Analysis

[Millionero]

https://t.me/wangabtc/171

the Big Beaver has a new post on Telegram.  He posted an image of some Russian text, something he was quoting.   I used the Google Translate camera and the translation came out:

Termination of Russian gas supplies threatens Europe with at least 10 years of recession.  So say German analysts.  At the same time, the world's energy crisis has been predicted for a long time.  Now it is getting worse.  That's what I've been saying for a long time, including here.  We are waiting for 10 years.  And Russia.  And not Russia, And all.

Vanga's own comment is this

Boт и я гoвopю дaвнo, в тoм чиcлe здecь. Hac oжидaeт 10 лeт пoлнoй ().()
И Poccию. И нe Poccию. И вcex.

which translates as

That's what I've been saying for a long time, including here.  We are waiting for 10 years of full ().()
And Russia.  And not Russia.  And everyone.

If you've been reading the eggheads on the macroeconomic implications of this geopolitical clusterfuck, there's a lot more to it than just recession.  This will lead to a sea change in the way sovereigns treat money, away from trusting permissioned fiat (i.e. the dollar, SWIFT, U.S. Treasuries etc.) and toward commodity money.
The confiscation of Russia's reserves has put the nations of the world on notice that the capital they've saved up through decades of trade can simply disappear at any moment.  
Say good-bye to dollar hegemony, and light a candle for the memory of Bretton Woods.
Say hello to massive inflation in the West, and celebrate the birth of a new Russia/China axis.

[Millionero]

Another Telegram post from the master a few days ago:

Бeзoпacнo пaдaть мoжнo aж дo 35700. Пoкa дepжимcя дoлгocpoчнoгo вocxoдящeгo тpeндa.

We are safe to fall right up to 35700.  For now, we are holding on to a long-term trend.

[birr]

Bcё-тaки зaтяжнaя мeдвeжaтинa этo peaльнocть. Oчeнь бы xoтeлocь eщё нa coтoчкy cxoдить, нo yвы и ax. Bce тaки нa нeдeльныx paзвopoтнaя фигypa двoйнoй тoп. Этa вcя xyйня бyдeт пaдaть нa 9к. Brace...

Still, lingering bear meat is a reality. I would very much like to go another hundred, but alas, ah. All the same, on the weekly double top reversal pattern. All this bullshit will fall on 9k. Brace...

Can one of the Russian speakers please confirm or disconfirm whether Beaver is saying bitcoin's price could hit $9k?

[Wind_FURY]

Bump. masterluc's last post in TradingView.

Does anyone know what masterluc's latest projection on Bitcoin currently is and his latest takes on the market in general? This was his last post in TradingView, https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/zzbhCPLm-Long-term-targets-approaching/

That was posted last October 2, 2021. That's two years ago, and he was always very bullish. Perhaps it's the same bullishness today, but maybe that changed when QT started + Russo-Ukraine War?

[Millionero]

Bump. masterluc's last post in TradingView.

Does anyone know what masterluc's latest projection on Bitcoin currently is and his latest takes on the market in general? This was his last post in TradingView, https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/zzbhCPLm-Long-term-targets-approaching/

That was posted last October 2, 2021. That's two years ago, and he was always very bullish. Perhaps it's the same bullishness today, but maybe that changed when QT started + Russo-Ukraine War?

follow "Bitcoin Beavers" onTelegram

[G_Besar]

follow "Bitcoin Beavers" onTelegram

Can Bitcoin Beavers help provide the best analysis for Bitcoin prices that will run in the market? I have never found Bitcoin Beavers via Telegram because I didn't know that there was a group for analyzing Bitcoin prices. So before I join Bitcoin Beavers, I want to know your explanation about what things are discussed in Bitcoin Beavers. Because I still think that making an analysis about anything is not easy enough for everyone, especially when it comes to the price of Bitcoin.

[birr]

follow "Bitcoin Beavers" onTelegram

Can Bitcoin Beavers help provide the best analysis for Bitcoin prices that will run in the market? I have never found Bitcoin Beavers via Telegram because I didn't know that there was a group for analyzing Bitcoin prices. So before I join Bitcoin Beavers, I want to know your explanation about what things are discussed in Bitcoin Beavers. Because I still think that making an analysis about anything is not easy enough for everyone, especially when it comes to the price of Bitcoin.

Dude, Bitcoin Beavers is masterluc.  The OP who started this thread years ago.

[Wind_FURY]

Masterluc's post in Bitcoin Beavers, 👀

Mecячнaя кapтинa. Cвeчa чeтo нe cпeшит выйти вышe бб. Ecли oнa зaкpывaeтcя нижe, знaчит цeнa пиздyeт нa мa20. A ecли тaк, тo этo пoxoжe нa пoлнoцeннyю зигзaг кoppeкцию вceгo импyльca c 15к нa 107к. Пo Фибoнaччи мoжнo вычиcлить чтo впoлнe мoжeт cxoдить нa 50-60к.

Translated through Google Translate,

Monthly picture. The candle is in no hurry to go above the bb. If it closes lower, it means the price is screwing up at MA20. And if so, then this looks like a full-fledged zigzag correction of the entire impulse from 15k to 107k. Using Fibonacci, you can calculate that it may well go to 50-60k.

Masterluc made good analysis and projections on the price of Bitcoin during previous cycles, but crashing to a $50,000 to a $60,000 price level might be very low probability, no?

I don't believe it will happen, but that would suggest that Chad Saylor would get a margin-call, or probably will be forced to liquidate part of his investment which could cause another crash below $50,000?

[JayJuanGee]

Masterluc's post in Bitcoin Beavers, 👀

Mecячнaя кapтинa. Cвeчa чeтo нe cпeшит выйти вышe бб. Ecли oнa зaкpывaeтcя нижe, знaчит цeнa пиздyeт нa мa20. A ecли тaк, тo этo пoxoжe нa пoлнoцeннyю зигзaг кoppeкцию вceгo импyльca c 15к нa 107к. Пo Фибoнaччи мoжнo вычиcлить чтo впoлнe мoжeт cxoдить нa 50-60к.

Translated through Google Translate,

Monthly picture. The candle is in no hurry to go above the bb. If it closes lower, it means the price is screwing up at MA20. And if so, then this looks like a full-fledged zigzag correction of the entire impulse from 15k to 107k. Using Fibonacci, you can calculate that it may well go to 50-60k.

Masterluc made good analysis and projections on the price of Bitcoin during previous cycles, but crashing to a $50,000 to a $60,000 price level might be very low probability, no?

I don't believe it will happen, but that would suggest that Chad Saylor would get a margin-call, or probably will be forced to liquidate part of his investment which could cause another crash below $50,000?

You are both retarded. 

I addressed this previously in another thread about Saylor not dealing with collateral in the MSTR leverage and/or other financial instruments being deployed, yet you still speak the same nonsense with a presumption that Saylor has to sell BTC merely if the price were to go below his cost per BTC or some other nonsense that you are either making up or you are reading other retarded pieces of information and then parroting such nonsense.

Regarding Masterluc, he doesn't seem to have a great record in regards to calling BTC price correction levels, and even a claim of anything in the $50k to $60k  arena would likely mean that our bull run is over, which I doubt that it is over, even though surely we have some decently good downward momentum that has already brought us to the lower $80ks so price drops into the $70ks would not be out of the question... .. but yeah, I tend to be a bit reluctant to figure out bottoms in these kinds of circumstances. 

As I type this post, so far we have a price correction of about 24% from $109,356 down to $83,377.  It is not an unusual level of correction, so far, even though  surely we had remained above $90k for most of the time between mid-November to present (nearly 3.5 months), so maybe we got spoiled with those ongoing supra $90k prices for such a long period? 

I would suggest that even though our current price correction is likely to continue to shake out some weak hands, we also may end up with a situation of many sellers experiencing a reversal and not being able to buy back lower, as they had hoped.

[Wind_FURY]

Masterluc's post in Bitcoin Beavers, 👀

Mecячнaя кapтинa. Cвeчa чeтo нe cпeшит выйти вышe бб. Ecли oнa зaкpывaeтcя нижe, знaчит цeнa пиздyeт нa мa20. A ecли тaк, тo этo пoxoжe нa пoлнoцeннyю зигзaг кoppeкцию вceгo импyльca c 15к нa 107к. Пo Фибoнaччи мoжнo вычиcлить чтo впoлнe мoжeт cxoдить нa 50-60к.

Translated through Google Translate,

Monthly picture. The candle is in no hurry to go above the bb. If it closes lower, it means the price is screwing up at MA20. And if so, then this looks like a full-fledged zigzag correction of the entire impulse from 15k to 107k. Using Fibonacci, you can calculate that it may well go to 50-60k.

Masterluc made good analysis and projections on the price of Bitcoin during previous cycles, but crashing to a $50,000 to a $60,000 price level might be very low probability, no?

I don't believe it will happen, but that would suggest that Chad Saylor would get a margin-call, or probably will be forced to liquidate part of his investment which could cause another crash below $50,000?

You are both retarded. 

I addressed this previously in another thread about Saylor not dealing with collateral in the MSTR leverage and/or other financial instruments being deployed, yet you still speak the same nonsense with a presumption that Saylor has to sell BTC merely if the price were to go below his cost per BTC or some other nonsense that you are either making up or you are reading other retarded pieces of information and then parroting such nonsense.

I'm the stupid one as I have mentioned many times before. But just for clarification's sake, what would happen if Bitcoin's price crashes below Chad Saylor's cost-basis? Let's pretend there was a Black Swan event and Bitcoin crashed to $30,000. That's a a little bit over 50% below Chad Saylor's cost basis of $67,000.

I don't believe that "nothing" will happen, because he used his company as collateral. The company will either need to do corporate restructuring or liquidate part of the company's position, which either path taken, will be a loss in the company's balance sheet.

  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[JayJuanGee]

Masterluc's post in Bitcoin Beavers, 👀

Mecячнaя кapтинa. Cвeчa чeтo нe cпeшит выйти вышe бб. Ecли oнa зaкpывaeтcя нижe, знaчит цeнa пиздyeт нa мa20. A ecли тaк, тo этo пoxoжe нa пoлнoцeннyю зигзaг кoppeкцию вceгo импyльca c 15к нa 107к. Пo Фибoнaччи мoжнo вычиcлить чтo впoлнe мoжeт cxoдить нa 50-60к.

Translated through Google Translate,

Monthly picture. The candle is in no hurry to go above the bb. If it closes lower, it means the price is screwing up at MA20. And if so, then this looks like a full-fledged zigzag correction of the entire impulse from 15k to 107k. Using Fibonacci, you can calculate that it may well go to 50-60k.

Masterluc made good analysis and projections on the price of Bitcoin during previous cycles, but crashing to a $50,000 to a $60,000 price level might be very low probability, no?

I don't believe it will happen, but that would suggest that Chad Saylor would get a margin-call, or probably will be forced to liquidate part of his investment which could cause another crash below $50,000?

You are both retarded. 

I addressed this previously in another thread about Saylor not dealing with collateral in the MSTR leverage and/or other financial instruments being deployed, yet you still speak the same nonsense with a presumption that Saylor has to sell BTC merely if the price were to go below his cost per BTC or some other nonsense that you are either making up or you are reading other retarded pieces of information and then parroting such nonsense.

I'm the stupid one as I have mentioned many times before. But just for clarification's sake, what would happen if Bitcoin's price crashes below Chad Saylor's cost-basis? Let's pretend there was a Black Swan event and Bitcoin crashed to $30,000. That's a a little bit over 50% below Chad Saylor's cost basis of $67,000.

I don't believe that "nothing" will happen, because he used his company as collateral. The company will either need to do corporate restructuring or liquidate part of the company's position, which either path taken, will be a loss in the company's balance sheet.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I am not claiming to be an expert on the topic, either, yet I recognize that your superficial statements are uninformed, and your repetition of such themes causes impressions that you are not even trying to understand how Saylor/MSTR has structured their various financial instruments, including their debt instruments.

They do not have the same kind of financial/Debt instrument for each of the various bitcoin purchases that they made, yet many of the debt instruments, such as the convertible bonds have either very low (like less than 1% per year interest rates) and their terms are 3-5 years into the future, so if the BTC price goes down, Saylor/MSTR merely needs to continue to service the debt that is in dollars and to pay the interest on the debt and the amount will not come due for 3-5 years or more, depending on which of the debt instruments we are talking about.   Some of that debt already rolled over  (or converted) into equity into the company, so when some of those were issued at lower BTC prices, they converted into equity when the BTC price went up 30% or some other amount, so then the company owe nothing on the ones that converted already.

So MSTR/Saylor own a vast majority of thier BTC in the clear and so they don't owe anyone on it, yet if the BTC price went down and continued to stay down, they would not be able to issue more of those debt financial instruments, since the interest in the market would dry up.  The market is more excited about buying those kinds of products from Saylor/MSTR when the BTC price is going up.

The other aspect of the BTC price staying down low for a long time, such as more than 50% below the cost of their BTC, sure their balance book would look worse, but they are only needing to service their 0% to 1% interest loans, and surely they could even have extra cash on the books that would be available to  service debt, and they also have cash flow from their regular business around $100 million per year to be able to service interest on various debt instruments... which may well mean that the BTC price would  have to stay quite a bit below 50% below their cost basis, maybe even 25% below for a couple of years before Saylor MSTR might start to run out of cash to service their various debts.

So it remains quite doubtful that MSTR/Saylor would have to sell any BTC to service their debts, and I am also pretty sure that their balance sheet is in better shape now (they have learned a few tricks) as compared to late 2022, in which they were also around 50% in the negative in regards to their BTC cost basis (which I believe was around $32k at that time0 for decently long periods of time.. and at that time, MSTR/Saylor were/was saying that the BTC price would have to go to around $3,200 before they might have to take some actions to service the BTC that they had on collateral with Silvergate at that time.  But MSTR/Saylor learned their lesson from that situation and they no longer have BTC under collateral.

You can continue to doubt all you like, yet your doubts seem to be ungrounded in terms  of the way that Saylor and/or MSTR is/are structuring their financial instruments and/or debt.. and yeah some of it is not debt. .it is just the issuance of equity, so sure the stock price will go down and go up, but so what?  The stock's price going up and down does not necessarily cause  them to not be able to service whatever debt that they might have.  Surely, I have personally been concerned that Saylor/MSTR might suffer from some custodial issue, but that is not the kind of thing that you are talking about... and even your speculation of an outrageous BTC price drop down to $30k seems quite outrageous, unless we are currently in a bear market or going into a bear market, and even for the BTC price to stay below the 200-WMA for extended periods of time seems to be expecting outrageous and unlikely kinds of scenarios. 

Right now the 200-WMA  is right around $44,451, and so usually during bullmarkets (in which we are in one right now), the BTC price does not drop to below 25% above the 200-WMA - which would be right around $55,564. Sure outrageous things can end up happening, yet you are contemplating scenarios of more than 35% below the 200-WMA before we have even gone into a bear market..and also even if such spiraling of BTC prices were to take place, it takes a while to grind down to those kinds of oppressive and outrageous areas, and yeah they could happen, but they are not very realistic to be acting as if  they were really realistic. 

[UNTO Chain]

I'm not sure what the "old topic" refers to, but I think you're talking about a stock market analysis of some sort? If so, then my response would be as follows:

1. Determine the current price level and any relevant support/resistance levels.
2. Identify any patterns or trends that have been observed over time (e.g., uptrend, downtrend).
3. Consider fundamental factors such as earnings reports, news events, etc., which may impact future prices.
4. Use technical indicators like moving averages, RSI, MACD, Bollinger Bands to confirm existing trends or identify potential reversals.
5. Decide whether to buy/sell based on these analyses; remember risk management principles when making decisions!

[Wind_FURY]

Masterluc's post in Bitcoin Beavers, 👀

Mecячнaя кapтинa. Cвeчa чeтo нe cпeшит выйти вышe бб. Ecли oнa зaкpывaeтcя нижe, знaчит цeнa пиздyeт нa мa20. A ecли тaк, тo этo пoxoжe нa пoлнoцeннyю зигзaг кoppeкцию вceгo импyльca c 15к нa 107к. Пo Фибoнaччи мoжнo вычиcлить чтo впoлнe мoжeт cxoдить нa 50-60к.

Translated through Google Translate,

Monthly picture. The candle is in no hurry to go above the bb. If it closes lower, it means the price is screwing up at MA20. And if so, then this looks like a full-fledged zigzag correction of the entire impulse from 15k to 107k. Using Fibonacci, you can calculate that it may well go to 50-60k.

Masterluc made good analysis and projections on the price of Bitcoin during previous cycles, but crashing to a $50,000 to a $60,000 price level might be very low probability, no?

I don't believe it will happen, but that would suggest that Chad Saylor would get a margin-call, or probably will be forced to liquidate part of his investment which could cause another crash below $50,000?

You are both retarded. 

I addressed this previously in another thread about Saylor not dealing with collateral in the MSTR leverage and/or other financial instruments being deployed, yet you still speak the same nonsense with a presumption that Saylor has to sell BTC merely if the price were to go below his cost per BTC or some other nonsense that you are either making up or you are reading other retarded pieces of information and then parroting such nonsense.

I'm the stupid one as I have mentioned many times before. But just for clarification's sake, what would happen if Bitcoin's price crashes below Chad Saylor's cost-basis? Let's pretend there was a Black Swan event and Bitcoin crashed to $30,000. That's a a little bit over 50% below Chad Saylor's cost basis of $67,000.

I don't believe that "nothing" will happen, because he used his company as collateral. The company will either need to do corporate restructuring or liquidate part of the company's position, which either path taken, will be a loss in the company's balance sheet.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I am not claiming to be an expert on the topic, either, yet I recognize that your superficial statements are uninformed, and your repetition of such themes causes impressions that you are not even trying to understand how Saylor/MSTR has structured their various financial instruments, including their debt instruments.

They do not have the same kind of financial/Debt instrument for each of the various bitcoin purchases that they made, yet many of the debt instruments, such as the convertible bonds have either very low (like less than 1% per year interest rates) and their terms are 3-5 years into the future, so if the BTC price goes down, Saylor/MSTR merely needs to continue to service the debt that is in dollars and to pay the interest on the debt and the amount will not come due for 3-5 years or more, depending on which of the debt instruments we are talking about.   Some of that debt already rolled over  (or converted) into equity into the company, so when some of those were issued at lower BTC prices, they converted into equity when the BTC price went up 30% or some other amount, so then the company owe nothing on the ones that converted already.

There are posts in X that said MSTR price should be above a certain price point or else the bonds can't be converted to stocks which the nominal will need to be paid in cash. But I forgot at what price point that was. I will DYOR about it later if I have the time. OR I will merely wait for the news.

The smarter people in BitcoinTalk are welcome to join the discussion if they have more information.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

There are posts in X that said MSTR price should be above a certain price point or else the bonds can't be converted to stocks which the nominal will need to be paid in cash. But I forgot at what price point that was. I will DYOR about it later if I have the time. OR I will merely wait for the news.

The smarter people in BitcoinTalk are welcome to join the discussion if they have more information.

My understanding is that the bond is treated like an ordinary bond, and it is serviced as an ordinary bond at the dollar interest rate that is assigned to it, until the strike price is reached, then it becomes convertible into equities.

So let's say for Example  (I am using round numbers just to attempt to make calculations easy), an investor bought $100k worth of convertible shares when the Share price was $500, so he got 200 bonds that  would convert to shares.

But he would only have those 200 bond shares convert to equities when the share price reached 30% higher ($150 higher).. so the share price would have to go up to $650 before the bonds would convert to shares.   So maybe the bonds are for 5 years, and so if the share price never goes to $650, then the bonds would be serviced at whatever is their interest rate.. perhaps $1k per year (if the rate were 1%),  and in some of the reason debt instruments, Saylor/MSTR has been getting service rates that are in sub 1% territories.  

After 5 years, if the share prices do not go above $650, then the $100k would be owed back at that time, and Saylor/MSTR has been getting relative long duration bonds, and so there is no real problem to service the bonds in terms of either duration or in terms of interest rates.. If the BTC price goes up then the shares go up and  cause the shares to be convertible.  So, if the shares were moving somewhat similar to BTC, then if the shares were purchased when BTC prices were  at $100k, they might become redeemable once the BTC price reaches around $130k.

Does not seem stressful to me, even if the numbers might look BIG in the  abstract.  You can also look into how much debt Saylor/MSTR has as compared to its various assets, and their debt levels are not particularly high, especially since several of their earlier outstanding debt instruments had already converted into equity.. and another thing about MSTR's equity, there are characterizations of such equity as being accretive rather than dilutive, especially measured in terms of quantity of BTC per share... which they are pointing out that their quantity of BTC per share continues to go up, even while they are issuing more shares..

Edit:  I just saw OOM post and link an article regarding this very same topic in the WO thread.

MSTR might be an interesting one to watch today.

Why?
Because of the liquidation FUD?

In truth, MicroStrategy doesn't have any liquidation price. Unlike at other times in MicroStrategy's history, all of the company's debt is now unsecured. Its creditors don't hold any BTC as collateral and they have no power to force Saylor to sell any of it.

Source: https://protos.com/what-is-microstrategys-bitcoin-liquidation-price/

[Wind_FURY]

Boт пpимep мeдвeжьeй лoвyшки из нeдaлeкoгo пpoшлoгo

Here is an example of a bear trap from the recent past

 👀

That's the latest post from Masterluc. He compares the current mini-crash to the COVID Crash of 2020 during the month of March.

But the big different - the Federal Reserve's money printer was turned on in full power to inject liquidity into the system. We perhaps might see a monetary expansion this year, but it's probably not going to happen during the next two or three months?