|
I'm not investing now, but investing when the bull run only just begun is not a horrible idea, but you need to take profits at a later stage, otherwise you could even miss out on profits entirely and have to sit with a loss for the next bear market, which is pretty bad.
The price right now is not only at ATH, but also at the peak of the previous cycle, and we can expect that the next peak will be way higher, like it always was before.
|
|
|
|
|
They don't have enough BTC to cause a major crash, they can only cause some short-term panic. When you're looking at price movements, you should also consider how long they last. Like, maybe the US dumping the coins that they have would drop the price by 10%, but in a week or two the price will return back to its course. Even if Microstrategy dumps, the price will eventually recover.
The only holder that you should be worried about is Satoshi, because a million of coins + the reputation loss of the creator abandoning their creation would be pretty bad and the effects would be felt for many-many years.
|
|
|
|
As crazy as the difference in amount between these local currencies of some countries and the dollar it is becoming an increasingly necessary evil for citizens of these countries to whom their currency is repleting in value by the hit of inflation to find a hedge to keep value on with their money by either holding it in dollar or investing in bitcoin which in the long run create extra value for them.
And I think the falling value of the currencies of these countries has also become one of the propeller drive among youths of these countries particularly of the African continent to increasingly adopt bitcoin because of the profit it profers to it long term holders.
This has been the case for a really long time, probably since WW2 when the US became the dominant world economy. And it will still be the case for a long time because the US economy is both the biggest and quite resilient and quite open and no other economy is doing all of that at once. Bitcoin can't realistically replace US dollar because its volatility means it's actually a bad store of value and it's rather an investment. A good store of value is never losing its value and Bitcoin always has ups and downs. |
|
|
|
|
The longer it goes up, the more like it to correct, that's the rule. Reaching the peak of the cycle will never be a single upstreak, there will be major corrections. Halvening is typically a sellf-the-news event, so if by then there will be no correction I expect it to happen during or after it. But I think that already in March a correction is very likely, if it would happen now it would bring the price to around $45K. Also, the ATH will be a major psychological barrier at which some investors will take profits.
|
|
|
|
The main two arguments I’ve heard against single sig & passphrase is that it’s a 2/2 setup increasing chance of loss and it’s not safe from a wrench attack if the passphrase is memorised or kept with the HWW/seed.
Nothing is safe from a $5 wrench attack so it shouldn't be a factor. If you have access to 4 locations it could be better to make a 2 of 4 multisig, because then you can lose any two of them, while with two seed+passphrase sets you can lose coins if you lose both seeds or both passwords. It really depends on how likely you are to lose backups. If your backup locations and storage methods are reliable, even having two is good enough. |
|
|
|
While every cycle, the multiplication of Bitcoin's price decreases like for the last time of 2021 bull run, it went $69k-$70k and that's around 2 to 3.5x for its growth since 2017 bull run.
So, starting with $69k, if it goes 2x or 2.5x then it's possible that we may see $150k and that's not a high speculation if we'd base that with its growth.
Although price wise, it's expensive when it goes there but can we do anything with that? I don't think so, Bitcoin's bound to hit new ATHs and new ATLs.
I'd expect the top to be less than that for 2 reasons. First is that this difference between peaks of cycles tends to decrease. In 2013 the peak was $1,300 and in 2017 it was $20,000 and then $69,000. So if we take into account not just the previous cycle but 2 last cycles then the peak might be at around $100k Second is that the previous ATH was actually reached twice. And there was 6 months between those peaks, so it means there was a lot of resistance. It might be that the resistance is still here and massive profit taking from long-term holders will not let the price reach $150,000 |
|
|
|
What do you think, is there a liquidity crunch and it makes sense to sell now because sellers will come in soon to take advantage of these high prices? Or does it make sense to just hold at this point?
You should only be concerned with such events if you are a day trader and try to profit of every movement. But if you bought in 2022 and still waiting, you're likely a long term investor so you should wait for a decent exit price. The bull market has only just begun, and there will be many corrections when other holders will be taking profits, but it's important to not panic thinking that that's the big crash and just wait. But also not get too greedy and missing on the bull market entirely. So it's best to sell in batches throughout the bull market and get some average price. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin can't maintain this growth rate forever, simply because it would make it unrealistically expensive. This current trend will end sooner or later, and the new trend might not be so forgiving - it could be that Bitcoin will harshly correct and won't recover for decades.
Also the previous performance could be attributed to the effects of halvenings, but we already entered the stage where halvenings matter less and less.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a good strategy, but if this cycle will play out similar to the previous ones, it's better to wait with the selling until the price reaches at least 1.5x of the last ATH - so above $100k USD. Then you cast start selling progressively more and more. You don't need to time all or even most of your selling at the next ATH - that's unrealistic, but getting 80% close to it is a pretty good result.
|
|
|
|
Today I read about the news of El Salvador bitcoin hodling investment yielding about 40% profit and i had to imagine that 40% in figures in contrast to the amount of dollars El Salvador hold in BTC.
Their investment hasn't yielded anything until they sold it for fiat money - it's only potential gain that they need to take. If Bitcoin will peak at $100k and crash to $35-40k and they would still hodl, they would just sit on a net zero unrealized gain. It applies to all holders. Most people won't take profits and will have to wait many years for another opportunity to take large profits, even though it's much more profitable to sell during every bull run and buy during ever bear run. |
|
|
|
|
There will always be some reward in the form of transaction fees, and it's impossible that no one will transact Bitcoin, but the big question is whether this reward will be enough to get hashrate for securing the network, or would 51% attacks become more likely. This is something that we'll see in 12-16 years after a few more halvening, because right now the reward is still quite big.
|
|
|
|
|
Bank deposits are not lucrative because fiat currency suffers from inflation, and guess what - that same inflation is applied to the stable coin too, because it's pegged 1:1 to a fiat currency. But it also suffers from some downsides that are not present in banks - banks are often insured and guarantee withdrawals up to a certain limit, and banks are legal entities that can be sued. While stablecoins are much less regulated and you could indeed lose money if they crash. Especially dangerous are the so-called algorithmic stablecoins which lost their peg a lot of times in the past and supposedly got hacked, or maybe those were inside jobs.
|
|
|
|
Just have a view of an anonymous Bicoin P2P transaction where you could trade and transact millions of dollars legitimately with a zero risks of being physically attacked for theft or bridged of trust with a dealer after successful transactions.
Yeah sending Bitcoin to other person is quite safe, although there are other risks with Bitcoin as a system. But sending Bitcoin is only a part of the deal, and you could get scammed on the other part - bank transaction could be charged back, something physical could be not delivered, etc. And actually using Bitcoin as payment for investments has higher risks than using bank transactions, because once Bitcoin is stolen it's impossible to return, while bank transaction in some cases could be reversed. But going back to Bitcoin as a system, the fact that your keys could be stolen by a virus or through phishing is a major problem, compared to other financial systems. |
|
|
|
Donald Trump may be thinking of a new strategy as Bitcoin continues to spread around the world. Seeing crypto flourish so much may have Donald Trump changing his stance on crypto, selling NFTs and planning more crypto-friendly policies if re-elected.
What's way more likely is that his people noticed that his voters tend to view Bitcoin positively, so they told him to start praising Bitcoin. I doubt that he himself understands anything about Bitcoin, since he's pretty old and also, let's be honest, not very bright, especially in the recent years. |
|
|
|
|
Theoretically it's possible, because it's just like backing with gold, but even more convenient because it's easy to prove the ownership publicly. But it's not possible today, because Bitcoin is way too volatile. This volatility hurts Bitcoin's adoption as a currency today and it would be the same with Bitcoin-backed fiat. Another problem is that to establish a fiat currency you'd need millions of BTC at the current price, and obtaining them would be quite costly.
|
|
|
|
Saylor claims MicroStrategy will never sell their Bitcoin[4], positioning them as unwavering "diamond hands".
Saylor created himself an image of a true Bitcoin believer who is in for the tech and will hodl forever, but remember that it costs him nothing to write posts on twitter, and some 5 years ago he was a Bitcoin skeptic. He changed his opinion because he saw opportunity for profit, and if Bitcoin starts performing poorly, he could easily dump it and look for new investment opportunities. I won't even be surprised if one day he turns into an altcoin shill - maybe he'll use the trust he build to launch his coin or promote someone's coin for a decent chunk of premine. |
|
|
|
|
It's a bit scary that so many people easily fall for the simplest scam if it's performed through a trusted channel. Bitcoin's motto is "don't trust, verify" and the users are supposed to be responsible for their security, yet an average crypto investor just blindly trusts some gurus and is ready to give them their life savings if they promise to make them rich. This is not how things should be. If Satoshi's accounts got hacked, how many people would fall for a similar scam?
|
|
|
|
In 2013, Howells, from Newport, Wales, accidentally threw out the hard drive which contained 8,000 Bitcoin. 1. Does AI really has the ability to track the hard drive given that it has lost 11 years ago? 2. How much do you think is the percentage of odds of finding that hard drive again using AI tech? 3. If that hard drive will be found in one of these days, do you think the Bitcoins inside it can still be recoverable using current technology? (Take note it's been 11 years on the ground if not being sold to junk shops by scavengers.) [/quote] 1. You need to physically search through piles of garbage, AI can't help here in any way 2. So there's zero chance AI will find anything 3. That hard drive likely got damaged after the first few months on the dumpster. There are rains, and there's a lot of possibility for mechanical damage as more garbage gets piled on. It sucks to lose 8k coins, but the worst thing to do in this position is to desperately try to get them back. Better just move on. |
|
|
|
Now, the governments are in charge of the banks and other centralized monetary systems in a centralized networks while BTC and the cryptocurrencies are decentralized networking system of transactions which obviously the governments has no place of power on it.
They can't stop Bitcoin transactions, but a business is more than just sending money, because it's also about providing goods and services for those money. What incentive would businesses have to accept Bitcoin if government outlaws it? A simple audit would uncover the fact that they accept Bitcoin and they would be in a big trouble for it. The only way to have an economy without any control from the government is to get rid of the government first and live in anarchy. |
|
|
|
And yet in the face of these facts, a near constant refrain from many crypto enthusiasts is that the reason Bitcoin hasn't replaced the world's sovereign currencies like the USD and the Euro is because there's a conspiracy of government regulations to stop it.
Because most crypto enthusiasts have very little understanding of how government works and what they can do. If government really hated Bitcoin, they would take very simple steps - ordering banks to stop servicing large crypto trading platforms and a bit harder but still doable - monitor p2p transfers and freeze suspect traders. This alone would destroy 99.9% of Bitcoin liquidity and Bitcoin would be traded mostly for cash, gift cards, stolen credit cards and so on and basically it would be worth $500 or so. And true believers would still hoard it and wait for the day when government collapses and their coins become world currency. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
