Your assertion only makes sense if the ASIC-mined BTC will be sold whilst the previously GPU/FPGA mined ones weren't (if they were being sold already then there's no change). But if the BTC being mined with GPUs/FPGAs WEREN'T being sold previously then those people no longer have a mined source for the BTC they were either hoarding or using and have to BUY them - increasing demand.
The charts and discussion in the report discuss new buyers entering the market around Jan 7th and exiting around the 24th. ASIC manufacturers are just a red herring.
...if you strongly believe BTC will fall (by any significant amount) in the short-term then investing in fiat/silver/gold is NOT the way to go. Leveraging your capital via options is the way to maximise profit. Investing BTC into Silver/Gold makes more sense if you believe (but are not sure that) BTC will fall in the medium term - if you believe it will fall in the long-term then not sure what you're even doing on the forum (as you're wasting your time on a project - BTC - that you believe will fail).
Yes, leveraging into options is always more profitable than buying the underlying commodity so long as you don't get a margin call. Other problems with leverage include the level of expertise you need to trade options successfully and the amount of money required (upwards of $50,000) before you can get margin. This places such trades out of reach of most bitcoin investors.
The report recommends silver because there's a double play of silver rising and bitcoin falling. This alignment of the stars will, I believe, present the trade of the year. It will be like getting one of the first ASICs. The main difference is anyone can participate in this trade. At any time, even with no technical expertise and only a small amount of BTC. So it's just a better trade overall than options IMO.
Actually as a fund manager yourself can you share your analysis of TU.SILVER? I'd be interested to know if ATF has any or is planning to buy
For curiosity's sake I guess.