Economists say Bitcoin's high price was caused by buyer 'contagion'

Analysts at the British bank Barclays compare the rise in the price of bitcoin with the spread of infectious diseases. They believe that in December, when the price rose by more than 900%, buyers were “infected” by Bitcoin euphoria. Since then, the price has dropped from $20,000 to $7,000 as buyers have become immune.

Using research data in the field of epidemiology, a branch of medicine related to the emergence, spread and control of epidemic diseases, the bank’s economists built a model for bitcoin prices, according to which most people are now already insured against the temptation to make money on a new financial asset. They noted that prices tend to rise when "contagion" spreads from one buyer to another through word of mouth, especially among those who are afraid of missing out on a chance to get rich quick. The entry of new participants into the market contributes to higher prices, while the loss of funds “develops immunity.” 

Claiming that the population's "susceptibility" to bitcoin infection has now decreased, economists said the price reached before Christmas was the maximum price that could ever be reached. “The same thing happens with infectious diseases, when the disease gets to the point where most people develop immunity and cannot get sick a second time.”

Using this logic and applying it to a variety of other digital currencies, including bitcoin derivatives such as ethereum and ripple, Barclays analysts concluded that the total value of all cryptocurrency assets could never exceed US$780 billion, which is максимальную сумму всех криптовалют по состоянию на начало января.

Попытка оценить криптовалюты является проблематичной для мира традиционных финансов, поскольку они являются новой формой актива без какой-либо внутренней стоимости, обеспеченной денежным потоком. This means that their value is determined solely by what people are willing to pay for them.

Editor's note: We don't know whether the British bank's analysts are strong in economics, but they are clearly ignoramuses in epidemiology. Or they were not informed that you can get the flu or dysentery many times. Or that the “hotbed of infection” is considered extinguished when the last sick person dies or recovers. Again, the question remains open: what category should we include those who did not lose anything, but made good money on the jump in the exchange rate? Should they be considered hopelessly ill or already dead? Therefore, this “theory” is fully consistent with the saying “British scientists have proven”..

According to https://www.theguardian.com