I don't know of any stores that take ETH, while plenty take BTC. BTC also completely runs the economy of the DarkNet.
I believe all cryptocurrencies are somewhat propped up by speculation, but BTC is still the preferred currency for the vast majority of people using cryptocurrencies for the actual exchange of goods and services. That's how BTC derives its value (+ speculation, but very few people are willing to speculate at $1500 USD per coin).
As for the other cryptocurrencies, I would say that a lot of their value comes from people wishing to get in on the next "BTC" for $20-$80/coin.
I'm not at all judging the technical merits of one cryptocurrency versus another.
Provided you use one of a limited selection of providers compared to using credit cards.
>I can meet up with people locally and sell BTC for cash [effortlessly]
Depending on where you are located.
>I can't do that with any other cryptocurrency.
You can do both of those things much more easily using traditional currencies. In both those cases you are getting a worse deal than just using normal cash for the services desired.
That's why you can't judge any cryptocurrency for that because they are all universally shit at it.
Compared to the none of them that take ETH.
> Depending on where you are located.
Or irrespective of where you are located if you are trying to offload ETH because nobody wants it.
> That's why you can't judge any cryptocurrency for that because they are all universally shit at it.
There are varying degrees of shit and BTC is the only one that even comes close to being a real currency rather than a speculative one.
No one's arguing bitcoin has the same level of adoption as USD for facilitating trade. They're arguing that it has more than zero and that ETH has zero.
Two comments up you argued that having fewer options inherently means you're getting a worse deal than someone with more options. Bitcoin is an extra payment option in n>0 situations. "n is small" is true, and a reasonable point when evaluating the usefulness of bitcoin. "n is small and therefore n is zero" is a little less reasonable argument, but seems to be what you're arguing.
And not a payment situation at all in almost all solutions.
"n is small and therefore n is not useful compared to x" is what I'm arguing. You cannot depend on n when the ability to use it as a means of payment is so inconsistent. That goes for any value of n not just Bitcoin.
That is complete codswallop. My VPN is cheaper when paid with btc than with PayPal or credit/debit card or Stripe.
Why would you meet up with someone to sell cash for cash?
So your VPN also accepts credit/debit cards? That means I have more choice in VPNs as a credit/debit card user. So you're getting the worst deal.
>Why would you meet up with someone to sell cash for cash?
Because you need a different currency? Why would you meet up with someone to sell cash(bitcoin) for cash?
Forex
Bitcoin is "digital gold" while Ethereum is a bit like "digital oil". So the main value of Ethereum should (in theory) arise from decentralised apps and smart contracts.
Therefore, if use cases like (for example) Bosch's proposed idea of using smart contracts to eliminate fraudulent odometer tampering[1] or Santander's experiments with allowing their customers to buy digital tokens from their bank account takes off[2], that's where the value will come from - not necessarily DarkNet stores or other transactions.
[1] https://www.ethnews.com/bosch-using-blockchain-technology-to...
[2] http://www.coindesk.com/santander-vies-become-first-bank-iss...
Also, Monero is also on equal terms with Bitcoin when it comes to dark net markets. Another crypto with an actual valuable distinguishing feature (true anonymity) has more of a use case than Bitcoin here.