Hmm, i don't think we're in clear waters yet.
There is lots of long liquidity in $74k and below.
Somebody wants to pick it up and the futures gap didn't always get filled.
Curious. I got my share of cheap corn yesterday, but still 80% of my buy volume is waiting on the sideline.
Since my buys had started around $120k and my outstanding buy orders go down to right around the mid-$30ks , I would give a rough estimate that right around 50% of my buying funds have been used up, yet much of those funds had been intended to be able to graduate out of the BTC funds and to be able to spend such "extra" funds without worry... but yeah, the BTC price keeps dropping.
My buy orders in the lower $74ks
got filled did not get filled yet (getting close now, as I type), then they are staggered in $2,500 increments down, and then thereafter, the buy orders are in $2k increments down if we were to get down to $69k and below.
I would rather not use the buy funds, even though such buy funds are present.
MSTR bought more Bitcoin today!
Not so sure how good that news is.
It is going to be very interesting watching Strategy attempt to avoid bankruptcy this bear market. Saylor just posted that his preferred offerings don’t even pay regular dividends. They are “return of capital” distributions. A true ‘you are the yield’ scenario. This means his shareholders won’t even be able to write off massive losses as their cost basis continues declining with each payout.
The things Strategy is doing to pump Bitcoin are so reckless, it is difficult to believe they will succeed.
This kind of shit is starting to sound like the Tether truthers all over again.
Tether has a very simple business model to create profits. They sell you digital dollars and then they earn interest on your real dollars while you earn nothing holding their digital dollars.
Tell me how Strategy profits enough to be paying more than 11% dividends to preferred shares. “Return of capital” tells the story. Tether earns free interest and pays noting, Strategy pays double digit interest and earns nothing. If they sound similar to you, you need to wake up.
If you frame the matter like that, then Tether is waiting until they earn interest (not that they are making money in real terms when it comes to the debasement of the dollar), and MSTR is anticipating that in the future bitcoin will continue to earn in the ballpark of 30% per year on average, so then in the long run, paying of 11% ends up paying off as long as bitcoin (on average) goes up at least on average of more than 11% per year... I suppose that if MSTR is thinking that they can get through both the downs and the ups, and if the upward price appreciation of bitcoin continues to average out around 30% (or perhaps at least above 11%) then MSTR will still end up profitting.
There are quite a few presumptions in MSTR's approach to bitcoin, yet a lot of the money that they had borrowed in earlier years had ended up paying off to the extent that they had been able to keep their debt levels low enough so that they ended up accumulating a lot of unencumbered bitcoin that they would have had not been able to accumulate without the various fancy financialization (debt) products.
Right from the start, I had considered MSTR playing too loosey goosey, yet a lot of what they had been doing had been working, so then during these kinds of BIG corrections, we might end up being able to see the extent to which what they are doing had been built in a way that they don't end up with having to engage in selling practices that might spiral downwards. MSTR continues to proclaim that they are not going to have to sell any BTC absent really outrageously low BTC prices, perhaps even if the prices were to get into the $20ks or lower.. so yeah, we don't always know if anyone is telling the truth (especially in the market) unless they end up getting tested in ways that are meaningfully rigorous... and MSTR has already shown various weaknesses in its armor in recent times.
Any trading experts need a new job? Fresh from the big news of a merger with SpaceX, xAI is now reportedly hiring crypto experts to teach AI models how to trade crypto. The machines will be coming for our coins soon…
I nominate Mindrust.
Why not OgNasty himself?
OgNasty must be amongst one of the smartest people (traders) (if not the smartest?) that any of us have ever come into contact with.
if an early guy were to have had been able to accumulate 138 BTC, then he could currently be in a position to sustainably support an $800k per year income with 7% per year increases
hey j can you break down the fiat tax liabilities on somesuch lifestyle plz and tia
From
the sustainable withdrawal calculating tool and other assumptions that I make in relation to the BTC price as compared with the 200-WMA, I can figure out the withdrawal rate based on achieving any particular level of BTC accumulation now, or if we were to choose a past date in which a certain quantity of BTC had been achieved an then a sustainable withdrawal rate might have had begun.
I believe that right now $800k with a 7% dollar increase forever into the future would be sustainable from a bitcoin holding that is at least 138.047 as long as the BTC spot price mostly stays at least 25% above the 200-WMA.
I really don't want to go into tax ramifications because they tend to vary so much, and I don't even think that tax ramifications is a great topic for open public threads like this, since there tends to be qute a bit of individual variance, and sometimes we might bat around various theories about how to treat taxes and we may or may not end up carrying out our accounting in the ways that we might theorize as being feasible.. and then when push comes to shove, we might end up talking about some application in one way, yet when we apply it to our taxes we might end up treating it in another way.
Other guys could jump in if they want to discuss tax ramifications of withdrawing in the ballpark of $800k per year with a 7% increase of the dollar amount into perpetuity, or at least until death do us part.
Of course if someone were to be withdrawing $800k per year from bitcoin, there are surely likely to be quite a few tax ramifications since I think in my examples from the above-cited post, I was mostly presuming like someone like pompous OgNasty into bitcoin early who supposedly had a decent amount of capital could have had fairly easily accumulated 138 BTC prior to 2013 and even without deploying a ,.ot of capital whether he had a lot or not.. . so then maybe the cost basis from someone who had been able to do much of their BTC accumulation prior to 2013 might have had been around $10 per coin - even though, sure at the same time, there could be circumstances in which the cost basis for various coins (or various tranches of coins) ends up being much higher, which is another reason that I think guys tend to need to figure out these matters based on their own circumstances.
Let's get back to what I consider the more interesting aspects (and the parts that I would prefer to talk about), which is that right now based on the presumptions of my tool,
based on today's price and the 200-WMA, a guy with 138.047 BTC would be able to cash out right around $66,667 (0.84637773 BTC) per month as long as BTC spot prices remain higher than 25% above the 200-WMA. He could have had also chosen to withdraw quarter by quarter or year by year or he could have had even attempted to strategize his withdrawal when the BTC price are high and withdraw a few years in advance and to minimize the extent to which he might end up having to withdraw from his stash when BTC prices are relatively lower (which might end up having some luck involved in regards to what the BTC price might end up being at the time when the withdrawals are made).
In the end, each of us remains responsible for trying to figure out the extent to which we might be able to try to strategize around our expectations of how high the BTC spot price might go relative to the 200-WMA or on the opposite side how low the BTC spot price might go relative to the 200-WMA. Even in recent times, I have been even starting to question some of the presumptions of my tool in regards to outside limits and/or what is extreme, yet it seems to me that if we are withdrawing within the parameters of BTC's spot price's distances from the 200-WMA, then we might at least be guiding ourselves with some cushion in terms of time and price, to the extent that we might feel that overall BTC average prices warrants making upward or downward adjustments to our withdrawal rate - which I attempt to put some ideas into the withdrawal tool (and the "how to use" instructions) about downwardly or upwardly adjusting based on BTC spot price distances from the 200-WMA.
By the way, there could be some guys who achieve way lower levels of BTC accumulation, since I was largely using 138 BTC based on OgNasty having had laughed at $80k per year as an entry level fuck you status, and so using 10x that rate (accordingly $800k per year), then I thought that several of the points could have had still been made in regards to a quantity of BTC that would have had been fairly easily attainable for guys who had opportunities to accumulate bitcoin prior to 2013.
Surely we have a lot of guys who are much more humble and even willing to admit that they live more modest lives and/or that they are willing to budget themselves, even if they also might not negate having some hookers, lambos and blow in their budgets... so surely we likely have all kinds of guys who might have anywhere between 13.8 BTC and 138 BTC who are active in these here parts, which they might consider to be enough bitcoin to go into some variation of fuck you status so that they might mostly start to get income from their bitcoin rather than income through obligatory work (I mean the work becomes no longer obligatory)..
There also could be guys here who could have had fairly easily gotten their stack of bitcoin size in the range of 13.8 BTC to 138 BTC, yet they might have had screwed up somewhere in the process - and not just mindrust, even though he appears to be an exemplary case where he likely could have had either gotten himself into the range or just at least held through the bad times and still ended up with having 10-ish BTC today (slightly below the above western life-style range).
Stop writing these lies, you really are a malicious individual. Gavin was compromised and the main reason why Satoshi left us. You never contributed a single thing to Bitcoin, you even took precious Bitcoin away from many people. You are a narcissistic fraud.
Saying good things about the guy that vouched for the scammer Craig Wright, how stupid one has to be and delusional..
Gavin fell for a sophisticated confidence trick. He should have known better and he recanted as soon as he realized what had happened. It didn't affect his ability or honesty as a developer and the whole things was used as a dishonest pretext for a coup. He was never compromised and that's a dishonest reading of the situation and defamation of a man that Satoshi handed control of the reference code to.
I think that BitHodlers was referring to likely concerns that Satoshi had around the time that Satoshi left bitcoin in late 2010 and when Satoshi gave keys to Gavin.. referring to Gavin's announcement that he (Gavin) was meeting with the CIA, which yeah, that seems contradictory to give the bitcoin source code repository keys to a guy who is considered to potentially have had already compromised himself.. and bitcoin was already open source by then, so surely the code had already been distributed on a pretty wide basis.
Gavin's meeting and errors with Craig Wright in early 2016 were "holy shit" type pieces of information (and conduct from Gavin) that were likely not as sophisticated as what you are making them out to be. Surely Gavin showed poor judgement on a lot of levels in and around his having had met with Craig but also came out to publicly support Craig.... and Gavin's conduct to publicly announce his confidence in Craig after the various errors that were not completely know also seemed to have had forced Core into a corner in terms of the seeming to need to remove Gavin as one of the five maintainers (which happened May 2, 2016) - even though Gavin had already stepped down as lead maintainer a couple of years earlier in April 2014.
Poll
