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

[philipma1957]

[edited out]

btc is 17 years old put every date in a box hmm 17x365=6,205  dates
at least 5,500 are under 80k

so picking when to get in at random and hodl means you have a 5500/6205=0.886  88.6% chance of a winning day
more likely that number is 5700/6205=0.919  but I do not feel like look at every date since we hit 90k last November 13 2025. (about 425 days ago)

so 5800/6205=0.935  is the likely win percent of a random pick and hold

You are not making your point clearly, since it likely hardly matters what date you get into bitcoin if you have an investment timeline that is greater than 10 years.

Of course, if your investment timeline is shorter, such as 4-10 years based on age and/or health considerations, then your level of profits might be more important - even though it is tough to try to figure out when short-term BTC prices might go up, down or sideways.

I frequently consider that if you are buying over a long period, such as 4-10 years, then each new buy that you make has a 4-10 year holding timeline.. so it seems better to establish your position earlier rather than later, especially if you want to be able transition from buying into selling (or being eligible for selling).

Newer guys are going to have more and more coins that are less than 4 years old, and the longer guys have had been in bitcoin, then the more likely they will have coins graduating into the 4-10 year time line and then graduating into the greater than 10 year timeline.

If coins are greater than 10 years old then maybe there is likely more importance in how many coins you have rather than figuring out the extent to which they are in profits - even though presumptively we might consider them to be in profits after 10 years, even though it might be difficult to know in advance what level of profits they are likely to get to.

[edited out]

Phil - When to get in vs. What to get in makes all the difference in success of investing! So investing in stocks, it depends on which sector of stocks the random pick (with a thrown dart) is made from.  For example, the stock sector pertaining to Real Estate, Energy, Healthcare and Utilities have not been a good investment over the past ten years whereas the stock sector pertaining to Information Technology, Communication Services and Consumer Discretionary (Cyclicals) like Amazon and Tesla have been outstandingly good as investments over the past 10 years.      

I seem to recall bitcoin being good over the past 10 years, whether you had been able to front load in earlier times and even if you had been buying more recently - even though the last year has not been that great for bitcoin, yet bitcoin has continued to have short term volatility that can sometimes not play out very well, even if many folks had considered bitcoin's pattern (4 year cycle) as if it were guaranteed - which surely would be a problematic way of considering bitcoin as an investment.

We also cannot go back in history - so to the extent that we might question where to invest or how much to invest, we are considering from today, yet we also might consider in terms of investments that we already hold too, and whether we might feel it justified to reallocate from anything that we already own.  Maybe this time of the year, guys review some of their holdings - even though surely many guys might have already been reviewing their holdings prior to the passing of the calendar year, to the extent that investors might have had been considering reallocating.

I see that Tom Lee believes Bitcoin is breaking the 4-Year cycle, and he is doubling-down on his $250k price target prediction in 2026.

He has been making BTC predictions since 2017 and has never been right -- not even once.

No one seems to remember that he also signed up to be the headliner at a BSV conference.
I'm not sure if he went through with it or if he realized he was walking into a big mess before the conference. I don't know. But he was being billed.

I don't like his prediction any more than I would like that squawk box guy doing it. He does it next and we're doomed for sure. 😁
Thing is Bitcoin doesn't give a shit about them either, so this might be their stopped clock scenario.

I think that many of us have to concede that current times remain a bit confusing, and there are a lot of BIG players who seem to be engaging in attacks on bitcoin, yet they are attacking it in such a way while trying to keep it alive at the same time.. like they know it is a golden goose, but at the same time, they want to try to tame the golden goose without accidentally killing it.

Accordingly, the ongoing behaviors (some of them even seeming desperate) of various BIGGER players seems to contribute to ongoing confusion in regards to recent bitcoin price dynamics - and sure, I am not discounting UPpity... even though its becoming more and more difficult to have confidence in my own end of the quarter bet - even though with high levels of uncertainty and confusion (even if a stupid-ass thing like the "clarity act" is passed), can still end up resulting in a dragging out of price movements (meaning more ongoing flat), yet we also know that with any consolidation period, explosive periods will sometimes come into play, too... They can explode in either direction, even though so long as we have not yet been knocked of the pre-existing bull market, the odds for up seems slightly greater than the odds for down - yet even having odds in favor of one side does not assure that the opposite not end up happening.

[edited out]

PS The worse his individual predictions are behaving, the more outrageous are his long term projections.
The numbers he is throwing around now are even less likely to occur than M. Saylor's as far as non-bitcoin entities are concerned, imho.

Of course, Tom Lee's going fairly heavily into ethereum did not help his image - at least from a bitcoiner's perspective.

Well I certainly do not know the future is I. If I did I would have 1000+ BTC and I am under 2 btc.

Part of your problem is that you are so outrageous.

Even though you claim to needing such a heavy income, you already have some income coming from other sources (pension-like products and likely social security)..

So right now if you had anywhere between 14 BTC and 50 BTC, you would be set for life...

So these days, guys do not  really need very many BTC as compared with how many they might have had needed in years gone by

Right now, 14.0031 BTC is sufficient to sustain an income of $80k per year forever and ever and ever (including a 7% per year raise in the dollar amount).

Alternatively,

Right now, 50 BTC would provide for sustainable income of $285,714 per year income forever and ever and ever (including a 7% per year raise in the dollar amount).

Of course, having achieved the second quantity of 50 bitcoin would be better than having the first quantity of 14.0031 BTC, yet it seems to me that even to be able to achieve a passive income of $80k per year would be quite a great place to be even if it were to be the sole income source that a person has.

[edited out]

well yeah if you go with the slot theory that BTC is mirroring 1992-2002 gold.
gold did 200-400 in that long slot
a good thing about slot theory means the 4 year cycle died.

Even if there may be some powers that be that would like to manipulate bitcoin into some kind of stability, yet I am not even sure if the manipulating powers that be are even wishing for such a 10-ish year slot, even if they might be able to accomplish such, which is a BIG IF.

but in 2022 it took a long time to really drop say April 1 42k off Nov of 2021 67k
which is kind of like 126k in oct to 90k now

You are all over the place with trying to grasp some data that fits some kind of a narrative that you would like to highlight.. so suggesting that the drop is not yet over.. which seems more like your wishing rather than objectively analyzing what might be plausible bitcoin price directions from here.

You don't need any further context for your suggestion  that there might be more drop from here?

What is going to be the catalyst for the further drop this time?  

Remember around April 2022 that our first shoe to drop was that Terra Luna issue - but then there was a lot of cascading fall out that came from losing confidence and also underlying problems in which a lot of the leverage was not able to tolerate that level of downity  - since some of them were paying yields of up to 20% on bitcoin that were rehypothicated several times - yet one by one they were falling.. which all started from Terra Luna, yet could have had started the cascading in some other way or even could have had been delayed, which makes it difficult ot conjecture about alternative theories of events when historically we ONLY have one set of events, even if we don't necessarily completely know what were all of the components that ended up causing it to happen the way that it ended up happening.

the tank or real drop was after April 1 back in 2022 42k to 29k on may 12.
which means maybe we really tank around  April this year.

Especially if you can pay taxes in the USA with no cap gain BTC

Of course, we don't necessarily need to know the catalyst in advance, even if there still would likely need to be some kind of a catalyst that you imagine to potentially be present in order to cause further dropping, which from my point of view comes off as a mere stab-in-the-dark guess.

a good thing about slot theory means the 4 year cycle died.

the tank or real drop was after April 1 back in 2022 42k to 29k on may 12.
which means maybe we really tank around  April this year.

I don't get it? Do you mean to say you don't agree that the cycle theory is dead? If you do then we should not tank around April.

it means I do not know what will happen and that I am in doubt as to uppity sideways or down for 2026.
But I still stack all my mining coins about 0.0011 a day or 0.0330 a month

I also but a bit when I sell silver.
If I push hard I could leave the 1+ btc rank and grow to the 2 btc rank by Jan 2027

Your not knowing is probably one of the more accurate statements that you made in recent times, even though you seem to get quite a bit of pleasure in throwing out random thoughts as if those random stream of consciousness thoughts were to have some kind of plausibility behind them.

It seems that if BTC prices were to go down, then you would be able to stack more cornz for the same quantity of dollars - even though it seems quite a bit of a large question regarding any specifics about how many bitcoin that you might be able to stack in 2026, since surely there is a range - base case, best case and worse case.  

Maybe it is big so what to try talk about the whole range and/or to emphasize the best case scenario when it might not even have high odds as compared with the base case scenario.

JJG you fail to understand my random concept.

Only 420 days are over 90k and 5800 are under.

My concept shows random picks of all past days have a 92% chance of being a winner.

Hodl has zip to do with what I am talking about.

What I am talking about is an upward trending number btc price over the last 17 years.


As for the fool that does not want to compare btc price over the last 17 years to the stock market over the last 60 years

It is a simple lack of understanding of investing in number go up products.


I removed hodl time and just listed days under 90k today's price.
I removed hodl time and hinted at the market s price of 49k

BTW percent wise  the the dow today has a higher percentage of days under 49k then btc has under 90k

So in the same 17 year time frame it is more likely if you picked a dow buy vs a btc day to be ahead.
N I mb
As only 50 days are over 49k dow

And over 200 days are over 90k btc


BTW only the bots did not understand me so finally I am satisfied the JJG is a bot or a bot human hybrid at best

Along with ESG as failure to understand the random pick of the collective dates in the last 17 years has zero to do with hodl and everything to do with % of days over or under today's numbers

[philipma1957]

~

~

~

#plus,
Orlando, the cat>>
 https://prosperitythinkers.com/three-monkeys-and-cat-pick-stocks/

"  
As The Guardian describes, “While the professionals used their decades of investment knowledge and traditional stock-picking methods, the cat selected stocks by throwing his favorite toy mouse on a grid of numbers allocated to different companies.”
"

so 55 wins and 87 losses is no where near almost half in my book

68 and 74 or 69 and 73 sure

not 55 and 87.


BTW if you believe market go up you should be better off buying and holding an index mirror fund.

I remember th dow at 800 and change my childhood home was worth 50k

the market is 49k and change my childhood home is 1.2mill

both are 60x

but a lot of maintenance to keep the home going

a lot of property tax to keep the home going

so over 60 years and 60x your money

means  picking and winning at random is no big deal.  because you are betting on a number go up product.

btc is 17 years old put every date in a box hmm 17x365=6,205  dates

at least 5,500 are under 80k

so picking when to get in at random and hodl means you have a 5500/6205=0.886  88.6% chance of a winning day

more likely that number is 5700/6205=0.919  but I do not feel like look at every date since we hit 90k last November 13 2025. (about 425 days ago)

so 5800/6205=0.935  is the likely win percent of a random pick and hold

-Bitcoin is an Superior Asset, and cannot be compared with stocks.
 Even if  have shares on exchanges that represent him,
 these papers do not have the same function as Bitcoin itself.

 The coin that bought your house, lost its value, and your house still costs the same 50k,
 but correcting this loss of value that the coin had,
 it needs 1.2 m to pay the 50k that it itself was worth at the time,
 a good government coup to collect more taxes.

 The monkey lost by 1/3 against 2/3 of the fundamentalists' hits, but Orlando the cat, won with the same random choices, in a different method, even the polls seem to have random results, in this case, of course.

Children and Cats Beat the Odds (and the Experts)
In the WSJ’s 46th Investment Dartboard Contest of 2012, the darts again beat Wall Street Journal reader’s picks, as they have just over 60% of the time since 1988. Sandra Ward, the senior editor of Barron’s (an investment magazine published by the Dow Jones & Company), lost 4.5% with her picks. However, a class of sixth-graders from Fairfield, Connecticut saw their choices soar nearly 32%.

In 2013, monkeys, dartboards, school children, and financial experts faced a fierce new competitor in stock picking: Orlando the cat, a British tabby. The Observer Portfolio Challenge pitted the cat against a team of high-level financial professionals, including a wealth manager, a stockbroker, a fund manager, and a team of novice finance students from John Warner School in Hertfordshire.

Each team invested a notional £5,000 in five companies from the FTSE All-Share index at the start of the year. After every three months, they could exchange any stocks, replacing them with others from the index. At the end of the third quarter, the professionals had generated £497 of profit compared with £292 managed by Orlando. But an unexpected turnaround in the final quarter gave Orlando the lead. By the year’s end, the cat’s portfolio had increased a total of nearly 11%, ending the year at £5,542.60. The professionals finished with £5,176.60, a dismal gain of 3.52%.

 I'm not judging the knowledge of the experts, just comparing the lethal coincidences,
 which in this case, the image that xHomerx posted, reminded me...

Bot or bot-hybrid

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[goldkingcoiner]

[edited out]

Skepticism toward policy and narratives is rational but dismissing the underlying science entirely is not.

Global warming evidence is strong, Jay. It's just that the discourse around it is often misleading.

The evidence of global warming is likely not as strong as you are suggesting it to be, and the supposed global warming framework is too frequently used an excuse to downplay various other human failings.

I am not against various governmental efforts to reduce pollution or even to incentivize the production of better quality products - rather than what seems to be incentives around throw aways and/or lack of repairability..

There are many times that we are mislead by supposed science when it ends up coming up with questionable frameworks that are meant to be repeated as if they were true... and global warming seems to be one of those frameworks that lack evidentiary support.

Which aspect would you like to talk about within a bitcoin thread?  Phil wants to talk about it in terms of how land use might change in the coming 30-ish years... I don't see any reason to accept the global warming dogma, including how it had been recently been used in the context of bitcoin (and electricity usage) back before more friendly stances towards bitcoin had become the current fashion - which part of global warming do you want me to accept? and for what purpose is it necessary to consider as an acceptable framework?  land use?  resource use?  energy consumption?  resource extraction? Food consumption? or something else?

I probably have no burden in regards to provide anything to support my global warming skepticism, yet here is a recent scientific discussion of the topic on the STEM Talk podcast.

I do not know that podcast or the people on it, but NASA has very nice empirical proof: https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

All I ask for is a general acceptance it is real and not a hoax. And some characters have been leveraging unrealistic FUD about global warming for their own reasons (usually media attention) and that too is not what we should focus on.

I think the problem will solve itself soon with fusion energy. And talking of Bitcoin, I wonder what cheaper fusion energy will do for Bitcoin. Any thoughts?

[d_eddie]

I find that bearish as fuck.  This is just from bettors bets as I understand it.

nah, you read it incorrectly, imho.

The way i see it, it shows that -20K and +20K are equally possible (66-67%), but the weighted center seems to be 100K (84%), which is mildly bullish in comparison with the current 90+

..Especially if you can pay taxes in the USA with no cap gain BTC

That law is not on the 'books' yet (it's just a proposal of one congressman), so it is not relevant in the near future, probably.

Being able to pay taxes with no cap gains would be very bullish because no one would ever sell corn to pay taxes anymore. The corn would go straight from coiner to taxman, which wouldn't be able to sell because Orange Man no like it.

[d_eddie]

I think the problem will solve itself soon with fusion energy. And talking of Bitcoin, I wonder what cheaper fusion energy will do for Bitcoin. Any thoughts?

Let's see this fusion energy first. At the moment, it does not appear to be in the room with us.



Look at the guys here
How old is the youngest one?
Time waits for no one.




#haiku

[smartcomet]

https://x.com/btconometrics/article/1874311314514075772

Bitcoin represents an unprecedented monetary asset where future supply points are known with mathematical certainty. This certainty, combined with its network effects and predetermined halving schedule, creates a unique temporal phenomenon:
The exchangeable value of Bitcoin at any moment represents the temporal collapse of all future monetary phases into the present.

We are entering into "Store of Value".

Tweet deleted?

no, i can see it.
He also pinned it at https://x.com/btconometrics homepage.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[philipma1957]

three peat ugg

[ESG]

[]...~...[/]

Sir Mister Doctor Phill,  The Investor.
 Don't be mad, dont be, please

i understanded all that you said, some I agree with almost one hundred percent, others, I didn't want to ask questions, like your childhood home, which was bought at a time when paper money had value, and if this house was only maintained and nothing was improved, it would be costing much more, because money devalued, but if improvements were made, bathrooms for each room, swimming pool and many other improvements, of course it would be worth much more than the devaluation of the currency.



Choosing a property for purchase is not a random choice, and in the long run, the trend will always be appreciation, not because the property appreciated itself, but because the currency devalued, services and materials became more expensive, taxes rose, a series of factors that contribute to the rise in value, but a random choice in an asset on the stock exchange, which is expected to result in the short term, as in the examples of the experiments, both of the monkey and of Orlando, the results were expected in the period of 12 months, more or less the case of Tom Lee, who makes predictions in random numbers with expected results for 12 months, and it doesn't mean that in a longer term he didn't get it right, because he kept saying that btc would reach 100k in 12 months, but it took a few years for his one-year prediction to be confirmed.  

 In the same way that I understood your math of the days when if you bought BTC randomly, you would be in the gain, but depending on the random date, there may have been a loss, but stocks and BTC really are very different the patterns, they have always been different...Some stocks have appreciated much more than BTC in a year, and others have had a negative performance .
So man, don't need to get mad and say I didn't understand you.

..and then, after Donald Thompson took his almost rotten friend to spend a few days of vacation in NY, Brent Crude Oil was at 61,500, tried to close above 62, was almost below 60 and today hit 64 with time there will be excess supply, but for now it will be investment, so BCO is a dangerous market, and it can be worth 80, and then fall well and go back below 60, only time will tell the right.
Silver was very volatile from 75 went up from 80 and back to 75 and now it is at 79.900
Gold has remained stable, it has varied between 4350~4450, and is at 4500 now, both gold and silver are still in strong purchase and have a great possibility of beating 6200 gold this year, and 100 silver, gold always more stable.

while bitcoin after the D.Thompson event...>>> 🩸🦀🏄


When there is no need to try to make money in the short term, long-term investments will always prevail, when there is a need to make money in the short term, the risk of losing increases considerably

Why I am not surprised...I read the reference to a Fidelity study that found that the best performing accounts were those of dead people and those who lost the password, apparently.
...~...

PS The worse his individual predictions are behaving, the more outrageous are his long term projections.
The numbers he is throwing around now are even less likely to occur than M. Saylor's as far as non-bitcoin entities are concerned, imho.

 His predictions even happen, but the problem that he puts a deadline of one year,
and in fact it takes more than five years to happen...

It would be as if  he needed to create a Fomo in the difficult times for BTC,
 and then he makes these predictions for him to flow his.?..
 Or that would be his role, to always be creating these moments
of fomo for a specific audience... but for free he doesn't
 make these predictions, I'm sure not.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

JJG you fail to understand my random concept.

What else is new?

Only 420 days are over 90k and 5800 are under.

So what?  

It seems to me that there are not going to be any more days below $50k either, even though there are likely more than 4,500 days below $50k.. With the passage of time, it is not like the lower quantity (referring to price) days are still likely to happen..

My concept shows random picks of all past days have a 92% chance of being a winner.

And does that not sound like nonsense to you?

Even if we don't know the future, and even though either BTC price direction could play out, Bitcoin prices do not happen randomly.  

It seems to me that each of us should be engaging in our bitcoin management practices (whether that is accumulation, maintenance or liquidation) in accordance with expectations that bitcoin remains on an upward trajectory - even though such upward trajectory is not guaranteed.    

Accordingly, we keep accumuating until we reach overaccumulation status.

From my perspective, price does not play a BIG role when we are in bitcoin accumulation status, especially if we might be in our earliest of years of accumulation and even perhaps prior to our reaching overaccumulation status, even though I would agree that overaccumulation status might be a bit ambiguous.. since there tends to be needs for guys to take account of all their 9 personal factors.

Surely price could become a bigger deal if a guy is getting closer to overaccumulation status or that he had already accumulated enough or close to enough bitcoin - so then a transition into maintenance might be more cognizant of price.

Of course, there are a lot of guys here (in this thread) who have already reached high levels of accumulation and perhaps even overaccumulation status, yet I am not going to presume that they have reached such status, since I think that it is more fair to presume guys to be still accumulating bitcoin - even though sure, some of them aren't really in that accumulation status anymore.  Even you seem to be in accumulation status, yet you have always seemed to have been tailoring your actions around price, which seems problematic to me.. as I have repeated only like a few hundred times.

Hodl has zip to do with what I am talking about.

What I am talking about is an upward trending number btc price over the last 17 years.
 

Ok... fair enough.. even though maybe the first few years might not count very much.. yet even if we start from the beginning of 2012, the upward trending dynamic of the BTC price remains the same... so yeah, you won't get any argument from me about that, even though we cannot go back in time.  We can only figure out what we are going to do from now and into the future.
 

As for the fool that does not want to compare btc price over the last 17 years to the stock market over the last 60 years

It is a simple lack of understanding of investing in number go up products.

I removed hodl time and just listed days under 90k today's price.
I removed hodl time and hinted at the market s price of 49k

BTW percent wise  the the dow today has a higher percentage of days under 49k then btc has under 90k

So in the same 17 year time frame it is more likely if you picked a dow buy vs a btc day to be ahead.
N I mb
As only 50 days are over 49k dow

And over 200 days are over 90k btc
  

Ok... .Maybe I am still not really getting it?  I am not sure why any comparison would be needed, even though I had been frequently saying that my various non-bitcoin investments had doubled in price (more or less) since the time that I got into bitcoin, yet my bitcoin holdings is around 90x greater.  

In the short term, we could find results flip flopping around, yet we have had several instances in which bitcoin had done stair-stepping upward changes as compared with various stocks.. so that maybe we spend 90% of the time correlated, but then the various 10% of the times end up being the most important... and yeah, bitcoin has the unfair advantage of being a unique asset class (paradigm changing) but also bitcoin has been a sort-of s-curve exponential growth period that gives it another unfair advantage.

BTW only the bots did not understand me so finally I am satisfied the JJG is a bot or a bot human hybrid at best

Along with ESG as failure to understand the random pick of the collective dates in the last 17 years has zero to do with hodl and everything to do with % of days over or under today's numbers

Maybe I should have taken my Ritalin today? in order to address the ADD... Do bots take Ritalin?  It's a trick question, and yeah I would imagine that the human side of any bot hybrid would step in from time to time to help out the bot.. to make sure that the bot does not fall too far off of the rails.

[edited out]

I do not know that podcast or the people on it, but NASA has very nice empirical proof: https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

All I ask for is a general acceptance it is real and not a hoax. And some characters have been leveraging unrealistic FUD about global warming for their own reasons (usually media attention) and that too is not what we should focus on.

I think the problem will solve itself soon with fusion energy. And talking of Bitcoin, I wonder what cheaper fusion energy will do for Bitcoin. Any thoughts?

I am not too excited about carbon dioxide levels being evidence of global warming, even though they are evidence of human activities (and industrial activities) existing and increasing on the planet.  I think that there is strong evidence that cities are warmer than their surrounding areas, especially if trees have been cut down.  I am pro-tree and pro vegetation and I even like the idea of keeping some natural areas natural, yet surely we also have questions of how those natural areas might still be managed.. ideas of controlled burns or whatever.

[edited out]

Being able to pay taxes with no cap gains would be very bullish because no one would ever sell corn to pay taxes anymore. The corn would go straight from coiner to taxman, which wouldn't be able to sell because Orange Man no like it.

I like the idea of being able to pay taxes with bitcoin.. yet I can imagine government folks having ongoing monitoring and control issues and ongoingly wanting to go down various KYC routes and source of funds bullshit... so trusting governments can surely be a wee bit of a problem when they continue to be abusive in their ways of manipulating people in terms of financial freedoms and/or privacy..

Maybe there would need to be a practice and/or preference for normies to send from a mixer.. yet sending from a mixer might just trigger the taxman to  audit..  rather than letting bygones be bygones... Many governments seem unwilling and/or able to control themselves.. and perhaps seemingly ongoing states of desperation do not really seem to help them to relax, either.. and to just let people be people.

You know what got the Samurai developers locked up?  Probably freedom of speech.  Governments do not like people to speak freely, which seems to have had been what the Samurai developers were convicted of.  Both of them need to be pardoned.

Look at the guys here
How old is the youngest one?
Time waits for no one.

Young guys tend to take time to build up their income, and surely some young guys are more challenged than others to get themselves into situations in which they are making enough discretionary income to be able to buy bitcoin, even though bitcoin allows for small investment amounts.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Biodom]

I don't necessarily dismiss the @philipma1957 hypothesis about the similarity with the gold's $200-400 "slot" between 1984 and 2004 (albeit it was not really a slot, but a fast decline from $800 first (1979-1982), then slow decline until 1999-2000, then slow rise until 2004).

To me, the conundrum is why bitcoin decoupled from everything else (stocks, bonds, gold, silver, other metals, other commodities) in the last quarter of 2025.
I can't find any coherent explanation.
Some thinks that it was a deliberate attack, others blame OGs who strictly adhered to the four year cycle timing.
It could also be a combination of factors (which is the likeliest explanation):

Here is a scenario-watching negative flows from OGs starting at the end of July with that $9bil (80K btc) sale, Wall Street players designed and executed a scheme where they spooked the market with an MSCI rumor that was released exactly when POTUS also declared additional 100% tax on China. You cannot blame WS because they always try to liquidate the leverage players-it goes without saying. The combination of all three factors (OG selling, MSCI rumor and POTUS China tariff threat) affected the weakest link-some obscure stablecoin (worth $12 bil or so), which un-pegged (destabilized), caused collateral liquidation, affecting market makers. Bitcoin was initially affected the least, but market structure damage was done and market had to find a new equilibrium 30% lower.

What does it tell us about 2026?
Not much because there is a 50:50 probability that instead of bitcoin catching up to the markets upswing, other markets might meet bitcoin in the basement.
Currently, I continue to be optimistic while considering various scenarios.

Alternatively, it might be that bitcoin signaled the upcoming deflationary impulse probably caused by AI affects on employment and general (non-investment) income.

PS: On a personal note: it has become exceedingly difficult to sell something at a decent value on ebay.
No mater what price you put the item at, somebody always asks to pay 30-50% less.
Whether this indicates that populace is out of money or expects deflation, it is difficult to know.

[JayJuanGee]

I don't necessarily dismiss the @philipma1957 hypothesis about the similarity with the gold's $200-400 "slot" between 1984 and 2004 (albeit it was not really a slot, but a fast decline from $800 first (1979-1982), then slow decline until 1999-2000, then slow rise until 2004).

To me, the conundrum is why bitcoin decoupled from everything else (stocks, bonds, gold, silver, other metals, other commodities) in the last quarter of 2025.
I can't find any coherent explanation.
Some thinks that it was a deliberate attack, others blame OGs who strictly adhered to the four year cycle timing.
It could also be a combination of factors (which is the likeliest explanation):

Here is a scenario-watching negative flows from OGs starting at the end of July with that $9bil (80K btc) sale, Wall Street players designed and executed a scheme where they spooked the market with an MSCI rumor that was released exactly when POTUS also declared additional 100% tax on China. You cannot blame WS because they always try to liquidate the leverage players-it goes without saying. The combination of all three factors (OG selling, MSCI rumor and POTUS China tariff threat) affected the weakest link-some obscure stablecoin (worth $12 bil or so), which un-pegged (destabilized), caused collateral liquidation, affecting market makers. Bitcoin was initially affected the least, but market structure damage was done and market had to find a new equilibrium 30% lower.

Are OGs selling in the room with us now?

Take that OGs selling with a decently large grain of salt, since it hardly makes any sense...and surely certain powers that be are able to get coins to dump and to make various proclamations.

What does it tell us about 2026?
Not much because there is a 50:50 probability that instead of bitcoin catching up to the markets upswing, other markets might meet bitcoin in the basement.
Currently, I continue to be optimistic while considering various scenarios.

Yeah.  You sound really optimistic.  

Alternatively, it might be that bitcoin signaled the upcoming deflationary impulse probably caused by AI affects on employment and general (non-investment) income.

PS: On a personal note: it has become exceedingly difficult to sell something at a decent value on ebay.
No mater what price you put the item at, somebody always asks to pay 30-50% less.
Whether this indicates that populace is out of money or expects deflation, it is difficult to know.

For 100, I will go with "populace out of money" on this one, Biodom.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[WatChe]

I do not know that podcast or the people on it, but NASA has very nice empirical proof: https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

All I ask for is a general acceptance it is real and not a hoax. And some characters have been leveraging unrealistic FUD about global warming for their own reasons (usually media attention) and that too is not what we should focus on.

I think the problem will solve itself soon with fusion energy. And talking of Bitcoin, I wonder what cheaper fusion energy will do for Bitcoin. Any thoughts?

Climate change is a reality, specially south Asian countries are experiencing drastic change in climate. Summers are getting more hot and their duration is also increasing. This is something I personally experiencing because I belong to that region. 

New Human inventions are doing more damage to environment then good.

Traditionally paper bags were used and we were told that to stop deforestation, plastic is the solution and today we are reverting back to paper bags to stop plastic pollution.

 

[OgNasty]

I do not know that podcast or the people on it, but NASA has very nice empirical proof: https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

All I ask for is a general acceptance it is real and not a hoax. And some characters have been leveraging unrealistic FUD about global warming for their own reasons (usually media attention) and that too is not what we should focus on.

I think the problem will solve itself soon with fusion energy. And talking of Bitcoin, I wonder what cheaper fusion energy will do for Bitcoin. Any thoughts?

Climate change is a reality, specially south Asian countries are experiencing drastic change in climate. Summers are getting more hot and their duration is also increasing. This is something I personally experiencing because I belong to that region. 

New Human inventions are doing more damage to environment then good.

Traditionally paper bags were used and we were told that to stop deforestation, plastic is the solution and today we are reverting back to paper bags to stop plastic pollution.

Just a reminder that no amount of taxes or regulation is going to stop the oceans from boiling one day. The only real solution to global warming is space exploration.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com