But I see that so many people seem to be caught up in some kind of mental framework that if the actual high does not happen within the four year fractal.. as scheduled by the pundits, therefore, the odds for the high happening after that same framework has diminished greatly..... or were the odds always not much more than 50/50 anyhow?
Price prediction in a growth phase is a paradox. We are sure that the price is going up in a long enough time. If it is predictable that the price would be up and at X at time T, the smart thing to do would be to buy large amounts at anything <X right now and sell at T for guaranteed profit. That would immediately drive the price to X. The only way this resolves is for the price to be hard to pin down except in generalities. In fact, the tighter you make the analysis, the harder the price is to pin down.
Either Clarke or Asimov wrote a story based around this principle.
In other words, HODL!
There is something wrong with your way of framing the matter because even if we might be able to measure a kind of overall consensus for something like in four years, the BTC price will be higher than it is today, there remains a whole hell of a lot of need for the passage of time.. and also to work it all out because even with consensus there remains a lot of individual variance within that... and the concreteness of individuals needing to act with the passage of time... no way to really lock them in, even if logic and emotions might add up to a kind of proper conclusion about what they should be doing.
Another problem with buying a lot at time T (before the 4 years has passed) is that even though people seem to have natural inclinations to want to gamble, they do not tend to have enough patience to bet on something 4 years in advance and to lump sum into it... that is if they were even capable of such lump summing in the first place.. because one thing is reallocating equity, but another question is whether there is any equity that remains that can reasonably be dedicated for 4 years.... so yeah, people do that for houses all the time, but even with their houses they are not exactly responsible in terms of how they build their equity.. and if they might end up leveraging any bit of equity that they do end up building in such asset.
DCA continues to seem to be a powerful way to even bet 4 years out, so long as the level of aggressiveness is not greater than assuring that other foreseeable and somewhat unforeseeable matters are covered for that time period....
For example, even though you are likely going to be better off by employing a $100 per week (or even more aggressive) BTC DCA strategy, you are also going to get fucked, if you have not sufficiently budgeted your expenses that you might end up having to dig into such BTC investment as if it were some kind of short term emergency fund or savings that is not adequately small enough that you are not going to be tempted to dip into it... so in that regard, you gotta really have your shit together so that you are ongoingly buying BTC.. and not dipping into it in order to get to a sufficiently high level that you are actually able to build principle with the passage of time.. rather just spinning your wheels in place and barely getting anywhere because from time to time you need to dip into such reserves because you do not have the rest of your finances/psychology in order.
There's a real life concrete reality that people have to deal with, and that is part of the reason also why the efficient market hypothesis is full of shit because even though in theory it may well seem like a known quantity (such as the halvening) should already establish the BTC price in advance because it is so damned fixed and known in advance, but part of the fact of the matter remains that there are relevant actors who have no fucking clue about what bitcoin is and they are going to be acting on their own in the future to actually help to create the BTC price dynamics in T+4 years, so even if others are speculating on their behalf and bidding the BTC price up on behalf of those who are not participating at time T and even hoarding their share based on expecting what they are going to do in T+4 years, it still matters what the ones who come into the space actually do in T+4 years rather than just theorizing about how they are going to feel about it and what actions they are going to take T+4 years down the road (when they probably should have been acting at time T, but they did not).
Many of us have not always known (or had high confidence) about whether what we suspect is actually going to play out, but several of us long-termers in bitcoin are coming to realize (and we might not even be completely convinced) that Saylor is largely more correct than he is not in terms of the benefits of buying as much BTC as you can at time T and continuing to do so all along the way.. even accounting for having some pretty good ideas about where BTC is going to be higher at T+4, but T+4 does not end for him and he keeps buying all along the way in getting to T+4 so T+4 just starts another T+4 once arriving at the initial T+4.. so it never ends.. just like the jelly tomorrow idea in the
Through the Looking Glass scene with Alice..
and I am not even saying that they whole process of having a T+4 years measuring timeline to be futile.. because action in lines with ongoing accumulation of BTC still does help to cause tomorrow and even T+4 to become better.. even if T+4 only ends up coming if you act rather than waiting for later to act... but surely, not everyone acts and not everyone is sufficiently confident enough to actually go through the motions of actually dedicating the time needed to act even if their logic and emotions might be telling them that it would be for their own good to act now rather than waiting.
...but even if the longer-term bitcoiners are increasingly knowing that there are ongoing needs to establish space within the limited real estate, ongoingly there are new actors into bitcoin that either do not know that or believe that or they actually cannot discipline themselves well enough to actually have a plan that allow them to continue to buy no matter what the BTC price... so many folks want to be smarter than the market.. even if they have decently strong consensus that T+4 years the BTC price will be higher than today, but in the meantime, they are considering either that their strategy is going to allow them to accumulate more coins between now and T+4 years or that they really feel that they need to reward themselves along the way (even after they got started).. because T+4 years never really comes, because even if such smarter than everyone else newbies get to T+2 years, the new T+4 years ends up being T+2+4(6) years because ongoingly we have to account for the passage of time, and act based on where we are at any given moment, and you cannot really short-cut T+4 years merely by trying to get in front of it, even if you have pretty decent ideas about knowing where it is going, and we cannot just transport ourselves from T to T+4 years without actually going through the process of ongoingly accumulating BTC and sticking with some meaningful variation of our original plan (whether accumulate through DCA, or HODL or some variation of complementary practices that might also involve lump sum investing and buying on dips.. without getting too smart for our own good and lose what should be our ongoing BTC accumulating focus (if that's the stage that we are in at time T?)).
Poll
