Just like all the billionaires that bought the total supply of tulips when they were falling, right?

Fixed total supply vs unfixed (perishable) total supply. There is no legitimate comparison to be made as far as 'collectibles' are concerned.

There were about 30 rich people who got scammed on tulips and that's it. That's the whole story. The end. They barely lost any money.

It might just overshoot zero and go to a negative value.

0n a long enought time line bitcoin, in its current form at least, will 100% be worthless. That day is when its cryptographic backbone is either broken or surpassed by computing capacity to break the public / private keys.

So you think the chain will be attacked and all the devs with trillions invested (at that point in the future) will be completely blindsided and not defend the network by soft/hardforking/etc? I completely disagree.

Your reply reads like a 'complete agreement' rather than a disagreement - as at that point in time you suggest, the chain ... will no longer be in its current form.

So yes, I completely agree with your agreement.

>Your reply reads like a 'complete agreement' rather than a disagreement

Wrong, there have been a few soft forks already. You seem to not know the history of bitcoin or what makes bitcoin bitcoin. You need to do some studying before discussing this topic.

Why do you think they would do that?

Because I know a large % of the supply will never be unlocked and I can own the remaining available supply at a reasonable price.

This is not a hypothetical, I will buy the remaining supply given a steep enough discount. At $1 BTC, the total supply would only cost $21M (not a lot of money). I can think of at least 5 peers that would do the same.