Sourced from an interview between Charlie Lee and the Decred team. (source link at the bottom).
Litecoin became the promised star it always had the potential to be
My main concern is that the value of litecoin is completely dependent on the creator Charlie Lee and so far he has, some would say let the supporters down once. In 2013 Charlie moved to work on Coinbase. I can completely understand why. Mass adoption was dependent on an easy to use exchange and wallet that was newbie friendly. Charlie filled this void with Coinbase. But by leaving Litecoin as lead developer, Litecoin lost it's momentum and dropped to $4. Development subsided to a respectable level where loyal developers were doing what was necessary to maintain Litecoin.
Then came along Segwit. Litecoin was already super fast compared to Bitcoin. But when Segwit was implemented in Litecoin, Litecoin became the promised star it always had the potential to be.
Charlie Lee said that he was in this for two years before he'd move on
Bitcoin has been a loathsome technology to use in the last month or so. At that moment, Litecoin became the superior alternative in general usage. What is Bitcoin, but an alternative to Fiat, right? Bitcoin to me, did not feel like a credible alternative to Fiat. Litecoin did.
Recently Charlie said that he was in this for two years before he'd move on. Now I know that Segwit and eventually Lightning network would allow for a very promising future. At the same time I have a nagging feeling that in two years Litecoin will become that stumbling alt currency that sits at a lower than acceptable level, because Charlie Lee will be moving on to new projects.
There are other alternative cryptocurrencies. Dash and Decred have both raised my interest in the past. I am not quite convinced by these coins and I will keep my eyes peeled for future releases.
Lightning network, atomic swaps, Mast and all before Bitcoin
Why would I even consider a different cryptocurrency to Litecoin? Litecoin has the highest chance of being at the forefront of developing technologies such as Lightning network, atomic swaps, Mast and all before Bitcoin.
My theory is that for a cryptocurrency to last it needs a sustainable development community and a governance that democratises decisions so we don't have the issues we currently have with Bitcoin's two side battle.
Charlie Lee is treading lightly so he doesn't step on Bitcoin's toes
Charlie controversialy refers to Litecoin as being a testbed for Bitcoin. I can see why Charlie Lee is treading lightly so he doesn't step on Bitcoin's toes. "testbed" sounds less threatening than "contender". If Bitcoin plummets, so does Litecoin. Litecoin is a hard fork of Bitcoin, so consequently relies on Bitcoin development and relationships. On the other hand I don't think users of Litecoin or loyal developers for that matter consider Litecoin to be just a testbed. Charlie seems like an awesome guy and goes out of his way to answer user questions. On the other hand I think a public relationship spokesman should represent all the stakeholders of Litecoin and provide the necessary marketing for Litecoin to succeed. Charlie should stick to what he's great at, litecoin development.
For me to invest any further money into a cryptocurrency I need to be sure of three crucial features.
- Governance
- Fungibility
- Reliable development
For Litecoin to survive past Charlie leaving in two years
Number three is the most important yet it is the most lacking aspect of many cryptocurrencies on the market. I would personally say that Bitcoin is the only currency that has number three in the bag. I believe Litecoin and Bitcoin can work hand in hand to be the main two cryptocurrencies. For Litecoin to survive past Charlie leaving in two years, a sustainable development roadmap needs to be planned. The perfect solution would be for Charlie Lee to be able to leave Litecoin without inadvertently forcing the coin into a $4 swamp.
Follow me for weekly updates on everything crypto. Upvote if you liked it.
Source about Charlie leaving in two years: 