Wishing for down is not permissible, here.




Whoaza...., Maybe goldkingcoiner is correct (above)?

We cannot have too much optimism.  That optimism must be broken.  right guys?

Many of us likely realize whether we are talking about trying to get above and stay above €10k, and to get stay above and not go below $10k, these are just transitionary numbers.

There is no do or die in regards to king daddy and the up and down waves that she goes through.

We just experienced an up before down, and fuck we start to be able to tell when the price goes up about $700 (6%) in 24 hours, but it had already gone up $2,300 (25%) in the previous week or so with no meaningful correction, and we are getting the feeling that this thing is a bit over doing it... which could cause even greater extremes - and neither direction is out of the question - even while we are feeling a bit of a relieve to get fucked to shit by a 30-minute $2,350 red candle, and we don't even know when that one is going to stop... (and lucky that it did), so we are back into consolidation mode.. and either direction, again becomes a kind of 50/50.. at least if it does not over heat too much too soon.

Maybe we go back into 4 digits and maybe we get above €10k, and stay there?  Either way, life is good.    

Glad to have been here since before 2017 and rode the wave all the way through 2018, 2019 and the first half of 2020...

Bouncing around between $10,900-ish and $11,250-ish and not knowing for sure, which way she is going to break, short-term, currently, as I type, we seem to be in a good place boyz and girl.  


Wat?

Have you guys been consulting with Torque?

Numbers are hardly as BIG of a thing as you are making them out to be.

Even though they are.

fuckers.

 

At least, we had a quickie breach of $12k to make everyone feel good.  Lasted well over 10 minutes.

Who doesn't appreciate a quickie?

Oh?

That's a very risky prediction.

 

Well, I bought all the way down from the late 2013 top of $1,163 to the early 2015 bottom of $158 (my highest buy on local bitcoins was $1,200 when I first got into bitcoin and my lowest buy was around $180 - not very much because I was running out of cash), and there ended up being another bottom in 2015 of around $198 in August/September, I believe.  I am thinking that my lowest buys in that mid to late 2015 time frame mostly were in the $220 to $240 price arena.  

I just don't see how anyone can really know that the BTC price is going to continue to go down when in the middle of the matter.. so I did not really have regrets for buying at various BTC price locations that ended up being higher than where the price ended up going at later dates.  I recall making quite a few buys in the $380-ish price arena in late 2014 because I was feeling pretty damned sure that the bottom was in, even though, overall with all of the purchases along the path down, it took more than a couple of years for my BTC holdings to mostly transition into a pretty much break even territory.. and maybe even close to three years before my BTC holdings became largely unambiguously "in profits."

In 2014 while the BTC price was continuing to drop throughout the year, I had considered myself to be in a BTC accumulation phase, but then once 2015 came, I was starting to feel as if I had largely accumulated enough BTC, so I started to feel that I was mostly in a DCA maintenance stage.. maybe not complete categories, but ballpark descriptions of my mindset and my then strategies ( that I thought were pretty damned well thought through), and maybe you are now going to assert that I am rationalizing my past and I could have done a whole hell of a lot better and I should have known better about the price was going t drop more and more and there was plenty of evidence that the BTC price was going to drop and you could assert a lot of blah blah blah..

And, surely, I could look at what I did "after the fact" and see various price points where I could have employed some better strategies, but I also think that such Monday morning quarterbacking is very unrealistic in terms of figuring out what to do while in the middle of the situation and the upside and downside insurance.. mostly upside preparations by continuing to DCA buy BTC in the 2015/2016 period and feel a decent amount of confidence in the then BTC fundamentals (even though continued perceptions of risk).. and I also think that I did way the fuck better than a lot of people who I saw enter and leave and sell back lower than they bought or some other nonsense and folks who were ongoingly ambivalent, scared and engaging in way more emotional transactions in response to the whole situation than I was.. and ended up cashing out at any small fiat dollar profit as soon as their portfolios became profitable.. and I was not even feeling very worried.. even though my portfolio was negative for long periods.. even though the value invested kept going up, but there was also some kind of assurance that I never felt that I needed to cash out any BTC because my dollar cash flow and expenses continued to be covered by my continuing to invest only with extra money that I had rather than anything that I might need within 1-6 months for my ongoing expenses.. and even some tight cashflows during several parts of 2015.

Probably we can just agree to disagree on this point about whether an investor (could do better or could have done better).. even though hypothetically, I do understand a certain amount of wait for a BIGGER dip idea that you seem to be proclaiming to be "better", but any person can end up buying BTC all the way down the downward trajectory of the BTC price for reasons that are based on his whole cashflow situation and ongoing uncertainty about when the bottom is in and how much more (if at all) the price might fall, or not, and in BTC still end up profitable as fuck and even more profitable than a variety of folks who had taken different strategies of trying to time the market and who may have ended up waiting too much and NOT buying and being too nervous.. and like I already mentioned there remains a certain amount of UP insurance that goes into place when you buy, even if there is a lack of clarity of whether more down is coming, when BTC accumulators are buying a lot of the dips along the way and even dollar cost averaging at prices that end up continuing to go down and down and down, in spite of personal projections of the situation and supposed experts that "know better" regarding where the BTC price is going to go.  

A considerable number of those purported experts end up being wrong too, even though there might be some price points in which they ended up being write.. but many still might be saying to wait for two digits when the price is in the mid $200s.. and similar bullshit "waiting" assertions are made in modern times, too.. but just at different price points.. wait for $2k or $1k or blah blah blah, and some guys would have been lucky as fuck to get in any time in the $3ks, but they were waiting, waiting and waiting.. we can pick almost any price point and show that sometimes the waiting does not pay off, either.. and ends  up being a worse BTC accumulation strategy... even though it sounds good when monday morning quarter backing about various price points that should have been done because the market was clear.. blah blah blah.. and the market is hardly ever clear.. even when there are proclamations that it is, or was.

Sure... "weird" is a reasonable descriptor, even if just focusing on kingdaddy. 

As I am typing, I am observing a current price (peakening) of $11,949 - and looks like it wants to push higher - which is the highest price that we have seen since 8/7/19

I wonder why I am feeling like a dog?



instead of like a bot





 

When we are speaking about overall wealth, the general accepted practices  is that you are able to achieve 4% per year average on a variety of investments including index funds of whatever.  That is a standard presumption, and there is a bit of a presumption also that bitcoin is at least average if not above average in that regard.  Anyhow, I am going to presume based on such standard practices that BTC and whatever my investment portfolio is invested into is going to continue to appreciate at least 4% per year on average, and if it does not, then I end up digging into my principle in terms of my various investments.

Look strawbs, before I got into bitcoin, I had good years and I had bad years in terms of my returns on my investment, and really I had more than twenty years that largely averaged 5.5% returns on my various investments, and I was not really doing anything special.  

Of course, you can presume that times have changed and virus and new normal and blah blah blah, but I see no reason to abandon standard presumptions, and yeah maybe have to play it by ear if I am eating too much into my principle, but the reality of the matter is that usually there are ways to ensure at least a 4% return with various kinds of proper diversification, and sure there are also some folks who might go more conservative on their withdrawal rate, so then they have to acquire a higher principle in order to even pull any kind of fuck you lever if we are presuming some kind of need to have $6,666 in monthly cashflow (for example).

Personally, I don't feel that kind of a need to handicap myself like that in terms of wondering what my returns are going to be or to put off saying fuck you merely because of some kind of deviation from the standard concerns because all of a sudden I become more risk averse or all of a sudden I conclude that I am not able to live within my needs or I have some other cashflow management issues that I have not had in all of my earlier years of living (or at least by the time I pull the fuck you lever, I should have sorted out these various ways that I might make mistakes.. and I have fixed them), and personally I don't think other guys should use other percentages either (unless they specifically know that they cannot get those kinds of returns), but hey, to each their own and of course, a bit of tailoring of particulars is inevitable too as long as guys are not painting themselves into such a corner that they are causing the perfect to become the enemy of the good.. which surely I don't believe in that either.. but I also don't believe in pulling any fuck you lever too early.. because by the time you pull any fuck you lever, you should already sufficiently know all the details, including any cushioning concerns that might be of concern that you do not have to return out of fuck you status with your tail between your legs because you inadequately planned and pulled such fuck you lever too early.


Bots do not have any sense of time.

whoops.. did i say too much?


Of course, Biodom brings up a good point, too.

It is not the end of the world if you might have to draw into your principle.

But of course, if your timeline to live is 50 years after you pull the fuck you lever, then only having 25 years of runway is going to put you in a pretty "awkward" state for the last 25 years of your life when you might have preferred to have been getting massages my hookers, doing donuts in lambos and having a once a day blow happy hour.

First off, I had to do a double-take regarding your seeming attempt to out wall of text me, which I believe has been noted in subsequent posts.

   

Let me allow my anger to sink in for a bit more and for a while, longer...

 

Regarding the substance of your above point, I understand that the WHO has been pointed out as waffling, being inconsistent and even getting political, such as covering up Chinese misinformation.. so yes, there are some problems with their contradictory stances and then seeming attempts to recover from that.

I would not be proclaiming that science is either absolute or that it has not be without its problematic influences, but I will still maintain that value can still be gotten from various kinds of science and even looking at its methodology or even demanding from time to time that both it's work has to be shown and that there might not be any absolute answer on some questions or that preliminary results may have led to bad outcomes.  Even if there might be people or institutions to blame for bad science or bad information,  each of us needs to be humble enough to either admit that there might be certain science claims that we do not understand or that sometimes we get things wrong... and to attempt to learn from the various mistakes and even take corrective actions if there had been some corruption or bias issues involved in previous communications of facts and/or science..




Of course, we know that there are various ways to transmit, various measures that can be taken and various questions regarding both when a person might be contagious and whether someone who has already caught Corona might be able to catch it again.

You, xhomerx10, seem to be describing some background that supports my point is that there are knowns, unknowns and unknown unknowns, still.


I think that some of these matters are still being studied, so don't lock yourself into a position too soon, homer.



Yes.  There has been lots of variations in terms of how various countries had implemented guidelines, the extent to which ppe and facilities to socially distance (or separate known infected peeps) were available, variation in compliance and variation in both tests available and ability to socially trace once positive results were discovered.


It's quite likely that various lock downs were accomplished with such recklessness that almost anyone could point to better targeted ways to attempt to address the specific virus issue.. so I am not sure how far we are going to get if we are going to discuss the so many ways that shutdowns could have been better tailored including various kinds of empowering measures like ramping up testing and the production of ppe and social distancing facilities whether treatment or lodging or other attempts at targeting efforts.



Probably no one is going to disagree with you regarding an overall statement that targeting could have been carried out better, yet some folks might disagree whether you are a pharmacist... **

** by the way, I believe that a more specifically trained person for this virus matter would be an epidemiologist rather than a pharmacist.. but who is trying to parse these kinds of details, anyhow, besides us?



I think that there were various approaches, and sure we agree that better targeting could have been accomplished.


I cannot really disagree with you here, even though my middle name is "disagree"  



Does this mean that we agree or we don't regarding something that is contagious being of a slightly different category, even though there may still be weighing of community versus individual interests with any kinds of policy considerations?


If we keep agreeing so much, we are going to have to get a room together, I would not want that.   #nohomo.


Of course, workplace to workplace is going to vary, and sure some people are pissed off as fuck if they are having to hassle with wearing masks everyday, and being potentially exposed to the virus and others might stay at home and get paid more than if they had been working.

We have nearly perfect grounds for lots of people getting pissed off... even if they are not really victimized in any kind of specifically individual and meaningful way.


 Maybe.  Do you believe that is representative, or even some conflicts can ensure that start out of a lot of stupid-ass shit.. so, hard to say, just on the face of it, that the man was given the death penalty, even though he did end up dying.


 A vaccine might never be developed.. so I would think that some measures should be taken.


Sure.  again a lack of targeting.


 fair enough.


 Yes.  Virus is more likely to be spread when there is lack of consistencies and lacking of adequate precautions.  Virus does not seem to be going away anytime soon in part based on a lot of misinformation, disinformation and a variety of lackenings of adequate precautions.. and even sometimes even purposeful refusal to take any precautions.


Probably there are going to be rages no matter what, and even lack of consistency can cause rages, too.
 


Give me a hug, xhomer... you big fluffy pussy cat.    We made it through the whole thing.  #nohomo.


Exactly.

He's trying to displace me.  That fuck. 

I would think that making sure that whatever purported stable coin you get into is actually secure is more important than any kind of yield farming that might exist with some of those... .. You would not want your cashing out attempts to play the BIG swings to end up with you being a victim of an exit scam.


Seems to me that machasm was merely proposing that he was planning to be cashing out up to 75%, perhaps, of his BTC, once BTC gets within the $40k to $100k price range... and he had not really specified how much cashing out that would amount to, but that he was suggesting that within that BTC price range of $40k to $100k it would be sufficient enough for him to retire, to prepare for buying back and to provide a legacy for his heirs (something like that - maybe a bit of an overachiever, perhaps?).

Probably because their henchman leader believes that his winning strategy is to create as much chaos and division as he can, so for some reason even if some peeps proclaim that they do not agree with the henchman leader, they still find it convenient to spout out the same anti-science, anti-fact misleading bullshit that he spouts out.., even while many of them believe that orange man is a ridiculous compulsive liar, they still find it convenient to believe that he is not lying from time to time when it suits their fantasy wishes.

 

I recognize that I did bash on Phillip a bit in my earlier post, and I did not really mean any of that in any kind of personal way in regards to Phillip...

Surely, in some of his subsequent posts that I did not acknowledge within my response post, Phillip did mention that he was not completely attached to some of the ideas that he was exploring in his post, including clearly providing some "outs" for himself in terms of both asserting that he was just throwing around some ideas that he had and even acknowledging some decent chances that "he could be wrong."

I do tend to agree with a large part of what you are asserting here, LFC, but surely there is a lot more going on with nocoiners than pure bitterness - because there are likely a lot of nocoiners who just don't realize that they are precoiners or they have not been properly introduced to bitcoin or have not been sufficiently enlightened to the actual raison d'être of bitcoin.

I understand that we could get into technical or semantical arguments regarding the difference between a nocoiner and a precoiner, yet I doubt that we would be making much progress to attempt to pigeon-hole either of these categories of potential bitcoin adopters.

I guess what I am speculating is that in 2-3 years or maybe even 5 years, we are going to have a large number of new bitcoin adopters who had been in both categories, and probably even a certain number of them are going to have selectively forgotten why they had previously been so hostile to bitcoin, and even arguing why they are more OG than some other bitcoin adopter, including some of us who are likely objectively way the fuck more OG than them.

In the end, probably it does not matter too much regarding which bitcoiner is MOAR OG than the next, and surely some bitcoiners will either have great advantages in terms of having had been able to go from rags to riches because they had accumulated their bitcoins really early or that they had persistently continued to attempt to accumulate bitcoin (even while making lots of mistakes along the way) and strung together a decent BTC position through many years of struggle and sacrifice, and likely some other later adopter bitcoiners might have just converted (or become enlightened towards bitcoin) at some later point in time in which they are able to move the silver spoon from their mouth into some other pot, such as the bitcoin/kingdaddy pot.

I thought that a lot of businesses, governments and even individuals were spending a lot more time considering the filtering systems of their air circulation systems, whether we are talking about buildings, enclosed recreation, or enclosed transportation systems. 

Of course, some smaller buildings or less trafficked places might not have air circulating systems, but I bet that the consultation and even the production of filters and filterting systems for buildings, enclosed recreation, and enclosed transportation systems has been becoming a booming kind of business, even if it might NOT exactly be a bit clear regarding how much of a difference (based on evidence and logic) that such filtering systems might make to spreadability of viruses or possibly other health benefits as compared with costs of such possible filtering systems.

Down before up?  Where have I heard that one before?

Could be necessary to get down before up, but I am not sure.  

Seems that I have heard those kinds of, "down before up" proclamations on a number of occasions, and they don't necessarily end up happening, even though they are purportedly "necessary," and they may even cause some people to wait before buying BTC, to sell some of their BTC or even more risky, to short with an expectation of buying MOAR BTC, and any one of those courses of action might not play out very well in terms of preparing for the likely more important aspect of bitcoin, which is the "UP aspect," which seems to be an actual thingie-ma-jiggie in bitcoin investing strategies.

It seems to me that a more salient point would be that a lot of folks got rich as fuck from BTC (and admittedly from the various pump and dump shitcoins, too).. but anyhow, let's stick with bitcoin for this discussion.. especially since we are in a bitcoin-focused thread.

We do not need to ONLY look at billionnaires because if we were to focus in that kind of way, we would be limiting our pool BTC investors who got fucking rich as fuck and largely from bitcoin.

I am NOT proclaiming to know exactly where "rich as fuck" status begins, and I think that in this thread we referred to it as "filthy rich" status on several occasions...

Nonetheless, let me attempt to make some kind of distinction between 1) fuck you status, 2) filthy rich status and 3) billionnaire status in order to attempt to cause any discussion of billionnaires (to the extent we give any fucks about them) to become more of a meaningful measuring guideline in terms of how BTC might have either got them to such status, assisted them in getting to such status or put them on a road in which they are likely to get to such status in the "near future" (aka soon ^tm).

I personally believe that three status above are on also on a spectrum of subjectivity, so fuck you status is much more subjective than billionaire status, yet in any event, I am going to try to put price ranges and a bit of a descriptive on each of these statuses.

1) fuck you status = that would be having a starting point networth of anywhere between $100k and $10million, and of course, is a kind of status that gives options, so if a guy is able to live within his means with a networth of $100k and does not have to answer to anyone or worry about how to spend his time and feels that he is getting sufficient passive income and insurance from his $100k networth, then he has reached fuck you status... Personally, I am thinking that around $2million networth more objectively brings any guy to fuck you status because it allows for a passive income of about $6,666 per month, which I believe objectively brings a guy sufficient flexibility anywhere in the world to proclaim fuck you status, even though I do understand how guys might argue higher and lower thresholds for the reaching of such status.

2) filthy rich status = that would be having a starting point networth of anywhere above $40million, and surely lots of this assessment  of degree of filthy rich is relative, and of course, the more networth that a guy/gal has, the more filthy rich s/he is.

3) billionnaire status = that would be having a starting point networth of anywhere above $1 billion.  Sure there are various levels here, too, but surely is a decently small pool of people, and likely there are some people who are very close to reaching billionnaire status, that could live a lifestyle very similar to a billionnaire, even if technically they have not yet reached such officially billionnaire status.  

Anyhow, part of my point in attempting to make these distinctions is that I believe that we lose sight of the POWER of either the wealth creation of bitcoin or the wealth redistribution aspects of bitcoin if we merely focus on billionnaires and whether they are actually at billionnaire status or if they had achieved their billionnaire status from bitcoin including how much of their wealth is in bitcoin as compared to being allocated in some other assets.

I don't necessarily feel that I need to attempt to beat this horse to death or to analyze these proposed categories in any further detail in order to highlight that there are all kinds of variations in terms of what wealth status that any individual, institution or even government might have, including being in one of the above categories and including interesting aspects and variations regarding how much of their wealth is getting allocated to bitcoin, going to be allocated into bitcoin or had already been allocated into bitcoin.. including current or future ramifications of such BTC allocation choices.

Does your highlighting that area of expected BTC price movement as "blue" cause $13,000 to be more within the realm of price movement possibility or might there be some other factor(s) at play?


O.k.  Maybe this answers my question.  It's about momentum, and that seems to make some sense.... at least to me.
 

I thought that fear/greed index was a reverse indicator?
 

Fuck them.  The tail does not wag the dog... at least in my understanding of how the world works.   

 

Could be, but how many shits do we give about those other nine, really, in the whole scheme of things?

 

Sing on baby!!!! I cannot disagree with this last sentence of yours.

You should not be setting your ladder steps at round numbers, and without getting too caught up in the placement of the orders of other people, of course, you do want to attempt to front-run any order placement locations that might have a lot of resistance/support and therefore even having a decent cushion between your set order and the likely resistance and support points .. some of those resistance / support points are going to be more obvious than others, and other resistance / support points might only develop after you had already placed your orders.

By the way, usually, I personally, don't really monitor or second-guess my ladder orders once I place them.  Except the overall caveat above regarding round numbers and anticipated resistance/support points, I largely place my ladder orders in accordance with my own measurements and preferences rather than giving too many shits about what others might be doing or how they might be changing their orders at specific locations after I had already placed my orders... but hey, I am not saying that there might NOT be some learning involved in such monitoring of how orders are placed and being placed by others and maybe from time to time you might be able to increase the likelihood of your order(s) filling before the price reverses (which tends to be a goal of laddering).  Nonetheless, having said all of that, after you have kind of learned some various strategies, I tend to find it a bit of a waste of time to dicker around very much with my orders or even to monitor how close they are being filled by the behaviors of others, once I have placed my orders.. either they fill or they don't fill.. and once they fill, then I can place the order(s) of the opposite direction.



Never put anything past the picnic bear.   

 

We largely ONLY know how far or how deep a BTC price dip is going to be after the fact, and I don't think that it is good to be second-guessing ourselves or to be kicking ourselves over having had been able to buy more lower, blah blah blah..  especially if we bought a lot at $8k and then the price dips to $6k and we buy a lot at $6k, and then the price dips nearly to $3k and we do not have very much money, so we ONLY buy a little bit in the $3ks because we feel that we are running out of money.  Worrying that we could have bought more BTC for lower will either lead to inaction and getting left behind when the BTC price unexpectedly goes up (which happens quite a bit in bitcoinlandia) or putting too much mental energy in trying to study preparing for down and further down rather than meaningfully and adequately preparing for up.. that seems to be why peeps invest in bitcoin in the first place.. ,,, So, largely, we likely going to be much better off financially, psychologically and time managemently to be spending more of our energies preparing for UP rather than preparing for down (even though a bit of preparing for both with an emphasis on preparing for UP does not seem to hurt).  


Of course, people have a tendency to do the opposite of what they should do.

That is part of the reason that no one should be overinvesting into BTC (except maybe on the margins).

BTC investors should set some kind of reasonable and meaningful BTC accumulation target, and then also make sure that their expenses are covered - so that they do not have to dip into their BTC investment, except at a time that is at their completely own choosing. 

If you overinvest, and you do not have your regular expenses and emergency expenses (remember emergency means that you don't necessarily know that it is coming.. but you should still prepare for such) covered, then you will likely end up screwing yourself by having to dip into your BTC investment that is at a time that is NOT of your own choosing.

Of course, I see that the red zone is very small in that graph/chart that you provided above, Wind_FURY.

You have been registered on this forum since mid-2016, so let's take mid-2016 as a projection timeline.

If anyone who got into bitcoin in the mid-2016 timeframe had actually been following some variation of what you are suggesting in this post (which seems to be a combination of buying on dips and DCA), then there would be almost no way that they would actually be unprofitable, even if technically they had made some purchases with the DCA aspect of your suggestion that were higher than the current BTC price.

It's like there was so much passage of time in which BTC prices were lower than our current price that any BTC purchases that were made above our current price end up getting washed out (or averaged out into profitable) by the BTC purchases that ended up getting made below our current price, which your chart also shows a lot of that happening since mid-2016 - even though the whole chart looks kind of flatly inclining upwardly since it goes all the way back to 2011.

I know that in this thread, several members have raised both the question about not really knowing what constitutes a sufficient enough dip, and then also they raise questions about having their BTC profits to end up being less because if they employ some DCA method, then they miss opportunities to buy BTC lower (and more of it) with that same money that they had used to buy BTC higher because they ended up DCA buying rather than really being able to achieve a BIG SCORE with a BIG DIP price.

I would bet that almost all members who have been in BTC for at least 4 years have made some mistakes along the way in which they could describe some "should have" "would have" "could have" situations in which more money would have been made if they had done a, b & c rather than x, y & z.  My experience has been that many folks accumulating and HODLing bitcoin should not be kicking themselves with 20/20 hindsight, but realize that lots of mistakes tend to be made along the way,  and those who strive to learn from their mistakes tend to profit more in the long run and likely to make fewer mistakes by learning to employ the soundest of strategies, which are the buy on dip, dca and HODL strategies... and thinking about the matter, and acting to employ such buying and HODL in meaningful ways continues to be quite profitable in bitcoin even if some members will profit more than others and some will make more mistakes than others.