Facebook is a communication company. If they don't offer anything tangible neither does any other communications company out there. The difference is that Facebook gives the communications aspect away for free to sell marketing services. Investors passed on Google when they went public with the same arguments.Tangible in marketing, but marketing is still something that is based off nothing tangible. You are just promoting things that are tangible. I agree with you fully in that it is something worth investing in because marketing is an established trade. All Im saying is that there is a lot of tech on the horizon and some of it is very different than what we are used to seeing. Im not saying you are all wrong but just that something valuable might come from this, especially since so many publically traded companies are trying to utilize the technology.
I dont even know if it will even be traded like it is when it hits its final iteration that takes it even more mainstream, but I do think it will find a place. What is happening a lot right now is that these individuals are creating a crypto that large companies are becoming interested in for various projects so when you invest in them you reap the dividends of whether they take off or not. Say I put a $1000 in Ethereum at like $100/share. Ethereum has no tangible value but I believe it will take off at some point in time. Eventually a manufacturer like Ford comes along and says "Hey, we want to utilize Ethereum's crypto-coding to be the basis for our new p2p communication system that we expect will be adopted industry wide". That would be a pretty tangible development that would make that particular crypto more valuable and worth something; it's essentially just like a highly secure computer program at that point which plenty of companies have been highly valued doing. With Ford's adoption Ethereum may jump to $2000/share and so on because it's future look promising to be widespead at that point. Only difference and problem with that example is that Ford is developing their own crypto because it probably isn't that hard for them to develop in-house.
Just so we are clear, when we say Bitcoin are we talking about the specific Bitcoin or crypto-currency in general? I personally dont think Bitcoin is worth much as its technology has been surpassed greatly by other cryptos, like Ethereum and Litecoin, but I know people often refer to crypticurrencies as just Bitcoin, so I want to be clear on that. Bitcoin is irrelevant imo.
Bitcoin's problem is that it's still a confusing pain in the ass for most people to use. I've said that since the first year it was developed, crypto needs average people and more vendors to gain any sort of traction. Until that changes it's going to be nothing more than a pyramid scheme for the layman and that's why it's not going to skyrocket again.