Does "First to Market" Status Really Justify Current Bitcoin Values?

Let me start by clarifying I am NEITHER a bitcoin zealot, nor a basher. I am a pragmatist when it comes the concept of crypto-currency. In order to truly understand, appreciate, and grasp the dangers, potential, and yes, folly of believing most of the hype around the mostly ridiculous rise in various coins lately, most needs to have a healthy understanding of all of the following:

• Macro-economics
• Geo-political dynamics
• Traditional finance AND banking
• Technology including cryptography
• Equity trading
• SEC
• IRS rules (such as those relating to the property classification of digital currency)
• And numerous other areas

Unfortunately, this means that 99.999% of the individuals speculating in crypto-currency are simply gambling. Of course, I can hear the zealots already getting pissed, but come on....admitting one's problem is the start.

Now don't get me wrong. I am VERY aggressive on various investments. I once went to lunch and clicked "Buy" on a 10-lot options call buy. Didn't even know if the order went through. 90 minutes I came back and sold those contracts for a $8,000 profit. I've also gotten hit with $100k in losses due to an e-Trade system failure years ago and had to threaten a class-action counter-lawsuit to achieve restitution. My point is that being aggressive and taking risks is not always bad "as long as you truly understand the risks". For example, how many people recently got caught up in the bitcoin irrational price move only to see [Bitcoin lost a third of its value in 24 hours] (http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/22/investing/bitcoin-plunges-below-14k/index.html).

At various times investing in micro-cap bio-tech stock was hot. At other times, throwing money at any tech start-up with precious few vowels in its name (the less the better) has been the hot thing. Just a year or so ago any micro-cap having to do with marijuana was a 10-20 banger for sure.