Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[Richy_T]

@ChartBuddy, I apologize for this:

FUCK YOU, BUDDY!  Fuck you, you actively malicious son of a bitch.  I hate you.

It's fine. CB isn't a pussy like Google's AI.

[death_wish]

Does anyone know if Solend developers have accounts on this forum?  Asking for a friend.

TL;DR:  “Governance” is a sham.  And this has an obvious motive:  Transparent excuses for trying to protect the SOL price.

Solend, the largest lending market on Solana is about to have a crippling liquidation of $170m SOL that could crash the network. To prevent this, the decentralized protocol is proposing to seize the user's funds via governance

https://old.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/vfszpt/solend_the_largest_lending_market_on_solana_is/

When shit starts to implode, all the true colors of decentralization comes out.

Sounds Centralized to me.

So to prevent this, they are proposing to literally steal the user's funds and execute OTC trades:

Thanks for posting that.  (And thanks for the old.reddit link.)  It is interesting to me, because I have hands-on experience using Solend—and I have read the source code to their on-chain program (customized fork of SPL lending).  They have an active developer grant program, to which I have sometimes considered applying with various ideas to enhance their protocol, or to build things based on their protocol.  I so note, just in case anyone from Solend ever reads this:  This is how you lose people.

“Governance” is a euphemism for letting shitcoin whales control a system by a hidden hand, while evading personal responsibility by ascribing centralized executive decrees to a “governance vote”.  What does the word “fiat” mean?

In some cases, I think this may be ethically justifiable—to avoid the hassle of baseless regulatory attacks, at least in theory.  At least, the theory is that if any government tries to target no-KYC, permissionless, unlicensed, totally unregulated financial systems, the answer to “whodunit?” is, “DAO did it”.  (Needless to say, my description of what some people are doing is not legal advice.)

But the general result is awful shitcoinery with financial manipulation of “governance tokens”, plus the detriments of artfully concealed centralization.

Terra did the same thing last month, when a value-stealing hardfork was executed within ten days.  The vote was blatantly rigged:  Recent LUNA buyers (i.e., everyone who bought in the crash) were prevented from staking so they could vote.  Pre-crash LUNA whales then voted to rip off new investors, and to violate peg obligations to UST holders while tossing them a handful of volatile shitcoins as a booby prize.  Against massive protest, the whole thing was pulled off by Do Kwon and a few large DPOS companies.  (One large, well-known DPOS company dissented, voted “no with veto”, and shut down their Terra operations after the hardfork.)

Not too long before that, the Juno shitcoin shamelessly stole a whale’s money with a “governance vote”.

And a few years ago, we saw what happened with STEEM:  Hostile takeover of the network using borrowed stake!

Now, if Solend seizes user funds under the rubric of “governance”—wow, just wow!  How is this different from a bank?  I mean, besides being totally unregulated so the Solend principals can do even worse abuses than a bank—whilst hiding behind the mask of “governance”.


Edited to add:  Even their rationalization is nonsense.  Transparent excuses for trying to protect the SOL price.

Yes, the DEX ecosystem on Solana may have a little struggle absorbing so much SOL in a liquidation.  So what?  This is how markets work.  And arbitrageurs would make a killing on this, trading between Solana DEXes and CExes.

Whoops!  That means the price of SOL would just... crash.  Everywhere.

Letting a liquidation of this size to happen on-chain is extremely risky. DEX liquidity isn’t deep enough to handle a sale of this size and could cause cascading effects. Additionally, liquidators will be incentivized to spam the network in an effort to win very lucrative liquidations. This has been known to cause load issues for Solana in the past which would exacerbate the problems at hand.

Every round of cascading liquidations on Solana causes “load issues” for the reason that they state!  Fsck, don’t even get me started here...

Why don’t any of these people intervene when the little people are being liquidated?  For the matter, why do they design financial systems that are ridiculously unsafe—practically guaranteed to get people unexpectedly liquidated by design?

I think they want to protect SOL.  Because they are SOL holders.

I also wonder who this whale is—and if any of the planned OTC trades could have better results for the whale than onchain liquidations.  Seizure of user funds is not necessarily adverse to the user—it could be collusive, to give one user special treatment.  Liquidations are extremely destructive to the assets of the little people.  This is my speculation—just suddenly wondering...

The whale is not closing their position.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Biodom]

While picking up Sats on these dips, here's a little impression of the recent night skies.
(180 seconds exposure at 14mm)



good night  

Awesome, thanks.

What is out there in the Milky Way?
Will we ever get to the stars?
I hope so in the next 200 years or so, but there is a huge chasm.

Before stars we would be probably have asteroid mining and gold would become a typical house decoration metal.
In fact, we would probably have a new iron (or metals in general) age.
Less oil, probably, but plenty of metals.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[philipma1957]

fuck you buddy back to 19k+

[xhomerx10]

Edit:  Damn it, Buddy.  The oracle price is just over $20k where I sit ($20,063).  Went as low as about $20,275 before it started to fall back...  Now $19,977 here.  Sigh, edit, edit.

There's no despair without hope.

 Yet by definition, despair is the absence of hope!  Despair can't exist without hope and at the same time it can only exist without hope.  Thank god there's alcohol.

Despair is often filled with false hopes.  Denial.  Self-delusion.  “Hopium”.


Not to pick on you, Homer—no offense to you personally—but I am as disappointed in some of the WO regulars as I am shocked that I violated my own advice to newbies never to mess with margin.

Despair?

When I finally got out of debt, I showed this thread with all my pathetic trainwreck-posts to the market pro who advised me to cover in February at $35k.  Heater wasn’t the first to advise me to save much more than I eventually did.  He saw all the recent posts that look worried, and told me not to waste any more of my time with the weak hands here.  Ouch.

Now, I have Jay talking to me as if I am unworried because I lack sufficient “stake” in Bitcoin.  WTF?  It’s called diamond hands.  I have diamond hands when I keep my life savings in Bitcoin.  I have diamond hands when I have money I cannot afford to lose in Bitcoin.  The only time when I crumple like tissue paper is when I get into debt, and suffer repeated liquidations.  Easy solution:  Don’t do that!

Now, we may have regained $20k—or this may be like when we so recently bounced around between $28k and $32k for awhile.  (Or before that, between $38k and $42k.)  I DGAF.  This is all short-term thinking.  And by the way, the only reason why we need to suffer these dips-for-ants is the fickleness of short-term thinkers.

When Bitcoin is up, WO is full of memes about rockets and trains.  When Bitcoin is—sad, weeping softly to itself like now, WO despairs.

If you despair, then please mindrust your coins right now so that the market can get started slowly absorbing them.

I wear no hat.  I have no “laser eyes” pic (my natural, inborn laser-eyes are good enough, thank you very much).  And as long as I am not at risk of liquidation, I honestly do not care if Bitcoin takes its time crashing for awhile before recovery.  I don’t plan to sell, so why should I be upset?

(Observing $20,041 as I write this.)

 No offense taken.  I've always thought of despair as hopelessness so in my mind, one couldn't have false hopes and despair... maybe I'm wrong but regardless, I don't despair nor do I drink; I was just riffin' on the definition.  HI-TEC99 got it and reciprocated accordingly - good one by the way!

 I can't imagine most of us (oh god... Sorry for the royal we JJG!)  in here enjoy watching bitcoin fall in value wrt various fiat currencies.  Rockets and trains just aren't appropriate at a time like that anyway so e're not going to cheer about rockets hurtling back to earth or trains stopping at another station to board more passengers but I don't think WO despairs.   Perhaps this should be the next poll question?

[xhomerx10]

fuck you buddy back to 19k+

 It's working phil!

 $20,169

[Ahli38]

maybe I'm in a state of sleep but my hands can't stop buying bitcoins at the current price. DCA has possessed me. I don't want to regret going back like when BTC was at $60k. those days are really tight. for hoping bitcoin goes down. and after going down why even the courage to recede. luckily this hand moves on its own, continues to pay in installments and buys btc by itself hahahah GHOST DCA is really terrible. 

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[xhomerx10]

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[DVlog]

When gold prices (in dollars) soared from 70s stagflation, then crashed, was it smart to sell the top?  OK, how do you know what the top is?

In gold’s extreme, extended bear market, after it started crashing, was it smart to sell at $800?  $700?  $600?  Selling for $600 and later re-buying for $300, you could have doubled your gold holding.

...$500?  $300?  $260?  Whoops!  Selling for ~$260 (IIRC^*) would have been mindrusting gold.

Holding gold is always safe, if your biggest concern is not to be stuck with less gold than you have already accumulated.

Holding BTC is always safe, if your biggest concern is not to be stuck with less BTC than you have right now.

^*  Numbers here are tossed off the top of my head to make a point.  If someone corrects any errors as Jay corrected my recollection of when Slaying the Bearwhale occurred, then... eh.  Here, at least, it will not change my point.

So you are saying investors should only accumulate gold or BTC to increase their portfolio? If you do not extract some profits from your gains and reinvest them in that same assets or something else then you are not an investor. You are more like a collector. Professional investors always circulate their money in the different asset classes. If you do not know what the bottom or upper limits are then follow the market sentiments.

If you think of yourself as an investor you must keep track of the market about what's going on. Many people think a bear market is a downside of our economy but wise investors knows this is their opportunity. You can get things with a high discount price in a bear market so buy when everyone is selling and start selling when everyone is buying. This is that simple if you do not know about price actions charts or fundamental analysis.

Semantic game, No True Scotsman, and an absurdity:  What you mean is that I am not a trader.  You are repudiating the whole concept of “buy and hold”.  (Also, you implicitly figure PnL in dollars—not in real money, i.e. BTC.  For my part, I sometimes spend BTC on investments to make more BTC.  Figuring PnL in a depreciating, perpetually devaluing currency is extremely stupid.)

You say “collector” as if there were something wrong with that.  It is funny, because I have called myself a “collector” in my own thoughts about investment strategies.  My explicit goal is to collect and to accumulate valuable things, and to keep them.

In stocks, would you call Warren Buffet “not an investor”?  Buffet is a damnfool about Bitcoin; he should stick to what he knows, and he does know stocks!  He is the most famous (and only most famous) investor who takes the extreme buy-and-hold approach to stocks.

I call the extreme buy-and-hold approach to investing:  If you buy something good, the best time to sell is never.  Selling is an admission that you made a bad call when you bought—either you bought too much of something that’s not good enough (so, reduce your exposure to it), or you bought something bad (get out! run away!).  It happens.  Nobody makes the right call on 100% of investment decisions.

Of course, it is not the only good approach.  But in my opinion, it is the only good approach that >99% of people can achieve.

I can see you agree with me here. The basic rules of investment are circulating your wealth to make more assets. It doesn't matter whether you are converting your BTC in fiat or not. The primary approach here is to increase your wealth. This is the main goal of investment and every successful investor do. The market goes ups and downs which gives investors the opportunity to increase their wealth. It is not a straight lineup. If you are not circulating your assets to buy other assets then you are just ignoring the basic rules of investment. I think nobody has unlimited money so that they can only buy and hold.

Do you know how warren buffet like investors makes a hell lot of money? They buy small stocks or real estate when the market is declining and sell it when it's strong. The rule is this simple. Then they buy bigger stock or real estate. They start small and increase that same money through investment. They are billionaires not because they only keep buying stock and hold it. No one has an unlimited bucket of money. They are billionaires because they know how to reinvest.

If your intention is not to sell ever then it is not your wealth. We do not have unlimited lifetimes.

[Wilhelm]

When gold prices (in dollars) soared from 70s stagflation, then crashed, was it smart to sell the top?  OK, how do you know what the top is?

In gold’s extreme, extended bear market, after it started crashing, was it smart to sell at $800?  $700?  $600?  Selling for $600 and later re-buying for $300, you could have doubled your gold holding.

...$500?  $300?  $260?  Whoops!  Selling for ~$260 (IIRC^*) would have been mindrusting gold.

Holding gold is always safe, if your biggest concern is not to be stuck with less gold than you have already accumulated.

Holding BTC is always safe, if your biggest concern is not to be stuck with less BTC than you have right now.

^*  Numbers here are tossed off the top of my head to make a point.  If someone corrects any errors as Jay corrected my recollection of when Slaying the Bearwhale occurred, then... eh.  Here, at least, it will not change my point.

So you are saying investors should only accumulate gold or BTC to increase their portfolio? If you do not extract some profits from your gains and reinvest them in that same assets or something else then you are not an investor. You are more like a collector. Professional investors always circulate their money in the different asset classes. If you do not know what the bottom or upper limits are then follow the market sentiments.

If you think of yourself as an investor you must keep track of the market about what's going on. Many people think a bear market is a downside of our economy but wise investors knows this is their opportunity. You can get things with a high discount price in a bear market so buy when everyone is selling and start selling when everyone is buying. This is that simple if you do not know about price actions charts or fundamental analysis.

Semantic game, No True Scotsman, and an absurdity:  What you mean is that I am not a trader.  You are repudiating the whole concept of “buy and hold”.  (Also, you implicitly figure PnL in dollars—not in real money, i.e. BTC.  For my part, I sometimes spend BTC on investments to make more BTC.  Figuring PnL in a depreciating, perpetually devaluing currency is extremely stupid.)

You say “collector” as if there were something wrong with that.  It is funny, because I have called myself a “collector” in my own thoughts about investment strategies.  My explicit goal is to collect and to accumulate valuable things, and to keep them.

In stocks, would you call Warren Buffet “not an investor”?  Buffet is a damnfool about Bitcoin; he should stick to what he knows, and he does know stocks!  He is the most famous (and only most famous) investor who takes the extreme buy-and-hold approach to stocks.

I call the extreme buy-and-hold approach to investing:  If you buy something good, the best time to sell is never.  Selling is an admission that you made a bad call when you bought—either you bought too much of something that’s not good enough (so, reduce your exposure to it), or you bought something bad (get out! run away!).  It happens.  Nobody makes the right call on 100% of investment decisions.

Of course, it is not the only good approach.  But in my opinion, it is the only good approach that >99% of people can achieve.

I can see you agree with me here. The basic rules of investment are circulating your wealth to make more assets. It doesn't matter whether you are converting your BTC in fiat or not. The primary approach here is to increase your wealth. This is the main goal of investment and every successful investor do. The market goes ups and downs which gives investors the opportunity to increase their wealth. It is not a straight lineup. If you are not circulating your assets to buy other assets then you are just ignoring the basic rules of investment. I think nobody has unlimited money so that they can only buy and hold.

Do you know how warren buffet like investors makes a hell lot of money? They buy small stocks or real estate when the market is declining and sell it when it's strong. The rule is this simple. Then they buy bigger stock or real estate. They start small and increase that same money through investment. They are billionaires not because they only keep buying stock and hold it. No one has an unlimited bucket of money. They are billionaires because they know how to reinvest.

If your intention is not to sell ever then it is not your wealth. We do not have unlimited lifetimes.

Not completely true

Investing can be done to preserve wealth from inflation. Creating more wealth is a higher goal.

Waren Buffett is rich because he only invests and hardly ever sells. He is an investor not a trader nor a speculator.
He does value investing which means he figures out what a company is worth and if the price to book ratio is favorable he invests in it. He only gets out of a company if it's stock value is higher than what the company is worth. By investing a lot he gets a seat on the board and can help the company increase in value.

Bitcoin is "rat poison squared" because he doesn't have the tools to evaluate it's true value...

My 2cts

[AnotherAlt]

Bitcoin itself: i am literally the same thing as i was when i cost a penny. What is wrong with all? y'all weirdos.




Source: internet

[JayJuanGee]

Let the market burn, as I frolic in the sunshine!

I think that we have already established that no coiners and low coiners have tendencies to be assholes in that kind of a way..

In March of 2020, I had much more BTC than I have now.  I had the same attitude.  (Insert list of previous crashes.)

But I am ideologically motivated to be in Bitcoin.  It is my primary, dominant motive—even if it conflicts with my financial interests.  That gives me a perspective different than most.

No problem.. we can agree to disagree.  I stand by my point.

Therefore one of the likely strongest solutions from contributing towards mitigating your asshole tendencies is for you to get a meaningful and substantial stake in our lil precious..

I am not subject to your judgment or anyone else’s of whether or not I have sufficient BTC.

Fair enough. It is totally up to you to determine how muchBTC to accumuate and whether you have reached enough and the extent to which you might have accumulated other assets/currencies too.

Furthermore it is totally up to you to determine how to spend your time and your mental energies, too.

 “...a meaningful and substantial stake...”  What is this, POS?

Don't get distracted. You should understand what I meant by getting  “...a meaningful and substantial stake...”  in BTC by the context, and we both should know that "proof of stake" (POS) is a different concept with different ramifications, and often used in various shitcoin circles to mislead folks into believing that there might be some meaningful competing alternative to proof of work (a core bitcoin dynamic).  If you were attempting to meaningfully engage with me in terms of what I had said and in the realm of which you should have understood that I meant, you should realize that I am not talking about that kind of nonsense... so why devolve into such a misstatement regarding what I said or what I likely was talking about?  Are you even trying?

The “no skin in the game” argument applies to those who have significant wealth in fiat, stocks, etc.  Yes, someone who has a big portfolio but only 0.05 BTC can pretty much just fork off!

But you would call me “overinvested” in BTC.  Before you pretend to pass judgment on me or analyze my “tendencies”, please dump your stocks (I don’t have any), cut your central bank shitcoin holdings to the bare minimum needed for short-term living expenses (I live simply, and I have almost no money in the bank—though when I am in wealth-building mode, I like to gather up some Tethers, etc. when that’s advantageous for cashing out to BTC at opportune moments), and figure your personal net worth in BTC as a unit of account.

You are reverting to some pie in the sky abstractions, again.

Sure, newbie normies come to bitcoin with a variety of starting points in terms of what does their investment portfolio look like

So if they are going to determine how much to allocate into bitcoin, versus what they might have allocated into other investments is likely going to differ too depending on how the various other investments look at the time that they come into bitcoin.  

In the past 12-18 months, I have been o.k with a suggestion that some of the already somewhat established newbie normies start with a 1% to 25% allocation in bitcoin, but the decision is theirs regarding where to put themselves within such starting allocation into bitcoin or if they want to go outside of my recommended starting range.. and of course it could take weeks or even a few years to go from aero towards reaching their target BTC allocation, too.

Of course, there are going to be newbie normies who do not have any other investments, so their considerations would likely be different from someone with 10, 20 or 30 years of building an investment portfolio that might even be somewhere in the $100k to $500k arena of a total investment portfolio after having had invested quite a few years into it already), and with the newbie normie who has no already established (or significant) investment portfolio, I do not mind recommending that they start out with ONLY considering their bitcoin and their cash in terms of creating some initial allocation targets.. and then perhaps getting up to a certain level of investment value.. maybe $50k or maybe some other amount that they consider to be sufficiently large to trigger some kind of diversification motivation and then at that point consider if they may well feel more comfortable to start to diversify into other assets.. Of course, with BTC's price appreciation, they could initially allocate something like $50k into bitcoin and have $10 or $20k in cash, and then if BTC ends up doing a 4x, they would then end up having something like $200k in bitcoin.. so then all of a sudden that new amount of suddenly gone from havingt $50k in value to $200k.. such an increase in amountmay well cause them some concern  - financially and psychologically;

Even with less than 0.05 BTC, I am drastically “overinvested” in BTC as % of all the money and investment assets that I have.

From the various stories that I heard form you.. it does not sound like 0.05 BTC would be overinvested, and there are not too many scenarios in which 0.05 BTC would be over invested, but I suppose you can make those kind of determinations if you believe that they adequately describe your situation in terms of helping you to figure out how you want to act going forward, if at all.

I do have an incentive now to hope for BTC to stay low for awhile, so that I can obtain more of it—preferably, at least as much as I recently had.  That is no different in principle than WOers who are hoping for BTC to stay low until their next paychecks (or whatever), so they can DCA down.  It is quite different from nocoiners/ex-coiners who hope for BTC to fail.  

You seem to be agreeing with something I already said.

And I have always enjoyed bear markets, even when I had much more BTC than now.  Divide the wheat from the chaff, give LTH the opportunity to accumulate more while there is blood in the streets.  My personal “greed and fear” index is wired to the opposite of most people’s.

Difficult to know how long BTC will stay at these prices, dip lower or even stay below the 200-week moving average.  I hardly claim to know.  You might get lucky in terms of the BTC price staying down or going lower, and you might not...

I am gravely worried about Bitcoin, because I care about Bitcoin.  

You will care more if you get some stake... or at least increase your stake.

No.  It would apply for most people; you don’t know me.

Ok.. whatever.. consider my comment to apply to the fact that we are interacting in  a public thrtead, then.

 Nonetheless, I absolutely should stack up some bitcoins.  For my own self-interest, not to meet your criteria or anyone else’s for “stake”.  

Nothing wrong with that.

Again, what is this POS type of talk?

Fuck off with your nonsense.. You should know better than that.  I am not talking about proof of stake.. are you fucking retarded?  just asking for emphasis sake.  

Fuck off with your

This is an attack.  But that is an idealistic worry—cause for worse pessimism over the state of the world—

Don't fret or worry ur lil head about those kinds of matters.

Stay focused.

You might even need some lazer eyes... unless you had merely misplaced them from earlier.  Homer can help.. perhaps.. but only those who want to be helped.

hahahahaha

If I didn’t think of these kinds of matters, I would not have any BTC at all!  “Those kinds of matters” were the motive that first brought me to Bitcoin, and these matters will always keep me holding BTC no matter what.  I did NOT buy in to see “number go up”.  I learned about that after I already had BTC.  Once upon a time, I somehow managed to spent years on this forum blissfully avoiding Speculation, before I even learned that the Wall Observer existed (sorry, you are not as famous as you think).  I still have the same essential attitude, and I always will.

I don’t need laser eyes graphics or other memes, for my own personal use.

Ok.. just trying to help.. but if you do not consider it as help, then do your own thing.. no problema.

You might need a mentor because if left to your own devices, you seem to have a predisposition to devolve away from reasonableness and prudence...

Any volunteers?

Anyone want to mentor one stubborn fuck, aka D_W?  And some other names too, but "we" just refer to him as internet dog/cat.

Thanks, but I was doing just fine until I did something that I had previously warned others against.  Although I do highly respect the intelligence and the market instincts of some of the die-hard regulars here, I do not need a WO mentor.

Ok.. fair enough..  You took my suggestion for a possible mentormuch better than I had anticipated...  

It wasn't like we saw potential mentors breaking down any doors to get involved anyhow..   I am sure that you would be a challenge as a mentee.. anyhow.

I will do much better now, if/when I fork off and ignore WO so I can get some work done.  

Fair enogh.

The market has been a perpetual distraction to me, since I have been forced to pay attention to my liquidation risk.  Now that I can ignore the distraction of short-term BTC price movements, I have good prospects to make money.

I know the feeling of the market being a distraction.. but of course, for different reasons than you.

[Richy_T]

Do you know how warren buffet like investors makes a hell lot of money? They buy small stocks or real estate when the market is declining and sell it when it's strong. The rule is this simple. Then they buy bigger stock or real estate. They start small and increase that same money through investment. They are billionaires not because they only keep buying stock and hold it. No one has an unlimited bucket of money. They are billionaires because they know how to reinvest.

Nah, they take a position and then pay politicians to make sure that position is profitable. The small-time investor is just grist for the mill. They'll pump your costs up with inflation then take your wealth when the bubble bursts. And on the rare occasion it looks like you might be stealing a march on them, they'll call up their friends and have them close down trading.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[JayJuanGee]

Gold had a two-decade extreme bear market.  Anyone who bought gold at the wrong time had to wait an awful lot longer than four years to be not underwater.  I also think that was a politically motivated economic attack, though I don’t want to get into off-topic discussion here that will derail into other matters.  (I have mentioned this in some prior post, a few weeks ago...  Something about gold-producing countries under international sanctions.)

Only fools declared gold dead.  Smart people bought gold as low as ~$260, not so very long ago.

If we can escape from erroneous thinking about Bitcoin as “like a stock”, and really start treating it as digital gold, then there is ample precedent for shrugging off much worse crashes and bear markets than I now anticipate.  As bad as this one is.  Even if we are still nowhere near the bottom—maybe; maybe not; I am realistically pessimistic, but not prepared to make a call either way.

1) bitcoin is not gold.. it is likely about 1,000x better than gold.. but still could take 50 to 200 years or more before shown in bitcoin's price relative to gold's price.

2) if you sufficiently understand bitcoin, there is likely little to no need to have gold in your investment portfolio apart from various Armageddon  scenarios that have less than a 1% chance of happening. .. so maybe you would have 1% in your portfolio at most.

3) you do what you want in terms of your choice to allocate any resources to gold... it's a free country.