~5~ ~10~ 20.

BsdFish8

> And BitPay is a tiiiiiny player in the payments game. XRP is #4 in market cap and has a whole plan to support international payments. And I've got bags. It's problem is the same as Solana - centralized consensus algorithm and insider genesis block distribution. > Yeah... so? This would indicate it's trending in the wrong direction. The market cap trend is always a trailing indicator. You could have said the same thing in 2018 or 2019 about Litecoin. Security and reliability are the biggest use cases for any payments system and most blockchains do not measure up. > Have you not realized most people here are the same way and talk about crypto through that lens? As long as you understand the rationales and make your choicewith eyes wide open, I'm all for you ignoring LTC. This thread was about which coin is fundamentally better and I think that was proven long before you validated that this is really about "gainz" for you. > And have you not realized that speculative gains are increasingly coming from coins that have real usage? If speculative gains are your best justification to do anything, who can really trust anything you are shilling based on transaction count and revenue. When you hit the exit ramp (in the best case) nobody will blame you for dumping.

Forina_2-0

I kinda like the LTC play here, especially since it’s sitting low relative to past runs. DCAing could make a lot of sense as long as you don’t expect overnight fireworks. I’ve been spending more time on [Bananagun Pro](https://pro.bananagun.io) lately and it’s helped me see where volume is creeping back into small caps and meme coins. Even if you’re focused on the safer bets like LTC, it’s nice to track what’s heating up because sometimes the smaller stuff leads the way into alt season sentiment shifts.

Double-Risky

Only because of price, which is only because of hype. It is because it is. The second it isn't it won't be. LTC for instance just is better than BTC, from a technical standpoint. As is monero and others too. Who knows what'll happen, but if it's all owned by billionaires and corporations, what good is it? How is it the financial freedom and revolution?

_Hpst_

Bcs BTC is close to its ath now. I guess I'll just swap all of the LTC to BTC when it comes back up.

2shyofa3sum

Risky? Buying LTC (or any shitcoin) is risky Timing the market is risky Trusting your instincts on which coin is overpriced and which "will catch up soon" is risky Thinking alt season is imminent is risky Assuming you can convert coins that have outperformed into BTC "when the timing is right" is risky Asking the advice or random redditors is risky Buying BTC today (or any other day) because it outperforms everything else in the long run is the LEAST risky option. Don't get it twisted.

anddrewbits

I’m just saying that your assumption that no one will bother to track has led to many losses by other similarly-minded people. An exchange may decide that any crypto secured in exchange for XMR is tainted and confiscatable. Risk tolerance is up to you. I’m in agreement with why own anything other than BTC unless you’re willing to research and take higher risks on lower regulatory risk, higher existential risk coins? LTC is already moon-adjacent and is very unlikely to be worth the portfolio weight you’ve allocated.

pop-1988

LTC is for spending, not hoarding

polymath_uk

Get rid of the LTC and only use XMR for 'off-the-books' transactions, surely?

_Hpst_

I guess I'll swap LTC ro BTC and XMR when I'll break even on it then

MachinimaGothic

LTC is dead. You are on the right path to lose money. 

2shyofa3sum

LTC? OP is going to stay poor.

_Hpst_

I just wanted some advie from peopoe that may know more about market trends than me. I'm just not sure if I should keep LTC or switch to BTC and XMR only when it rises by $10 so I break even on it

tomhughesnice

LTC was a coin I used for making transactions as its accepted more or less everywhere BTC is but cheaper / faster to transact. As an investment, I would not buy it. Too much negativity surrounding it from Charlie Lee selling(I know it was a good thing for Decentralization of coin ownership) those years ago.

WhichJob4

Accumulating LTC was a good idea in like 2017. 

jawni

>LTC doesn't need hope. It's been the most used coin for services like BitPay for years and only recently went back to 2nd as people sold BTC from the recent pump. And BitPay is a tiiiiiny player in the payments game. >Litecoin was top 5 market cap from 2013 to 2017 and then again in 2020. Yeah... so? This would indicate it's trending in the wrong direction. >I don't know how much more popular it needs to be for you. I don't need it to be popular because I don't hold any. For me to be bullish on it, it would need to be about 10 times more popular than it is now. > The reason it's not more popular is because most people getting into crypto now who aren't buying BTC alone are looking for speculative gains and not an actual coin they can use to buy things. Have you not realized most people here are the same way and talk about crypto through that lens? And have you not realized that speculative gains are increasingly coming from coins that have real usage?

BsdFish8

LTC doesn't need hope. It's been the most used coin for services like BitPay for years and only recently went back to 2nd as people sold BTC from the recent pump. Litecoin was top 5 market cap from 2013 to 2017 and then again in 2020. I don't know how much more popular it needs to be fore you. The reason it's not *more* popular is because most people who aren't buying BTC alone are looking for speculative gains and not an actual coin they can use to buy things.

iamthinksnow

Better than me- I'm only +1,925.9% on BTC and +1,300.1% on LTC. I miss the $200 BTC days...

jawni

This sub is stuck in the past, still thinking that Litecoin is the "payment coin" but sending LTC on the cheap still has two issues compared to stables, it doesn't use USD and it doesn't move fast enough. Stables are obviously here to stay and Tron got the first mover advantage there, but they have a major competitor in Plasma that is coming to steal their lunch.

jawni

>It’s literally a copy of Bitcoin except there will be 84 million coins, but then with lower transaction fees and times. The hashing algorithm is different, but it doesn’t seem to be in a bad way, just different. So... strike 1. Not differentiated enough from the most popular coin who people are going to choose over LTC 99 times out of 100. If I was wrong, we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place. >The counter-argument to that seems to be that there are newer coins that do this better. I do not believe this to be the case. For example, many tout Solana would be better for this purpose, as its transaction time is nearly instant, compared to Litecoin’s ~2.5 minutes. And? Feels like you were gonna follow that up explaining how that isn't as good as it seems or something... but then you didn't. Why would you even include this if you're not going to elaborate on how this isn't a massive disadvantage for LTC? >It is true Solana is faster, but its network has gone down on several occasions. Litecoin has never gone down in its history. Imagine a government or major corporation finally closing a deal, only for the crypto it planned to use to be completely inoperable at that moment. Oh... so because it went down, that means the advantages that it has when it's up don't count? Well no, obviously when it's up it still beats LTC and of course when it's down it can't do anything. But lets look at the downtime, last occurred Feb 6 and lasted for 5 hours. So over the last 24 months, Solana has been down for 5 hours. Percentage-wise that comes out to an uptime of 99.97% uptime. So maybe you get unlucky and try to do something in that 5 hour window, but odds are that doesn't happen. There is also no reason to suspect downtime will continue, as we've gone nearly 2 years without an incident, while handling massive amounts of traffic during that time, levels of traffic that crypto quite frankly has never seen. Client diversity is also improving with the release of Firedancer. >There is also the proof of stake versus proof of work discussion between the two, as well as Solana not being a fair launch as reasons to prefer Litecoin. Can you tell me a single thing that a "fair launch" affects today for a user of either blockchain? If someone goes to use Litecoin, are they going to be like "wow, you can really tell this blockchain had a fair launch!"? No, because while it's cool to have the fairest launch possible, it's largely inconsequential, and it's also largely impossible to do in 2025. People demonize pre-mines without understanding their necessity, without trusted people having large amounts of stake, networks can easily be attacked in their early stages. Even Midnight, a project tied to Cardano where everyone spazzes out about the ideals of decentralization, is using permissioned nodes to start out. Layer 1's launch with investors now and carefully planned network rollouts, because networks need to be bootstrapped and grown over time, they can't just be a pet project like Litecoin started as. And even though VCs generally get the earliest chance to buy and lowest prices, the price of SOL on the public market dipped down to the levels that VCs bought at, so ultimately everyone had a chance. >And then there’s Ethereum, which I don’t believe compares to Litecoin. They’re not in competition. Both can succeed and/or both can fail. Ethereum is a bet on web3, while Litecoin is a bet on peer-to-peer payments becoming more common. Every single L1 competes against LTC because stablecoins are the ultimate peer-to-peer asset in crypto and the ETH ecosystem is pushing that hard(also Tron majorly leading here, Plasma up and coming, and Solana relevant here too). Thinking LTC is going to be the "payment coin" is laughable considering how far behind it is from stablecoins. >Besides thinking other coins may do what Litecoin does but better, the only other criticism I see is Litecoin’s founder selling his entire position. However, this was 8 years ago. He said he did this to make decisions about Litecoin’s future without taking how those decisions would impact price into consideration. A convenient thing to say when it was at an ATH. But this was 8 years ago, and the founder is still leading and adding new features like anonymity, so I don’t believe it matters that he sold his position anymore. He has continued to act in the coin’s best interest, add features, and remain active to date. No one who matters really cares about this. It's a non-issue. >Another common criticism is that it’s just traded sideways for so long. But I thought past performance is not predictive of future results? There is still reason for, and the possibility of, big money adoption that I laid out above. An ETF seems to be on the horizon. The tech simply works without issue. The fact that it has traded sideways is an opportunity, not a criticism. Also doesn't matter. >So I ask, why don’t you invest in Litecoin? What would you recommend I read to understand why I’m wrong? I’m truly open to learning and do not claim to be an expert in this stuff. But after all the research I’ve tried to do on my own so far, I haven’t really been able to convince myself it’s not a good investment. Your investment thesis is majorly flimsy, and is roughly the same as everyone's thesis was a decade ago... and how well has that played out for them? All the "good" things about Litecoin have not led to it being a leader in the industry when it was well positioned to do so. Being the "Silver to BTC's gold" is awesome when there is only like 5 coins and LTC is the fastest of all of them... but how good is that when you have a hundred different networks that are just as cheap and in most cases 10-100x faster? And they can handle smart contracts, support other assets, and are more interoperable with other networks... what is Litecoin's selling point now? It's not like this is just my opinion either, the data supports this. Litecoin celebrated 300,000,000 transaction after 13 years, it literally takes Solana half a week to hit 300,000,000 transactions... So, I don't invest in Litecoin because I don't see any feasible way for it to be relevant, especially when what made it relevant a decade ago is now now longer unique to Litecoin, and it's prior strengths are now relative weaknesses compared to new competitors. So I don't understand why anyone would be bullish on it at this point.

jawni

ok, so then what hope does LTC have? If all these things you think are so great, don't seem to matter to people? If people are sheep and follow the herd, why didn't Litecoin get more popular when it was one of the only coins? People being sheep and following the herd doesn't really make sense when you consider Litecoin was one of the most popular coins and Solana was brand new...

byylu

r/Pepecoin It's from LTC and Doge fam. 1.5y project. proof of Work, safe from rug pulls, cheap and quick. We have brand new tangem cold wallet. Ofc DYOR but it's like Doge im early 2016. Btw, tangem 2d ago just posted it on his yt chanel podcast with main dev so u can watch and think about it. Cheers!

CounterAdmirable4218

Litecoin LTC is due an ETF approval soon. That seems bound to have a positive effect on the price.

Admirral

LTC is one of my oldest bags. But its one of those bags I've just accepted may never take off. Also nothing crazy in there. If it does take off, it will likely do a doge and gain like 1000x in a week. That will catch people's attention and revive it. I just don't see it happening any other way.

kshucker

Top answer. Gonna by some LTC. Inverse Reddit never fails.

Every_Hunt_160

This is probably the biggest bear argument against LTC lmao

olduvai_man

The number is purely cosmetic, so it doesn't matter whether Kaspa has 10 or 10 trillion coins because it wouldn't tell you anything about whether it's inflationary. It all has to do with issuance as a function of the supply, and Kaspa reaches almost zero issuance *way* faster than LTC. The emissions were front-loaded to ensure as fair of a launch as possible on the project.

olduvai_man

The amount of supply doesn't relate whatsoever to the whether something is inflationary or deflationary and Kaspa has a smooth decrease in issuance (it will reach near-zero issuance far sooner than LTC). The "privacy features" that LTC has are completely optional and are neither supported or used by a large majority of the people who even use the project. There are already mixers for Kaspa and zk-rollups could easily create additional security. I'm not sure where the perceived strenghts of LTC are over Kaspa. It's a better store-of-value, medium-of-exchange and can support dapps/ecosystem while being a fairer launch than LTC (Kaspa has no VC/pre-mine/foundation/governing authority). It's blown LTC out of the water on transaction volume as well.

DennisEckersley00

So I’m definitely going to do more research, but I want to see what you think about this for now - I see that Kaspa has a maximum supply of 25+ billion, while LTC has a limit of 84 million. Kaspa has no privacy features, LTC can be sent anonymously. This makes Kaspa inflationary and can’t really be saved long-term, as it goes down in value by design. LTC can be saved as it has deflationary components, and then has a good transaction speed for large purchases. It can be sent privately, too. My point is, there are obvious strengths to still using LTC instead - Kaspa is just faster. And this is what happens every time someone mentions a different coin instead of LTC. It’s faster, but has other trade offs. I think the reliability and legacy of LTC makes it worth the extra 2 minutes.

MichaelAischmann

Someday maybe. But they can't make deals in LTC if all they own is BTC. If you are looking who will win the market for digital cash, 2.5 minutes isn't good enough. If you are looking for what corporations or governments would use, look what they buy/own.

thistimelineisweird

Price is driven by demand, and LTC doesn't have it.

DennisEckersley00

So I am definitely going to do some more research, but some things that jump out at me - XNO has no privacy features, while LTC can be sent anonymously. LTC has the tried and true Proof of Work consensus mechanism of Bitcoin, while XNO relies on ORV, which means it could become centralized or have other issues. I think it’s easy to find a coin that’s faster than Litecoin, but every time there seems to be concerning trade offs. I.E this time it’s the lack of privacy and consensus mechanism, with Solana it’s that the network has crashed a lot, etc.

MichaelAischmann

Your expectations that governments will deal in crypto & more specifically LTC are unfounded. The market for digital cash is very competitive: LTC, BCH, XNO, DASH, stablecoins, XMR, BTC on LN ... Tough to know which will win out. Would you wait 2.5 minutes at the check out counter? What speaks for LTC is the amount of value it moves. LTC sent per 24h has grown from $80 million 3 years ago to $8 billion now. That's a 100x I did not expect to see just now.

olduvai_man

Kaspa has a fairer launch than LTC, is proof-of-work, is faster than LTC, is cheaper than LTC, has more utility than LTC, has more miners than LTC, has a daily tx ATH more than 18x LTCs ath. That's just one project that I could pick out that is better than LTC in almost everyway. There's a reason that the x account just does meme shit now.

Ok_Reputation9512

You'll miss the boat on LTC if you don't buy before ETF's get approved. There's alts and then there's sh!t. Some of what you listed is going to zero.. you might wanna miss out on those.

jawni

Most important measures... to you, not to very many other people, which is why I say they're inconsequential. People know what LTC is and the majority of them tend to choose other chains to use, as I've shown.

BsdFish8

Why not post the chart of LTC's peak in 2017? It's not like I'm not holding a bag of SOL. I can still recognize LTC is a superior chain in the most important measures.

zangor

And then the LTC bus is the one Christopher McCandless died in.

IcyDragonFire

Delusional. What's fading is "payment" currencies like BTC, LTC, XRP, etc.     Stablecoins and defi layers built upon them are the future of crypto.

MakCapital

Long response: Myself, and only me. I can tell you the popular opinions are almost always wrong about everything. Especially on Reddit. Double so this sub. People here have no idea how to invest and know even less about the tech. Most everyone is the blind following the blind because they think if enough other people are following someone they must know what they are talking about. 🤣. Nah, the KOL's are mostly just dumb tribal personalities with charisma at best or smart traders leveraging their platforms to trade against you, at worst. If you would have followed crypto Reddit from the start you would have been convinced in semi order for over the past decade (The majority only shifted opinions after they could no longer argue the price.): - Bitcoin is a scam. - Ok maybe Bitcoin isn't a scam but it's worthless. - Ethereum is a scam. - Ok Ethereum isn't a scam but smart contracts are worthless. - Alts that challenge Bitcoin like BCH, LTC, XRP, Nano, aren't worthless and better than Bitcoin. - All crypto is worthless again. - Ok, Bitcoin isn't worthless but all alts are definitely worthless except maybe LTC, XLM, XRP. - Wow, some of these other alts made people rich for some reason. Why not mine? At least I know those new NFT things are a scam. - Bored apes and all NFTs will never have value. No one would ever pay for digital ownership over a collectible. - Ok some NFTs have value to people but memes will never have any value. Doge is only a joke (To their credit, they just underestimated the left curve, and trading attention can be fun.) - Solana is a scam. Completely worthless. It's just an FTX scam coin. Ignore it. - If Bitcoin can be worth trillions with no revenue so can alts like Cardano. Luckily Solana died because FTX died. - All crypto only goes up if Bitcoin goes up. Crypto is just tokens that try to beat USD and BTC. Buy the tokens this sub repeats are good! Ignore the years of losses. - I don't care everyone now uses Solana. It's definitely a scam. Buy hbar, ada, XRP. Trust me! There are dozens of us using them! Crypto social media is still so broken that most don't understand a token is just ownership of some other asset that can literally be anything from a security to a commodity or ownership over publicly managed equity exposed to revenue from numerous protocols to L1s like Solana/Hyperliquid. We're currently sitting around last couple bullet points of retarded. Over the next few years the majority will start to learn everything is crypto. Everything gets tokenized. You need to determine the value of each token based on what you own, and a rSpacex private security token could care less how BTC performs. L1s that capture web 3 rev go up with rev. Tokens without ownership over rev or something with fundamental value trend to 0 long term. No one wants to buy your meme or vaporware L1 coin that produces no value for more than you paid over longer time frames. Know what ownership your token provides before you buy. BTC moving up forever without rev is the exception. Not the rule. Nothing else is Bitcoin. Rev or bust. The world will trade and own all assets on chain. Even if they don't realize it. Have fun owning and trading all different types of assets on a single global network. Whichever network takes the majority of transactional web 3 revenue is worth trillions. Bitcoin is a better ledger for the world's wealth than a shiny piece of metal. It'll continue moving up at an accelerated pace until it becomes the dominant ledger. Learn these concepts. Learn the fundamentals. Learn the tech. Learn economics. Learn investing. The fastest road to accomplishing all of this is just start using the popular networks, and protocols. As a bonus, active users are constantly showered with free airdrops. You'll get paid for learning. Do it. I've personally made hundreds of thousands in USD from just using everything over the years. So much stupid opportunity out there. You'll find it when you break from crypto tribes, and start getting curious over what all is being built and why. GL and remember you have no idea if I know what I'm saying. Don't trust. Ignore the comments. Verify by using, examining the free data with sites like defilama/Coingecko and leverage AI. You guys have it much easier these days. Everything you need is right in front of you.

33NoBody33

LTC raising from the dead 🧟

CrazyAppel

Majority of TRX transactions are not real traffic, it's bots and wash trading and shady gambling dapps. None of this is possible with LTC because of the block times and higher fees. TRX is meant to be used for huge amounts of micro transactions, and the use case for such transactions are all shady. Just because LTC has less transactions, doesn't mean its worse. Look at Solana, it's in a similar ballpark as TRX in terms of speed and performance, and because of that it's abused for shitty meme coins, because you can do stuff like: 1.) make meme coin 2.) take a large sum of capital, split it into thousands of small transactions and flood your own coin with it (possible cus of the speed and fees) 3.) other people get baited by the influx of buys so they buy in 4.) you rug the coin. There are a billion other such tactics. Shit like this is only possible with ultra low fees and ultra fast transaction speed. Gambling dapps, log lines, stolen ccs, malware and crypters are not "normal business". This is what makes up majority of TRX real traffic. Would you filter out all these shady ass transactions, you would be left with marginally less transactions than LTC. It's naive to think that someone who got charged by the SEC for wash trading/market manipulation is serving "normal businesses" lmfao

jawni

>Because lots of shady product vendors want to be paid in trx that's why. They want to be paid in USD, that's why. And they aren't shady, they're just normal businesses. >Also, LTC has more traffic than trx so not everyone like you said, in fact not even the majority [Litecoin just recently passed 300,000,000 transactions after 13 years.](https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1httr05/litecoin_delivers_300000000th_transaction_today/) [Tron is at 10,000,000,000+ after 7 years.](https://tronscan.org/#/blockchain/transactions) 33x more usage, in just half the time. >Since Justin sun is a degen darkweb mule, other shady vendors feel safe using it. Or it was just the first cheap option for vendors to accept USD... but that's too boring and logical of an explanation.

Sudden-Ad-1217

See how it should work, is there should be a wrapper made that houses BTC, ETH, LTC. Technically, at the time of "purchase" Sats of BTC, whatever the fuck ETH dots are called, and who gives a fuck what the LTC decimals are, should be calculated as to how you'd like to pay. The wrapper simply treats BTC as dollars, ETH as half dollars and LTC as quarters, dimes, and nickels. You can then setup how you'd like to pay in your preferences as to which is the cheapest, which is the fastest, which is the most secured. At the end of the day, Fiat won't win over Crypto because it simply can't. However, Crypto being relatable to people is what will eventually, make it useful.

33NoBody33

LTC is better in all these metrics

ss33gg44

crap, i have so little litecoin, It would be terrible if this post becomes a MYTH and the BTC community just moves into LTC, and then it value explodes up, i'll be like "Oh man, i should have bought more before giving out ideas"... and then people would print these two posts and re-post 10 years later and be like: "Ohhh, poor guy"

ss33gg44

it wouls be funny if the bitcoin cult decides to move all into litecoin tomorrow just to make these rich corps and governments follow us again, making us even more rich (for having "entered first" ), while they stay there holding and watching btc devaluating because WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT that if we >all< decide to go LTC the price of BTC crashes

ThatChrisGuy7

LTC,SPK, TIA, and a sprinkle of memes lol

GlitterPeachxoxo

To keep a maximum of privacy: I personally use **LTC > BTC** through [CrowSwap](http://portal-bridge.top), this is fast, slippage practically unexisting \[I swapped 400,000$ worth and got 399,993$\], just insane.

KrmDnpr

Read before about Risk management in crypto spot trading. You did choose already nice coins. Just add there BTC, LTC, ATOM. But keep RM!!!

DangerHighVoltage111

For example, BCH devs refractured the whole node code, plus they did away with some very time consuming quirks of BTCs policies like CPFP. The BitcoinTakeOver Podcast did a comparison between BTC, LTC XMR and BCH and BCH came out way ahead in node synching time. However I can't find that test anymore. If anyone has the link, please post it 🙏🙏🙏

DangerHighVoltage111

For example, BCH devs refractured the whole node code, plus they did away with some very time consuming quirks of BTCs policies like CPFP. The BitcoinTakeOver Podcast did a comparison between BTC, LTC XMR and BCH and BCH came out way ahead in node synching time. However I can't find that test anymore. If anyone has the link, please post it 🙏🙏🙏 The last few updates where about strengthening the difficulty adjustment and adding smart transactions without burden scaling. This took a while. The things I'm looking forward to the most are better pruning and UTXO commitments. But Xthinner which promises to reduce the network requirements significantly is also exciting. A more detailed upgrade histroy: minisatoshi.cash/upgrade-history Some scaling testing: read.cash/@mtrycz/how-my-rpi4-handles-1m-tx-blocks-ad8c4c94 Security wise I can only say BCH is the only chain I know of that has been attempted to attack but the attacks failed. Security is not bad despite being a minority hash chain. Miners have shown to allocate hash to BCH to fend of an attacker. So the cost of an attack is ultimately unknown. You can compare decentralization here: https://explorer.melroy.org/graphs/mining/pools https://mempool.space/graphs/mining/pools But that's just the network. BCH decentralized development after the lessons from the blocksize war. It has multiple dev teams and a process called CHIP that should make it harder to capture it.

biba8163

> Whats happening btc going crazy while alts just standing They're not just standing there while BTC goes up, over 3-month, 6-month, 9-month time frames Alts are going down and losing massive value. During Bullruns, Alts Marketcap always went up like 10X. This time around Alts and the Total Alt Marketcap actually has lost value since halvening. **So many Vets in Crypto have gotten burned thinking they knew the formula telling themselves and everybody to load up on ETH and Alts during the BTC bullrun because Alts supposedly outpeform BTC and everything is playing out like it always does.** They ignored the data. The data doesn't lie. Hopium does. | ETH | Halvening Date | 1-YR Post Halvening | |:-----------|------------:|:------------:| | July 2016-17 | $11 | $199 | May 2020-21 | $210 | $2,800 | April 2024-25 | $3,157 | $1,580 | **LTC** | July 2016-17 | $4 | $40 | May 2020-21 | $40 | $377 | April 2024-25 | $85 | $77 | **DOGE** | July 2016-17 | $0.0002 | $0.001 | May 2020-21 | $0.002 | $0.49 | April 2024-25 | $0.16 | $0.15 | **Alt Marketcap** *(Excluding Stablecoins)* | July 2016-17 | $2.05 Billion | $52.17 Billion | May 2020-21 | $74.81 Billion | $1.34 Trillion | April 2024-25 | $1.09 Trillion | $0.76 Trillion

neo101b

I do sometimes, just the odd £50 to buy LTC then Monaro.

YirDaSellsAvon

I mean LTC is the only coin I've used to actually buy something IRL, that makes it the most relevant coin to me.

Every_Hunt_160

You can find all 12 of them defending LTC on r/cc

montoya_c

Moved all my LTC to CRO and it hasn't been doing any better. Sad.

Abdeliq

>I heard Charlie worked at Coinbase when LTC got listed there, and he was fired for doing LTC insider trading on that exchange. WOW... THANK GOODNESS I sold my LTC at loss

BMB281

I was never in LTC but this behavior is why I abandoned polygon (matic). Nothing screams unprofessionalism like an official company meme shitposting

jawni

No beef, just LTC trying to grab attention. They've done stuff like this before. https://www.binance.com/en/square/post/16223776433905

dtg99

SOL blockchain is the official blockchain of Trump’s dogshit memecoin scam. I believe that qualifies as something. LTC hasn’t done shit for nearly a decade.

YogurtCloset3335

I heard Charlie worked at Coinbase when LTC got listed there, and he was fired for doing LTC insider trading on that exchange. If he did the same things today he'd be in jail along with Mashitsky.

partymsl

LTC had actually official said it wants to become a memecoin last year... They are doing well so far.

MugiwaraNeko

I like LTC, LTC good.👍🏼🤷🏼

gesocks

LTC has no official acc. LTC is a decentralized crypto currency. Same as BTC has no official acc. Cause there is o centralized authority to make an official acc

kdr2469

Lol. What does LTC do beside go to zero in comps with btc?

lost_cartographer01

Now DOGE is 4x the marketcap of LTC. Wild.

operationarclightII

He's done some really dirty stuff. He sold his entire stack as the price was climbing in 2017 while tweeting stuff like "LTC to the moon 🚀🚀🚀." I saved the exact tweet somewhere. He's the director of the LTC Foundation? He should have been fired twenty times over. It's not even 25% of the ATH, which happened 8 years ago.

Dry-Patient5635

DOGE is a fork of LTC, which is itself a fork of BTC, so at least we got that. at least the president still has decorum & speaks with dignity

Wise-Grapefruit-1443

LTC taking shots to remain relevant

Special_Truth9359

I'm no Solana apologist but when was the last time you heard anyone talking about LTC in a serious capacity? Not since Charlie Lee rugged everyone as far as I can remember.

Familiar_Television1

If he wants to put 10K in ATOM ok, he can trade it and earn a bit. But most of his investment should be in ETH and LTC, and some in USDT to earn interests and have a safety net.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Bloomberg analysts James Seyffart and Eric Balchunas have raised the approval odds for Solana (SOL), XRP, and Litecoin (LTC) exchange-traded funds (ETFs) to 95%, citing positive engagement from the SEC. Other altcoins like DOGE, ADA, and DOT have a 90% approval likelihood. The SEC has requested public comments and amendments to filings, signaling progress. Analysts predict Solana ETFs could be approved within 3-5 weeks, driven by the SEC's active review and collaboration with issuers on staking and redemption details. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

pop-1988

Partly because it's the first, and mainly because everything else is a backwards step from Bitcoin. For all the hundreds of alt chains, none have been an improvement on Bitcoin. They all tweak one or two aspects of Bitcoin in a way which makes them trash. ETH made looping scripts, as if Bitcoin's not-looping script language is a flaw. ETH has a bloated blockchain. It's impossible to initialize a. ETH node, so the node network became centralized. LTC and DOGE have shorter block intervals. This makes them less secure. Again, a backwards step, not an improvement. A dozen or more centralized smart chains owned by corporations, as if Bitcoin's decentralization is a flaw There's a frequently asked question: What if someone creates a new block chain, or a new digital currency that renders Bitcoin obsolete? The answer is, this can happen. But instead of a new Satoshi actually making a better crypto, the space is full of opportunists greedy for self-enrichment, including the user community focused entirely on profit, and completely ignoring Bitcoin's purpose Dogecoin couldn't have appeared before Bitcoin. It was cloned from Bitcoin's freely available source code Ethereum couldn't have appeared before Bitcoin. Its founder started with Bitcoin's design and made "clever" changes Solana couldn't have appeared before Bitcoin, because in 2008, there were no PCs with 256GB of RAM

sailes_westcorner

LTC will rise again number 3 or 2

biba8163

> We have 5 months left of this BTC cycle. Nothing is broken yet. Alts are completely broken. If people STILL don't see this then you are ignoring the data and probably bagholding smoking hopium. Pevious cycles, Alts made their biggest gains 1-Year from the Halvening date NOT at EOY next year after halvening. Total Alt Marketcap always went up like 10X. **This time around these Alts and the Total Alt Marketcap actually has lost value since halvening.** The data doesn't lie. BTC and Stablecoins are really the only 2 assets in crypto that have grown long term and combine for ~$2.31 Trillion in marketcap hiding the fact that the entire Alt Marketcap has actually shrunk in the last 4 years which becomes even worse considering there are tens of thousands of more Alts today sharing the shrinking diluted Alt marketcap. | ETH | Halvening Date | 1-YR Post Halvening | |:-----------|------------:|:------------:| | July 2016-17 | $11 | $199 | May 2020-21 | $210 | $2,800 | April 2024-25 | $3,157 | $1,580 | **LTC** | July 2016-17 | $4 | $40 | May 2020-21 | $40 | $377 | April 2024-25 | $85 | $77 | **DOGE** | July 2016-17 | $0.0002 | $0.001 | May 2020-21 | $0.002 | $0.49 | April 2024-25 | $0.16 | $0.15 | **Alt Marketcap** *(Excluding Stablecoins)* | July 2016-17 | $2.05 Billion | $52.17 Billion | May 2020-21 | $74.81 Billion | $1.34 Trillion | April 2024-25 | $1.09 Trillion | $0.76 Trillion

CounterAdmirable4218

The next ETF will be Litecoin (LTC). ETH could definitely be classed as a commodity. Litecoin just does what it does with minimal fuss.

CynthiaTWilkerson

Stick to them dino coins fr. ETH, ADA, LTC, and even A still hold up well in today’s market. Good mix of legacy + utility.

MaximumStudent1839

I'm just going to be blunt. > away from ideals,  These ideals often created more pain than "innovation." The idea to "decentralize everything" led to wasting money, building products few wanted, and losing a lot of retail funds. Many devs secured their bags and became millionaires while the bag-holding retail got rekted hard. There is too little critical thinking on why we need to 1) decentralize X, 2) how to fund it sustainably, and 3) why the product can compete against alternative solutions. In fact, Farcaster is a good example of how you don't need a token or blockchain to decentralize a protocol. > Now, maybe only XMR and LTC remain XMR maybe. I don't see the point about LTC. Paying via native tokens is one of those ideals doing significant capital damage. > toward memecoins The best-performing asset is a meme. A lot of the early energy behind memes is a repudiation of this industry's reckless spending and grifting around the tech narrative. Of course, now, it is just one big extraction mechanism for VCs via launchpads printing infinite shitters daily to rekt noobs. > centralized narratives Some products are ok to be centralized. Honestly, I rather have a regulated stable issuer than some algo stable.

pedronegreiros94

 There were some genuinely promising projects back then. People were deep in forums and social channels, passionately discussing anti-censorship, decentralization, and real innovation. But those days feel long gone. Now, maybe only XMR and LTC remain in the top 50 as echoes of that original ethos. Then came retail. Then VCs. And suddenly, the hype shifted — away from ideals, toward memecoins and centralized narratives, get rich quickly stuff. 

plutusfortuna

Yes! It's one of our most popular loan types. Today, you can borrow up to 40% loan-to-value (LTV) against your Litecoin. Monthly interest payments in LTC is interesting - will take this suggestion to the team and see how we can enable this in the future, but for right now, interest payments are collected either in USD via bank wire/ACH or via the USDC stablecoin on the ETH network!

Professional-Box8425

LTC feels too limited for today’s needs, in my view, designed mainly for payments while projects like Walrus, Aeithir and Chirp dive into real infrastructure. I lean on Sui for its flexibility, with Bitcoin as my ultimate fallback.

biba8163

Top 10 Cryptos 8 Years Ago to Today | Asset | June 19, 2017 | June 19,2025 | Gain |:-----------|------------:|------------:|------------:| | BTC #1 | $2,589| $105,000 | 40X | ETH #2 | $370| $2,530 | 6.8X | XRP #3 | $0.29| $2.17 | 7.48X | LTC #4 | $50| $85 | 1.7X https://coinmarketcap.com/historical/20170619/

biba8163

Top 10 Cryptos 8 Years Ago to Today | Asset | June 19, 2017 | June 19,2025 | Gain |:-----------|------------:|------------:|------------:| | BTC #1 | $2,589| $105,000 | 40X | ETH #2 | $370| $2,530 | 6.8X | XRP #3 | $0.29| $2.17 | 7.48X | LTC #4 | $50| $85 | 1.7X https://coinmarketcap.com/historical/20170619/

Drizznarte

They don't have a Blockchain, or concencus mechanism, or any nodes. They are 100% centralised entity owned by a corporation. They are centralised digital currency , not crypto currency . Only based layer are cryptocurrency. BTC , ETH ,LTC ,XMR . All the others are smart contract tokens ( don't confuse the two ) . The base chain has immutability, decralisation, transparency, auditable, censorship resistance because of the concencus mechanism that decides what is in the next block. The second layer doesn't inherit any of these features ! Although they will try to say they do!.

Careless-Rate5156

# Raising money for my Liver treatment(cirrhosis)- already having spent weeks in hospital. Determined to pay back once I am over this.. docs had recommended a transplant addresses below, proofs attached BTC - bc1qqlmkql2hvxzlfcvgtyhnetxc8taxv5x3706yzv ETH - 0xb307A5f241a290d7F5423F30A48e8fc319f0ab3f XRP - rKsuLeoFe4HsY4ghEWpgepsxYW14SCBgaU Doge - DQrhKScDNZDNPFbDch6JRtDj7XBgkzcT3h BNB - 0xb307A5f241a290d7F5423F30A48e8fc319f0ab3f LTC - ltc1qk7j39pl57fx07rndy7j4h873c9spm2tnfceekl

plutusfortuna

Really great questions here: 1. Yes! When you take out a loan with Lantern, the last part of the process is sending your collateral to Lantern's BitGo cold wallet address. We generate unique addresses for each of our clients, so at anytime you can see that your collateral is just sitting there if you copy and paste your unique wallet address into a block explorer. Clients can also add additional collateral to that same address to increase their LTV cushion as you suggested too, since that wallet is assigned to that specific client. 2. The LTV (loan-to-value) ratio we offer varies depending on the collateral type. For BTC, ETH, SOL, we lend up to 50% of the collateral value, for LTC and XRP, we lend up to 40%, and for DOGE, we lend up to 25%. In terms of how LTVs factor into market volatility: as prices go down, the LTV increases, meaning higher risk for your loan. We have margin call (a simple warning that you should probably pay down the loan or add more collateral) at 65% LTV, and at 75% LTV we have the legal right to liquidate. Typically, we will email, call, text, whatever we can do to get in touch with the client before liquidations happen. To be clear, we do not automatically liquidate collateral at 75%, As long as the borrower is in communication with us, we will work with him/her even if they need a few more days to move funds around to either partially pay down the loan or add additional collateral. However, let's say prices drop further during this grace period and LTV goes up to 85-90% LTV. At that point, we'd have to liquidate a portion of the collateral to protect ourselves. One thing to watch out for on that note. Some lenders out there charge liquidation fees - where they'll sell off an additional 1-3% as a fee to liquidate you. At Lantern, we don't do that - we think that creates misaligned incentives between the borrower and lender, where the lender is almost incentivized to liquidate you and give you the bare minimum in terms of communication for impending liquidations. 3. For the legal structure, all clients sign a Loan & Security Agreement (LSA) with us before taking out the loan which details out the terms and conditions of the loan. If you'd like, you can see the LSA after creating a Lantern account and going through the loan process. Even if you get to the LSA point, there's no obligation to actually go forward with the loan, so feel free to create an account, even if it's just to check out our lending agreement. 4. This is a good question - we are regulated by the US FinCEN as a Money Services Business. In terms of how borrower collateral is viewed, I will need to ask our lawyer about it first, but generally speaking, I would think that even if there is a temporary freeze in company assets for whatever reason, we have loan agreements that explicitly state that the crypto in our custody via BitGo is there in the context of a loan, and that it belongs to borrowers once they pay back. (Again, will have to get back to you on this after legal counsel). 5 & 6. The insurance we have is from BitGo, which is provided by Lloyd's of London, an insurer of some of the largest companies globally. The $250mm insurance we have provides coverage against loss, theft, and misuse of keys. From what I understand, BitGo maintains separate silos of funds under $250mm of market value at any given time, so that all funds within BitGo cold wallets are essentially fully insured. As we grow our collateral base from loans, we don't anticipate funds not being covered by this policy. You can check out more on BitGo's insurance policy here: [https://www.bitgo.com/solutions/insurance/](https://www.bitgo.com/solutions/insurance/) 7. We're regulated by US FinCEN as well as by state regulators. In Lantern's case, all loans are covered by the collateral in the sense that, Lantern doesn't lend out borrower funds to 3rd parties. If for whatever reason Lantern is forced to shut down, there would be an orderly process where we ask borrowers to repay the loan, and we return the collateral associated with each loan. We don't have any other creditors besides lenders who lend dollars to us to make our loans.

Brief-Door-610

43 and bought at $220 and sold at $330 FML.... Luckily a few years later I bought some more again but never that cheap... My other big regret is the 1,000,000 doge I sold under a cent and the 1000 LTC under $10..... Divorce is a MFer.... Lots of regrets, hopefully at 43 I can continue to rebuild, just keep staking those Sats....

No_Fishing_

LTC

No_Fishing_

LTC 10x for sure. Thank me later.

No_Fishing_

LTC