It's true that learning everything is essential to to every investment, real estate, stocks and etc. But for me, you don't need to understand the whole concept of bitcoin at first before you invest. You need to learn how to buy and sell, and how to store it. It will surely take you sometime before you learn the whole concept of it by reading the white paper of bitcoin. If you are just here for profit, learning the basic is fine. In fact, I still don't know how bitcoin works technically, I mean on the deeper side of blockchain, thus I earned profit from bitcoin because I have it.
I agree with you, beginners do not need to learn too much knowledge when starting out because theory is not enough for us to visualize and understand everything. no matter how much knowledge we read, if we have not practiced or experienced it, we are still a newbie. in my opinion, newbies should accept spending a small amount of capital to perform buying and selling operations to better understand how bitcoin works as well as better understand the concepts of storage wallets. besides, we should only invest a moderate amount of capital to monitor the market and become familiar with the market's volatility. if we don't experience this knowledge, we will never understand it no matter how many theories we read. |
|
|
|
Manchester City has definitely been very careful about spending money. They have brought in the players that they actually need. They did not overspend at all. Well maybe we can say something different about Jack Grealish. I do not think he deserved that big of a transfer money. But I guess that’s okay. Considering how much money people are spending right now for players. They have actually brought in very good results for the amount of money that they have spent so far. I don’t think not a lot of clubs can actually say that. Especially not Manchester United. They have spent stupid money for a lot of players that did not give them almost anything.
At first I thought the same and then yes, it was because all those prices for any players of any quality were suffering from inflation literally. The prices were irrational and nobody could understand them. It was about that time when Grealish was bought and unless players have a clause that they can leave the club for a fixed sum of money like De Bruyne and Haaland I think, Manchester City is a rich club and the others make them pay for it. But still the difference between Manchester City and Chelsea is that Grealish became an essential player for the team. He is important to the whole game and perfectly fits into the system that Guardiola wants. If you see it that way, Manchester City spends 100 million once and it is good. Chelsea spends 70 million four times and none of the players delivers. The inflation has definitely got to the people. But sometimes I wonder if inflation actually gets to those people. because they already have enough money to spend on anything. But at the same time, I also think that inflation does hit them a lot. Because the way the price of players are increasing right now, it is surely causing a lot of problems. Now the problem is they actually try to bring him expecting a huge performance from him. But he really did not perform that well to be honest. Actually, the trend of spending too much money for a player started with Manchester United in my opinion. They were spending a lot of money for players which did not actually deserve that much money to be spent on them. And to be fair, a club which is as rich as Manchester City is definitely going to spend a lot of money to bring players. It is very possible that one time a certain player is not going to perform as they expect him to. But after that, Manchester City sprinted money, very carefully. |
|
|
|
Everton look awful this season as they've done in the last 2 seasons. It's very difficult for them to get points from a giant like Arsenal when they can't even beat mid-table teams. I expect an absolute Arsenal win in this match. Arsenal haven't beaten Everton away in recent years, so they should end this bad streak today. Gabriel Jesus also loves Everton games, he always scores against them. If Ødegaard and Saka play in their level as always, Arsenal should win without any difficulty.
Last season, Everton was battling relegation, yet they defeated Arsenal at Goodison Park. It has been almost six years since Arsenal won Everton at the Park. I just hope today’s match comes with a different result since the Arsenal team is very ambitious and is willing to compete for the title. Everton was unable to win even a single match in this season. They have also lost three out of the four matches that they have played. With only one point from the four matches is that they have played so far, they are currently in the relegation zone right now. Arsenal versus Everton match has just started. only ten minutes have been played in this match so far. I do not think Arsenal is going to lose this match. Mainly because Arsenal is really interested in winning this match and staying close in the title race. |
|
|
|
I'm not suprised at his performance this season because he's a proven top class player and currently the best in his team, and so far the club have been relying on him for goals which I think is not a bad idea because he's setting more records by scoring in almost all the matches so far and helping the team be successful but I feel they're putting more pressure on him and shouldn't rely on only Mbappe for goals they still got other top quality players in the team and they needs to start finding the net also because it might affect them if Mbappe sustains an injury and is sidelined from a match.
Well apart from that I think Mbappe is a wonderful player and has achieved alot for his age but he won't get a better chance of achieving that which he's after currently due to his current team and it would had been easier if he was in a team that's got a good winning mentality in the Champions League like Realmadrid to help him stand a chance of winning the Ballon D'or in the next 2-3 years time, however Mbappe and Jude Bellingham at Realmadrid this season would had been very Amazing to watch.
In my own opinion, I think Kylian Mbappe is the best player of his age at the moment and he's yet to be have a Balon D'or award to his name because of the club he's currently playing. The way he runs at defenders and dribbles past them like they aren't existing is very rare to find among players of his age at the moment. He is clearly better than any forward footballer in the world at moment apart from Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo. Paris Saint Germaine lost their their French Ligue 1 game against Nice on Friday but Kylian Mbappe still bailed himself with two goals in that game. No wonder Real Madrid president Fiorentino Perez desperately wants to bring the France national team captain to Real Madrid next summer I think there can be a really good debate about which player is actually better, Mbappé or Haaland. Based on what we have seen, so far, I think we can easily say that Erling Haaland can definitely be described as a better player compared to Mbappé. And let's not forget that English Premier League is definitely a lot harder compared to Ligue 1. And that is a big reason why I think the current performance of Haaland is better compared to Mbappé. But both are definitely up there as the two most important and probably best young players right now. It won't be very wrong to expect them to be the replacement for Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo. Another thing is, I don't think personal performance actually means anything if the team is not winning. Haaland with Manchester City has been able to win a lot of things so far. The same cannot be said with Mbappé with PSG. |
|
|
|
Just because the owner is willing to spend money, that doesn't mean that the club will get better, if you misspend that money then you are going to stay a terrible team. Doesn't mean that you can do wonders without spending neither, Pep spent hundreds of millions of dollars to be this good, but at least he did the right moves while spending it.
So, you can't be like United and Glazers family and just not spend anything you do not have to, they basically spend the bare minimum to keep them competing, but you can't be like Chelsea and Todd which would be spending money way more than you should, on players that do not even deserve that much money, and expect good results neither. The only way to get better is to spend right amount of money to the right players.
That is right and I think Pep Guardiola is a great role model for a manager who is massive resources available but yet a well-considered and reasonable approach to building a really strong squad. Since 2016 Guardiola has spent roughly £1 billion for new players with Grealish being the most expensive for £100 million. He also got Haaland for only £52 million. He made a number of high quality transfers and knew exactly what player he needs for a specific position, but also for the consistency and balance within the team in terms of character, quality and strength. But this isn't the end of the story. Guardiola also let go players and his net spending since 2016 is £478 million. They have won 14 trophies including the treble. Manchester United has had a net spending of £835 million over the same period of time. And over the last five years Manchester City's net spending ranks 10th among the Premier League teams. Respect! Manchester City has definitely been very careful about spending money. They have brought in the players that they actually need. They did not overspend at all. Well maybe we can say something different about Jack Grealish. I do not think he deserved that big of a transfer money. But I guess that’s okay. Considering how much money people are spending right now for players. They have actually brought in very good results for the amount of money that they have spent so far. I don’t think not a lot of clubs can actually say that. Especially not Manchester United. They have spent stupid money for a lot of players that did not give them almost anything. |
|
|
|
If you get lucky and won such a huge amount of prize, you'll be rich. But if you don't know how to handle that money or how to grow it more, then it'll be gone after some time. To be able to be stable with your wealth, you build yourself. And it takes a lot of effort and hard work. You can be rich with one time luck but it won't last without skills and hard work.
And that's just how it is, even if you get lucky once you still have to manage it and ensure that whatever benefit you get from hitting the luck will not be gone after a day or two. There already have been a lot of stories of individuals winning the lottery and after less than a year they have lost almost all of the price money. Those stories showed how you cannot just depend on luck alone, you still have to work and manage everything yourself. If you keep relying on luck then you will continue to find yourself back to where you started. Yes and that means that no matter how big the luck is, it still depends on how you can manage it. Because it's useless even though you have as much money as you have or as rich as you are if you can't manage your finances well then yes the results are like what you said maybe it will run out in just a day or two. We can see how rich people who started from the bottom to the top point in their lives, they are more concerned with how to maintain their wealth rather than prioritizing their desires such as buying something that is actually not important at all, and that is clearly a waste. And I think that means a person who has wealth from the results of his hard work will be very different from those who are rich from the results of getting lucky from winning the lottery for example, and clearly the difference is from how they can manage the money to continue to grow. Honestly agree with what you said, that indeed we cannot continue to depend on luck alone, there must be action to make changes, it doesn't need to be too significant but you can start slowly and consistently. Totally agree with what everyone is saying, regardless of whether that success comes from luck or because we inherited it. but if we don't know how to manage it, no matter how big that asset is, it will one day disappear. But I want to emphasize one thing, luck is indispensable when it comes to anyone's success. although sometimes we will see a lot of successful people coming from poor backgrounds, or working hard to achieve success, I believe that without luck, no matter how talented they are, they will not succeed if luck does not come to them. we must not be lazy and rely only on luck, but we also cannot deny that luck is a part of our success. |
|
|
|
If you really aren't too concerned about privacy, centralized exchanges like Binance will give you a better bitcoin buying and selling experience. but if you don't want to make your identity public, then decentralized exchanges are the right choice for you.
As far as I know, even for those countries that ban bitcoin, I believe they cannot ban exchanges because we can use VPN, but the problem is to make sure that your bitcoin investment is only you know, no one else. one more thing, if you use centralized exchanges, remember that they are just places to trade, buy and sell, not a trusted place to store your bitcoins.
Most of the cases when the government is ban Bitcoin, the centralized exchange also restrict the country to access their site, if @OP use VPN, it means he broke the exchange rules. When the exchange ask KYC, then what you can do here? you can only let all of your coins gone. If you admit you were live on the restricted country and you provide your KYC, there's a chance if the exchange report to your government, you could get jailed. That is not entirely true, not all exchanges cooperate with the government to comply with government regulations. because not all exchanges are headquartered in all countries where they operate. if the exchange truly complies with government regulations, why can't the government do anything to claim the rights of their citizens when FTX goes bankrupt? Furthermore, using a VPN is also useless when you use an exchange that has removed your country from their active list. you won't be able to verify your KYC accounts so how can you use them? |
|
|
|
I'm sure that football games like the one between The Hammers and Manchester City will never be predicted the way things are now. Personally, I think Man City has always been the best, but I remember Arsenal being ahead in the standings at the start of other seasons, which adds some doubt. The current play of West Ham also can't be ignored. But I need to point out a mistake I made about Declan Rice, who works for Arsenal right now. Because of these factors, I understand your desire for a fair match, but it's hard to say for sure which way the outcome will be
Hammers are enjoying a great run since start. They have brought in some good players from the Declan Rice's sale. Personally I think City are still way ahead in terms of squad and tactics but right now I feel that Hammers might have a chance against City. It's interesting to see that lately Alvarez have been playing behind Haaland in the formation and is making the run when opponents defence focus has been on Haaland. Hammers really need to be aware of that and needs to mark both Alvarez and Haaland in their upcoming game. It's a tough fixture but I think Hammers have a chance if they do things properly. Manchester City is currently on top of everyone in the table and they are still unbeaten in this season. So surely it is not going to be easy for anyone to beat Manchester City. And Manchester City have not shown many weaknesses this season. So I don’t think there will be much exploitation from the opponent. I definitely do not expect West Ham to win against Manchester City. Even if they are able to get one point from this matter, it is going to be something like a win for them I believe. It is definitely going to be a little expecting to see them win against Manchester City. |
|
|
|
This doesn't affect me personally because I consider my old transaction a push in order to have this great success in the crypto industry. if weren't for those transactions we have back then, we wouldn't even talking all these things here or they might even be ignored or forgotten because it won't survive if those transactions never happen. Right now, all I can do is just continue doing the things I want which is buying low and selling high and a little bit of trading as well, in that way I'm still getting some decent amount of income whenever the price gets back to its ATH.
If we laughed at and criticized those who chose iPhones over bitcoin many years ago, we should also laugh at those who sold bitcoins for 1 thousand dollars or Laszlo Hanyecz who spent 10 thousand bitcoins to buy 2 Pizza. we should even regret spending so much in the past because if we had let that money invest in bitcoin we would all have become rich. I've seen so many threads about this meme in recent days that I really find this a pointless and tasteless comparison because the future is unpredictable. |
|
|
|
Most at time, some of the crypto/Bitcoin investors mistake Bitcoin to be some form of a Ponzi scheme, where individuals could invest x amount and get xxxx profits within a short stipulated time, those are all lies and will only lead you to scams, but if you must take the part of Bitcoin investment, then you have to go all in for the long term. I don't think many people are confused about this today because bitcoin has become so famous and most know it is an asset and not a ponzi scheme. but the problem of many people who have not invested in bitcoin is its volatility, not everyone like us likes strong volatility. however, newbies still mistakenly believe that investing in bitcoin is easy and can make quick profits, which is still a fairly common mistake for newbies. Most countries around the world have not made any stand on Bitcoin since they don't have control over Bitcoin access in their countries, since Bitcoin is decentralized.
Not really, many countries have been introducing regulations on cryptocurrencies as well as bitcoin, they do not ignore them just because they cannot be controlled. You are underestimating the government. they won't easily ignore our huge taxes, don't expect that just because the government hasn't acted yet doesn't mean they will let us be free forever. |
|
|
|
how we can sell and parchase crypto like BTC etc can we deposit directly into our account because in my country BTC and all others crypto is not acceptable
i her that there are lots of 3rd party platform available for that and also online exchange company corporation
You can also purchase Bitcoin from decentralized as well as centralized exchanges. But, if your country has blocked centralized exchanges then you should consider buying from decentralized exchanges. While it's possible to buy Bitcoin from decentralized exchange but still you should be careful when buying from decentralized exchanges. Still, if you find a good and reputable one then you can purchase from them without any issue. When it comes to centralized exchanges then my experience with Binance has been good so far, but still I won't vouch for anyone. Do your own research and then purchase Bitcoin. yes a agree with your this option to escrow and also use of decentralized as well as centralized exchanges in lots of openion i also like binance plateform where we can sell and buy lots of crypto If you really aren't too concerned about privacy, centralized exchanges like Binance will give you a better bitcoin buying and selling experience. but if you don't want to make your identity public, then decentralized exchanges are the right choice for you. As far as I know, even for those countries that ban bitcoin, I believe they cannot ban exchanges because we can use VPN, but the problem is to make sure that your bitcoin investment is only you know, no one else. one more thing, if you use centralized exchanges, remember that they are just places to trade, buy and sell, not a trusted place to store your bitcoins. |
|
|
|
They are the best club, they are hard to beat and have great stability in the depth of the squad, many people praise Man City's play.
Obviously no matter how good the team is, there will be times when they lose 38 matches but it won't be much, the probability of losing ratio will be small, I think the defeat of Man City can be counted including the draw.
Deciding who will get the trophy? Man City, Liverpool and Arsenal as a whole are competing great, there are also other surprises in the Premier League that are common.
The surprising thing is Tottenham is in the second position right now. I guess they have started performing well after Harry Kane left the team. Talk about the "Harry Kane" effect  . But anyway, right now it is all about goal difference between the top teams right now. Only Manchester City has 4 out of four wins. In the next five spots, from 2nd to 6th position, all the teams have three wins out of four matches that they have played so far. Currently, it is just the goal difference that has made the difference between them. Not many matches have been played so far. So we will have to wait and see what happens. But definitely, Manchester City is the team which is going to be the favourites to win the trophy. You don't measure the success of the side with that of the first four games played let's measure to see how consistent they can eat running at a top level. The sale of Harry Kane haven't been really felt. The Madison player Tottenham bought has supported the attackers very well. Manchester City won it for a good number if times they still look potential but still let's leave our eyes wide open. Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool are liners for the trophy. Of course I am not trying to judge the performance of a team just based on the first four matches that they have played so far. There is still a long way to go in this season, but I will definitely say that Tottenham has started this season Well enough. And they are truly playing well even without their star player Harry Kane. So I think they will be able to continue performing well unless they have like a bad situation of injuries with players. But let’s be honest, no one is probably going to be able to beat Manchester City for the English Premier League title. Emm i think Arsenal might have a chance. And the only chance for the other teams to beat Manchester City and get the English Premier League title is probably if Manchester City concentrate too much on Champions League. |
|
|
|
Barcelona has been getting some very good young players. If you look at their u19 team, you will see that there are plenty of players that are worth millions of euros already, and they are like 16-17 year olds as well. Xavi is known for caring about youth talent, and I believe that they are trying to revive the la masia academy to bring in more players that could worth something. They recently bought a few of them for a few million dollars.
Not all of them are there though, some of them are at Barcelona Athletic, which is a whole another team, so that they would get more fierce competition and play real meaningful minutes. That could actually help them in a few years, someone who is 16-17 could play in the league games in 1-2 years, and that should be great help for them.
Appreciated with Barcelona manager Xavi Hernandez have braveness for promoting young talent player to senior squad, current young talent Lamine Yamal make new record as young player for Barcelona and he was success get Spain national calling and success scoring goals in his debut match. Current Barcelona young player right now have Pedri, Gavi, Bale and Lamine Yamal. Xavi Hernandez full trusted with Barcelona academy La Masia and seems not stopping with Lamine Yamal in this season will have new young talented make debut with senior teams actually Barcelona have participants in Champion League and Copa del Rey as competition for young talent show their performance. Can't find with rival team Real Madrid likely most instant way by signing young player and less promotion their players academy. Barcelona has a good record of finding young players. I hope that Barcelona will be able to find some players like that who will be able to come into the seniors squad and perform well. But it is surely not going to be easy for any young player to do that. One reason for that is they will definitely be under pressure to perform. Which is never a good thing for a young player. And for some reason, everyone thinks that any player who is going to be promoted like that will start performing like Mbappé. But that is definitely not the case. Xavi is someone who actually cares about young talent as you said. And I genuinely do not think that Barcelona actually have any other options to be honest. Because they cannot spend as much as they want. |
|
|
|
After the first 4 rounds in Ligue 1, Lyon only had 1 draw and lost 3 matches, temporarily ranked bottom of the table. Although he is considered a legend of French football, having led Les Bleus and achieved much success in Ligue 1, coach Laurent Blanc could not stay in Lyon even though the season had just begun. Lyon's management lost patience and fired him.
Many reports say that Fabio Grosso will be the new coach of Lyon. The agreements have been completed, Lyon is only waiting for the paperwork to be completed.
Hopefully, with the arrival of Fabio Grosso into the Lyon squad, he can bring quite significant changes to the Lyon team this season and enable Lyon to recover from their current very bad position. It is indeed very sad to see that Lyon is in a very bad ranking in the Ligue1 standings now because previously Lyon always provided quite good competition in Ligue1 so that its achievements in Ligue1 were also worthy of being said to be great in the previous season. But Fabio Grosso also does not have a great history as a head coach, because so far Fabio Grosso has also never been a head coach in a big team. But indeed, maybe this factor also does not have a bad impact on Fabio Grosso coaching later at Lyon. Because it is possible, Fabio Grosso will be able to make a big change for Lyon performance at this moment, because at least Lyon should also be able to recover quickly because of its currently very low position on the standings. But regarding Lyon performance from season to season, basically Lyon also no longer has good results throughout the season, and in this season Lyon is having worse results. Lyon is at the bottom of the table. They will have to improve quickly. And the steps that they are taking are not the best in my opinion. Fabio Grosso will have to motivate the players to perform better. It is definitely going to be a hard thing to do. After all, the morale of the players are not good right now. No player wants to see their team at the absolute bottom of the table when they have finished seventh in the last season. This is surely going to be a tough ask for the coach. And the expectation is also going to be pretty high from him. Because even though the team is at the bottom of the table, they have finished seven in the last season. And similar results are going to be expected from him, even though he has just arrived as the coach. |
|
|
|
I also won't deny that currently Man City is the best and most consistent club in the Premier League. There is no need to doubt the stability of the players, but does that mean Man City will not lose in a total of 38 matches? Of course not, because there are times when performance decreases, and losing once or twice is normal. Don't assume that strong teams cannot be beaten, because the games of Premier League clubs are always surprising and can come from teams that are considered weak.
We just need to enjoy it, deciding who will win the trophy doesn't have to be drawn from now on. The process of starting the Premier League competition has just begun.
They are the best club, they are hard to beat and have great stability in the depth of the squad, many people praise Man City's play. Obviously no matter how good the team is, there will be times when they lose 38 matches but it won't be much, the probability of losing ratio will be small, I think the defeat of Man City can be counted including the draw. Deciding who will get the trophy? Man City, Liverpool and Arsenal as a whole are competing great, there are also other surprises in the Premier League that are common. The surprising thing is Tottenham is in the second position right now. I guess they have started performing well after Harry Kane left the team. Talk about the "Harry Kane" effect . But anyway, right now it is all about goal difference between the top teams right now. Only Manchester City has 4 out of four wins. In the next five spots, from 2nd to 6th position, all the teams have three wins out of four matches that they have played so far. Currently, it is just the goal difference that has made the difference between them. Not many matches have been played so far. So we will have to wait and see what happens. But definitely, Manchester City is the team which is going to be the favourites to win the trophy. |
|
|
|
Banks and cryptos don't seem like adversaries to me. Every country has banks but not every country has crypto approval. When there are more than one private bank in a country, the competition between the private banks can be called rivals, but since crypto is not approved in most countries, crypto will not be an opponent of the bank. But Bank China let people of their country transact through crypto or let people of their country invest in crypto. Because whenever the people of a country invest in crypto, the amount of people keeping money in the bank will decrease which is harmful for the bank. That's why banks are always anti-crypto but not anti-crypto.
I don't understand, if cryptocurrencies are considered an investment market, why cryptocurrencies become a competitor of banks? don't we also have stock markets and foreign exchange markets that are also investment markets? Why aren't they competitors of banks? People are also investing heavily in forex and stocks and the market has a capitalization of tens of trillions of dollars, while cryptocurrencies have not even exceeded $2 trillion. how will it affect the bank's interests? are people making unnecessary comparisons and seeing banks as competitors to cryptocurrencies? |
|
|
|
I have read some painful stories online about Bitcoin fans that lost their Bitcoin to hacks more than once and how they gave up because of the hacks, this made me curious about people on the forum, I will like to ask you guys how many times you have lost Bitcoin to hacks or your own mistakes, and why are you still not giving up.
Can you keep buying bitcoin if you have already get hacked like twice or more in the past?
Like a story about an American who lost his love for Bitcoin because of the hacks, I believe it's because of his own carelessness though, because you can't leave your wallet on a bench outside your home and not expect someone to steal it, and you come out and say your wallet was stolen by a thief, like what do expect?
Basically I don't keep my Bitcoins in platforms such as centralized exchanges or any other place where there is a possibility of my account getting compromised by hackers, I don't even keep my Bitcoins in online or centralized wallets where I don't have my keys and the wallet is closed source. If someone is careful with all these things and isn't careless with their assets or Bitcoins, they won't face those situations. Those who stop loving Bitcoin or get away from buying or storing Bitcoins just because they got hacked more than once, need to understand that when they buy Bitcoin, they need to keep that in a non-custodial wallet where only they can access it, and they should keep their private keys somewhere very safe. Using a non-custodial wallet or hardware wallet only helps you increase the security of your bitcoins and does not absolutely guarantee your bitcoins. the safety of your bitcoins depends entirely on you. if you use a computer but use cracked software, frequently access strange links or do not store seed phrase in the safest place. So you shouldn't be surprised if one day your bitcoins are hacked. many people do not have basic knowledge about security, which will also cause losses that they do not even know the cause of. |
|
|
|
I can't even begin to imagine how many chances people who rush out to get the newest iPhone every time it comes out have lost.
How I wish iPhone users would one day understand the chances they have lost for so long. Instead of purchasing a flashy iPhone that wouldn't increase their fortune, they should have thought about investing in bitcoin.
What I've seen shows that a product can fade away or lose value over time, but an asset like bitcoin will continue to increase in value even after the expensive product has disappeared.
Most of our technology products or consumer goods will lose value over time, not just the iPhone. and the purpose of buying it is to serve life needs, while bitcoin is an investment. I find it quite lame to compare these two. If someone has a low income and a difficult life, but often buys expensive things and does not focus on improving their life, then that person is really a fool to pursue expensive products like the iPhone. but if a person has a high income and buying a new iPhone is simple for him, why doesn't he have the right to do it? Because we try to invest and work, isn't it to have a better life? an iPhone or a car is just one of many other things we strive for as we improve our lives. |
|
|
|
If your goal is profit-seeking, the next piece of advice would be to sell when the price is higher and employ Dollar-Cost Averaging (DCA) when it trends downwards. There's no other rationale for profit-seekers to hold for an extended duration. When opportunities arise to reap gains, say 20% or 50%, do not squander those chances.
And what is your goal in this market, aren't we all for profit? OP has a stable income so I don't think the idea of short-term investing would be suitable for him, especially since he is still a newbie. what guarantees that when bitcoin goes up 20% or 50% bitcoin will adjust so we have a chance to buy back? If the market operates so simply, why do many people who trader or speculate short-term continuously lose money? long-term holding is still a better choice for us instead of just looking at short-term profits and missing out on bigger opportunities. |
|
|
|
I read that Cointelegraph article too, and I have to admit, it was about time Mt. Gox showed some responsibility. If you ask me, such massive refunds always have a catch. Remember, we're talking about 142,000 BTC, not just pocket change.
Now, lets entertain the thought of the potential dump youre fearing. If these victims, quite understandably irritated by the years of waiting, decide to sell their refunded Bitcoins, were looking at a potential price dip. But hey, its Bitcoin. It has been through worse and bounced back. The market is far more mature now. Still, for those victims, Id advise not to get too trigger-happy with the sell button. The essence of Bitcoin is its future potential, not a temporary price tag.
As far as I know, Mt.gox will pay in many different coins, not just BTC, and it all depends on the victim's choice. but if those who choose bitcoin and decide to sell their bitcoins immediately after receiving them, there is nothing to regret because if you compare bitcoin prices in 2014 and now they have actually made a very significant profit. remember that taking profits is never wrong. but if they don't need the money urgently, continuing to hold should really be considered because bitcoin's upside potential is still huge. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
