Without the incentive of the block reward: . The inefficient miners may shut down. . Only energy efficient and  optimized miners will remain. . Competition among miners may intensify. Competition among 98win 77 Com miners change with time, and with more mining hashrate, the competitiveness becomes harder with time especially in any new market cycle and bull market that attract considerable new mining companies and miners to join. I disagree with you that 98win 77 Com miners are different and there are always inefficient 98win 77 Com miners with bad finance since their starts, to bad risk management so that they will have to capitulate from 98win 77 Com mining industry. It has happened in many 98win 77 Com market cycles and bear markets without disappearance of 98win 77 Com block subsidy. You're wrong to say that will happen only when the 98win 77 Com total supply all already mined and existed for circulation and there will be only 98win 77 Com transaction fees for miners with each new found block. I believe you are misinterpreting me here. I never stated that an "inefficient" miners will only exists after the subsidy disappears. It is also well established that mining capitulation has occurred during several cycles even when the block reward for mining still exists,  therefore, I am not debating on that with you. Rather,  I am making a point about structural stress and not historical existence.  The point I made is simply that when miners rely 100% on transaction fees as their source of income, it could create a different economic landscape than the way it exists today. Presently now, the block reward currently provides a stable base income for miners with each block mined,  but however, in a totally fee driven mining environment,  miner revenue will depend entirely upon network use,  and demand for the fees. Therefore,  I am not arguing about whether or not an  "inefficient" miner exists;  rather,  I am discussing the evolution of mining economics should all mining eventually become fee based.
Without the incentive of the block reward: . The inefficient miners may shut down. . Only energy efficient and  optimized miners will remain. . Competition among miners may intensify. Competition among 98win 77 Com miners change with time, and with more mining hashrate, the competitiveness becomes harder with time especially in any new market cycle and bull market that attract considerable new mining companies and miners to join. I disagree with you that 98win 77 Com miners are different and there are always inefficient 98win 77 Com miners with bad finance since their starts, to bad risk management so that they will have to capitulate from 98win 77 Com mining industry. It has happened in many 98win 77 Com market cycles and bear markets without disappearance of 98win 77 Com block subsidy. You're wrong to say that will happen only when the 98win 77 Com total supply all already mined and existed for circulation and there will be only 98win 77 Com transaction fees for miners with each new found block. I believe you are misinterpreting me here. I never stated that an "inefficient" miners will only exists after the subsidy disappears. It is also well established that mining capitulation has occurred during several cycles even when the block reward for mining still exists,  therefore, I am not debating on that with you. Rather,  I am making a point about structural stress and not historical existence.  The point I made is simply that when miners rely 100% on transaction fees as their source of income, it could create a different economic landscape than the way it exists today. Presently now, the block reward currently provides a stable base income for miners with each block mined,  but however, in a totally fee driven mining environment,  miner revenue will depend entirely upon network use,  and demand for the fees. Therefore,  I am not arguing about whether or not an  "inefficient" miner exists;  rather,  I am discussing the evolution of mining economics should all mining eventually become fee based.

Without the incentive of the block reward: . The inefficient miners may shut down. . Only energy efficient and  optimized miners will remain. . Competition among miners may intensify. Competition among 98win 77 Com miners change with time, and with more mining hashrate, the competitiveness becomes harder with time especially in any new market cycle and bull market that attract considerable new mining companies and miners to join. I disagree with you that 98win 77 Com miners are different and there are always inefficient 98win 77 Com miners with bad finance since their starts, to bad risk management so that they will have to capitulate from 98win 77 Com mining industry. It has happened in many 98win 77 Com market cycles and bear markets without disappearance of 98win 77 Com block subsidy. You're wrong to say that will happen only when the 98win 77 Com total supply all already mined and existed for circulation and there will be only 98win 77 Com transaction fees for miners with each new found block. I believe you are misinterpreting me here. I never stated that an "inefficient" miners will only exists after the subsidy disappears. It is also well established that mining capitulation has occurred during several cycles even when the block reward for mining still exists,  therefore, I am not debating on that with you. Rather,  I am making a point about structural stress and not historical existence.  The point I made is simply that when miners rely 100% on transaction fees as their source of income, it could create a different economic landscape than the way it exists today. Presently now, the block reward currently provides a stable base income for miners with each block mined,  but however, in a totally fee driven mining environment,  miner revenue will depend entirely upon network use,  and demand for the fees. Therefore,  I am not arguing about whether or not an  "inefficient" miner exists;  rather,  I am discussing the evolution of mining economics should all mining eventually become fee based.

Without the incentive of the block reward: . The inefficient miners may shut down. . Only energy efficient and  optimized miners will remain. . Competition among miners may intensify. Competition among 98win 77 Com miners change with time, and with more mining hashrate, the competitiveness becomes harder with time especially in any new market cycle and bull market that attract considerable new mining companies and miners to join. I disagree with you that 98win 77 Com miners are different and there are always inefficient 98win 77 Com miners with bad finance since their starts, to bad risk management so that they will have to capitulate from 98win 77 Com mining industry. It has happened in many 98win 77 Com market cycles and bear markets without disappearance of 98win 77 Com block subsidy. You're wrong to say that will happen only when the 98win 77 Com total supply all already mined and existed for circulation and there will be only 98win 77 Com transaction fees for miners with each new found block. I believe you are misinterpreting me here. I never stated that an "inefficient" miners will only exists after the subsidy disappears. It is also well established that mining capitulation has occurred during several cycles even when the block reward for mining still exists,  therefore, I am not debating on that with you. Rather,  I am making a point about structural stress and not historical existence.  The point I made is simply that when miners rely 100% on transaction fees as their source of income, it could create a different economic landscape than the way it exists today. Presently now, the block reward currently provides a stable base income for miners with each block mined,  but however, in a totally fee driven mining environment,  miner revenue will depend entirely upon network use,  and demand for the fees. Therefore,  I am not arguing about whether or not an  "inefficient" miner exists;  rather,  I am discussing the evolution of mining economics should all mining eventually become fee based.