Those are not bad numbers in terms of figuring out possible areas in which breaking above them might cause some concerns or considerations regarding where we are going next, and what you are saying is not too far different from what I had been saying in recent times too...  - even though it seems that I am putting greater odds that we are not likely going to be stuck between $30k and $60k-ish for the whole of 2022..

Since we seem to be agreeing so much in broader strokes, we might not be able to formulate a bet because the difference in opinion needs to be sufficiently different to be bettable.... so unless maybe you are asserting that the odds of staying within a $30k to $60k for the whole of 2022 would be above 80% or something like that, then we might be able to bet because I would find such odds to be quite high and at best I would consider them around 50%.. so 50% is hardly bettable, no?  I mean, I might be willing to say 55% odds that we break above $60k.. but that is hardly bettable either.. unless you have more stubborn odds, which was the level of your arrogance earlier.. even though now you are coming off a wee bit more reasonable (at least temporarily).... 

Regarding a few weeks ago your spewing your seemingly lame-ass FUD ideas of less than 1% odds for supra $200k in 2022..... you seem to like to become more emboldened to spout out such nonsense as the price is going down.. but now that we might be having some temporary stabilizing of the BTC price, you seem to have become a wee bit more silent in terms of repeating anything close to that.. but I suppose if we get further into 2022, you may well become more embolden to repeat those kinds of lack of imagination naysaying proclamations that have likely kept you somewhat in the poor house to have had been insufficiently and inadequately preparing for UP.. and still seeming to be reluctant to learn any lessons from your past bearishness, fence sitting and failures/refusals to act and this time is different right?  more bearish for sure this time, no? -I can already imagine that if BTC prices were to still be within a kind of $30k to $55k price range by May or June (seems like a stretch, but it could happen), you might be willing to throw out your 1% odds of supra $200k and to say "I told you so.".. and of course, if we go until the middle of the year without breaking back above $55k, I may well start to change my tune too.. .. and for sure, we are going to be needing to see how these coming months play out and if we get above those $46k, $55k and $62k price points...

By the way, I don't know what would be "noman's land" about $55k to $62k.. To me, it just seems to be a price area of ambiguous significance.. sure it is between getting above a price in which we might proclaim that the current $31,951 bottom is in, and it is prior to getting into the real noman's land of supra $62k(if we were to get there) in which a new ATH at that point of getting above $462k would become a kind of shoe-in.. if there is such a thing of moving from 55% to 65% or something like that.

Sure it's a price area that could potentially cause some issues, but I doubt that your use of the term noman's land is very accurate because there really is nothing going on there except for that it was part of noman's land last time around (remember September to November when we were building up to revisit the previous $64,895 ATH?).

Who would invest in crypto?

That would be dumb.


Something about your phraseology causes me to conclude that you are tweaking what you had previously said.. and also presuming that it would be easy to reach consensus about some kind of issue that would freeze some coins.. and that is not the case because a lot of members (node operators) put a lot of value on both fungibility and also on decentralization (not fucking around with the protocol absent overwhelming levels of consensus... in the 90% to 95% plus arena), and you are also framing that matter as if it were some kind of a BIG deal issue that some bad guys got coins that they were not supposed to have, and it does not seem to be currently an issue that even rises close to the ideas of fungibility and not intervening absent extra-ordinary circumstances (aka maintaining decentralization), and I don't really see a large number of coins being in the "wrong" hands becoming a BIG deal absent some really extraordinary circumstances - much beyond anything that you described so far.


O.k... so now you are UPPing your scenario in the realm of even more extra-ordinary circumstances - which also may well not be enough to trigger nodes to want to follow rules that fucks with fungibility and/or decentralization - and hey, by the way, just to go along with you a wee bit, I am sure that there have been various ideas already batted around regarding how to potentially deal with these kinds of potential extra-ordinary issues that you are proposing that are not currently in front of us and were such extra-ordinary to occur.. also something like quantum computing scenarios, no?  

But if the extra-ordinary circumstances are not currently happening are about to happen in a tangible and concrete way, then I see little to no reason to be fretting about something that is not currently in front of us, unless perhaps you are wanting to discuss in some kind of specialized thread that is focusing upon such "in the weeds" discussions of scenarios that are currently ONLY at the theoretical level, in the way that you are framing them... even though, like I mentioned, presuming them to be some kind of potentially important matter that you need to point out and feel worthy of discussion and to propose potential solutions.. that may or may not end up getting agreed to, in the event some variation of what you describe were to become an actual issue that needs to be dealt with.

I doubt that bitcoin is going to reach consensus regarding the freezing of any coins.. unless there were some major security issue, which these kinds of cases (of stolen bitcoins - even if in the several millions) does not establish any such major security issue or any other reason that would likely inspire consensus...

For sure, anyone is free to create a BIP to argue for such, and to see if they are able to achieve consensus.. and it seems that you have about a snowball's chance in hell of getting consensus.. one of the ways that bitcoin is distinguished from the vast majority of shitcoins, including but not limited to ethereum.

I guess that I am not really opposed to the idea that seems to be in the ballpark of the 200-week moving average for projecting ahead the bottom, but I am bit bothered by language of "never" go below, and even I had suggested that there might be a need to bring down the rate of anticipated BTC price appreciation as contained in the historical appreciation of the 200-week moving average as compared to its anticipated projection forward.. and so in that regard, when you plot it out on a graph it does look overly bullish (even if the BTC price and also the 200-week moving average may well end up playing out like that).. causes me to want to batslap myself too.. .hahahahahaha..

One thing that I had thought that I was attempting to do was to project out the idea of the 208-week moving average, but surely to be able to monitor it as I go...

 so for example, if I had already gotten to fuck you status, then I could consider that I may well be able to spend within a certain level of parameters and continue to monitor if the 208-week moving average is kind of staying within a range that would allow me to continue to spend at a similar level or if it might be prudent for me to adjust my spending upwards or downwards.

Another example would be one in which I might not yet be at or near fuck you status, but projecting out the 208-week moving average has been a somewhat conservative measure to attempt to figure out how long it might take me to get to fuck you status.. while also keeping in mind that I both have to continue to monitor whether the 208-week moving average is continuing to move up at the tentative pace that I had anticipated and perhaps figure out if I am being sufficiently aggressive with my coin accumulation.. because also there would likely continue to need to be some desires for a cushion in the quantity of coins accumulated..and the ongoing reassessments along the way would help to decide how close that I might be coming to fuck you status currently and whether what I am doing might still end up being able to reach fuck you status at some point in the future.....

So, I suppose that part of my objection would be to put too much certainty upon certain lines/bottoms NOT being crossed because even though we can use the 208-week moving average as a guide that we can continue to monitor.., we can also see that from time to time (even in recent bitcoin history) the 200-week moving average has been breached (such as December 2018 through March 2019, and in March 2020), and even stayed very close to the 200-week moving average for a whole year in 2015.. with a few wicks below the 200-week moving average during 2015.

https://www.lookintobitcoin.com/charts/200-week-moving-average-heatmap/

I remain skeptical about putting too many certainties in where the BTC price might go while at the same time suggesting that each of us should be striving to prepare for varying contingency scenarios.. even if we might have decently high levels of confidence that overall the 200-week moving average has good chances of holding... because of various ongoing BTC fundamentals (that we should continue to monitor, too).

I am glad that you came to your senses by the time you got to the end of your statement about king daddy

King daddy no does not do sideways very gracefully, unless it does... so even if you were hedging not to presume sideways, it remains dangerous to presume sideways that might or might not end up happening....

....if that means anything to uie pooie?    






 



Even though it appears that the 4-year cycle is under stress and perhaps even broken.. I would not be so quick as to completely throw it out.. even though likely there had been normies who had been putting too much credence into the idea that king daddy was on some kind of a specific schedule.


You seem to be buying into negative presumptions in order to denigrate bitcoin.. with your "great costs" language.. and your moralizing with your chosen word: "integrity".

Over bitcoin's life, we have had quite a few exchange hacks and exit scams in bitcoinlandia.. so surely there are likely "lessons to be learned" from a variety of incidents that have happened over the years, and surely some of the earlier cases were likely pure sloppiness in which some of the ways of operating within bitcoin have become quite a bit more professional in several ways, and at the same time, I consider it problematic to be narrowing in on a moralizing framework in regards how you believe that bitcoin might be lacking because it seems quite difficult  (if not impossible) to catch the bad guys.  So what would you like to argue?  Better tools to catch bad guys?  

Bitcoin does not stop attempts to develop better tools to attempt to catch bad guys, and of course, frequently the powers that be, the mainstream media, the bitcoin naysayers, the no coiners, the shitcoin pumpers and even some other classes of individuals/institutions will end up exaggerating aspects of the supposed problem such as suggesting that bitcoin is the problem, but seems to me that you should know better than playing into those kinds of moral denigrations of bitcoin phillip..

There is a lot going on in bitcoinlandia, including that there may well be some bad guys that are able to stay ahead of law enforcement and to get away with keeping that value that they stole.. .are the bad guys going to make mistakes that contribute to getting caught?  I don't know.  

Do I know about the various tools that are used by law enforcement?  I don't know that either because I don't have too many clues about how I would attempt to get away with a crime if I were to want to commit a crime.. while at the same time, I do try to learn aspects of trying to keep my bitcoins private and secure, and I am not even sure if there might not be ways that I am vulnerable or perhaps some better ways to achieve my objectives while attempting to maintain some kind of balance with skills that I have been attempting to learn over the past 8 years...

No one said that it is easy to hold your own coins, but I would hate to speak to the dialogue that bitcoin is lacking in moral integrity also...l because I believe that bitcoin provides way more good than harm, even if some bad guys are finding ways to make a living from various kinds of vulnerabilities that exist.. whether it is getting into exchanges or other ways of moving around value without getting caught/identified.

Hahahaha... somac.. the winds of change might be upon us?  You are coming off as a wee bit more bullish than me, at the moment, which inspires me to re-submit my prior question from a few days ago.

Surely, previously there were an overwhelming majority of the responding members who were fighting the hypothetical.. so I am going to attempt to reframe the hypothetical** a wee bit from the start.

Here we go - with some modifications below from my previous post on the topic.

If we presume that the BTC price is either staying in the same place or mostly going up from here (without breaching it's current bottom of $31,951 - from 8 days ago) then how much UP are you going to need before you are going to personally start to believe that the bottom for this particular correction is "in"?

**I will give you a hint regarding how to "deal with" an actual hypothetical question as it is presented to you (#nohomo) - if you so inclined to fight the hypothetical and to proclaim that I am looney for hypothetically asserting for the sake of this question that we are going up from here and that there has to be another test of the bottom blah blah blah before we can go up, then in this hypothetical question, you would likely require more quantity of UP, relatively speaking, before you would be comfortable conceding that the "bottom is in.".. maybe you need $62k or $70k or greater price levels rather something more normal and practical such as upper $40ks or lower $50ks.. hahahahahha

Largely I agree with you fillippone.  Several times, I have seen folks commenting on Saylor and his way of directing MSTR, and frequently there are guys trying to get in their little digs about Saylor being too risky or MSTR otherwise being a failing company, but even if we might consider that MSTR is able to generate enough extra cashflow a couple or a few times a year of $25 million, I find that difficult to characterize them as a failure - especially in these times when having some extra cashflow might be less than reliable... though of course, even Saylor has admitted that his whole company has generated some extra attention and therefore extra business through its having become more well-known through its recent publicly aggressive bitcoin stance.

Those numbers look really good too, in terms of its overall stash costs and size and the amount that it is still in the green.. Some people have been speculating that MSTR is not in the green enough.. but I would still consider that those folks are too much trying to let the perfect be the enemy of the good - because sure we could likely assert that MSTR could have timed its bitcoin buys more strategically or even engaged in some trading behaviors and blah blah blah would have been better, and nearly always there are ways to engage in Monday morning quarter-backing - yet being in the actual game and actually carrying out the buys, the maintenance strategies while being public about it remains quite an amazing feat - even if there are naysayers suggesting a variety of ways that "it could have been better" blah blah blah.

Not to be mixing subjects too much, but I saw some similar bullshit bout stock to flow today too.. already writing it off and saying it has failed and suggesting various alternative (and likely fly-by-the-seat of your pants) theories,.., without really committing in any kind of solid way.. and for sure the stock to flow has a commitment.. which is different than just throwing out a variety of ideas to see what might stick.. so similar with MSTR.. there is a certain validity that comes with actually putting theory to practice rather than merely talking some kind of vague BIG game and saying that you were correct afterwards, when no one could figure out what the fuck you had been saying ahead of time..... end of rant.      for the moment

Do you have anything more concrete Wind_FURY?

Are you saying to buy or not?

Did you already buy during this dip?

Are you waiting for more dip?  

Remember this dip has been going on since about mid November.. we had one dip down in early December to $42k-ish and then a rebound to $52k and then this second dip down to $32,951... What's the strategy?  Just wing it?

My strategy, in case you don't know, would have been to have a DCA buying strategy throughout the whole period that is supplemented by buying on dips that are staggered down as far as you believe that the price might go.. without attempting to be too fancy about it... and if you end up running out of money then at least you continue with the DCA or otherwise just HODL through it.

Do you got something better than that?  or do you just want to say after the fact what "you should have done?"  DCA remains amongst the best of strategies for sure.. of course, it is not necessarily a bad idea to supplement your DCA'ing strategy with buying on dips so long as you do not get too smart for your own good by trying to time a dip that does not end up happening and then you end up being regretful while at the same time inadequately and insufficiently prepared for the UP when it does end up happening... and over and over again, we have seen in bitcoinlandia some periods in which king daddy goes into punishment mode and you should have been in during that time.. rather than fucking around with small insignificant values and waiting for a further 5% dip that does not end up happening.

Interesting.. and yeah?  Can anything be done about it?  These may well have been some sophisticated players.. presuming that the same groups got the 119k coins.. there are a lot more of those presumably stolen bitfinex coins that could get moved.

Of course, this is not the place to ask for merits, and there are threads in which you can get members to review your posts.

I did review your posts, and they seem to be pretty decent in terms of largely seeming to help share information about some of your mining experiences.,. and you do not really seem to be a shitposter, a spammer or any of those kinds of less than desirable things that were part of the reason for the merit system to lessen the ranking up of those kinds of posters (you do not seem to be one of those).

 I had not seen your posts before in part because I do not follow the kinds of mining threads that you seem to do - as you seem to be interested in mining-related ideas (at least from your historical posts).. and of course, you participate in the forum in the areas of your interest... nothing wrong with that.

I would suggest striving to make a post a week in the forum or at least a post every two weeks, and members will get to know you better with the passage of time.. It does seem to take quite a bit of time for members to get to know you, and surely you gain more credibility with more members knowing you and then starting to trust your judgement, but surely no members warm up to any other members without seeing them post for a while, and in that regard, it takes a while for members to get to know you, and they will never get to know if you if you do not post...

Another thing would be to maybe go to and get involved in some other more active threads on the forum too.. of course, the areas of your forum participation should be areas that are of interest to you... while at the same time, you will likely get to know the posts of some other members and maybe learn some topics or contribute to those topics.. whether other members agree with you or not.  

By the way, I thought everyone who is interested in bitcoin would be interested in bitcoin price, and from my quick review of your posts, I did not see if you are involved in mining shitcoins, which surely is less interesting to me personally (and various shitcoin topics or projects are not interesting to me either.. so in the end, there are going to be certain kinds of members in some parts of the forum and other kinds of members participating in other parts of the forum)..

Also like you mention, there might be some value in participating in parts of the forum that are a mixture of newbies and longer time members.. not that it hurts to help newbies, but it can also be helpful for longer time members to come across your posts from time to time and they would be more likely have merits, too.. not that you are even asserting that you are ONLY trying to get merits, but surely it does feel better for members to get some merits - especially when they feel that they are contributing to the forum... and to feel that their posts are appreciated.. even though appreciation might also come through interacting with some members in threads of interest to you, too...... ...  

Party poop.


 

Ok... I see you are stuck in your lack of creativity and ongoingly overly-bearish thinking... but hey.. you do you... and continue to fail/refuse to sufficiently and adequately pee pare ur lil selfie for UPpity as you have done for around the last 8-ish years...making some variation of the same mistake, over and over and over again.  No problem.  

No skin off of me, even if you are trying to spread your whimpy BTC management ideas to others through this thread.



Not going to shut up bout nuttin.  You made the outrageous claims that you were not willing to stand behind.

Regarding your proposed bet size:  that's disingenuine as fuck.  There is no reason to bet large amounts, and especially since you had been making such outrageous claims, it would not really be to your advantage to bet large amounts, if I were to even go down that path because it will cost you a lot of money to stand behind some kind of claim that you verbally assert to be 1% odds... so I can see why you do not actually stand behind that and you try to divert into some other kinds of odds.. and proclaim yourself as generous when you are not even getting to the point.. in other words, your proposed amounts seem to be distractions and ways for you to weasel out of the bet and blame me. .blah blah blah.

Regarding your bet:  It did not even come close to addressing your outrageous claims, and for sure they were not on-point for any claims that I have made - my claims as of December 16 and December 28 are largely reflected in post 4 of my thread.. that I have still not updated.  In other words, your claims were at issue, not mine....mine are so reasonable that they are hardly bettable..  #justsaying.



You did not really fix anything, but you did clarify that you are still in outrageous landia and not willing to stand behind your claims.  How long are we going to be stuck in this range?  For the rest of 2022?  Come on.. do it.  do it.. do it.  

You will make a claim once in a while, and then poof.. disappear, run away like a little girl or just change the topic...

I don't mind hearing your claims about what you believe might happen in bitcoinlandia (prices), even though I get the sense that you are far from making them in good faith... and it is not even very common that my claims are challenged in any kind of strong way.. unless we can find someone with a strong opinion.. and you seem like you might be able to be the one.. but you won't hardly stand behind shit or even try to hone in on some way that we might be able to frame an acceptable bet.. including your ongoing deflections and failure/refusal to take responsibility for your own words...

By the way, the key would not be saying "I told you so" afterwards, but standing behind whatever claim that you are making in a timely manner in order to allow the agreed-to timeframe or the conditions of the bet to play out.. .. whether it would be for the whole calendar year or some other shorter period of time or even upon a certain condition being reached (such as the breach of a price threshold).. so there could be a faming that is based on time, price or even a combination.. and surely a lot of soothsayer wannabes throw out all kinds of claims and then select the "I told you so"s from the parts that ended up coming true.. including the fact that frequently the claims are so damned vague that there are difficulties in pinpointing exactly what had been claimed.. so then later they can come back with "I told you so"s.. and they had not even specifically claimed or stood behind whatever the fuck they might have been implied to have been saying.

I think that you have mentioned some pretty decent potentially bettable items if you would be able to stand behind them.. .One of the claims is that we will stay between $30k and $60k for the whole year or some nonsense like that.  Another claim is that we ONLY have a 1% chance of breaching above $200k by the end of the year.  Those are both potentially bettable.. .if you were to stand behind them (which over and over you have shown that you will not.. but if either one were to come true, you will proclaim " I told you so" even though you would not deserve such credit because of your failure/refusal to stand behind either of them in a timely way).

There is nothing really outrageous or bettable about my claims.. even though you want to lock me into making my claims in much stronger ways than I am willing to make them... which my claims never had really been made with high levels of odds.. even though there could possibly be ways to frame them in acceptable bettable ways.. but that would be a back and forth process rather than merely you imposing unilateral betting terms and then calling me a coward (and perhaps other names?) for not accepting your unilaterally imposed betting terms.

Another thing is that it's not as if we have found an escrow, anyhow (like Dabs or even anyone else that we might agree upon).. in the even that we might be able to make some progress in coming to bettable terms... and by the way..... don't be devolving into personal attack bullshit, when you are the one who even frames bets in unreasonable ways and present them as take it or leave it when they are not even coming close to getting at the topic as it had been originally brought up.. merely your attempts to slither out of some kind of possible bet while blaming someone else (yours truly in this case).

FTFY

FTFY

You could present your latest up/down theories (stuck in a range) and/or less than 1% odds of supra $200k by the end of 2022... or any other new variations of off the wall conjecturings that you may have considered... even if you are not willing to stand behind them.. but that's o.k.... we (royal) don't really mind too much.  At least, it's "on topic" #nohomo. 

I was starting to consider that Arriemoller might well be a cat...  no actual person could really put together ideas like he does...so just seems to confirm what some of us (maybe just yours truly?) was already suspecting.

seems like I read that somewhere.. but I just can't place it.

I am not sure for what reason that you consider such a piece to be irritating to me.  It seems to be quite a bit on point in this thread with regards to what a lot of us so called "maxis" tend to argue - that it is best to attempt to understand bitcoin first before branching out into other various kinds of shitcoins or "crypto" related projects... and surely there are so many instances when investors (whether retail or institutions) seem to jump straight into the "crypto" space and think that they understand the space and have not spent very much time specifically studying and understanding bitcoin first.  

Maybe there is a question of how many hours do you need to understand bitcoin?  Shitcoiners might have spent 10 hours and believe that they are experts, and many bitcoiners have spent thousands of hours and consider that they are still just scratching the surface of understanding.. and some areas in which they have no clue in understanding.

It's likely true that I don't really agree with some of their suggestions to potentially consider getting into shitcoins (or projects) after having had gotten some grasp on bitcoin, yet really that would not be so much of any kind of objection that I would have when they are suggesting to understand bitcoin first (in order to attempt to put those various other shitcoin projects into some kind of perspective)... .. so yeah, we need not get into that portion in this thread, but it does not hurt to come at the issue from that direction - and well could be the case that by the time you understand bitcoin, you may well find very little reason to diversify much if at all beyond it (except maybe some relatively small portion of your assets such as 10% of all crypto would be in shitcoins ... but for sure a slippery slope if your shitcoin choices were to end up outperforming bitcoin.. at least in the short term and then a kind of dilemma whether to continue with investing into such shitcoins.. and if perhaps some dilemma might increase with the passage of time.. and for sure guys will come out differently in such weighings - even while we would not need to elaborate upon those matters in this thread because it just ends up inviting shitcoin pumping rather than trying to stay focused, somewhat)..

Oh now we can go back to discussing historical versus present dynamics of Russia, Ukraine and Crimea.....

It would be better if that article was not behind a paywall..... but yeah.. like the idea of three more countries (Panama, Paraguay and Guatemala) going down the legal tender path - and we will see closely the laws resemble one another (or not)... Even though some shitcoiners have gotten into the El Salvador space, so far we have been pretty lucky that El Salvador has been almost exclusively focused on bitcoin, and sure there might be more tolerance for shitcoins... yet we likely still have to see...

Like you kind of mentioned in your mix OgNasty.. I do think that $52/$53k is a kind of interesting resistance point (because it is right around the top of the December 3rd move UP)... I am kind of thinking that we cannot call this bottom of $32,951 as being "in" until we get into the $46k to $48k arena.. and of course, any amount of move up will give us some additional comfort towards being further from $33k - but at the same time, anything before $46k to $48k feels too close for this here cat to start to have confidence that our bottom is "in" for this particular correction.  I was tentatively thinking that something like staying above $46k for a week, $48k for more than 4 days or $50k for more than 2 days would all be equivalently sufficient for me to consider that the bottom is "in."

After we get past, our "bottom is in" threshold (if we were to get there?), then probably we can start talking more confidently about retesting our current $69k ATH.. and for me, getting even close to the ATH, such as getting above $62k largely would make the ATH a decently close to being "done deal" (if we could conclude that moving up from 55% confidence to 65% confidence as being as close to a "done deal" as this here cat might be willing to venture?) including another shot towards getting through a kind of "noman's zone" that did not work out too well last time,** when it was seeming like we were going to fairly easily get close to $80k.. but flopped short of that by about $10k-ish...

**Note... this time I am tentatively considering noman's zone to be between $62k and $92k---- last time, noman's zone seemed to be somewhere between $55k and $80k - and yes, we know that we did not make it through noman's zone last time of course.

Last time was not exactly a complete fail because we know that anything can happen, and one of the positives that came out was that surely the bearwhales had to spend quite a bit of resources to get the BTC price to reverse in the midst of noman's zone.. those fucks.... Can they be successful in that deployment of resources again?  that is if we were to get there in the coming months?  For sure, they do not want us to get there.... not comfortable for them.. and willing to spend a lot of resources to attempt to prevent it..  but let's see..? let's see?  let's see?

The next weeks to months are critical^tm.....

I have my doubts about shooting straight-up to something like supra $62k.. but there might be some willingness within the bearwhale camps to allow us (if that's the right way of phrasing it?) to dabble around in the $40k to $52k arena without losing too much confidence that they lost "control" over the situation... but how long can these party poops keep this bad boy down?

For some of these reasons, I am speculating that getting through the $52k to $62k territory could take a few months.. even though we know that there are decent possibilities to short-cut and to go all the way through that $52k to $62k price range without spending so much time in any kind of gradually kind of scenario.. (a funny thing is that sometimes king daddy is able to accomplish gradually/stable blah blah blah.. but sometimes that gradually/stability does not play out so well either).. but still seems like there are going to exist a lot of continued incentives and desires for the bearwhales to battle getting through that $52k to $62k arena, even though the bearwhales would be filled with wet dreams if they could accomplish $69k as the top for the whole of 2022 (including some folks in this thread.. should I name names?... tempted for sure.... )... but even keeping king daddy below $69k (and have they lost it if we get above $62k?) for the whole of 2022 might be a bit too much for any wet bearwhale dreamer to hope for, even though such a thing is not impossible.