It’s dead.
Death by covid. Bear market, sure. CNBC know what they're talking about, It's obvious.
I don't even get WHY markets dump because of the news.
What do you do with all the fiat after selling your assets?
Or is it more about "sell before everybody else is selling, to get in again after everybody has sold"?
Last weekly candle was well in the red. So I think this is just people selling because they think the expected dump might go deeper because of the covid news. Any hopes of last weeks candle being a bear trap are gone. The dump goes on.
Dump? What dump? This tiny -10% setback will disappear on a yearly (even monthly) graph dwarfed by the enormous multi-10k daily candles of December!
Don't mindrust it now, brethren...
Mindrust was quite a bit more than 22% or even more than 50% depending upon the price point where such dumpening is counted.. and surely he dumped his BTC in a quite unusual macro-market situation (peak of march 2020 liquidation event).. and I am not trying to excuse him, but just saying that this is not even anywhere near that but our correction/drop is surely greater than 10% and even more than double greater than 10%.
Agreed, I think we need to remain more conservative over utilising the phrase "doing a mindrust".
It's reserved for bear market bottoms, or otherwise post crashes, significant ones of at least 50%+. Dumping after a 22% correction from ATH is no where near this concept. Mindrust dumped at a 80% correction if not mistaken, from the $20K highs to the $4K lows. I'd argue that selling at $30K after a 50%+ correction would be doing a mindrust, even if not completely obvious at the time, but not at current prices.
Bare in mind that mindrust's dump came after Bitcoin moved from $4K to $14K and back down to $4K, it was a break-even sell. There was no money lost if not mistaken, only potential profit. One key lesson to learn from this experience is not just dumping at the lows as being a bad move, when price is oversold and at key long-term support, but not taking profits when price is up 3.5x is also an error if you feel over-invested.
While not defending mindrust for his manoeuvre, it's worth remembering he didn't lose any $ over this.
You seem to be correct dragonvslinux that any factual behind-the-scenes updates that we had received from mindrust had him proclaiming to have had been partially motivated to sell his whole around 10 BTC stash at around $4,500-ish during the March 2020 crashening was that he did not want his BTC holdings to go into the negative relative to the dollar. So for sure, he was way overinvested (and he admitted so) because he ended up panicking after a short-term quickie correction of 50%-ish that had occurred over the previous day or so, and he was also seeming to closely be following some stupid-ass Masterluc theories that argued that the BTC price had to correct back into the $1,500-ish price arena (which would have been around our previous 2013 top) or at minimum BTC prices had high chances of returning to sub $2,000 prices, even if it could take a few up and down waves to play out.
It also seemed like this panic-selling was not only based on his $ value going in the red, like it did for most accumulators of the past 4 years at that time, but also because price went below a crucial level he considered to be a point of no return for price. Despite heavy accumulation leading up to this price. I assume this was the 200 Week MA that had been broken, at the time on the Daily chart quite convincingly as well (by around 25% if not mistaken). I'm not going to pretend like I wasn't concerned for the price around this time, but instead was more doubtful about a recovery back to $20K being possible by the end of the year, as I had been earlier in the year, as opposed to the idea of price going lower. But alas, mindrust wasn't convinced that price would hold this level on a Weekly scale, and panic sold.
Sure, BTC prices had gone below the 200-week moving average during that time for nearly two weeks... and in the end, the extent that someone is overinvested in an asset may well have a considerable toll upon causing too many emotions.. and largely mindrust admitted that he was way over-invested.
There is a kind of mindset that exists with people who get too preoccupied with their BTC dollar valuations and fail/refuse to recognize and appreciate bitcoins existence as a pristine asset class.. or even an emerging pristine asset class that should cause and justify ongoing buying at any price and just waiting it out, but instead there sometimes is way too much attempts to time tops and bottoms and then ending up psychologically causing their lil selfies to NOT build themselves into HODLers rather than whiners and bitcoin naysayers. Of course, Billy nocoiner is of a similar type and eXPHorizon and a few other nocoiner/or lowcoiner dweebs who we see posting their nonsense in this thread from time to time.
This mentality is also expected in any emerging asset class I imagine. Especially for those who have been invested for less time, and something that I can imagine doesn't effect you what so ever, but this $ value consideration is very relevant to most holders.
I also had considered myself to be quite a bit overinvested, but part of the difference with me is that I had dollar cost averaged into bitcoin for nearly a year between late 2013 and 2014 to reach my then target of about 10% of my total investment portfolio to have had been into BTC. I had spent about the next year continuing to DCA so through 2015, my about invested into BTC had gone from 10% to about 13.5%.. and so my average cost per BTC was a bit over $500, but the BTC price was largely in the mid-$200s for most of 2015... .so yeah I had considered myself to have been overinvested.. but I was also willing to allow the BTC price to go to zero and sure that might have been my problem if the price continued to go down and I continued to buy but the BTC price never recovered.
I doubt that my situation is much different from mindrust in terms of having had been insulated because he said that he was like 40% or more invested into BTC.. and I had continued to assert that he was overinvested, but he said that he did not care and he continued to buy.. and he feared going into the negative to continue to buy.. so there continues to be something wrong with your attempt to compare mindrust to me. .because I had already been covered in other areas, even though I did feel over invested in BTC from 10% to 13.5%, and seem to me that mindrust had few other investments except bitcoin and cash and he was probably even understating his percentage as being 40%.. and so he had painted himself into a pickle situation...
For me, I largely continued to consider myself as being overinvested in bitcoin when the BTC price went up from around $250 to around $500 in late 2015 which would have been my break even point, but then BTC prices corrected below $500 in early 2016 but returned to supra $500 by the middle and even the end of 2016... and then by the time BTC reached $19,666 which caused my portfolio to go into the 85% territory of allocation.. but at that point something more than 20x in profits... so yeah there is a pretty BIG difference in being overallocated (and how much a guy is overallocated) while his BTC holdings are in the negative and then being overallocated as BTC goes into decent profits and ends up largely staying in profits.
I can imagine that I might have been in a worse situation if the BTC price had never gone up and I continued to invest in BTC... but I still believe that I never put myself in any kind of similar pickle.. and my own placement has more to do with my situation being different rather than some kind of sporadic luck of my having had been more fortunate in some kind of way.. because there are surely ways to read my ongoing investing into BTC to have been going on for three years with mostly being in negative (even if there may well have been ways to read it as positive as well), but my levels of overinvestment were financially and psychologically more tolerable and seems to have been related to how I did it... with quite a bit less gambling involved, even if some might characterize aspects of mine as having gambling too so maybe more of a matter of degree rather than kind even though I would suggest that when you control the degree, then you also affect the kind of thing that you are doing (and I feel that I was investing rather than gambling..and what mindrust was doing was quite a bit over the edge in terms of gambling rather than investing).
Especially those in the past 2-3 years I'd assume. Knowing that you have DCA'd since 2013, I'd assume you've remained up for the past 6+ years.
yes.. exactly.. and the beginning period is probably the most difficult for any of us to establish our system and don't overdo whatever we are doing... I also had about 20 years of investing prior to coming into BTC to actually build up a total portfolio that allowed me to establish what was going to be my BTC allocation and then to incrementalize into my BTC allocation over a year.. and even though my 1st year of getting in did not cause me to be in profits, and neither did the second year.. and even if the third year was ambiguous regarding whether in profits or not, at least I kind of felt like I was not as much in negative as I had been for the 1st and 2nd years.
Whereas others who are newer to the market will likely first fluctuate between being up & down against their $ investment, thus much more difficult to ignore. Despite each individual being able to look at the same decade long history of Bitcoin's price movement, it's clearly a lot easier to acknowledge BTC as "pristine asset class" as you put it when your investment is UP, as opposed to when it's not.
Well sure.. but we have had more time for BTC to prove itself over the last 4 years or so too.. so if I have just reached my 8 year anniversary of when I got started in BTC, the second 4 years were easier than the first 4 years, but bitcoin has had those 4 additional years to show itself as a pristine asset class too..
So, even if bitcoin's upside potential is likely quite a bit less than what it had been for me, it is also quite a bit more assured in terms of having a safer downside, too. You seem as if you are spending a lot of time trying to defend mindrust or some alternative thinking while at the same time, NOT really pinpointing exactly it is that you are arguing against in terms of points that I had already made.
Personally I was also happy to see my average DCA in 2019/2020 be in the red, as it motivated and inspired me to accumulate more.
Yes.. I had those kinds of feelings too in 2014, 2015 and 2016, even if I would not really describe my state of being as "happy," to see that my BTC holdings were in the negative, but there were surely ways of considering the situation in the positive in order to see the bright side of a negative cloud.. in other words, if we are truly investing in bitcoin and we have established a decent stake in BTC, then we can appreciate that we are going to be better if the BTC price is up rather than down while at the same time consider that if we purchase BTC when we are in the negative, any purchases that we make are bringing down our average cost per BTC.
Much more so when it would be in the green. But this is because I always had a long-term vision than most new-ish-comers to the market, as well as a lot more conviction in making Bitcoin my primary reserve asset, unlike others who simply wanted to dabble or have some exposure to avoid missing out.
Ok.. now we are saying similar things.
Others who simply threw in X amount of fiat at $5K or $10K, generally remained skeptical throughout the entire bear market until price finally got back to $20K. No doubt many of them sold half their stash at this level, in order to only be invested with the house, in order to have less risk in an asset they didn't fully believe in. A lot of this is based on what you perceive Bitcoin to be, whether it's a speculative investment or a reserve asset.
Cannot really argue with you here in terms of some people NOT really seeming to have conviction towards BTC or a vision regarding how much of their investment portfolio they want to have in BTC. I hate to generalize too much, but surely we do see quite a few people who are not very aggressive in terms of the extent of their BTC holdings or their BTC targets, and I would not really want to blame anyone for the choices that they make because all of that is totally discretionary - even if they might later regret that they were too whimpy regarding the extent of their holdings.
By the way, I heard some interesting discussion recently regarding some of us having almost no way to even come close to being able to acquire similar amounts of BTC that we had accumulated earlier.. so if we had been able to acquire $20k worth of BTC and we end up with 20 BTC, after 4-5 years those same 20BTC now cost more than a $million.. so having had been able to acquire 20 BTC with $20k of capital now costs more than $1 million... Similar is true for some individuals who may have been able to acquire $1million at $1k each, then that would have been 1,000 BTC, which would now cost $56 million to buy those same quantities of BTC... .
Next week is important isn’t it. I feel like if we don’t start going up by the end of next week then the bull could be over. I’m prepared either way, obviously heavily leaning to wanting up but there are positives to both. Let’s see what happens.
Whoaza, LFC.
You are really caught up in this calendar year nonsense.
Whatever...
You do you.
I am going to remain skeptical regarding bitcoin having to conform to some kind of a calendar year schedule....
I'm also not tied to the doctrine of the calendar, despite so far not seeing the 4 year cycle broken, and considering it to remain relevant today. Until proven otherwise.
Yeah.. but how strict are you going to be? There needs to some flexibility in terms of deviating outside of the calendar, no?
This is also because I'm anticipating a top in January/February, definitely not December, given the cycle has generally been 49 months as opposed to 48 months (4 years). One small factor that many have overlooked. A lot can happen in 3 months, as we saw from October-December in 2017 when price increased by 300%. Even a top at $70K in three months wouldn't invalidate the idea of a 4 year cycle for me either, it would only further reinforce it, but likely with much less downside than previous years, if there is a lack of parabolic blow off top.
Why are you even talking about $70k.. it's irrelevant, no? We have already been there done that. $69k is more or less the same as $70k.. so if you are talking about BIGGER numbers for this year, we need to talk about something significant, no?
Maybe -65 or -70% rather than -80%, but that's just me.
Well, we already had a 56% correction from $64,895 to $28,600, so I don't see why we should be expecting 56% or greater without going UP first.
Yeah.. anything can happen, but let's try to deal with real movement that matters rather than just diddly-daddling in the same frame.
That said, I consider the logarithmic growth targeting $150K to be a lot more relevant than the S2F model, even if there is no time constraint, simply because statistically I understand it much better.
We are not in a mature asset, so I see no reason why we don't just stick with something approaching s2f rather than inventing some pattern that might apply to some mature asset that does not already have the 4 year fractal in place. But whatever, you do you.
Furthermore many have been confused by Plan B's floor model it seems (completely misunderstood it), which isn't based on stock to flow, but his own understand of it.
yes.. he seems to be wrong about that floor model, and he really has not given details either.
His $98K by November is merely pulling a number out of hat based on his own interpretation of the market, like many speculators have done so. S2F merely anticipates
$83K being a fair price for Bitcoin by 2024, or
$122K by 2024 depending on which upgraded version you look at. On average, a target of $100K by 2024, NOT 2021. He has also made it clear that price not reaching $98K by the end of the month, which now looks considerably less likely, doesn't mean that his S2F model is invalidated, but that his floor model is broken. They are independent models after all.
I am not really disagreeing with you, and I doubt that there was very much emphasis to his floor model anyhow, even if it ended up largely being true in the end of August, September and October... but falling quite short for the end of November.
Poll
