<a href="https://blockchain.info/address/1ABn5L14hXXJ9RowWEpUcsDc8HXqHXFre6" rel="nofollow">https://blockchain.info/address/1ABn5L14hXXJ9RowWEpUcsDc8HXq...</a><p>If you look at that and click on the destination, then do the same again you'll see someone pushing out 10s of thousands of very small transactions per day across the network. They do the same thing pretty much every day I've checked(the above is an old link since its the only one I had handy).<p>The days I've checked though these sorts of things have accounted for 30-50% of transaction volume.<p>They are odd not just because of the volume of transactions but the size of them and the fact that they pay a fee for every one. Ideally for the amounts and frequency they would be grouping many outputs into a single transaction to save on fees.<p>I think its safe you ignore transaction volume for the near future and recent past while this is going on unless you start accounting for it.
Every new announcement for bitcoin is about how its easier to spend but never any real announcements about making it easier to buy, the fees are high, the waits can be lengthy, and limits on amounts are low. Until this changes I dont see much else changing.
From the article... "Taking these three charts together, the relatively static USD transaction value per day metric in 2014 appears to be the result of the falling market price of bitcoin being offset by increased transaction volume."<p>...and then...<p>"Perhaps this is all just a coincidence, but it appears that 2014 was a year of relatively static demand for transacting value through bitcoin. Static demand implies that either 1) the number of people using bitcoin to transact value has been relatively stable, or 2) the number of people in the ecosystem using bitcoin to transact value is growing but offset by churn/decreased usage by other participants."<p>Am I being slow here? The graph showed the number of daily transactions was increasing over 2014, yet the conclusion being reached is that the demand for usage of Bitcoin is static. Perhaps I'm reading it wrong, but from where I'm currently standing it doesn't make sense.<p>One thing that needs to be understood about Bitcoin usage is that the transactions are not always for whole Bitcoins, it's increasingly common to see trades for fractions of a Bitcoin. The protocol explicitly allows this... <a href="https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#How_divisible_are_bitcoins.3F" rel="nofollow">https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#How_divisible_are_bitcoins.3F</a><p>If trades of fractions of a Bitcoin are being made frequently, then it does not mean there is a demand problem, but rather that prices are readjusting.
If you look at the all-time USD transaction volume, it seems pretty clear that it is growing:<p><a href="https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd?showDataPoints=false&timespan=all&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&scale=0&address=" rel="nofollow">https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-...</a><p>Using the same slope, I'd expect about $110M USD/day this time next year (from about $70M now). As bitcoin's usefulness is tied to the number of people using it (like email), it would be strange to see explosive transaction growth so early on.<p>Looking at all-time number of transactions, it's difficult to make the case that adoption is static:<p><a href="https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=7&show_header=true&scale=0&address=" rel="nofollow">https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=all&s...</a>
<i>Taking these three charts together, the relatively static USD transaction value per day metric in 2014 appears to be the result of the falling market price of bitcoin being offset by increased transaction volume.</i><p>This touches dangerously on correlation-implying-causation.
Fred Wilson posted better adoption metrics which are a more accurate (and more impressive) record of how Bitcoin is doing: <a href="http://avc.com/2014/10/bitcoin-adoption-metrics/" rel="nofollow">http://avc.com/2014/10/bitcoin-adoption-metrics/</a> It is smarter to look at these than at merely the number of transactions.
Not sure how I'm supposed to take this seriously when the author doesn't use logarithmic graphs.<p>If you look at a non-logarithmic graph of money and try to draw conclusions from it you will draw the <i>wrong</i> conclusions. It's inevitable, it's just how humans perceive graphs.<p>If you want to avoid this common error, use a logarithmic graph. The fact that the author did not points to a lacuna in his knowledge, and such a lack makes me wonder about the rest of his writing.<p>It's just such a <i>basic</i> error.
The problem with all of these graphs is that the rise of cloud players like Coinbase means that a lot (and I'd think probably most) of the Bitcoin transactions taking place these days are off-chain.<p>Coinbase can settle most trades internally and push out any 'interbank trades' onto the chain. Some of the patterns others have noticed could be them settling internal accounts, not sure though.