Sometimes I think there should be a newbie admission test in order to be able to post here. Maybe it's just me...
That would be a great thing…
The WO should be protected a bit indeed.
It’s surely the most exciting long going thread on the forum and should have only respected people at it.
Like a kind of lock on it only people with at least X-rank or something should be able to speak in here….
That would be something.
there is an Ivory tower section of the forum. This thread does not seem to fit such, even though you are likely suggesting some kind of a mini-Ivory tower, so it is not quite Ivory tower, but it is also not open to everyone and/or or anyone, like bitcoin is.
Last time, I checked bitcoin is open to everyone and anyone... Why should talking about bitcoin be any different? This thread is the troll box of the forum.. which allows the discussion of almost anything, which surely from my perspective seems to be the opposite of exclusivity.
Sometimes I think there should be a newbie admission test in order to be able to post here. Maybe it's just me...
That would be a great thing…
The WO should be protected a bit indeed.
It’s surely the most exciting long going thread on the forum and should have only respected people at it.
Like a kind of lock on it only people with at least X-rank or something should be able to speak in here….
That would be something.
A man can dream. Something like minimum 500 activity, or is it too tight? 365? Or at the very least, Sr. Member rank maybe? Anything reasonable would do, as long as we are spared the noise. Most of us are certified shitposters and already make enough noise on our own. Besides, there is style even when shitposting. Or maybe anyone could post, as it is today, but merit in this thread could only be awarded to more seasoned members. There are people here
suffering daily with ignore lists too long to show in a reasonable time. What do you think?
And could @infofront help with setting up such a filter?
Theymos would have to administer something like that. I doubt that the thread owner has very many privileges beyond deleting posts of members (which Infofront has lived up to his proclamations of minimal administration) and/or reformulating a poll. Sure, he can lobby theymos, yet I doubt that he would, since you guys are talking about ideas that go beyond the spirit and tradition of this thread... at least so far, the thread has been open to everyone and anyone, even though sometimes "we" beat up upon some of the newbies, because "we" are mean.
witnessing post once more of low coins on exchanges and supplyshock incoming
will this be the first supplyshock to witness ?
I don't know if there is any way to estimate the liquidity of the largest CEXs, but given that the influence of miners has become minimal and that ETFs buy far more than CEXs can replace, it is obvious that at some point there must be a supplyshock. However, somehow I have the feeling that there are still too many BTC on the market and that considering the price, the quantities being bought are no longer as large as before.
In addition, we still have about 1 million unmined BTC, of which just under 800 000 will be mined in the next 5-6 years, and the last 210 000 will remain for the next 100+ years. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that only then could we see real supplyshocks - unless central banks enter the game and start buying like drunk billionaires.
By the way, considering that most spot BTC ETFs use the custodial service of a well-known CEX, all these coins actually just move from one wallet to another, but remain in the possession of one and the same company.
To the extent that third parties are not overly creating paper bitcoin (and we know that some paper bitcoin are being created), then the price is going to just adapt to supply, so I have been having my doubts that there would be any exact shock, even though surely only so many folks are willing to sell and to put new supply onto the market through their selling.. so if the price suddenly doubles, it seems to me that supply is going to come available.
Regarding your last point, surely the custodian (Coinbase or whatever) is going to end up in BIG trouble if they don't have the coins that they claim to have... surely a honey pot.
That leaves me with the conclusion that 150k is a good point to sell if you expect to buy back lower..
I'm terrible at timing the market, so I gave up a long time ago.
yeah me too. Every time I sold a bunch I regretted it afterwards.
You really should only sell when you must... not to buy back lower..
however the long bear markets teached me that there are times when you really can't sell
so I want to prepare a 4-5 year fiat cushionKeeping 4-5 years in cash is a lot of fiat hanging around.. .though there could likely be ways to do some variation of that, so it probably is not totally unreasonable.. to consider..
Let's say, for example, that a person had been in bitcoin since 2017 (using your forum registration date), and sure maybe he front loaded his investment, but let's say that he largely had put most of his investment into bitcoin over a couple of years. Let's say that he put 2 years worth of his income, and so then his average cost per BTC might have had been around $10k or perhaps even less than $10k.. so maybe something like $8k per BTC.
If his income was $50k, then that would have had ONLY gotten him around 12.5 BTC, so, from my perspective, not quite enough BTC to be able to stack away 4-5 years of fiat. From my perspective, he would have had needed to get into bitcoin sooner.. Of course, if his average cost per BTC would have had been closer to $6k rather than $8k, then he would have had been able to get 16.67 BTC.. and he would be in a better place, yet still I would consider that borderline to be taking out 4-5 years of fiat from that... .. not totally unreasonable but there does not seem to be enough of a cushion to cash out 4-5 years worth of fiat.
btw I think nobody in the WO will sell his whole stash at 140k-150k
Me neither
It was a provocation hehe
No, but one could shave off 0.1% of his stash for...reasons.
Just sayin'...
exactly, it makes no sense sitting at home while hording numbers on a screen... you gotta enjoy life too !
get a nice girl have fun together and so on..
My nice girl is putting the exact same talk/pressure on me: "let's spend".
I resist....to an extent
I haven't met too many "nice girls" who don't love spending.
I don't really have any problem spending as long as there is some kind of attempts to account for it, rather than just considering the money to have had grown off of trees.
Let's say a person bought a couple of bitcoin between 2017 and 2020, so maybe the average cost per BTC is around $8k per BTC, so the total amount invested might only be around $16k... , and if that same person had been spending 10% every doubling, then maybe he would have spent something like this:
$16k - 0.2BTC = $3,200
$32k - 0.18 BTC = $5,760
$64k - 0.162 BTC = $10,368
$128k - 0.146 BTC = $18,688
So even once the sale of 0.146 BTC is made around $128k, there is still around 1.3122 BTC remain in the BTC stash.. even though nearly 0.7 BTC had been spent and nearly $30k extracted... The remaining 1.3122 BTC seems to be burning a hole in the pocket, and there might even be a desire to convert from price-based selling and into time-based selling... and one of the great things about bitcoin is that it provides options, as long as we do not end up selling too much too soon.
[edited out]
however... sometimes it's better to not tell a girl how mich money you really have...
That can be a big dilemma.
Poll
