JJG's Bitcoin Investment Ideas (Sustainable Withdrawal / Portfolio Maintenance)

[JayJuanGee]

Very useful information, perfectly outlined and well explained investment plan. I have always been wanting to execute a DCA strategy but i have no idea or target on how to implement it yet probably because I don’t have the necessary orientation about it yet. I just came across this post earlier today, and i was so interested in it that I spent the whole day reading through it from the beginning (BTC investment ideas thread). I find it very useful as it will help guide me through my investment decisions of accumulating BTC.

Yes.  You must be referring to having had read the combination of both of my investment threads since this particular thread will likely become more applicable (and even meaningful), once a person has either come close to reaching a target or goal or sets aside a certain quantity of bitcoin that he wants to use for a kind of passive/sustainable income stream based on the quantity of the coins in the fund and the withdrawal rate that he might set up.. or if he might also want to change some of the variables in regards to the how much is authorized to withdraw based on how far the BTC spot price is from the 200-week moving average.

I believe the DCA method is the best fit for me out of the three accumulation strategies because I am one of the majority of normies who don't make a lot of money but are still interested in investing in bitcoin. Due to the lack of capital, the lump sum accumulation approach is too much for me, and I am not skilled at timing the market, therefore I cannot use the buy the dip strategy.

I frequently assert that DCA surely can apply to anyone who is in the BTC accumulation stage, but it is even particularly better for the very beginner who might still be trying to figure out how aggressive he might be able to be in accordance with his own budget and psychology.  So even if you have hardly any clue about either bitcoin or details of your budget, including how much debt you have and how your cashflow and expenses vary, you still might be able to figure out enough about your financial situation to realize that you probably could buy $100 per week, but since you hardly have any clue abut your own situation (because you have been kind of sloppy and irresponsible or whatever), you can still just decide to invest $10 per week while you spend the next several weeks or even couple of months to get your financial matters in order and at least so you have better ideas about what is going on.  

So I frequently will suggest that people start out right away and figure out some of the details as you go, and then once you have your financial matters in order, then you can maximize your level of aggressiveness on your BTC investing. ... which I am not necessarily suggesting that someone who had been neglecting their finances is going to be able to get out of holes in a quick way, but you could start buying a little bit of bitcoin in the meantime.. and then the stronger financial situation would have mostly either taken care of various kinds of debt or got them under control, built up a cashflow reserve and/or emergency fund that covers 3-6 months or more of living expenses and emergencies that could come up (and yeah you don't exactly know the emergencies in advance so you need to attempt to make reasonable estimates of that.. maybe double your cash reserves or some amount you consider to put you in a good position that you would almost never have to be able to touch any of your investments, whether bitcoin or any other investment that you have at a time that is anything other than your own choosing.. and probably with bitcoin, it may well need to be the last of your investments that you should touch, even though it is more liquid than a lot of other investments, but it is likely amongst the best, but those would be choices that you would have to make if you got in to such a situation and hopefully you would already build up measures so you are not even put into such a position).

Sure, when deciding to start out investing into bitcoin you do need to make a determination that you believe that in the future that it has good odds of going up in price, even though it is not guaranteed to go up but that its investment thesis is sufficiently strong, and so you likely don't need to be very convinced in the very beginning, since one of the more important things is just getting the fuck started rather than sitting around and trying to figure it out, but as you are investing on a DCA basis, getting your financial matters in order and a lot of that, you can also continue to study into bitcoin, and surely some people are more busy than others in terms of their abilities to study bitcoin in terms of their balancing of other obligations that they might have..  and some people are faster learners than others.  So not all of us can go from not knowing hardly anything about bitcoin and then into giving national interviews in a matter of months.. like Michael Saylor - to the extent that he is even a human... so sometimes it could take a year or two to get more strongly convicted and then maybe also going from $10 per week, then to $50 per week, and then $100 per week and then $200 per week, and maybe even first getting your finances cleaned up, such as paying off debts, establishing an emergency fund, maybe projecting out cashflows to be able to better see future cashflow shortfalls, perhaps cutting some expenses and even increasing income...

Then after doing many of these things, it might start to become more clear what the BTC target is, and it might not be completely locked in place because there might be other variables too to figure out if you have any other investments and then to perhaps consider if you are going to invest in anything other than bitcoin and cash, and surely the more your bitcoin might become multiples of years of your annual expenses, then you might start to think about needs to have other investments so that all of your assets are not just in bitcoin and cash... discretionary and personal choices involved with those matters.

Thanks to this useful post, I now completely understand how to construct a bitcoin investing plan and also learnt some more things useful along the line although I will still need to revisit it in order to get some clarifications. We appreciate you sharing with us this information.

I frequently suggest that even if normies attempt to be somewhat aggressive and they invest 10% of their income into investments (in this case bitcoin), it is going to take 10 years just to get to 1 years worth of salary to be invested, and so sometimes there may be needs to be more aggressive than 10% in order to make faster progress, but then there is also the variable regarding how well your investment is performing in comparison to the cost of living increases, so if your investment is merely moving at parity, then you still are going to ONLY be at around 1 years income after 10 years, so any time that you are able to cut down some of those timelines without devolving into gambling (or overly risky strategies) then that would be a good thing, and so some of that will become more apparent as you go, too... Your investment, your own practices in regards to how interactive you are with it and how it is performing will surely help to inform you more about which of the charts are more relevant to you, and surely you will continue to run across variations of these kinds of ideas and maybe find some kinds of information to be more persuasive (or compatible with your personality) than others.

Any sane person reading this thread, better come quickly to these conclusions:

Since this is a self-moderated thread.  Don't consider my willingness to entertain your mostly child-ish stupidity and purposeful shit-stirring exaggeration to be either an invitation for dumb and mostly non-substantive comments or a waiver of my unilateral right and ability to delete posts with or without reason.  I am usually pretty tolerant in this regard, so I would rather see a pattern rather than just going based on one post.. even though you do already have a post history in the WO thread, but that thread has more tolerance for off-topicness and nuisances.

In other words you are pushing it, which you likely already realized that, and so surely a post like this would most likely not get deleted from the WO thread, so you are more than free to post things like this in that thread and press your luck that you won't even cross over the line in those there parts in terms of your unsubstantiated nonsense.

1) JjGLBtQ++ is a fagot AI, run mainly by his two daddies, with the sole purpose of controlling the Bitcoin narrative.

Makes no sense.  I am talking about various ways to approach bitcoin investing.. but yeah, I have some decently strong ideas about bitcoin that mostly lean towards everyone should get off zero first by accumulating BTC, and also start out by investing 1% to 25% of his/her investment portfolio into bitcoin. .and sure I have other ideas too which are in my two investment ideas threads (including this one).

2) Selling - at the peak - 60%-90% of the Bitcoin accumulated in every four year cycle is a must.

If you consider bitcoin mostly as a investment then accumulation is best accomplished in the beginning by consistent forms of buying which would mostly be 1) DCA, 2) lump sum buying and 3) buying on dips.  Surely selling could come into play both as a tactic of playing the price waves, but also a means of maintaining a portfolio, which may well presume a sort of over investment, but frequently we have to be careful with selling if we are in early accumulation phases because of difficulties to determining the top and also putting us in a bad mental framework if our goals are accumulating and we sell as a tactic to accumulate more.

Selling 60% to 90% at peak presumes knowing when the peak is going to be which overall is a specialty rather than a must and it may well not even be a good idea for more experienced and well to do traders. even surely sometimes some of them get lucky... but when it comes to investing it seems better to not be putting too much weight on luck and taking chances.. maybe until such time that you really might spend several years learning about bitcoin and trading and surely there could be some newbies to bitcoin who already have such skills, but not really generally applicable ideas rather than a niche group..and I am not really going to be as helpful to some of those folks who actually might fit in some of those niche groups..  

Even though I have several charts with probabilities and projections, I don't claim to be very smart... especially when it comes to figuring out short term BTC price directions.. but even with that we can frequently assign probabilities to directions of some of the indicators in order to figure out personal strategies in order to attempt to help ourselves to be both directionally correct and attempting to prepare (financially and psychologically) for BTC price moves in either direction (even extreme moves).

3) Humans cannot actually rationalise with AI’s, it is not their “thing” - only much worse with JjGLBtQ++ Bitcoin focused AI.

I have a pretty long post history in this forum, and it likely can be verified that almost none of my posts have been deleted over the years, and very few of my posts are edited beyond the first hour or so.. I would speculate that probably less than 1.5% of my posts are edited more than an hour after they were posted.. that is if such there is any way to verify that kind of a thing.  So anyhow, what I am suggesting is that my post history speaks for itself, including that I have likely developed in my substantive ways over the last nearly 10 years too (9 years and 9 months).

P.s.  Another thing in regards to your off-topicness Antisthenes, to the extent that you are even trying to grapple with bitcoin -related matters rather than fantasy, you are potentially mentioning ways to sell on the way up and then either to get in cash and/or implicitly to possibly buy back at a lower price, and so even though the substance of this thread's topic does have selling within it, there is a presumption of already having had reached a target accumulation level, but at the same time there are allowances to sell greater amounts of the monthly sell budget - and even several months in advance (up to 60 months in advance) in accordance with this chart, so there could be some possibilities that the administrator of the budget may well decide to use some of those advance sales to buy back bitcoin, especially if the BTC price were to either get close to the 200-week moving average or to go below the 200-week moving average, so I suppose in those circumstances then those bought back bitcoin would just be folded back into overall account value and then to be able to increase future monthly allocation amounts based on the account increasing in value, and then just presumably with the passage of time, it seems quite likely that the 200-week moving average just continues to go up rather than ever going into the negative (even though it would not be impossible for the 200-WMA to go into the negative, it is just not part of the more likely future scenarios).

[1714289890]

1714289890

[1714289890]

1714289890

[1714289890]

1714289890

[1714289890]

1714289890

[1714289890]

1714289890

[1714289890]

1714289890

[Antisthenes]

~ bollocks ~

[JayJuanGee]

I could not resist but to make a few adjustments to my table in order to 1) add descriptions to the spends from they accounts, 2) show the dollar amounts for each month and that way we can see how the dollar value of the account changes, 3) highlight a couple of the values related to how the BTC spot price relates to the 200-week moving average, which showed me that I had mislabelled row three and it should be BTC spot price - even though the highlighted cell is 200-week moving average.

Adding of the dollar value did really highlight that a 4% withdrawal rate is likely quite a bit too low in terms of a sustainable amount, even though it might be an acceptable withdrawal rate if the goal is to allow the account(s) to continue to grow... so if the goal would be to attempt to mostly maintain the value of the account,  most likely the withdrawal rate would need to be quite a bit higher than 4% per year, perhaps double or more.

[Poker Player]

~snip

Lol. What happens with this guy? Is this an account created specifically to troll JJG?

Adding of the dollar value did really highlight that a 4% withdrawal rate is likely quite a bit too low in terms of a sustainable amount, even though it might be an acceptable withdrawal rate if the goal is to allow the account(s) to continue to grow... so if the goal would be to attempt to mostly maintain the value of the account,  most likely the withdrawal rate would need to be quite a bit higher than 4% per year, perhaps double or more.

I suppose we could take advantage of this depending on the personal moment we find ourselves in. If we are at retirement age it would be more reasonable to have a higher withdrawal rate and just try to maintain the value of the account, while if we are not retired or if we are but we do not have other assets, as we talked about in the previous post, it would be more logical to withdraw less and try to make the account still grow.

[fillippone]

Spreadsheet updated.
Willing to give you editing powers JJG! Not sure how long I can stay on par with you!




Also your colour scheme is giving me headaches! Luckily I am not colour blind-yet.

[JayJuanGee]

Adding of the dollar value did really highlight that a 4% withdrawal rate is likely quite a bit too low in terms of a sustainable amount, even though it might be an acceptable withdrawal rate if the goal is to allow the account(s) to continue to grow... so if the goal would be to attempt to mostly maintain the value of the account,  most likely the withdrawal rate would need to be quite a bit higher than 4% per year, perhaps double or more.

I suppose we could take advantage of this depending on the personal moment we find ourselves in. If we are at retirement age it would be more reasonable to have a higher withdrawal rate and just try to maintain the value of the account, while if we are not retired or if we are but we do not have other assets, as we talked about in the previous post, it would be more logical to withdraw less and try to make the account still grow.

At the risk of over-complication, I decided to update the chart/table again to: 1) add the 200-week moving average in there (columns H, I & J).. and since it was getting so cluttered, 2) remove account 2.



Adding in the 200-week moving average, and being able to see it next to the BTC spot price (columns D, E & F) might help to show more clearly what is being attempted here, in terms of the withdrawals authorizations being measured in terms of the bottom (the 200-week moving average), so the value of the account had been fluctuating in price more in terms of Spot price, yet the 200-week moving average continues to move up slowly, and most likely if we are trying to keep the account balance somewhat stable, then our withdrawal rate would potentially come close to flattening out the account's value in terms of the 200-week moving average.  

Of course, most of us likely realize that the cost of living continues to go up so much in terms of the dollar value, but if the withdrawal amount (limit) of our budget might slowly continue to go up, then that should not be a bad problem to have, so probably none of us should mind if even the value of the account continues to go up in terms of the 200-week moving average, even if we might be ongoingly withdrawing from it, and feeling that we are no longer feeling any need for our account to grow in any meaningful way beyond just making sure it covers the increases in the cost of living in terms of dollars.

Spreadsheet updated.
Willing to give you editing powers JJG! Not sure how long I can stay on par with you!

Also your colour scheme is giving me headaches! Luckily I am not colour blind-yet.

I am hoping to get closer to more of a finalized version so that there would not be too many more changes to format type issues, and maybe there were just a few too many unexpected format-related changes?  

I am not unreceptive to some changes to the colors, and I did send you a PM, too.

Edited: the above is the latest chart to my opening post 2, and seems to be the foundational ideas for Bitmover's helping me to create an interactive website.

[fillippone]

I am sorry JJG, I somehow missed this post and I am lagging on the updates.
I am traveling over the long weekend we have here in Italy, with limited access to all my forum machinery. I will try to improve the spreadsheet according to your indications asap.

[JayJuanGee]

I am sorry JJG, I somehow missed this post and I am lagging on the updates.
I am traveling over the long weekend we have here in Italy, with limited access to all my forum machinery. I will try to improve the spreadsheet according to your indications asap.

Of course, since I have made a couple of revisions since OP, I do consider the extent to which I might want to change the OP in order to reflect the latest changes and the latest clarifications. 

So far, in this thread, we have not heard from any forum members who have been trying out the spreadsheet, and even you, fillippone, mentioned that you consider that you may well not be quite far enough in your own personal bitcoin journey to employ such a system.. even though surely, the applications can be wider than some people had previously considered.  In other words, your BTC portfolio may well not even need to be at fuck you status in order to start to employ such sustainable withdrawals that may gravitate more towards the growth end of the spectrum or on the other hand more towards the liquidation end of the spectrum (which could also be stated as less sustainable).

I had also considered that the whole row 18 has the same BTC amount, so it might not serve any additional purpose to have the same number repeated, even though it serves as the base reference amount in which either the whole thing is authorized as monthly withdrawal as in column P, or a fraction of it is authorized as withdrawal as in columns K through O.  Or multiples of months are authorized for discretionary withdrawal as reflected in row 20 columns Q through X.  It is still not clear in my own head regarding how to exercise such discretion to withdraw multiple months because surely there is some attempts at foresight involved, and if higher prices are anticipated, it would surely be advantageous to withdraw multiple months in advance (and probably even a fiduciary responsibility to do so, but there still would be some judgement involved regarding when to employ it in order to attempt to get more benefits from it).

As I mentioned to you in PM, I am working on (looking into) some possibilities to get these ideas integrated into some kind of an interactive website - which may well end up making the input versus the output to become more user-friendly and perhaps even to help to make the ideas more salient - while at the same time, I am not yet at liberties to disclose much more than that - even though it could be a pretty BIG development and helpful to bitcoin HODLers who are interested in these kinds of sustainable withdrawal ideas.

[fillippone]

At the risk of over-complication, I decided to update the chart/table again to: 1) add the 200-week moving average in there (columns H, I & J).. and since it was getting so cluttered, 2) remove account 2.

Here is the updated version:



Sorry for the delay.
I would wait for the definitive layout to tackle formatting issues.
There are some inconsistencies in the cells in row 3. K3:X3. can you clarify what is wrong?

[JayJuanGee]

At the risk of over-complication, I decided to update the chart/table again to: 1) add the 200-week moving average in there (columns H, I & J).. and since it was getting so cluttered, 2) remove account 2.

Here is the updated version:

Sorry for the delay.
I would wait for the definitive layout to tackle formatting issues.
There are some inconsistencies in the cells in row 3. K3:X3. can you clarify what is wrong?

Thanks for that.  I had not realized that the formula that I had used in my row 3 was referring to a different cell so the values in my version came out a bit wrong, and your version (of the values of Row 3) is correct because it refers back to the 200-week moving average (in cell N3).  Thanks for catching that.


Edit: By the way, regarding format, I am not sure if I am going to be making any more changes, yet the potential interface with a web version could well end up influencing and inspiring some more ideas.  I think that there might be some kinds of underlying rebellion to the ideas of basing actions on the 200-week moving average because people get so excited about tops in the BTC spot price, and surely I am trying to figure out some formula attempts that would give guidance and hope to take some of the emotion out of some of these matters, and I am also thinking about placing another kind of price-based withdrawal strategy in this thread.... .. but I am having a bit of a dilemma in terms of not wanting to confuse the ideas too much... since it seems to me that there is already some confusion regarding the creation of withdrawal limits that are based on the direction and distance of the BTC spot price from the 200-week moving average.

[JayJuanGee]

I'm wondering also if you want to keep all this in the WO or if you want to move it to your specific thread.

That is probably a good idea, because it does kind of relate to the sustainable withdrawal idea.. but more of a price-based angle, as compared to my motivation of that that other thread was a monthly withdrawal limit.. which kind of becomes a time-based system that also just withdraws every month but also takes into account of the location of the spot price in relation to the 200-week moving average.. whereas this one is more of a pure price based approach... maybe I can put this chart into that thread since it is kind of related, and maye it wouldn't confuse people too much if I provide a bit of a descriptor regarding how it relates and how it differs..

I updated the spreadsheet, but still I am somewhat confused by not being able to exactly replicate the number you get in your own sheet.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zxMAwt2yHg9Nr7VMgo0zJe6igc8ZdYRpxfCWEr_Ds6w/edit?usp=sharing

Let's continue to the conversation here.

I have essentially updated my 4
Opening Posts of this thread, and our above conversation is dealing with my newly created Opening post 3.  

Of course, yours is linked in GoogleSpreadsheets above, and here is what my latest looks like:



After I made my revisions and you made your revisions, it is appearing as if all of our numbers are matching except for your column A is not matching my corresponding column X, and it appears to me that we are likely using different reinvestment success formulas.  My original formula is overly simplified, and I was just taking the average of all three of the reinvestment success probability projections and I used that average number of 41.67%..

So I decided to do a little experiment, and I changed the formula that I used to calculate to use the actual raw reinvest success percentages of 70%, 40% and 15% for each of the reinvestment increments, and then my numbers for my column X are much closer to your column A values.  

See this:  


My numbers are not exactly the same as yours, but they are a lot closer in this second revised version.  

This whole idea could be getting into the weeds details a bit much, even though we should probably try to figure out if there might be an easier way of attempting to depict the probabilities in order to attempt to depict realistic values.  

If we end up going with giving the raw weight of the probability of success to each of the reinvestment increments 70%, 40% and 15% in this example, then the average of 41.67% would no longer be necessary to show because then the average would not be used to calculate the values of your column A and my corresponding column X.  

It does seem more accurate to use each of the increments rather than the average, so I am o.k going with that, if that might be what might resolve the differences in our numbers.

[fillippone]

My original formula is overly simplified, and I was just taking the average of all three of the reinvestment success probability projections and I used that average number of 41.67%..

Actually, if you look at the formulas in my Google Sheets, you see that I take the average as well.

It looks to me the first difference between our sheets is in cell X89, in your spreadsheet.
My value computation is pretty simple:
BTC_{previous period}-Rake BTC _{previous period}+Rake BTC _{previous period}*Reinvestment success avg

OR

10-2+2*0,4167

I might have misunderstood some of your explanations if I cannot reconcile the first step in your spreadsheet.

It does seem more accurate to use each of the increments rather than the average, so I am o.k going with that, if that might be what might resolve the differences in our numbers.

I don't know what is accurate; these just work Hypotheses, once we agree o. those, we can start figuring out the rest. 

[JayJuanGee]

My original formula is overly simplified, and I was just taking the average of all three of the reinvestment success probability projections and I used that average number of 41.67%..

Actually, if you look at the formulas in my Google Sheets, you see that I take the average as well.

O.k.. Yes.. Now, I can see the formulas in there, and for some reason, I did not look at your formulas in my earlier response. .and so I should have been able to figure out the difference between what we were doing by looking at your formulas as compared with mine.  Whoops.  My bad.

It looks to me the first difference between our sheets is in cell X89, in your spreadsheet.
My value computation is pretty simple:
BTC_{previous period}-Rake BTC _{previous period}+Rake BTC _{previous period}*Reinvestment success avg

OR

10-2+2*0,4167

I might have misunderstood some of your explanations if I cannot reconcile the first step in your spreadsheet.

Ok.   Now I see where we are different because you are using the whole rake amount and assigning the success probability to it, which ends up completely ignoring the specific locations of the each of the projected reinvestments (which in this table I am taking from the reinvestment reserves - and you got the reinvestment reserves and also each of the reinvestment amounts the same as mine in row 88  .. Anyhow, my cell X89 formula looks like this for the earlier version:

=SUM(X88-AA88)+((AH88+AL88+AP88)*AI$82)  or (10-2)+((0.59259259+.074074074+1.05820106)*0.4167)

After I saw that your numbers were different from mine, I thought (without properly analyzing your formulas) that you did something like this second formula with yours.
 
=SUM(X88-AA88)+((AH88*AI$79)+(AL88*AI$80)+(AP88*AI$81))

.. but, yeah my revised formula did not resolve the discrepancy.. so I should have spent more time studying your cell formulas to catch the specifics...  whoops..

So, yeah, I think that the second formula is more accurate than the first one since it uses the projected success rate for each of the periods of 70%, 40% and 15% rather than using the success rate average of 46.67%.

It does seem more accurate to use each of the increments rather than the average, so I am o.k going with that, if that might be what might resolve the differences in our numbers.

I don't know what is accurate; these just work Hypotheses, once we agree o. those, we can start figuring out the rest. 

Even though I was kind of guessing when i put 70%, 40% and 15%, I think that we should use the second formula rather than the average of 41.67% because I do believe that using the percentage for each of the buy back intervals/increments allows for getting at making more accurate / realistic estimates...and yeah, who knows if anyone is going to use these formulas.. but I do see that I some folks are going to become less confused if they look at the formulas to make sure they understand what the spreadsheet is doing..

[fillippone]

Now we are talking!



Here, you have the Google Sheet equivalent of your pictures, where you can let your reader play with data.
I think there are many mumblings to be done here, but we are now on the same page.

[JayJuanGee]

Now we are talking!

Here, you have the Google Sheet equivalent of your pictures, where you can let your reader play with data.
I think there are many mumblings to be done here, but we are now on the same page.

Thanks.  Yes, it looks the same, and some members might not be able to create their own tables with those kinds of formulas on their own, so it can be quite powerful to be able to have a table like that and to be able to plug in your own numbers and then to see how it comes out differently for changes in the variables and/or changes in the assumptions of probabilities, and I am not sure if it might be helpful to better highlight which numbers are changeable and which numbers have formulas.  Of course, if you click on the cell you can see whether it contains a formula or a raw number, and if it has a raw number then it is changeable, and if it has a formula then it is referring to other cells in order to calculate its results.

Another thing is that any member can take the table from the link and copy it to their own, and rename it, and none of the information would be traceable as to how it is being used - absent regular issues of possible compromised google accounts or back doors into google.. but anyhow, there would at least be enough privacy from other forum members seeing what they put in those fields, unless they choose to share such information, which I don't have any problem with that, but probably it is still better to present the information in terms of hypothetical people rather than claiming the numbers to be your own numbers... just for OPSec reasons.

[fillippone]

I am not sure if it might be helpful to better highlight which numbers are changeable and which numbers have formulas. 

What about this?



All the cells that need to be edited are highlighted in Green. 
Every other format is directly computed from those green cells cells.
Settling a unique format for the cells to be edited can be a nice idea, even more if this is coherent across the various spreadsheets.

[bitmover]

Opening Post 2:  Creating monthly withdrawal limits - based on the then BTC Spot price's direction and distance from the 200-week moving average, and of course a withdrawal rate and quantity of coins in the account

Ideas of sustainable withdrawal that attempts to measure monthly budget limits based BTC spot price relative to the 200-week moving average

I have been working with JJG in a tool to implement this idea in a website. We will release the first version soon, and it will be nice to see fillippone and others who are discussing this giving their suggestion about this new tool.


This is a very interesting strategy. I plan to implement this strategy in my personal BTC withdrawals from next month, as we are moving to confortable rates above the 200WMA now (about 47% already)

[JayJuanGee]

I am not sure if it might be helpful to better highlight which numbers are changeable and which numbers have formulas. 

What about this?

All the cells that need to be edited are highlighted in Green. 
Every other format is directly computed from those green cells cells.
Settling a unique format for the cells to be edited can be a nice idea, even more if this is coherent across the various spreadsheets.

Yes.  That does look better in terms of highlighting that the green fields are the ones in which data would be entered, and then Viola!!!!! The spreadsheet will do the remainder of the calculations based on what is put into the green input fields.. although the labels are not input fields.. #justsaying..  hahahahaha

And, yeah, it is probably better to choose some kind of a similar format across various spreadsheets, whether it is color or some other way of distinguishing input fields from non-input fields.

Opening Post 2:  Creating monthly withdrawal limits - based on the then BTC Spot price's direction and distance from the 200-week moving average, and of course a withdrawal rate and quantity of coins in the account
Ideas of sustainable withdrawal that attempts to measure monthly budget limits based BTC spot price relative to the 200-week moving average

I have been working with JJG in a tool to implement this idea in a website. We will release the first version soon, and it will be nice to see fillippone and others who are discussing this giving their suggestion about this new tool.

Yes.  Thanks a lot bitmover.  Like you suggested, I think that we are getting very close to a version that would be ready for public release and open for public commentary.  Furthermore, the website (rather than spreadsheet) design would likely be more user-friendly, yet I am thinking that we still might have some uphill battles in regards to getting folks used to thinking about spot price in relation to 200-week moving average - because people get so focused upon spot price, and maybe even become confused about what to do in regards to managing their bitcoin holdings and when to do it, and hopefully tools like this can be helpful in terms of providing some guidelines to bitcoin holders in regards to more conservative, moderate and/or aggressive ways in which they might choose to spend their coins.

This is a very interesting strategy. I plan to implement this strategy in my personal BTC withdrawals from next month, as we are moving to confortable rates above the 200WMA now (about 47% already)

For sure, anyone who considers using either this strategy or even the strategy that is described in Opening post 3, may well need to consider whether he has assessed his bitcoin to be in a kind of "overaccumulation" or even a sufficiently adequately accumulated status, so in that regard, I consider either the strategy from Opening Post 2 or the one from Opening post 3 to help to serve as ways to provide insurance for something close to inevitable bitcoin volatility that has been in its history, and there is no reason to conclude that such inevitable volatility is not going to continue into the future, and surely we do not always know which direction the BTC price is going to go or how intense such price performance is going to be in one direction or the other.. but one of the things that does seem most guaranteed about bitcoin and its price performance is that it is quite strongly likely to continue to be ongoingly volatile.

By the way, from my discussions with bitmover, it does seem that he is planning to start a new thread in regards to the website related to Opening Post 2, and I will likely continue to keep this thread active and provide a link to such thread, if that is the direction that the discussion goes.  We are also in discussions regarding the creation of another website for Opening post 3, and over the years, I had seen some of bitmover's earlier work products in the creation of websites about bitcoin (and form-related) subject matters, and of course bitmover has a thread in which he talks about his bitcoin unit conversion website.. which is a pretty handy tool for quick conversion of BTC (or choose other bitcoin units) to dollars but to other currencies (and a bonus that it does not include shitcoins - unless you want to consider fiat as a shitcoin?.. hahahahhaha).

[fillippone]

I am not sure if it might be helpful to better highlight which numbers are changeable and which numbers have formulas.

What about this?

All the cells that need to be edited are highlighted in Green.  
Every other format is directly computed from those green cells cells.
Settling a unique format for the cells to be edited can be a nice idea, even more if this is coherent across the various spreadsheets.

Yes.  That does look better in terms of highlighting that the green fields are the ones in which data would be entered, and then Viola!!!!! The spreadsheet will do the remainder of the calculations based on what is put into the green input fields.. although the labels are not input fields.. #justsaying..  hahahahaha

I just edited the labels as per your suggestion!
And
Voilà!!!!!

Now the spreadsheets updates automatically when you enter the numbers in the green cells.

I can’t wait to see the final website.
Even if I have a concern: if you want to play with those hypothesis, you might want to come back multiple times. Coming back multiple times call for some sort of registration: but is this privacy friendly?

[JayJuanGee]

I am not sure if it might be helpful to better highlight which numbers are changeable and which numbers have formulas.

What about this?

All the cells that need to be edited are highlighted in Green.  
Every other format is directly computed from those green cells cells.
Settling a unique format for the cells to be edited can be a nice idea, even more if this is coherent across the various spreadsheets.

Yes.  That does look better in terms of highlighting that the green fields are the ones in which data would be entered, and then Viola!!!!! The spreadsheet will do the remainder of the calculations based on what is put into the green input fields.. although the labels are not input fields.. #justsaying..  hahahahaha

I just edited the labels as per your suggestion!
And
Voilà!!!!!
Now the spreadsheets updates automatically when you enter the numbers in the green cells.

I can’t wait to see the final website.
Even if I have a concern: if you want to play with those hypothesis, you might want to come back multiple times. Coming back multiple times call for some sort of registration: but is this privacy friendly?

Thanks for the spelling lesson.. yet I am not sure if i understand the reference for coming back multiple times and a potential triggering of registration?  Is that referring to the creation of a website, and attempts at monetization?  because there are a lot of bitcoin related sites that allow playing around and manipulating of data, but no need to register.  Or are you referring to google spreadsheets?  

Of course we likely realize that there is a kind of spirit of open-source in bitcoin, and sometimes even open-source could end up being monetized, even though at the same time, there can be areas of discontent because more sophisticated (or better marketers) could end up taking open-sourced ideas (and code) and then just creating their own version (and maybe close sourcing that), which may or may not end up being better than the original variation.