|
Depressing...
It's not the situation that I envisioned a year ago, but I still don't need to sell for the next 3 years.
|
|
|
|
 Where the dude @ Damn I am late on this! Isla Holbox, Mexico "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain."
Everyone knows the source, I suppose. |
|
|
|
I don't know what to make of it.
People are stupid and do not self custody and allow their coins to be used in naked shorting, Fractional reserve banking and participate in derivative never settling markets and then cry they don't know whats happening when its been spelt out to them for years? Nah, thats not it. Edit: got beat to it while spell checking.  Oh, ye, blame others for this...which is especially funny in relation to myself as I have 0% of my bitcoin on exchanges (historically never more than a percent or two). Perhaps, we should say that current bitcoin protocol was not enough to prevent all this calamity and allowed for fractional banking, instead? Are you enjoying the downturn, though? Me neither. |
|
|
|
Whatever the ultimate bottom is, I expect "only" 5-10X in the next cycle (from the bottom).
Why? Prior cycles:
$2 bottom, then $1160 top or 580X
$175 bottom, then $19780 top or 113X
$3100 bottom, then $68900 top or 22X
As you can see, the multiple keeps decreasing drastically (by a factor of about 5) in each consecutive cycle.
Accordingly, the next number for a top is roughly 5X of the bottom, but due to some variability, perhaps up to 10X is possible.
Currently, this would mean either $77.5K (which would be a GREAT disappointment for almost everyone) or up to, perhaps, $155K, which could be OK.
That would mean BTC can never exceed gold. I doubt that this progression will be valid forever... there is a bit of a paradox in bitcoin behavior so far. Let me formulate it: Bitcoin's bull stages appear to be progressively shallower from the bottom (at depicted above-from 580X to 113X to 22X), but downward plunges changed only marginally; from -94% to -87% to -84% to, currently, -77.5%. Therefore, if the trend continues and our next top is, say, 150K, then -70% down would be 45K and if only a marginal top in 80K vicinity, then $24K bottom in 2026-2027, which would be quite brutal in comparison with even the 2021 top. I don't know what to make of it. I always thought that IF bulls were to become shallower, then bears would be as well, but SO FAR, it did not really happen (at least not as much). Anyone with an explanation? TL;DR If bull parts of the cycle became shallower, why bear phases are almost as relentless as two cycle ago? |
|
|
|
Some dates: Currently, halving is adjusted to March 22, 2024 (from original May) assuming that it stays this way (hashrate) for a while. Pantera fund (Morehead et al) says that bottom occurs at around 477 days before halving. Therefore, THE bottom is projected on Dec 1, 2022, but since it is so close, me might have had it already at $15.5K, or otherwise hedgies might push more for it to close the month lower. I would be comfortable if we are at the expected $36K-40K at the halving, but suspect a bigger bump beforehand a la 2019 (maybe 49-50K). Place your bets. EDIT btw, Pantera just bought about $140mil in btc (a first btc fund fundraise since 2015). https://www.trustnodes.com/2022/11/19/pantera-buys-140-million-bitcoin |
|
|
|
Whatever the ultimate bottom is, ...
 either you did not read to the bottom of my post or you want to distort the meaning of it. "currently" and 77.5 being a 5x of 15.5 pretty much shows my opinion of the bottom. |
|
|
|
|
Whatever the ultimate bottom is, I expect "only" 5-10X in the next cycle (from the bottom).
Why? Prior cycles:
$2 bottom, then $1160 top or 580X
$175 bottom, then $19780 top or 113X
$3100 bottom, then $68900 top or 22X
As you can see, the multiple keeps decreasing drastically (by a factor of about 5) in each consecutive cycle.
Accordingly, the next number for a top is roughly 5X of the bottom, but due to some variability, perhaps up to 10X is possible.
Currently, this would mean either $77.5K (which would be a GREAT disappointment for almost everyone) or up to, perhaps, $155K, which could be OK.
|
|
|
|
BTW, here is an interesting article regarding tax treatment of FTX loss. It's better than I expected aka you could deduct the loss under ponzi scheme law: https://www.coindesk.com/layer2/2022/11/18/ftx-collapse-bankruptcy-crypto-tax-implications/The loss is deductible in the year of discovery or the year the Ponzi scheme’s orchestrator is (1) charged by indictment for fraud, embezzlement or a similar crime; (2) the subject of a state or criminal complaint and either admits guilt or has assets frozen by court-order; or (3) the subject of the fraudulent arrangement faces no charges, indictment or complaint because of his death. |
|
|
|
I see people are asking for collapse of CEX like Binance but they are bullish on decentralization?
I mean collapse of the biggest exchange will fuck all of us either be BTC or ETH.
Just wanna know your perspective on this. An exchange of a size like Binance dies, what do you expect BTC price to be?
My pick for a fail is KuCoin What do you hear? <snip>
I wish all exchanges fail and I can get some cheap coins. At the same time, I am wondering, From where I will buy coins then. Possibly from some miners? phil? Banks are moving to replace exchanges, for example M. Saylor says that BOA approached him for an agreement to buy/sell btc with them. I also know that Fidelity is making similar moves, starting with institutional investors and then probably moving to retail. Imho, it is probable that banks will start buying exchanges while they are relatively cheap and/or private. Anyone know where to buy carbon credits in bulk? We're gonna need them for our private jets and palatial homes... and maybe just to cook our food; it might be prudent to stock up now. Sarcasm? I did not see any /s.....  |
|
|
|
I see people are asking for collapse of CEX like Binance but they are bullish on decentralization?
I mean collapse of the biggest exchange will fuck all of us either be BTC or ETH.
Just wanna know your perspective on this. An exchange of a size like Binance dies, what do you expect BTC price to be?
My pick for a fail is KuCoin What do you hear? <snip>
I wish all exchanges fail and I can get some cheap coins. At the same time, I am wondering, From where I will buy coins then. Possibly from some miners? phil? Banks are moving to replace exchanges, for example M. Saylor says that BOA approached him for an agreement to buy/sell btc with them. I also know that Fidelity is making similar moves, starting with institutional investors and then probably moving to retail. Imho, it is probable that banks will start buying exchanges while they are relatively cheap and/or private. |
|
|
|
... not everyone will be able to safely self custody the way things work now. I hear the phrase "Anyone can write down 12 words" a lot nowadays.
...
 This is going to be a massive problem. When people hear the word 'wallet', they assume that it is like regular wallet (with their cash in bitcoin form inside). The fact that anyone can reproduce 'your" wallet with 12 words does not appear as obvious to many. I have seen dozens of posts lamenting the loss of the physical ledger (while words were intact) and vice versa (lost words and now reset the ledger by putting wrong pin code 4 times-oops). Maybe they should have called it a "key pen" or "personal signer", but definitely not a "wallet". |
|
|
|
As one of this Wall Observer's resident Monero degens I feel it is my duty as a fellow Bitcoin Maxi (I know...I thought that sentence up for Jay particularly as well as it being true) to remind you all:
There is no better time than the present to stage some sort of fantastic boating accident.
I mean... LOTTA ships sinking out there. Maybe one of them was holding all your corns?
Say no more?
(I kid...I kid FEDARALES! I have personally had no boating accidents, nor do I own any Bitcoin (and certainly not Monero)).
The unfortunate part of it is that while your property is impaired (say, stuck on a bankrupt exchange), you cannot take a loss (against your gains or $3000 loss against other income per year in US) until all legal proceedings are completed...or at least it is my current knowledge of that situation. |
|
|
|
|
Wow...Gemini?
BTW, it seems that partial paralysis of exchanges is limiting the downside a bit.
Perhaps, less people are sending coins to exchanges to sell right now since they could get stuck.
I am waiting for a couple of weeks even to do a stable coin/$ exchange.
My money is on Kraken and Coinbase to not get stuck, but some patience is needed albeit my last $ withdrawal from Coinbase was done in 2-3 bd.
|
|
|
|
The King Daddy still remains, and is still thriving. 🕶
yes, true, but, be honest, where is the "alternative financial system" based on bitcoin? It's possible that just sending coins from point A to point B would suffice (and being a putative 'store of value'), but Satoshi envisioned bitcoin banks, if I recall correctly. ... Can you post a link to it? All I could find was this post by hal. Actually there is a very good reason for Bitcoin-backed banks to exist, issuing their own digital cash currency, redeemable for bitcoins. Bitcoin itself cannot scale to have every single financial transaction in the world be broadcast to everyone and included in the block chain. There needs to be a secondary level of payment systems which is lighter weight and more efficient. Likewise, the time needed for Bitcoin transactions to finalize will be impractical for medium to large value purchases.
Bitcoin backed banks will solve these problems. They can work like banks did before nationalization of currency. Different banks can have different policies, some more aggressive, some more conservative. Some would be fractional reserve while others may be 100% Bitcoin backed. Interest rates may vary. Cash from some banks may trade at a discount to that from others.
George Selgin has worked out the theory of competitive free banking in detail, and he argues that such a system would be stable, inflation resistant and self-regulating.
I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash. Most Bitcoin transactions will occur between banks, to settle net transfers. Bitcoin transactions by private individuals will be as rare as... well, as Bitcoin based purchases are today.
You are right, Hal Finney said that, it was not directly attributed to Satoshi. I sometimes rightly or wrongly think that he is "the one". Satoshi seemed pretty anti banks judging by these quotes. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution. What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party. I don't see those two positions as being necessarily mutually exclusive. A big lightning hub could be thought of like a 'bank" in hal's description, sans issuing "their own digital cash", which may or may not be problematic. |
|
|
|
The King Daddy still remains, and is still thriving. 🕶
yes, true, but, be honest, where is the "alternative financial system" based on bitcoin? It's possible that just sending coins from point A to point B would suffice (and being a putative 'store of value'), but Satoshi envisioned bitcoin banks, if I recall correctly. ... Can you post a link to it? All I could find was this post by hal. Actually there is a very good reason for Bitcoin-backed banks to exist, issuing their own digital cash currency, redeemable for bitcoins. Bitcoin itself cannot scale to have every single financial transaction in the world be broadcast to everyone and included in the block chain. There needs to be a secondary level of payment systems which is lighter weight and more efficient. Likewise, the time needed for Bitcoin transactions to finalize will be impractical for medium to large value purchases.
Bitcoin backed banks will solve these problems. They can work like banks did before nationalization of currency. Different banks can have different policies, some more aggressive, some more conservative. Some would be fractional reserve while others may be 100% Bitcoin backed. Interest rates may vary. Cash from some banks may trade at a discount to that from others.
George Selgin has worked out the theory of competitive free banking in detail, and he argues that such a system would be stable, inflation resistant and self-regulating.
I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash. Most Bitcoin transactions will occur between banks, to settle net transfers. Bitcoin transactions by private individuals will be as rare as... well, as Bitcoin based purchases are today.
You are right, Hal Finney said that, it was not directly attributed to Satoshi. I sometimes rightly or wrongly think that he is "the one". |
|
|
|
The King Daddy still remains, and is still thriving. 🕶
yes, true, but, be honest, where is the "alternative financial system" based on bitcoin? It's possible that just sending coins from point A to point B would suffice (and being a putative 'store of value'), but Satoshi envisioned bitcoin banks, if I recall correctly. 13 years have passed, everyone got scars, but there is no "system", would you agree? At this point, i am not sure if it would be possible as many were trying and so far nothing major had happened. Maybe soon  . BTW, it is not the fault of bitcoin itself, just human folly and greed (and infatuation with supposedly more 'advanced' shitcoins). Plus, we need a mechanism that explicitly prevents fake bitcoin 'printing'. No entity should be able to say that they have bitcoin if they don't have a "physical one", and if not, then, as someone said here (sorry can't recall the name) it is "stonks 2.0". EDIT: btw, here is an interesting article suggesting that we should increase our bitcoin usage and not only focus on hodling: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/for-bitcoin-to-be-true-digital-cash |
|
|
|
Next time, I am not waiting even for a new ATH, will probably sell a large % portion earlier (if we ever get there-to my undisclosed current sell target).
It feels silly to sell at 16K, though, so I don't.
You're going to end up really disappointed if you do that. Well, I already did not sell twice: at 20K in 2017 and 69K in 2021, there would NOT be a 3rd time. Albeit, I also did not 'mindtrust' at $175 in 2015, $3100 in 2018 and $3800 in 2020. Part of it is age...waiting for 10 years makes no sense to me. However, I am not going to sell all...maybe 30-40% or so. Same here and it might very well be a third. Why on Earth would you sell so much without even a new ATH? Are you in desperate need of liquid funds or something? Yes when reading your post I had Mindrust in mind. I almost added "be careful not to do a mindrust" to the end of my post. Just sell what you need in immediate liquidity and keep the rest until we get anywhere close to final state valuation. We are not anywhere close to that. I mean Bitcoin market cap is only 2x ETH. Just that relative valuation should tell you enough already. not in need of funds and not selling before roughly 3X from here, but will not wait for 150K. |
|
|
|
Next time, I am not waiting even for a new ATH, will probably sell a large % portion earlier (if we ever get there-to my undisclosed current sell target).
It feels silly to sell at 16K, though, so I don't.
You're going to end up really disappointed if you do that. Well, I already did not sell twice: at 20K in 2017 and 69K in 2021, there would NOT be a 3rd time. Albeit, I also did not 'mindtrust' at $175 in 2015, $3100 in 2018 and $3800 in 2020. Part of it is age...waiting for 10 years makes no sense to me. However, I am not going to sell all...maybe 30-40% or so. |
|
|
|
|
If bitcoin was a gift (or a test?) from some friendly civilization, it seems that we are failing.
A glorious bitcoin got diluted by thousands of garbage coins, with no appreciation during the last 5 years.
It's just a fact, but if you want to soothe yourself, then count from Dec 2018 and be happy.
I guess, human folly spoiled it in the interim, imho. I mean, we seem to be unable to grow a robust financial system around bitcoin and it is just an observation that seems to be based on current facts.
The ecosystem (you can argue that bitcoin wasn't a part of it, but it is not a very solid argument) is now completely decimated-I mean tradfi companies involved in various yield schemes. Poof, gone.
Additionally, it seems that some were able to portray to their customers that their bitcoin was real when it wasn't (no bitcoin assets, just bitcoin liabilities).
I am not sure how it was accomplished.
Next time, I am not waiting even for a new ATH, will probably sell a large % portion earlier (if we ever get there-to my undisclosed current sell target).
It feels silly to sell at 16K, though, so I don't.
BTW, I think Cathy Wood is right and Fed is making a significant policy error.
By rising rates too fast, they are sowing the seeds of another Great Depression.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
