If you got your Bitcoins in 2013 and they are in the same adress today, you are in a good position, or you moved them but the transactions are clear and you can sign messages from the addresses. The only thing is that if you can't prove the purchase price, you will most likely be charged a 0 purchase cost, which won't make much difference with the real purchase price, since almost everything is profit.

If you moved the Bitcoins by mixers for "privacy" I think you have it more complicated as the IRS does not like privacy.

The only doubt I have is whether they will do so at the end of the summer, in view of the mid-term elections. I am not saying that they will change radically and lower rates in a drastic way, but perhaps slightly, because the return of summer is expected to be tough and I do not think that the Democrats want to face the elections with a more catastrophic economic situation than the one we have today.

I have the same opinion, but I prefer not to drink too much, just a couple of glasses or three at the most while eating, so that I can perform optimally after the meal with the attractive woman.

 

But you have to think that people like the case the OP describes are people who have self-control problems, and basically what they do with those behaviors is self-destruct. It's hard to understand these behaviors if you've never had them or don't know someone who has had them.

I am of the same opinion. I think this cycle, as far as good things go, is over and we won't break $69k again until the next one. And while I don't rule out that we may test new lows, I think it's unlikely. In the second half of the year I don't rule out what you say, that we will go up to $50k and stay in a $30-$50k range, but it will depend on many things, the evolution of the war, energy policies, if the Fed decides to give some liquidity again before the mid-term elections. If the general situation improves I think we will be in the upper part of the range, if everything goes worse I think we will move most of the time in levels below $30k and maybe testing new lows.

One thing is the original idea and another is how that idea evolves when it becomes a reality. Today we see many things that deviate from Satoshi's original idea, and not only in terms of the price that you mention.

Regarding the price, I guess what bothers you is that the comparison is made with the dollar, but it could be done in another way. Those of us who hold Bitcoin care about the purchasing power it has. When the Bitcoin was worth $1, you could buy a car with 1 Bitcoin? No. Today you can? Yes (as long as it's priced at $20k or less and the dealer accepts Bitcoin or you'll have to switch to fiat to exchange).

So, I say 1BTC=1BTC always put it in historical perspective, because 1BTC with which you bought just some chewing gum, is not the same as 1BTC with which you buy a car.

Yes, I believe it is the best the OP can do in light of the facts. The only one who supports it is him and the rest of us have opposed it. The most logical thing to do would be to recognize that he has made a mistake, something that happens to all of us from time to time, instead of insisting on the mistake.

My theory is that the supposedly "predictive" models serve more to understand the past than to predict the future.

What usually happens is the following: the past is observed, in this case of Bitcoin, some regularities are observed (which to some extent are arbitrary), and from there a model is assembled assuming that the future will be similar.

I prefer to rely on events that happen in the real world rather than on charts drawn on the basis of a continuation of patterns. Like the miners' ban in China last year, which was not foreseen in any technical analysis or predictive model, also the reduction of liquidity by central banks, or the cascading liquidation of leveraged positions as we have seen recently. All this is much more important than standing in front of a blackboard and drawing future lines based on the supposed regularities you observe in the past.

In the case of PlanB, he put together a very elaborate and logical model based on supply, and I understand that he does not want to give it up for lost after so much time and effort invested in it, but I think he would do better moving on and stop making a fool of himself.

I share your opinion, it is something like digital gold, which in the past was used as a currency and as a store of wealth. The number of daily transactions shows that it is partially used as a currency, but as bitcoin is so good at storing value it makes much more sense to spend the fiat you have and save your bitcoin, because in 1 or 2 cycles it will be worth much more.

OK, I'm done with this conversation. Best_Change arguments, although debatable, are sufficient for me. To say it is a scam exchange monitor is false based on what has been discussed in the thread.

I don't know whether to give much credibility to a tweet but seeing that this is a news agency from the Netherlands it seems more reliable.

I've googled and I don't see anyone else echoing it.

However, if it happens it will be indeed breaking news.

Waiting for people who know the UK situation better to comment on it, like Cnut237.

I would rather say that when the creator of a predictive model does not stop changing the predictions when the facts dismantle his theory, what he is doing is making a fool of himself.

PlanB had earlier stated in June around the mining and Musk’s energy FUD that the worst-case scenario for 2021 would see Bitcoin above $135k by the end of December

Plan B Says Bitcoin Price Still 'on Track Towards $100K' Despite Missing November's Price Prediction

PlanB Explains Why Bitcoin Won’t Drop to $24.5K Again

This last one is dated April 15 of this year.

More than waiting for the price to go down further or not, what is clear is that it is a good time to buy. The price could go lower, yes, but I highly doubt it will go much lower and stay at levels below $20k, barring catastrophic news. I think the price behavior lately shows that the level around $20k is strong support.

I agree 100%. When you have a theory that predicts some data, and subsequently the data does not match what the theory predicted, there are two fundamental attitudes:

1) Invalidate the theory.
2) Find excuses not to invalidate the theory.

It is clear to me that 1) is the correct option.

I don't know if it has anything to do with it but take a look at this thread:

weird pm received

In this case he talks about PM in the forum. It may have nothing to do with it or if it has something to do it will be some amateurs trying to hack forum members accounts in DT with great reputation.

Not at all. The only thing that had caught my attention was that Jollygood's reply was titled "Best Change is not a scam", but then I understood that it was because he had quoted you.

What I see positive in your answers is that you do not hide and give detailed answers to everything. But there is one main issue that you have not addressed:

What about Openchange's data. People have the right to know more details about the company, if it is even registered.

If you are in favor of KYC and blacklisting for legal reasons, at least the entity you support doing those things should have a more extensive published data on their website other than an email.

That question you have not adressed in your detailed responses in this thread.

I am still waiting for a response in this regard, and I think I am not the only one.

And how would you exchange $1M in Bitcoin for fiat? You live in France, go with your Bitcoins to Turkey and come back to France on the plane with $1M? There is a limit of €10,000 to travel in Europe. The same applies to Telegram groups: Would you meet in person with someone from Telegram to get €1M (or $1M) for your bitcoins? With the cash payment limits in many European countries it is highly unlikely that anyone would have that amount in banknotes.

Exchanging or spending small undeclared amounts is not a problem, when the amount starts to be big it starts to be a problem, and the bigger the amount the bigger the problem.

Your thread is actually fascist:

Considering that there are at least 68 genders, I don't know how you dare to pose such a heteropatriarchal poll.

This without taking into account that one can change genders many times during their life.

But they can see the flags.

I think the main thing was to lower the liquidation price, as you said. In a bankruptcy you can't do anything, the bankruptcy administrator take the remaining assets and liquidate them to pay the liabilities, partially, obviously, and how the payments are allocated and in what amounts depends on the regulations that are executed by the bankruptcy administrator.

But I think lowering liquidation price was precisely to avoid banruptcy risk.

I think it is due to a combination of Doritos overdose and boredom, rather than the result of conscientious study, as I have commented in another similar thread.

I don't see the strong bullish pattern anywhere, and I'd like to see it, but I can't. Although prices are practically impossible to predict, I believe that in the current context of reduced liquidity it will be difficult for prices to pull up strongly, at least in the short and medium term.