Some misunderstandings of my wordings to clarify...
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.
Don't worry I'm not getting too excited about the idea of a bear market, as requires a lot of patience, nor focusing on down before UP.
I've been clear about believing in $100K-150K by end of bull market, likely early 2022, rather than end of 2021.
My discussion of the future isn't correlated to any present.
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.
I think you've completely misunderstood me here. I made it clear previously that I considered a 75-80% drop with a multi-year bear market, only if price goes parabolic with a blow-off top. The usual 80% drop would be based on the usual parabolic top, ie it's conditional of such an event. I've also been clear about a much lesser correction if say $69K were the top, which is far from parabolic, but would simply be a recovery that failed to move much higher. In this sense I completely agree that $28K would therefore likely be the bottom, with the exception of a fake-out lower to trap bears, mirroring $69K trapping bulls.
Hence why I'm much less concerned about the idea of a multi-year bear market if $69K were the top, unlike others in this thread, as I think $30-35K would therefore become the new bottom in a years time, based on the 200 Week MA trajectory for a bottom, that will continue to rise as 2018 candles between $6K-10K get replaced for much candles at a much higher price. This would effectively mean consolidation for a year between $28K-69K for approximately 20 months, which wouldn't be out of the question for an emerging market. For example if price topped out in 2017 at $7.5K or $10K, as opposed to $20K, I still think $3/4K would of ended up being the bottom, ie the 200 Week MA, which would have largely remained unaffected. I also wouldn't have an issue with such a long consolidation period within a close range, probably have to go and get another job in order to simply DCA again, as I imagine shorting the market would be a bit of a nightmare without (m)any crash-like events.
Personally, I plan for the present as well as the future. I always have a plan for the future, that I then implement when if/it comes the present. Not having a plan for the future often leads to making irrational decisions in the present based on emotion, which is what I try and avoid at all costs, as usually it leads to costly mistakes. I otherwise try and plan for every eventually possible, so that my decisions in the present aren't influenced by the present that's usually overloaded with emotional and irrational sentiment, rather than pre-determined decisions I made in the past. And yes, I have taken into consideration every single eventually possible and how I would react to, despite how exhausting that concept might sound to you or anyone else. This is what I've done for years now to remain prepared.
Please don't get confused by me otherwise being prepared for every eventually possible, as I'm well aware 99.9% of those won't occur and only 1 scenario I've accounted for will actually take place.
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..
Personally I don't think Bitcoin is quite there yet, being worth $1 trillion is peanuts to the idea of a reserve asset, unless you want to make a cheap joke at a party, or a your a rocket scientist wanting to take a shot. For sure I believe this will happen in the future, but I think much more likely around the $5-10T mark it will be taken and treated seriously in this manner, which still wouldn't quite be a $1 milion Bitcoin price either.
You are completely right though, most will simply get rekt or otherwise miss out on a lot of weath preservation, as this is exactly how markets work. The majority lose when trying to trade or be a "smart investor", while the minority succeed. After all, if it was that easy to make money out of this market or others, everyone would be doing it and nobody would have to work for a living.
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.
Yes this is true, it's only the beginning in this sense.
\
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.
I think these days it's more likely that most will ride it out, and some will take profits, unlike in the previous cycles. At least earlier investors much less likely to take profits these days IMO, unless actively trading. Many investors these days are doing so on the basis that Bitcoin
could become the dominant global currency and therefore no.1 reserve asset, therefore selling isn't really an option.
People are much more aware of a 10 year history of profit taking being not only very difficult to do, but 95-99% regrettable in the long-term unless the intention is to re-invest, which usually it's not. Most aren't studying this on a daily or weekly basis for years, they have simply done their X/XX amount of hour of due diligence and taking a leap of faith. Which is obviously also a good thing for the price stability for Bitcoin as well. At least these days those I come across invested in Bitcoin aren't evangelists like those in this thread, they are simply taking the advise of them in order to invest money in a smart manner.
They are mainly all waiting for $1 million, which at a $20T+ market value, roughly speaking, wouldn't be the worst time to take profits either - as by that value fiat probably won't exist anymore anyway, it'll simply be considered as spending money. I'm personally of the opinion that there is not much price above $1 million BTC, that's simply when fiat currencies become redundant, as I fail to see how they would compete. You could argue that it will continue to go to $10 million, $100 million, $1 trillion price in a short matter of time, but that's simply because $ will be worth toilet paper and no longer utilized so the gain won't be realised. If will only be comparable to the likes of Gold or the stock market, which I imagine it would still be able to outperform for a while, especially with more stocks & Gold sold for Bitcoin etc.
I guess the gold reserves being liquidated into Bitcoin will maintain it's steady growth, but the general adoption by Western counties of Bitcoin as it's national currency will be a lot more relevant.
Just my theory anyway
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.
It does hurt sometimes, but I've never considered hard work to be easy. I take regular breaks, that's the important thing, as otherwise hundreds of charts can literally blind me from reality when I'm "in the zone". Often I'm simply reluctant to pay attention, which has it's ups and downs. At least with good risk management you can simply "ignore" and not have to worry about anything, only loss of income. As I've mentioned it before, I don't do research and fuck around with that nonsense, too many unrelaible variables, I just do it all statistically via risk/reward analysis. Some weeks are busy, other months there's no work to be done and it's already done. Ideally a solid trend in one direction or another limits the amount of labour. Ideally I'd be a good programmer and have a bot do my work for me
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.
Now we're on the same page. I still see a blow-off top happening, as there's simply no reason not to have one this time as I don't see anything relevantly different, yet.
I'm also not ruling out the idea of that it doesn't happen either, but not having one and $69K being the top is much less of a concern to be honest.
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.[/quote
Well yes, this I completely agree with and what I've been preaching, being prepared for every eventuality possible, in order to be positioned for every eventuality possible
The cycle is based on time, it has nothing to do with price.
You can believe whatever you want..
It is more likely both.
Ok well price is the variable, time is the constant, to put it differently. It's both, but price doesn't effect time. Time does affect price however.
The only correlation is time has previously determined price's up and down movements, but it hasn't determined
precise tops or bottoms so much.
This would moving averages for example, or other metrics, that combines both time & price factors. These I like
Even S2F model doesn't attempt to predict a "top price", only a "fair value". Whatever that's supposed to mean...
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.
The whole floor price model nonsense doesn't negate S2F at all no, as I said previously, reaching that median price even only by 2024 ($80K-100K whatever), would confirm it. Many people seem to think these models are dependant on each other, but this couldn't be further from the truth. The floor model was dependant on S2F, but S2F isn't dependant on the floor model as it were.
What can I say, people are easily confused, hence they often lose a lot of money or value in this market
My targets were minimums, not maximums. I don't see how having an infinite and undetermined possible value of a Bitcoin top is bearish?
I'm starting to learn why so many people do get rekt in this market when misinterpreting analysis to be honest though, no offence.
Many people make the mistake of selling short-term strength as opposed to longer-term weakness, I do not however.
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..
Again, I'm not. I clearly said
by 2024, not
until 2024. So for reference sake that could be today, tomorrow, end of year, next year, 2023, or even 2024 itself.
Again, a complete misunderstanding of what I said. I merely explaining what would invalidate Plan B's model - nothing until 2024 at earliest basically.
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.
Plan B is starting to sound like a denialist. He had a model that worked for 10 years of data, good for him. it's useless now though so best to move on. 75% accurate is poor quality. He's basically trying to blame the market as being wrong, as opposed to a model that has clearly failed him. His S2F still works, he should stick to that if you ask me. Or just make another model, ideally.
Poll
