It's difficult to NOT reveal at least some details, especially when they do not seem to be vry important - but later become more important...

One thing with the passage of time you do not need to continue to confirm because you can say:  "that was then."   You can also engage in conduct to provide disinformation, too... without saying what amounts are disinformation and which amounts are not...

Those are not lies that matter - because many of us deserve some rights to our privacy, especially if our safety could come into question... or even just there can be other kinds of problems when people know things that they really do not need to know.

Regarding selective memory... surely, people are likely to have differing memories of events and evn emphasizing different parts of the memory that may or may not matter at a future point in time.  This can be another issue of each of us deciding how we would like to spin such memories (past events) - whether true or not and whether anyone else has any rights to you providing a different spin or not.



Yes, I agree that you have a tendency to put unnecessary pessimistic spins to suggest that this time is different, when you really have hardly any evidence to establish that this time is different, beyond pure speculation that is shrouded by pessimism.

Accordingly, similar statements were made about all the folks who would be selling at the previous ATH of $1k, and it did not happen.  Sure, some people sold, but they largely got fucked because we were not in deadman's zone for very long.. and even some of those folks were hoping, in 2018 and 2019, to buy back cheap coins that they sold in early 2017 for in the neighborhood of $1k.. were not even able to get in for under $3k... .. and too bad so sad that they sold way too many coins too soon.. and I have no reason to believe that this time is going to be much different in terms of a need to be careful in buying into nonsense theories about all the BTC HODLrs who just cannot wait to get rid of their coins in the deadman's zone of about $17,250 to $23,500.  Not too bright to be selling much if any coins in that price range... even if you have some lame theory that there are peeps just eager as fuck to get out "at a profit."

Over the years, my thinking has kind of evolved regarding these points (especially 8 & 9), and I would not even suggest that I am any kind of sage on the topic, even though I have given considerable thought to matters of allocation and tailoring investments to personal circumstances based on experiences and also attempting to extrapolate in terms of how some variation of my experiences might play in terms of the situations of others (especially trying to consider the situations of normies, but not exclusively preoccupied with normies who might not be motivated to put some self-directed efforts into figuring out and employing their investment approach).

So there are a few points that I can elaborate on here:

1) Establish a target BTC investment that is based on your personal circumstances (maybe easier said than done) - taking account each of the circumstances of: cash flow, other investments, view of bitcoin as compared with view of other investments, risk tolerance, timeline, and time skills and abilities to plan, learn along the way and to reallocate including trading etc;

2) Surely, not investing more than you can afford to lose is a good concept (make sure that you have your cashflow covered for 6 months or longer and and also consider having an investment timeline that is at least 4 years, and safer to hav a longer investment timeline, like 10 years or longer).  Thereby, I am thinking that once target investment is established, there can be some value in thereafter overinvesting a bit beyond your preferred allocation target level will make it easier to skim off some profits along the way up (in the event that BTC prices go up - but surely only very small amounts that allows the vast majority of the investment to continue to ride for the longer term) and cause some increases in psychological and financial comfort levels, and this should help the prudent peeps from selling too much of their coins too soon.. in order to at least attempt to lessen issues with the problems that you, AlcoHoDL outline in your point 9;

3) actually regarding issues raised in your point 10.. who fucking cares what other people do or if some people might get a BIGGER stake? - that is the way the world works with the rich being able to exploit situations, and the best that you can do is to attempt to tailor your investment situation to your own circumstances and attempt to learn from others to the extent that might be possible or applicable (by the way, AlcoHoDL, I am not criticizing your ideas specifically because I recognize that you know the deal as well as most of us (if not better), so I do realize that you are NOT obsessed with what other people do with their coins but that you were merely trying to illustrate the blunt reality of how the rich are likely to take coins from the weak hands by hoarding coins once they figure out the importance of BTC.. and the weak hands (or would we say dumb money) are likely NOT able to recognize the value of the asset that they had previously purchased).

I am also NOT suggesting that there might not be mixed motives.

So, for example, he may have been required to disclose both his personal holdings and also his intentions in regards to where he was going to take the company, and he may have accomplished those disclosures through official filings of documents and official notices in prospectuses or whatever might be recognized as official channels.

At the same time, once the information has been put out there (even if the information might be in the small font footnotes of official disclosures - or orally disclosed at shareholder meetings or whatever other ways that CEOs may have to communicate to current shareholders or potential shareholders), then he decided to engage in a kind of double-downing discussion of some of these matters publicly, largely because he had already had to disclose the matters, so may as well get some benefits out of that information that is mostly already out there in kinds of public ways.

Yeah, he was also drawing attention to some of the matters too in ways that go way beyond minimum legal requirements and also his public discussions might NOT be adequate for proper disclosing, either.  Also, at the same time, he has probably already been briefed by legal counsel that when he is out there publicly, he runs some risks of going askew of legal requirements, too..

Sure, it can be framed that Saylor talks too much and then the SEC or whoever wants to go after him for pumping his shit... so it is kind of a damned if you do and damned if you don't kind of a situation, so Saylor could well be drawing too much unnecessary attention to himself, but from the contents of his various tweets and his interviews, he seems to be willing to discuss these kinds of matters because: 1) he seems to believe in what he is saying, 2) he is a bit of a risk taker, and 3) he may perceive some benefits in setting forth some kind of road map for other CEOs, companies or wealthy individuals (HNIs) that are likely finding themselves in similar dilemmas as him (especially these days) in terms of holding onto so much cash (or value in other ways) and thereafter feeling that he has found a legitimate place to park a decent portion of that excess cash rather than putting in equities, other real property assets, PMs or even buying back his own stock.. In his public discussions, he seems to be attempting to be relatively forthright and straight forward about these dilemmas that he had been feeling that he had been facing..

There may be some sectors in the USA that are approaching 5% adoption - and maybe even higher if skewing some kind of population of college students who don't hav any money and each of those invested owns, on average, .00027168 BTC, but I would argue the mere fact that they happen to own some BTC does not mean that they have adopted BTC in any kind of meaningful way..

So the study is way the fuck overestimating where BTC is at currently, especially since a vast majority of peeps have hardly any clue what BTC is or the significance of BTC.

I would say that many of the active participants of this thread are decently educated about what BTC is, but even in this thread, there are a large number of us who don't really understand BTC very well and we do not even understand the extent to which we should allocate value into BTC and are we sufficiently allocated into BTC.

In other words, fuck those kinds of attempts to suggest that bitcoin is anywhere near double digits adoption - when the fact of the matter remains that bitcoin has hardly even reached 1% adoption with the population that matters, and that is world-wide population - even though there is some skewing of adoption in which some people (not just Michael Saylor) are way more allocated than the average person would ever be able to approach.. and surely right now there could be a lot of folks who could gather up resources to sufficiently allocate up to 1 BTC or some other reasonable amount like that, but BTC is not like the adoption of refrigerators in the sense that one or two refrigerators might be enough to show that you have adopted refrigerators.. In the case of bitcoin, quantity of bitcoins that might constitute "adequate" adoption is going to change with passage of price, and in 5-10 years, it will likely be proclaimed that the current average broke college student with .00027168 BTC is adequately into bitcoin (adopted), but they are also going to need to be able to hang onto those BTC too, in the next 5-10 years, which is likely another angle that shows quantity of BTC cannot be meaningfully compared to quantity of refrigerators or some other aspect of technology in which more can be produced as adoption increases.


Biodom said it better than me.   

hahahahaahaha

I am glad that you conceded on that one....  


Even though I have been razzing OROBTC on this same question, I doubt that we can presume to know his situation or his specifics - even though he seems to have provided a certain amount of information that would cause for reasonable conclusions that he has been underinvesting in BTC - and I believe that his reasons for underinvesting are likely inadequate because he seems to be overallocating in gold and platinum or some other shiny metals.

I personally recommend beginners to BTC to start out by considering an allocation of 1% to 10% into BTC - and of course those are introductory type considerations that a more experienced bitcoiner should be able to feel comfortable in increasing, once getting familiar with bitcoin basics - and studying the space for a while, which OROBTC does seem to have been studying the bitcoin space for a considerable amount of time.

Another potentially relevant factor that OROBTC mentions is that he is likely more elderly... and surely I would agree that most elderly folks would not want to be entering any kind of an aggressive position in BTC if their investment time-horizon is not at least 4 years - and of course, we do have this little issue of the 4-year cycle, too, and a decent amount of likelihood that we are upon the precipice of an upward slope in the next year or two... and surely you, LFC, have already referred to that ongoing existing dynamic that would likely justify a more aggressive BTC investment stance for less than 4 years.

Surely, we can badger OROBTC a bit in terms of his lack of aggressiveness, yet in the end, he seems to have already thought through his allocations and seems to have a seemingly wimpy system in place, in which he is content with such wimpiness.. not to beat a dead horse.

That's kind of what I have been thinking - like he is doing more than just getting a meaningful stake in BTC, and maybe I am just having difficulties relating to that level of rich - even though I can relate to the idea that none of us should want to have our wealth eroded away.

Regarding disclosure, maybe he felt some kind of duty (or potential legal obligation) to error on the side of overdiscloser - even his personal hodlings - I am not sure.. of course, he did have obligations to disclose matters to shareholders, and maybe since the shares are public rather than private, anyone could end up being (or becoming) a shareholder, so his personal stake in BTC may well be relevant to that matter.. I am not sure.


Michael Saylor seems to be the real deal.  He learned about bitcoin in a relatively short period of time, and largely he put his money where his mouth is.

In his particular case, even though he has been getting a lot of attention, recently, he does not seem to be engaged in any kind of attention-whore seeking conduct, but instead there seems to be some kinds of need for disclosure that relates to his using the funds of a public company to buy bitcoin (as I attempted to address in my response in the above post to bkbirge..

Furthermore, under the confusing aspects of American Securities Exchange Commission rules, it may well be prudent (or even legally required) that his own personal BTC holdings and activities might actually have to be disclosed, too.

Surely, Saylor has been going much beyond mere disclosure, and he has been going on a number of podcasts and he also has been decently active on twitter, too...

Again, Saylor seems to have learned about bitcoin quickly (heard about it last year - like mid-2019 - but really started looking into it seriously around mid-March.. surely a quick-study), and he is really saying a lot of the right things, from a bitcoin maximalist position..

So getting to know Michael may well be a good thing.  Surely, I am not a hero worshiper either, sirazimuth, but still Michael's case is quite interesting and seemingly quite relevant in the bitcoin space today, including the extent to which his actions and his words seem to be providing a road map for other like-minded companies (or even governments) to consider attempting to take aggressive bitcoin positions, earlier rather than later (there is only so much room on the blockchain space, as many of us longer term HODLers already appreciate that aspect of bitcoin that Saylor is tangibly demonstrating through both words and actions).


Like this guy (aka yefi) says.   

Hahahaha... then you could sit back and relax to have your $6 million in cold "hard" cash and thereby be able to draw your $240k per year / $20k per month in passive income - not that you needed to withdraw $6 million in order to feel such comfort-levels, but to each his own.

By the way, you could have just left the $60 million in the fund, and drew 10x my above numbers.... $2.4 million per year / $200k per month... minor details...


I know that many of us mere mortals have difficulties understanding how anyone could feel that they do not have enough bitcoin if they have close to 18k of them and also own overwhelming majority in a company that owns more than 38k BTC... Just have difficulties understanding how that quantity might not feel like enough.  Or is it just me?

As I type, we do seem to be getting some UPpity pressures, and I am not going to complain to continue to witness bears getting recked beyond expectations.... gonna feel good, man. .. even though no guarantees --- but bear tears do make some decent kind of fuel.    #nohomo


Those are infamous words, in these here parts.... "long term bullish, short term bearish"... sucks to b uie.   

Looks like homo to me, even if you disclaim.

 

This is an interesting additional piece of information that was not really publicly known, previously.

So, we had found out that Saylor authorized his company to buy something in the neighborhood of 38k BTC at $425 million in two authorizations.

Now we are finding out that Saylor had also stocked up in his own personal stash of around $175 million.

Of course, both sets of purchase are quit a bit into profits in a relatively short period of time.

He can make any of us look and feel like small potatoes.. and there are similarly situated folks out there, like Michael Saylor who are well-likely sitting on a lot of cash and trying to figure out where to park such cash in order to at least NOT lose value.

I was tracking that it did not exist, but lots of normies were talking about it, as if it existed.


How could it detach, if it did not exist?

 

Is that a clip of Bob?  Or some cheap imitator?


Holy whoaza!!!!!

That surely does not seem to be a very profitable approach.

It seems to be NOT very aggressive in terms of "investing in" BTC, and it seems way too eager to take profits in dollars.  Maybe there are ways to make it work, but surely it seems to be a conservative approach, and one that I largely rejected to employ - because it plays too much into the idea of reallocating on a regular basis and failing/refusing the concept of letting your winners ride.

After some internal hemming and hawing about what I was going to do exactly, and even trying to figure out my goals in respect to BTC, I ended up settling on an initial allocation target into BTC  that was aimed at 10%, and maybe I have some lack of discipline because I did not stick specifically with keeping my allocation into BTC at 10%.  I largely reached such target in late 2014 - and at that point, my average buy in price into BTC was a bit over $550 per BTC - but the then BTC price continued to drop throughout the end of 2014 and into 2015 and largely stayed in the mid $200s for the vast majority of 2015.

Admittedly, I had some cashflow issues in early 2015 until about May 2015, yet I did continue to buy BTC during 2015, and before the BTC price got out of the $200s, my portfolio allocation in BTC had largely reached around 13% or 14%, so I had exceeded my own original authorization and target of 10%.

As BTC prices largely gravitated UPpity in 2016 and into 2017, somewhere along the line, I reconsidered the amount of BTC that I would sell on the way UP.  Originally, I had projected BTC selling plans that skimmed off pretty large chunks of BTC that would have caused me to sell 20% to 30% of my stash if the BTC price went up to something like $20k or greater (which were like longer term projections that were not really anticipated to happen in the shorter term), but as the BTC price continued to go up, I rejiggered my plans in such a way that caused me to sell way less of my BTC, so by the time we got up to $19,666-ish, I had ended up selling around 12% - or at least that is what my cash to BTC ratio had shown... but anyhow, my networth became quite lopsided in terms of BTC in the supra 90% levels - yet I decided to just let the matter ride - and I don't have any regrets about that.

But, hey each of us is going to come to differing assessments regarding these kinds of matters, and currently as I type, my BTC proportion is around 75% - and for some strange reason, I feel little to no inclination to bring it down to 10%-ish in terms of where I had originally authorized myself to allocate and to invest in that proportion.

Furthermore, I still recommend newbies to target anywhere between 1% to 10% of their investment portfolio to be allocated to BTC.. and I don't find any conflict or contradiction in that kind of a starting off recommendation - either, and of course, individuals may well come to their own conclusions regarding how they would adapt such recommendation to their own situation, including considering whether they would go outside of such range - either lower or higher or some amount that is based upon their own assessment of their own personal situation.


Personally, I feel kind of lucky to have both recognized BTC as a decent investment and also to have acted upon my assessment of the situation.. and also lucky that the BTC price has largely cooperated - even if there had been a few seemingly long slumps along the way.

Edit:  Looks like Jimbo said it first.  Go figure.



Your allocation to bitcoin seems a bit whimpy for someone who has studied the space, and sure could be a bit of a problem to be so distracted by shiny metals, even if you are not so negative on bitcoin as peter schiff...    

Concededly, I am NOT mining, so I do not have the same kinds of "hands on" and personal experience as you guys, yet I am having some troubles understanding the degree to which any kind of meaningful changes in mining difficulty are taking place.  When I look at the difficulty measurements, I mostly see minor fluctuations, especially if such measurements are made over each of the adjustment periods.

https://btc.com/stats/diff

So, currently, the difficulty estimator is showing that the next adjustment of difficulty is currently projected to be down about 5.91% in 5 days and 8 hours.... and I know that those projections can end up changing, too.. but even if such downward difficulty projection plays out, it still keeps difficulty higher than it was 4 adjustments back - on 9/7.

From a non-miner perspective, the adjustments to difficulty do not seem to be very great, significant or material, even if miners are reporting on the ground that these kinds of adjustments have a lot of meaningful impact on their own profitability - coupled with short-term UPpity BTC price moves?

Cannot argue with any of that.  Your earlier sell price was NOT really bad at all.  I had to sell a bit of lil fiend in November 2018 - due to bills - and I think that I got an average of about $4,200-ish out of those sold.... I did buy some of them back in the subsequent months, but really, BTC was NOT in that price territory for long enough for my holdings to completely get back to where it was before the sale.

So, I understand the juggling of cashflow that sometimes does not allow as much of a cushion as might be preferred - --- so your outcome likely worked out better than mine.   In my situation, I had entered into contracts in March/April 2018 - and so I knew that the bills were coming and I did a considerable amount of preparation - but NOT totally, so I let some of the cashflow ride inside of my BTC holdings. 

So in my case, it just so happened that large portions of my bills came due in such a way that was less than preferable from my perspective, including our price drop (halvening of price that also happened around that same time), and so sometimes the gambling that might be done - which I had done, might not pay off, and was surely partly a risk that I had taken of my own accord.   

Exactly!!!!!!

These are the kinds of things that happen when guys (and gal) plan and follow through with such plan... the plan ends up running into opportunities to adjust upwardly ... which some would call luck, but it can also be referred to as the location where preparation meets opportunity.

 Congrats....


Quite reserved, OOM... what's up like dat?




Hahahahahaha

You did have a really decent opportunity on September 2/3 to buy whatever the amount of those coins back at a considerable discounted price - and of course, various other times thereafter, too... so presumably (based on your posting here), you did not buy any of them back?   

Fair enough.

That sounds quite reasonable, and surely you gotta do what you have planned to do (and what you have thought through).... especially if the plan is largely a reasonable approach, accounting for the totality of your situation, including accounting for various uncertainties with lil fiend.

Personally, we should appreciate that none of us have any kinds of meaningful knowledge about what what the BTC price is going to do, even though we have price models and probabilities within our working expectations, so there is that angle.

At the same time, I still speculate that your coins are hardly going to make any difference in regards to what BTC's prices are going to do - even if you were to sell 1,000 BTC at $16k-ish..... In any event, it seems quite likely that we are going to continue to get UPpity... but I am anticipating that there could be resistance in the $17,250 arena.. .and surely it seems prudent to make some kind of shaving, if you are going to do so, before $17,250.. .but who knows.. lil fiend frequently enjoys overshooting expectations.. so there is that angle, as well...

Surely, I do appreciate your two price points are seemingly outside of the deadman's zone.. so there is that angle, as well.     #nohomo

Definitely gotta love this during any period in which the BTC price is not correcting.

As far as I can see from the charts, we have hardly had any meaningful correction since about early September, when we got a dip into the four digits arena, and surely there were plenty of bears, no coiners, pre-coiners, bitcoin naysayers, alt coin pumpeners, and fence sitters who were waiting for a bit of a larger drop....

and....


too bad



so sad

sucks to have been someone who failed/refused to meaningfully and adequately pee pare their lil selfies for UPpity.. which seems to have been what has happened, at least since early September, and king daddy may have gone into a kind of punishing mode to cause more pain on those kinds of peeps... ...


.. difficult to have sympathy for those folks  - they have largely had two years to figure out these matters and to pee pare for UPpity... ..Sure, there are some sympathetic folks who are just finding out about bitcoin, but for those who have known for a couple of years, bitcoin has stayed sufficiently down (or had been manipulated down) to create opportunities for anyone who knew about it to get in, even if such getting in would merely have been modest ...

That's right...

They can all get fucked..

I won't take it for granted to continue such shitcoin cliffdiving, but it feels good, currently.



By the way, getting quite close to testing $13,880 resistance - observing $13,758 within the past 10 minutes.

That was awkward.. therefore ---- FTFY - caveat added.

 

Maybe we are all loving each other with the recent price performance of lil fiend?

There's a dancing dude here?

I did not know that.  

Please introduce.