Tulip mania: the classic story of a Dutch financial bubble is mostly wrong
<i>But it wasn’t irrational to pay a high price for something that was generally considered valuable, and for which the next person might pay even more.</i><p>What? That's no way to 'disprove' a bubble. Of course the people buying stuff thought it was valuable, or that there would be a greater fool to sell it to. That doesn't mean they were right.<p><i>Although it’s true that the most expensive tulips of all cost around 5,000 guilders (the price of a well-appointed house)...</i><p>How is that not irrational? Come on.<p><i>I was able to identify only 37 people who spent more than 300 guilders on bulbs</i><p>Is this evidence of absence, or absence of evidence?<p><i>Anyone who had both bought and sold a tulip on paper since the summer of 1636 had lost nothing.</i><p>Well, yes. It's the bagholders that lose out in a bubble. If you manage to buy and sell something that's overpriced, then you'll be ok. But <i>someone</i> will be left holding it.<p>In any case, the south sea bubble is a far far better fit for bitcoin and crypto coin mania. They even had comparable ICO sales!