Sounds good.
Even if you win this bet, you will be at losing end because you will get 0.0003 Btc in case you win. 0.0003 BTC will be of less value if BTC went below 90k. Imagine worth of 0.0003 BTC on Jan 1, 2027 ? So a kind of win-win for me.
Hahahahahaha
A win-win for you, ONLY if you end up winning, and if I were to lose the bet, then the amount that I would be paying you has four zeros after the decimal (not 3 zeros).. which is: 0.00003 BTC (3,000 satoshis). Otherwise, if you lose the bet, then you have to pay me 0.0003 BTC (30k satoshis) (which has 3 zeros and not 4, and I have to receive that amount, so you are responsible for fees, if you end up losing and end up having to send to me).
Sure directionally, your satoshis cost less if you lose the bet as compared to if you win the bet, then satoshis that I pay you are worth more if I lose the bet, but they still are only 1/10th the amount of satoshis that you would end up paying if you were to lose the bet. I suppose one of the calculations of placing bets in satoshis as compared with placing bets in dollars when each of us realize that it continues to be likely that with the passage of time the value of satoshis are going to continue to go up in dollar terms.
In any event, I am expecting that the odds for you to win the bet are greater than for me to win the bet, such as perhaps you have 60% or 70% odds of winning the bet, yet I entered into the bet with you, since I really doubt that your odds of winning the bet are anything close to 90%, which makes the bet economical for me to enter it, even if my odds of winning the bet may well be only 30% to 40%.
And yeah, maybe I should have forced you into giving me greater odds, but that is O.k. I am feeling charitable to some extent to merely get you to agree to the bet terms, and the other portion, if the BTC price were to go up to $333,333, then at that point my paying you 0.00003 BTC (3,000 satoshis) would amount to a dollar value of right around $10. I should be able to afford, it, even though sure in dollar terms if you lose the bet then your 0.0003 BTC (30k satoshis) would ONLY be worth $27, so in dollar terms we might imagine scenarios in which the odds are ONLY 10/27.... so a little less than 1/3...
Maybe if you consider your bet to be such a great deal and such a potential money maker, you might want to seek some other guys who might want to enter such bet on similar terms or we could increase the amounts, since it is still relatively early in the term of the bet.
I stopped respecting that loser when S2F died a miserable death 4 years ago. The fact he still argues his models are valid is hilarious.
This is another string to his loser bow. Don’t have heroes in Bitcoin, guys. They will more often than not, disappoint you.
Now, when are we going to break out of this crab market, damn it.
We should be able to remove the person from the ideas. Stock to flow is a great model, and it is not broken as a meaningful framework to think about bitcoin, even if the proportions have not be correct, they have still been directionally correct, especially since many of us (including but not limited to you, LFC, as one of the biggest proponents) have not given up on four-year fractal ideas, when it comes to the price dynamics king daddy precious.
In other words LFC, you are quite aligned with S2F and with PlanB, even if you disagree with some of his specifics and some of his other behaviors regarding supposedly transferring his BTC price exposure from directly owning BTC to owning BTC spot ETF shares.
[edited out]
IIRC I and JJG were the only two not extolling his virtues, I personally pointed out he did not account for DERIVATIVES which was his downfall and I forget what JJG's beef was but it was probably that the guy didn't cost average!
I don't really have any major beef with PlanB, except that his floor model was a wee bit exaggerated, including that it ended up failing miserably since many of us likely cannot be guaranteeing floor prices.
Over time, I have also not really liked how he tends to say a lot of great things, but then he will seem to be giving guarantees, and even that last video that any of us might have seen, he said that he had expected somewhere between 3-5 months in this cycle (presumptively 2025) in which BTC would have something like greater than 50% price moves in each of the months. So then he was able to come up with a minimum price for the cycle that would be somewhere in the mid-$200k (or was it upper $200ks?), and so sure, it could happen, but describing such events as "minimums" is a bit problematic..
I think that my own beef with PlanB, to the extent that I have any, just relates to some of the particular absolutisms that he tends to prescribe, which kind of reminds me of of how Philipma1957
** talks sometimes, yet PlanB's frame works still tend to be quite great if he were not talking about some of those future BTC price moves as if they were certainties (or seeming that way). He tends to have good graphs/charts and nice colored dots in his graphs/charts too (which I think have also gotten better through the years), which can help to show underlying historical particulars (and justifications for his predictions) that he is explaining.
**By the way, my comparison is not to suggest that Philip is making good justifications for his predictions, but just that he gets caught up on making predictions that are too certain in the ways that they tend to be framed.Man this hovering below 100K is annoying.
I would feel much better hovering a bit above, even if that wouldn't be that meaningful a difference.
You are probably correct that the difference between hovering above or below $100k is not really meaningful, yet hovering below $100k does allow normie newbies, lowcoiners, no coiners, and perhaps even others, to be deceived about bitcoin and overly weighting downside BTC price scenarios, which results in: 1) selling too many cornz too soon and/or 2) failing/refusing to sufficiently prepare for up by buying cornz.
Poll
