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... .
Well yes, with the $ price consistently increasing, this is obviously true, but only to a certain extend. Another bear market with a 75-80% downside doesn't mean accumulation is simply based on $ value, there are many who will no doubt be selling high in order to buy back for less.
Don't be getting too excited about some supposed 75% to 80% correction that may or may not happen in the near future.
In other words, you are likely getting ahead of ur lil selfie by focusing on the down before the UP comes first.
Remember where we are at.
We already had a 6.5x BTC price appreciation that corrected down 56%.. that is no damned small or insignificant BTC price correction, so having that extent of a correction likely causes a decent amount of resetting and causing the $28,600 bottom to be in..
In other words, why the fuck would we be wanting to prematurely focus on bottoms that might happen before we see the top that has not yet come...
Yes, yes, yes.. even I have conceded something like a 42% chance that we go down from here rather than UP.. but seems more likely that our top is not yet in, and even if we had a top from here, then how far are we going down. Think about it.
On the other hand, if you want to engage in what seems to be premature focusing upon DOWNity, then that's all on you.. hopefully you do not shake too many of the rest of us from significantly and preparing for the UPpity that seems to be a wee bit more likely and even if it is not more likely.. it seems good, prudent and reasonable to prepare for it, just in case.
For example in 2017 I had no intention of selling my stash and wanted to hodl, but when price moved from $5K-$20K within a few months in such a parabolic manner, I did sell every last satoshi for an average of $17.5K and then re-accumulated at around $7K, so increased my BTC holdings by 2.5x.
Yes.. nothing wrong with that.. even though it may well be difficult to achieve in reality.
Call it being "lucky", but this wasn't selling the top, nor trying to buy the bottom. Just getting out once friends & family desperately wanted me to buy Bitcoin for them "before it goes to $1 million" and quickly realising that price had gotten out of control. I also didn't need years of experience in the market to see how greedy and irrational it had become, even if it was with a reasonable amount of research within a matter of months.
Sure.. fair enough. Some times things work out well... if you are somewhat prepared and able to identify some signs that end up turning out to have been mostly correct. Maybe a combination of luck and insight and having had set yourself up in a way that you were able to feel relatively comfortable in how you ended up playing the situation to your advantage.
This isn't my plan this cycle, nor if prices go parabolic, but I've always been clear about selling 50-75% depending on market conditions and then remaining patient in order to re-invest.
Sometimes these conditions can present themselves when you think through your own situation.
For example, in about mid-2015 when I initially created my plan and strategies to sell BTC on the way up, there was some vagueness in my outline based on the way that I had set it up with only projecting ahead about 5-8x of the current price, but as the BTC price kept rising, my projection ahead continued to show that I was less and less inclined to sell as much of my BTC as I had initially speculated that I was going to want to be as the BTC prices was going up. So as the BTC price got into the $2k to $3k range, I could seen that the BTC had already gone up around 10x from the $250 price arena in which I had initially established my tentative selling of BTC on the way up outline. So I had also considered that if the BTC price goes up another 5x to 10x, then I may well ONLY be left with 70% or 75% of my initial BTC stash.
Accordingly, I thought through my situation and decided to reduce the amount of my BTC sales because I did not want to be in that kind of allocations...... so even though I might have felt some hesitations regarding an ability to have had been able to buy more BTC in 2018 when the BTC price dropped, at the same time I was happy with how I had adjusted my overall strategy to include the selling of less BTC on the way up rather than either sticking with the original plan or even selling more BTC on the way up.
Each of us are going to balance in differing ways... and the extent to which we might have regrets will likely vary too...
Not selling the top, nor selling the bottom, but merely attempting to accumulate more Bitcoin when given the opportunity. Of course this can be high risk, and for me my decision is simply based on whether the market becomes parabolic or simply continues to grind upwards. Because in reality the mistake that most made wasn't selling BTC at say $5K, $10K then $20K but failure to re-invest when price inevitably crashed lower. The error wasn't selling at those prices per say, but not re-investing when given the opportunity again.
Sure - a fairly common theme.
For example even selling early at an average of $10K and re-investing around those $6-8K lows would have increased holdings by 20-40%. Personally I prefer to follow what institutions do, which is buying low and selling high within market cycles. Never selling all, but selling enough. Not the top, nor the bottom. Just basic risk management. But obviously if you're not 95-99% invested, then it's probably best simply hodl on and carry on accumulating. I've been on that ticket since $12K, max risk #noregrets, occasional loans, so my situation is different.
Doesn't come off as unreasonable.
For me it was also simply based on the theory of gravity and Bitcoin's previous price movements. What goes up must come down, and what goes up with sheer velocity with go down with that same velocity, kind of at least. It is how markets generally work, with Bitcoin not being an exception to that rule either.
Of course bitcoin is not an exception to the overall rule regarding both UPs and DOWNs, but the devil still remains in the details regarding how to manage it in regards to both some of its overall flavors and that it happens to both be a paradigm shifting asset class and that it also is likely in the midst (if not the early stages) of an exponential s-curve... so fucking around within that can get a lot of folks reckt not only in their failure refusal to ongoingly prepare for UP.. including some of their short-term taking of profits was not worth the risk of getting left out of the asset class when it does not return even close to earlier price levels..
Especially not now it has become institutionalised.
Still lots of institutions and governments to come... To me, still seems like early stages in the institutional getting in phase.
\
My rambling point is there will be many doing the same, taking considerably profits near the top, even if most likely fail to re-invest at lower prices.
Some will take profits at the top, and some won't. Some will just ride it out.
Not to mention the cascade of panic sellers "doing a mindrust" and selling at break-even, knowing that their considerable profits have evaporated, and the value of their BTC could continue to go lower from there on, and there's a good chance they'd be right in thinking so. But this isn't the fundamental mistake is the point. The error is always on selling early or failure to re-invest at lower prices (or even the same price if necessary). I imagine most make this mistake, without a shadow of doubt.
Fair enough..
Then there is obviously trading shitcoins to accumulate more Bitcoin, but that's another story.
You had to go there?
It's kind of like trading with fiat-based shitcoins, but with more volatility and only really possible with low risk in a bull market. So for me it's always about accumulating more Bitcoin for sure, but not simply with $ DCA or lump sums, but also considering market conditions as well as speculating on the latest hot topic for more satoshis.
Hopefully your brain does not start to hurt too much from such distractions.
Diversified accumulation you could say.
If you were trying to make it sound legit you might say that.
Of course we can look year on year on the cost of accumulating Bitcoin, but again for me this would be too simplistic a way to identify how to accumulate more Bitcoin when I've already identified a few ways which doesn't just include simply selling a state-issued shitcoin for Bitcoin. Others even accumulate by offering services to customers etc.
Even if $10 per week is not going to cause someone to become a spot-price millionnaire in the next 9 years as it had done in the last 9 years, it seems that just having a fairly aggressive BTC accumulation strategy should still put someone in a pretty damned decent place in 4-10 years, even if s/he is just getting started now.
So you should be way the hell ahead of a lot of folks since you have already been through a full 4-year cycle. I see little to no reason to get distracted into any kinds of risky behaviors and if you feel that you have not accumulated enough BTC just ongoingly engaging in prudence and practical ongoing accumulation should still keep you in an increasingly building of your BTC.. especially if you already have a 4-year base that has been built.
Traditionally, normies had been engaging in the building of investments for 30-40 years and sometimes even after 40 years, they would not get to any kind of close to fuck you level.. and for sure it seems that bitcoin should be able to cut short such a process so long as normies do not get too greedy and try to rush the process.. so getting to fuck you status in 15 years to 20 years is still cutting the normal path in half... and sure, nothing is guaranteed but having a prudent, reasonable and aggressive BTC accumulation strategy seems to still provide decent odds of getting to fuck you status, even if normies might have to increase their $10 per week up to $100 per week or something more aggressively assertive that is prudent within their means.. there surely are some peeps that can do $200 to $500 per week and still be able to maintain their budget and their expenses and their emergency fund... I still will say do what you can, even if it is ONLY $10 per week, and frequently I am telling folks that $100 per week seems to be quite doable for a lot of people and may well be important to focus on doing such $100 per week.. but people still do not even do that.
Remember earlier I had provided the $10 per week DCA chart that showed $1million spot price (more than 16.5 BTC), and you can imagine that $100 per week puts the more aggressive guy at $10 million of Spot price BTC currently, which surely no one should be sneezing at having had gotten to $10 million spot price (more than 165 BTC), even though I do not recommend using spot price as your way to either assess where you are at, but even using the 208-week moving average (currently at about $18k), 165 BTC is still going to put you at about $3 million valuation.. which should surely be above and beyond entry-level fuck you status for a lot of peeps.... even some folks who consider that they might have a wee bit of a higher budget.
For me, BTC based accumulation from trading is a no brainer in a bull market, but that's just me. If I wouldn't want to hold XRP (which I don't), I therefore certainly don't want to be holding many dollars either.
They are all shitcoins at the end of the day. Some are just useful to accumulate more Bitcoin in a bull market, others are useful for increasing accumulation in a bear market.
Yes.... You do you with your shitcoin integrations... I am not interested in either playing around with them or talking about them in this thread, unless it is to bash on them, generally speaking.
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?
No. $70K is exactly $1K higher than $69K, therefore it would be an ATH.
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?
In reality I mean any price above $69K as an ATH, within the next 2-3 months being the point here. I don't believe the top has to be significant for the cycle to remain in tact, this is the common confusion here influenced by S2F model / log growth.
Ideas regarding cycles predate the stock to flow model. including ideas of blow-off tops... Yes.. there is likely agreement that cycles can play out in a variety of ways including having potentially less of a blow off top.. but one thing about considering that a blow off top might be possible is to better be prepared for it and there is no reason to believe that the blow off top is dead.
One problem comes with bearwhales holding BTC prices down lower and longer than sustainable which contributes to fuel for subsequent blow off tops to take place... surely by now you can recognize and appreciate that within bitcoin there are likely going to continue to be times in which the price gets carried away in one direction or another. and we have not yet seen those getting carried away periods disappear so there should be no real logic in anticipating that they are over.. merely because of the fact that they could be over.. In other words, they are not over until they are... so therefore it is probably better to continue to prepare for them just in case that they happen rather than presuming that they are over or failing to prepare for them and then they end up happening and catch you off guard.
The cycle is based on time, it has nothing to do with price.
You can believe whatever you want..
It is more likely both.
Previously there were blow off tops prior to a mutli-year bear market, but this is a variable not a constant.
Of course, they are not completely constant because if they were everyone
(who knows about them) would be rich.. .To a considerable degree, there needs to be differences of opinion for the markets to work.
Bitcoin's halving is a constant, arguably the only one that exists.
Yes... and it has an effect.
This constant is based on time with 98% accuracy, as it can be a month or so in advance or behind as you probably know, re mining difficulty and hashrate. By comparison, price is relatively unpredictable.
Fair enough.
Even S2F model doesn't attempt to predict a "top price", only a "fair value". Whatever that's supposed to mean...
I think that it tries to show an expectation of where the price is going to go so that any of us can see if the dog is walking above to line or below the line and how far above or below.. within 1 or 2 standard deviations of expectations (as PlanB mentioned in that same S.Livera podcast that you mentioned earlier)... so PlanB is feeling quite good if the dog is walking only within 1 standard deviation rather than 2, even though anything can happen... but if the dog is 2 standard deviations for too long then it starts to challenge the model.
Actually, I thought another point about the S2F model is that planB had determined that $100k is the median price for this upcoming halvening period.. but it seems to me that if he ends up being wrong and the median price is some other number such as $80k or $90k or $110k or some other number, then his whole model might not be broken but instead the part that attempted to determine the quantity of the next leg up may well have ended up being wrong.. so it does not necessarily negate the whole model even if there might be some need for rethinking of the four year jump quantities. Such model (or a variation of it) is not going away anymore time soon because it is so co-integrated with facts on the ground so sure maybe some unexpected future facts end up having to get incorporated to cause a shifting of the model but would not likely cause the model to be dead.
So if price only made it to a $70K ATH within 2-3 months, it wouldn't invalidate the cycle what so ever. It would only suggest that price isn't going to drop 75-80% because there hasn't been a blow-off parabolic top, but this has nothing to do with a time-based cycle, only price-based. It wouldn't suggest that there won't be a multi-year bear market. Time isn't dependant on price basically, it's an exclusive constant.
I am mostly in agreement with you on this point.
That said I still believe in $100K by 2024 (stock to flow value), as well as logarithmic growth that currently targets around $150K, but otherwise could be $200-250K if in 2023/2024.
Your numbers seem bearish as fuck and seem to want to presume the disappearance of any blow off top before there is much of any logic or evidence for such disappearance of the blow off top beyond your merely asserting it.. but whatever.. you do you. Hopefully you do not get reckt too badly with such limitations or even such presumptions that bitcoin extremes are going to smooth out... yeah right..
when was the last time that you saw a war without violence and extremes.. let's see how your stable and smooth war plays out and lovely stability lala landia..
By the way.. if Plan B is asserting that there is an average of $100k during this cycle 2020 to 2024 which means that there is a whole hell of a lot of time to make up in which BTC's prices have to trade above $100k in order to end up averaging $100k.. , and you are asserting that $100k might not get reached until 2024.. which largely seems to presume that our average for this cycle may end up around $50k..
I personally believe that there are good chances that planB's $100k average for the whole cycle could be reached even if he might be wrong by $20k or more either direction.. and you are wanting to cut his numbers in half, which just seems to be another model that is out of touch with the importance of historical facts and even current macro dynamics even though you are suggesting that your scenario would be similar... blah blah blah
They appear statistically valid to me, but simply not time-based. Ideally the 4.08 year cycle does come to an end, but only time will tell (pun intended!)
Might not.. I would not count off the ending of the cycle.. but of course, we can surely appreciate that new BTC supply is continuing to be cut in half every 4 years.
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.
Me neither. The year isn't even over and price recovered from $65K within 6 month. Multi-year bear market my ass!
I was obviously referring to a mutli-year bear market next year.
Ok.. maybe we were talking passed each other the first time around.
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.
Good advise. I'll stick to the statistics I've studied, log curves and such. I'll let Plan B stick to the "science" of stock to flow. One which few people can easily explain, let alone fully understand...
No problem.
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.
As they say in the world of math: "I don't care how you got your answer, without the workings out it's useless".
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.
Hopefully not, but if some disciples want to panic-sell over it then they are welcome to. The floor model definitely did establish a pattern of being accurate, but alas it didn't last long.
I listen to the S. Livera podcast after my last post, and PlanB is not backing away from his floor model. He is tentatively calling November an aberration and believes that we will be on target in December for $135k.. He is saying that it is based on 10 years of data.. . which also seems strange to me in terms of suggesting that such supposed upwards BTC price pressures are that damned high.. so I will believe it when I see it... if I see it.
Poll
