Why is any cryptocoin worth anything?

26 min readJul 23, 2021

INTRO

Are cryptocurrencies money?
What is a cryptocurrency?

WHAT IS MONEY?

Barter
The different kinds of money in History
* Let’s think about salt
* The stones in Yap Island
* Spices
* What about gold?

A HUGE CHANGE IN PARADIGM

Paper currency — the new problems
All paper currency is backed by gold (?)
The US$ and other currencies in the world are not backed by gold anymore

HOW DO BANKS CONTRIBUTE TO THE ECONOMY?

Checkbooks
Another new paradigm: Credit Cards
How do banks “create” money
The 2008 sub-prime crisis

MONEY IS JUST WORTH ANYTHING AS LONG AS PEOPLE BELIEVE IN IT

CRYPTOCURRENCY: A NEW PARADIGM

HOW ABOUT THE OTHER CRYPTOS? ARE THEY MONEY TOO?

Digital money — the cryptocoins
Utility coins — the coins that have a real use
Ponzi Scheme coins

COULD $TXL BECOME CURRENCY/MONEY?

What is $TXL?
How I see the future
Tixl will be valuable for developers and projects
People will want to use the Autobahn
People start to use TXL as currency

Intro

This article is certainly longer than my average one. What I want to discuss is something that I think everybody who is investing in crypto already asks but might just be forgetting: “why is any cryptocoin worth anything, and why should I have any?”.

In this article I want to discuss a little more about what money is, why do we use money, what has been used as money, what are the problems with money today, the advantages and disadvantages of the current and future systems.

If you think this is too much, too long, don’t want to read, you can just find the topic you find most interesting or close this window.

Are cryptocurrencies money?

I like to read and discuss a lot about investments in general and, in particular, I have a special interest in cryptocurrencies. Why? Because I see them as the future for currency. I noticed, lately, that a lot of people call themselves specialists and recommend tens of different cryptos “you should have” because they are going to give you 100x gains. I have also noticed that these so-called specialists can’t agree on 2 points:

Which are the best projects to invest in
If we are in the middle of a Bear or a Bull market

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying they are incompetent and/or dishonest. All of them are careful to say they are not “giving investment advice” and that “people must do their own research”.

I won’t discard the possibility that some of them have their own interests when they recommend something but, assuming that most of them are honest, it is fair to say that the reason why they won’t agree on which are the best projects is because everyone might have different opinions on what is good.

My problem with such recommendations is that, if you recommend 10 or more different projects, you probably don’t know any one of them in depth. At that point, the recommendations you make are much more based on your opinion than in facts. I study one project in depth and still have to make a lot of assumptions and opinions to say how good it can be.

But the second point I mention above is a more interesting one. After all, are we in a Bear or a Bull market? In my opinion, we are in the middle of a long-term Bull Market. One that started before 2016 and will continue for at least another 10 years. During this period of time, there will be the so-called corrections (we’re in the middle of one now — mid 2021) and some people will call these correction periods a Bear Market.

What is a cryptocurrency?

The reason I’m asking this question is because people really don’t know what a cryptocurrency is. Let me listsome questions or assumptions that people make about cryptos:

It is an investment asset, just like gold or stocks;
It is a Ponzi scheme;
It is money/currency, to be used on day-by-day activities;
It is only used for illegal activities;
It needs to be used for something.

In my opinion, I could say that all of the above are correct, depending on the project you are analyzing. Of course, you don’t want to be involved in a project that is a Ponzi scheme (at least, I don’t), but there are some that, if they aren’t, they sure look very much like it.

In order to discuss what a cryptocurrency is (any given one), I think we first have to understand why cryptos have any value at all and, to do that, let me discuss “why does money have value?”.

What is money?

It is not my intention to present historical facts here. But I’ll write some anecdotes to give you an idea why money was created.

Barter

One of the most important aspects, that separates human beings from animals is that we live in societies, and I’m not talking about a society where everyone is somehow blood-related. We form societies with people we just met and, since we have something in common, we form a community. That happened a long time ago, villages were built and got different people with different skills and possessions together. Some cultivated their crops, others raised cows for meat and milk, others could build houses, others could hunt, etc. At a certain point, they would get together and exchange goods amongst themselves. How hard do you think it is to determine how many potatoes are needed for a piece of beef? Or how much milk would you pay for the other guy to build you a house?

It just seemed practical to have something that represented a standard value (money), and all the rest would be valued (or priced) at a certain amount of that standard.

The different kinds of money in History

Many commodities have been used as money during our history. I just decided to list a few of the ones I found most curious or practical:

1) Salt — it seems that salt was used to pay the salaries of the soldiers in Ancient Rome. By the way, “salarium” stands for salary and comes from the latin word salius which is salt.

2) Stones/rocks — the Island of Yap is located in the Pacific Ocean, part of Micronesia. They carved rocks with the shape of coins, with a hole in the center (that was to make them easier to carry). The funny thing here is that the bigger they were, the more valuable they were. There were, literally, coins over 1m in diameter. If you are curious, check this link.

3) Spices — to be honest, I’m not really sure if spices were actually used as currency. I know, for sure, that they had real value and that is true even nowadays. Do you know the value of 1g saffron?

4) Gold — this will be my last example because I think gold is probably the commodity that best represents wealth for virtually every culture in the world and for a very long time.

What I want you to think about here is this: why did these commodities have any value? Could it be because they are or were scarce and everybody wanted them at a certain time?

Let’s think about salt

How much is salt worth today? As a curiosity, I worked for a food company, and I was responsible for supplies. One of the items I had to purchase was salt. Would you believe that 25 years ago, I bought 10 tons of salt for US$ 210? How can anything so cheap have ever been used as money in the past?

Some points to consider:

Salt has a very important role in our daily activities — try to eat anything without salt. You might say it is healthy. Maybe you’re right. What I know is that it is surely tasteless…
Salt could be accessible for people who lived by the sea — but how about the people who lived inland? Where would those people get salt? They had to trade it and pay for the transportation cost and the trader’s markup. They needed salt and, if no one else had it, they might just have paid/traded anything for it.

I’m mentioning 2 points above: salt had a very important use and was scarce (depending on the region). These points are enough to make anything become valuable. The problem with salt is that the oceans are full of it so, eventually, people found out how to mass produce it and, as roads became better, transportation cheaper, salt became more and more available. A few thousand years in the future and salt is virtually worthless.

The stones in Yap Island

The stones are a curious example, and it is quite easy to understand why that money simply couldn’t work. How do you transport them? I’m talking about the big ones. Their size should be enough for anyone to give up using them as money.

Spices

Spices had the same appeal that salt had. And the same issue: in general, they can be mass produced. A small difference when compared to salt: salt lasts forever if you don’t use it; spices will lose their quality. That is good from a value perspective. It is bad for the person who holds a spice for too long and doesn’t use it.

What about gold?

From a chemical point of view, gold is very good because it doesn’t react to anything (if I remember correctly my Chemistry classes). It is relatively soft, malleable so, easy to work with. It is, for all we know, scarce and… it shines! How many ancient cultures used gold for jewelry? It has the same color as the Sun (a god in many of those cultures): the all-powerful. It is easy to understand why royalty liked gold. People think “if royalty likes something, it must be good. I want that also so I will look more like them”. Yes! Royalty were the first influencers in History.

Unlike salt, gold does not dissolve in water. Unlike the stones, gold isn’t found everywhere for you to simply carve your own coin (although we know that, at certain periods in history that was done), and unlike spices, gold doesn’t have a shelf-life: it won’t lose its value if you keep it in your safe or kitchen or mattress for years.

There is one thing though: gold is still heavy (ok, nothing compared to the stones in Yap Island…). For those daily activities, that was not really a problem. It would become a problem when somebody wanted to buy a house or an estate, a castle. I’m talking about royalty again. They were the ones who had the problem of transporting hundreds of kilograms of gold around in order to deliver it to someone else as payment for a piece of land. Even when they collected taxes, after the tax collectors got all the money from all the villages, the amount of gold they had would be huge and transporting that wasn’t practical or safe.

A huge change in paradigm

The Renaissance is that period where people in Europe started to get curious again and wanted to see new things, new worlds. That is when travelers began to travel East to India and China. The goal: buy spices and other stuff to resell in their home countries.

Those travelers brought a lot of stuff. Not just spices but they also brought gun powder, and something that would completely change the world as they knew: paper-gold.

I was a kid when I watched a movie/documentary about Marco Polo (this is to say this is partly fantasy and partly history). In this movie, he was the adventurer who traveled to China and brought back this piece of paper, with an imperial seal and signed by the Chinese Emperor. This piece of paper stated something like “I, the Emperor of China, declare and guarantee on my word that this document is worth 2 kg of gold that I hold within the safe in the Imperial Palace… whatever”. The Chinese Emperor had taken the gold from the Chinese people and, in return, gave them that piece of paper. The gold was stored somewhere in the palace and the people could use those papers to trade because they had a value that was backed by the gold that the emperor held in the palace. As long as the people believed that the emperor would give them the gold back if they wanted or needed it, those documents had value. Did you ever hear about Treasury Notes? This all seems very familiar.

Those documents have a more recent names today: paper-currency or simply money.

Do you think the Europeans bought this idea just like that? Of course not! In that movie, the next scene is one where Marco Polo is trying to explain the whole “paper-currency” concept to the king of Italy as the king laughs and burns that piece of paper on a candle just to say “You see? This would never happen to metal gold, the real stuff. Because this is real money. This piece of paper is worth nothing.”

History shows that paper-currency was really a good solution, that is used all around the world, but it took a few hundred years for it to become the new paradigm.

Paper currency — the new problems

It did turn out that the concept of paper currency was really good as paper was much easier to carry around and, since everyone believed it had value, then it had value.

Of course, it had its own set of problems:

It was easy to carry — so it was also easy to lose or forget in places
It was a written document — signed by somebody (a king) — but who knew what the king’s signature looked like? For all I know, anyone could write anything in a piece of paper, sign it and say it was the king’s signature. Whenever one discovered that wasn’t true, it would be too late.
Paper isn’t impervious to weather and time
What would be the smallest unit of money? 1kg of gold can be divided — a document that is worth 1kg of gold cannot. Would you have to go to the king and give him a document worth 1kg and expect him to give you 10 worth 100g back, and burn the one that is worth 1kg?
The point above is just the introduction to the real big problem: how do you guarantee that the king (or the department that is responsible for currency) won’t just keep on signing more and more documents just because he can, even if there isn’t enough gold to back that up? Once again: does this seem familiar?

All paper currency is backed by gold (?)

Well, that is not true. At least, not anymore. It used to be true, though. I could say that every country in the world, that has its own currency, created such currency by taking an amount of gold from their citizens, putting it away somewhere and printing money at a certain volume that would represent that amount of gold they had, and distributing that money back to the people.

As time goes by, nobody remembers this concept, so we just get used to thinking that those bills are actually worth something.

There are some problems with paper-money, however:

Gold cannot be duplicated or created — you either have or you mine it (and governments have their eyes on every gold mine in the planet). Paper is just paper; it can be duplicated. It is pretty easy to forge money…
Gold doesn’t get old, moldy, it doesn’t fall apart. Paper gets old by use or simply because it got old. Itfalls apart, it can be torn, burnt.

Forging paper-money is a huge problem. Check all the anti-forging measures that any currency in the world has today: special paper, special ink, a specific strip inside the bill, watermark and the list goes on.

The reason I’m mentioning that paper money gets old is because, after some time, the government has to collect the old bills and print new ones. But let’s be honest… how do you control the amount of bills that are taken off circulation and guarantee that the same amount is coming back in? That is impossible. It would be fair to say that a certain amount is officially getting off-circulation, a certain amount is just disappearing, and a certain amount is being printed and put into circulation every day. What is the chance that the total amount of money is equivalent to the amount of gold that the government holds in their safes? I will say: ZERO chance.

The US$ and other currencies in the world are not backed by gold anymore

For a long time already! And the reason is not what I just mentioned above. It is because governments just keep on printing money every time they need more of it to pay for their own debt. Social Security, state owned companies, the government machine — all of these cost a lot. Governments get their income from taxes, but it seems like this money is never enough to pay for all their bills. In Latin American countries, in general, the amount of money that is wasted because of corruption just makes it impossible to meet the budget. Since they are the government, the solution seems quite easy: let’s print more money.

In 2008, in the US, there was this huge sub-prime crisis where banks were lending money to people who couldn’t afford to pay them. When everything went down, we learned that the banks were not doing their due diligence, but since all of them were doing those bad loans, if all of them went broke, the crisis would be worse than if the government just bailed them out (or that is what they want us to believe). The result of this was that nearly US$ 1 trillion was put into circulation without anything to back it, not even goodwill. That seems like a problem…

How do banks contribute to the Economy?

Banks also “print” money. It is not as obvious as the physical money printing that the government does. But the truth is that banks also print money, every time they guarantee a loan to someone.

In Brazil there is a bank that is supposed to help small entrepreneurs to start their businesses. These small guys can ask for loans from private banks, where they will be charged something like 15% per year, or from this government bank, where they will pay 3% per year. Where does this money come from? From tax revenue. Once again, if all the tax money is being used for Social Security, Congress salaries and expenses and other government related payroll, where do they get the money to lend to others? They must print it, or just sign a document that says that the bank, backed by the government, guarantees that the money exists. By doing that, they are “creating” money out of nowhere.

Checkbooks

This is another interesting example where we (the checkbook users) are the ones who print money. You have your checkbook and the bank is the one who guarantees it will be paid. You may be negative in your account but the bank still pays the money that you promised by just writing a value in a paper and signing it. Yes, if you’re negative, you’ll probably have to pay interest and the bank just lets you get negative because they’ve done their due diligence and know that you will turn that around.

My point here is: if all account holders decided to write checks without having the funds for such money in their accounts at the same time, would the bank have the money to pay for all that? Just keep this question in mind because I will get back to it later when I discuss the 2008 sub-prime crisis in the US.

Another new paradigm: Credit Cards

The credit card was invented in the 1950s. Once again, someone else is promising to pay for something you are buying and all you do is pass a plastic card. If you think about it, it seems quite weird that it would work and, however, everything is paid via credit card today.

How do banks “create” money

It is important to understand the importance that banks have to the global economy and what kind of problems they can cause because of that.

Banks finance the Economy by lending money to people who want to start and run a business but don’t have enough money to do it. Since they lend money, banks make their own revenue by charging interest on the money they lend. The problem is that the whole system is closed which means that the money ends up going back to the bank, except that it comes from someone else’s hands. Let me try to explain with a numerical example:

For the sake of this example, let’s consider this bank: ABC Bank — and it has $200,000 in its safe. This money is to be lent to make interest.
John wants to buy a car because he is going to Uber in order to make money, but he doesn’t have the money to pay for a car.
John goes to ABC Bank and takes a $20,000 loan to pay 5% annual interest.
Once John has the money, he goes to the car dealer and buys the car.
The dealer (Alex) gets the money and deposits it in his account in ABC Bank — the money just went back to the place of origin, but from someone else.
Alex noticed that a lot of people want to the same as John did, so he decided to buy another 11 cars to be prepared for these people. Each car will cost him $18,000, so he will need $198,000.
Alex goes to the bank and borrows that money, but sales didn’t go the way he expected. He was smart though and didn’t buy all 11 cars. He just bought 5 so he still has $108,000 of the money he borrowed. He deposited that money in his bank account in… ABC Bank.
Now Jean decides she also wants to Uber and wants to buy a $20,000 car and goes to ABC Bank to borrow that money;
The money is in the bank, so the bank lends those $20,000 to Jean and now we have a problem.

Let’s stop this example here: I find it hard to follow the whole story so, if you need, read it again. You should notice that the last loan the bank made was actually money that they had already borrowed to Alex but since he didn’t use it yet, they borrowed it again. By doing that, the bank just created, out of thin air, and extra $20,000. This is one of the reasons why the banking business is so regulated. This is illegal, but don’t you think it probably happened and people got hurt until regulators noticed and corrected it?

The 2008 sub-prime crisis

The most interesting cases happen, however, when banks fail to do their due diligence. That is when they loan money to people who don’t have the means to pay such loans. Remember when I mentioned that the bank will cover your check because they know you will be able to pay for it? Well, that’s exactly what they failed to do during the years that preceded the 2008 debacle.

People were buying houses with the certainty they would appreciate in price. Banks would accept any loan because they knew they would make money as soon as the houses were sold or if they didn’t get their money back, they would take the houses instead. They would recover the money by selling the houses themselves. That didn’t work either because house prices devaluated to under the value of the loans.

After that, came the chain reaction: banks noticed they wouldn’t get their interest and, much worse, they wouldn’t even get the money they lent back. They were lending money that didn’t exist.

This non-existing money had value as long as people believed it existed. Once they stopped believing that… huge problem… for the bank, right?

Wrong!! Since this was a systemic problem, where basically all big banks did this, it became a problem for the whole country. If things were allowed to happen as in a free economy, the banks would go broke but, since they were to powerful, they actually blackmailed the US government in the sense that “if the Government doesn’t help us, we will be broke and all the people who have money with us will suffer and the crisis will be much bigger than it has to be”. That was the justification for the infamous 2008 bail-out, based on the government printing a lot of money to “save” the people from immediate catastrophe.

They accelerated inflation and created the catastrophe that happens at a 20% rate every year: a time bomb.

Money is just worth anything as long as people believe in it

My point here is: people are doing business based just on the expectation that the money in their bank accounts is worth that much. If everything is done properly, that should be true.

When the US government decided to bail out the banks from the 2008 sub-prime crisis, what they actually did was they devalued the US$ much faster than it was already being done. Unfortunately, the average Joe didn’t notice what happened and inflation got bigger. Inflation is a very dangerous animal because it eats the value of the money you are holding.

Let me try to give you an example on how inflation eats your value. Suppose a country’s economy were still backed by gold and, after 5 years, the amount of gold it had grew 10%, but the amount of printed money available grew 100%.

In this example, we could say that, in year 2000, 1kg of gold was valued at $50,000. In 2005, the same 1kg was worth $90,909. Does that mean that gold is more valuable? Or does it mean that money is worth less?

Cryptocurrency: a new paradigm

It is said that the bitcoin was created because of the 2008 crisis. Satoshi Nakamoto wrote a paper where he mentioned that currencies shouldn’t be controlled by governments because they just do what they want, with no regards to the consequences to the people.

In his paper, Satoshi describes a mechanism where tokens (in this case, the token is called Bitcoin) would be distributed to people after they do a certain activity and that would be registered in a Decentralized Ledger named the blockchain. I’m not going to get into details on how this is done. The points I want to make here are:

Because of how they are created, there will be a limit to the total number of bitcoins that will be created in the whole world — that makes this token scarce.
Because of the decentralized ledger, these tokens cannot be forged or duplicated — security.
Because they are digital, they can be kept in a small device anyone can carry anywhere.
A bitcoin can be divided up to the 8th decimal after the point (100,000,000 parts) — practical.
A person who holds this token can transfer it to another person without an entity like a bank serving as intermediary.

All of the above are features that money has (or should have). In the early years until 2011 more or less, it was a fun game (if you like, watch “The Big Bang Theory — Season 11 Episode 7), until the day somebody decided to transfer 10,000 BTC to anyone who bought and delivered 2 pizzas at his place in Florida. That was when BTC started to have some kind of value. When other people noticed that BTC was scarce, couldn’t be duplicated, couldn’t be forged and could be transferred without being reported, then it seemed like something interesting for illegal commerce. Don’t be surprised! It seems like many new technologies have illegal and/or immoral activities as their first adopters. It was like that with the internet in the 1990s too. At a certain point it just seemed like everybody wanted to have bitcoins. Something that is scarce, and everybody wants… what happens? Yes, it’s price soars like crazy.

Bitcoin is not backed by gold. It wasn’t even recognized by governments as currency. For all they know, in the early days, bitcoin could just be a game. If people buy avatars for video games, then they exchange them with others, or for artifacts and so on, why should bitcoin not be the same? In fact, NFT is just another use of the same technology that created the bitcoin: the blockchain.

Once again: why does bitcoin have value? Because people believe it is worth something. Just like money.

How about the other cryptos? Are they money too?

This could be controversial. In my opinion, everything that has value can, ultimately, be used as money. But if you follow this line of thought you might just ask me “is a house money then?” This question makes total sense. No, a house is not money. It is worth (a lot of) money, but you don’t usually use a house to exchange for something else. It is an asset, and some people will consider it an investment asset. Money has to be widely used and accepted and that is not the case with a house.

The problem here is: bitcoin was born to be currency. Just like gold. And just like gold, it became so expensive and volatile that it doesn’t make sense to use it as money. That is why it became an investment asset.

I’m sure a lot of people agree with me on this and that is probably the reason why stable coins were created. USDC and USDT are probably the most known ones but there are many other stable coins in the cryptoverse. I mention these 2 because they have a special feature: they are valued a US$1.00 and (at least in theory) are backed by US$.

You might just ask me: a crypto that is backed by US$ should be just as bad as the US$ itself. Why would people have it? My answer is: we are living a very special moment in history — a transition phase, the moment where people still work with gold but there is this paper currency also being used, or the moment where there is cryptocurrency, but people still don’t feel comfortable with it, hence the stable coins.

There is a lot to happen yet until we are able to see where this will end. Nowadays, we see the following different types of cryptos:

Digital money — the cryptocoins

I think the best example for this is bitcoin. It is really the simplest use possible for a blockchain.

By definition, I would say that all stablecoins are cryptocoins too.

Utility coins — the coins that have a real use

I think the best definition for utility coins is those coins that you need to have in order to be able to do something. TXL is a great example of a utility coin except for the fact that you don’t need to have TXL in order to use the Autobahn Network.

Cryptos that generate NFTs are another good example: you need to have those coins in order to generate and/or buy the NFT (non-fungible tokens — they are “one” of a kind and that’s what makes them valuable).

Coins that power Decentralized Exchanges (DEX) Liquidity Pools (LP) — when someone provides liquidity to a certain DEX and receive interest, they usually receive it in a specific token like CAKE (if you provide liquidity into Pancakeswap), for example.

Ponzi Scheme coins

There is no such classification, of course, because nobody would openly say “hey, I created this crypto and it is great because it is a Ponzi scheme token. You buy it and make other people buy it to. When other people buy it, you will receive more of it. So, if you recruit a lot of people under yourself to buy it, you will get even more coins and people under you will want to bring more people under them because they will make more coins themselves”.

I’ve seen a few project that work just like that with a special tweak, to make them look a little bit better. They will say something like: “every time someone buys our token, we take x% and burn them, so this is deflationarytoken”.

Could $TXL become currency/money?

What is $TXL?

The easy answer is: TXL is a utility coin, that powers the Autobahn Network. People don’t have to have TXL to use the Autobahn but, when they use it, they will pay a certain fee and, at least a part of these fees will be used to buy TXL in the market. Then, we expect part of these tokens will be distributed to stakers and validators and another part to be burnt.

This simple strategy has a double effect on appreciating TXL’s price: the need to buy it from the market for distribution creates a frequent buyer that will buy no matter what the price is; and by burning some of the TXL, it becomes more scarce, which makes it more valuable.

All TXL tokens have already been minted and, just like any serious cryptocoin, it is maintained by a decentralized ledger in the blockchain, which means that TXL tokens cannot be duplicated.

Just like bitcoin, TXL has 8 decimals after the dot, so it can be divided (a lot), it can be easily transported in a wallet and transfers are independent from any bank. Additionally, TXL has a privacy feature that is ready, just not deployed yet, since governments and regulators haven’t resolved this subject.

TXL has all the features that bitcoin does so, in principle, it could be money, just like BTC. The point with TXL is that it is so much more, so sometimes, it seems hard to see it just like money.

How I see the future

Let’s fast forward a few years into the future: the world has noticed Tixl. Billions of $ in different cryptos have been transferred into the Autobahn Network. USDT, USDC, EURS and other coins are used to pay for things like groceries, restaurants, coffee shops etc. And TXL is very valuable. Let’s say 1TXL = US$ 100.

Finally, somebody notices the obvious: "Hey, I have to transfer US$10,000,000 in BTC from my wallet to someone’s wallet in Hawaii to pay for a house I’m buying. I think that US$1,000 is too much to pay as a transfer fee".

He won’t remember anymore that, when Tixl didn’t exist, this transaction would take 2 hours to be confirmed and that he would pay US$10,000 for the transaction. He is actually already used to his new reality: instant transfers and a US$1,000 transaction cost. Then he remembers that “TXL is the only token that will be transferred totally for free on the Autobahn” and thinks “why should I keep on paying such transaction fees if I can pay absolutely nothing?”

"TXL is the only token that will be transferred totally for free on the Autobahn Network"

The moment when he and a lot of other people realize this, they will want to own TXL, they will pay the current price and TXL’s price will soar once more. What would be the limit for 1TXL? I don’t know but, potentially, why not US$1,000 per TXL?

I see that a lot of people will not agree with my vision, but Tixl is a long-term project, and I think that Tixl has many different moments to become valuable:

TXL will be valuable for developers and projects
People will want to use the Autobahn which will make TXL more valuable
People start to use TXL as currency

Tixl will be valuable for developers and projects

This is the first moment, and will start soon, in 2021. We all say that Tixl has to become known, that people have to be aware of Tixl so they buy the token and it appreciates in value. That is to justify why they think that Tixl should invest heavily in Marketing and get listed on major centralized Exchanges.

I don’t agree with this approach. In my opinion, Marketing should be within crypto communities: getting good projects to get to know what advantages they will have by using Tixl and the Autobahn Network.

The easiest example is the DEX. Imagine you build a DEX just like Uniswap but it is much cheaper and it lets people swap coins from different blockchains. What kind of appeal is that?

Go further: whoever launches something like this (and Schnitzelswap seems to be the first to have foreseen this) will have huge advantages over Uniswap, but the best part is: they will do the Marketing, and by marketing their own product, they will be attracting people to the Autobahn Network, and that’s what we want.

In my mind, this could pump $TXL price at least 100x from today’s value (less than US$0.20 on Jul 18, 2021).

People will want to use the Autobahn

As projects are built on the Autobahn, $TXL price starts to go up and then people start to notice it. More people notice the obvious benefits of transferring their tokens into the Autobahn Network and will want to have TXL. Now comes FOMO. Centralized Exchanges now want to list TXL and people want to buy just because it’s become the cool one. We might get another 10x here, or maybe even more.

To be honest, as an early investor, when this happens, I will really not care what people think: I will be collecting my staking rewards in $TXL.

People start to use TXL as currency

Up to now, people just wanted to have $TXL because it was a good investment, but as I explained previously, at some moment (and I don’t know when), people might start seeing TXL as actual money, that can be spent. All we need is people asking that funny question: "why should I pay any fee if I can just use TXL to pay for anything and not pay any fee at all?" In my opinion, if and when this happens, we will see the last and maybe the biggest surge in price for TXL.

Think about this: if TXL is valued at $1,000, the total 600 million tokens will be valued at $600 billion. That is a little bit less than BTC’s total marketcap today. I’m talking about maybe 10 years from now.

All of this is, of course, a huge speculation exercise. The day TXL gets to be valued at $1,000 (if that even happens), it is very likely that my TXL bag will have much less coins than what it has today. Like every early investor, I want to get rich with TXL, but I also want to be able to sell some from time-to-time to benefit my Tixl enhanced lifestyle!

— — — — — — — -

If you found this article interesting and you want to invest in TXL, contact me. I can help you:

Telegram: https://t.me/diegoquast
Twitter: @DiegoQuast

Follow Tixl on all Channels to receive the announcements faster!