🤔
I have some questions.
Why is Bitcoin going through mini-crashes, then they're followed by mini-surges? Who's selling large amounts of coins below $60,000, and who buys them back/places price back over $60,000?
Will the market actually give everyone another opportunity to see Bitcoin go below its 200-Weekly SMA again? The last time proved to be a very good buying opportunity.
I had been proposing bets that the spot price would not go below 20% above the 200WMA until after 2025, yet surely we have been getting pretty close to those numbers in recent times. Even though I am willing to bet, I know that I could end up being wrong, so I would not be betting very much or even beyond 50/50 odds.. .. but yeah, when folks are proclaiming super low BTC price dips, they tend to back off of their assertions when you ask them to bet on their prognostication of such seemingly extreme dip numbers.
We know that there is an idea of cycles and what kind of a market we are in, too,
but even the ideas of cycles could disappear, and we might not be in a bull market, even though it seems that we are, potentially until 2025-ish.. .
That's especially true currently now that the Bitcoin Spot ETF is open and available for institutions to enter/exit to and from Bitcoin positions. It may have changed the "cycles". Because if we were to base the current point of the cycle today from the last cycle, today would be a time during 2020 which were not testing the previous all time high.
Even though I am suggesting and maybe even proclaiming that cycles could disappear, I doubt that we are anywhere even close to having actual facts to support the actual disappearance of cycles, and likely we are not even going to know or realize that the cycles were no longer persuasive until much after such time that BTC's price performance no longer supports cycle theory... so in that regard, I think that it is way better to continue to presume that cycles are ongoing rather than prematurely proclaiming they had already disappeared based on current evidence (facts) in front of us... including that the mere fact that we reached an ATH prior to the halvening rather than after the halvening seems to amount to lame ass evidence to supposedly support the disappearance of the cycles.
In other words, we surely have BTC price moves that are up and they are down and the fractals seems to be within reasonable parameters to overlay the previous fractals, even if the magnitude of some of the price moves might be lesser or greater than they had been within earlier fractals.
Maybe no matter what, whether we get 4 year patterns, we still likely should be able to presume that the general pressures on BTC prices is going to continue in the upwards direction, even if we might have extended periods of suppression or maybe even price rises that fail to correct back down within what we had expected to be our cyclical time frame.
Another combating theory concerns power law theory versus stock to flow, and surely, I still like to assert that stock to flow is a great way of looking at bitcoin price performance, even if we might not be able to identify with any precision the multiples and/or the magnitudes of the price cycles, there are folks that argue that stock to flow just falls within a powerlaw curve and merely complicates the powerlaw dynamics by adding more largely irrelevant variables to the equation (suggesting that the 4-year cycle is mostly irrelevant).. In the end, I personally give few shits regarding whether powerlaw might be more true than stock to flow, I still consider the 4-year cycles to remain valuable in terms of looking at the BTC price moves, even if there remains a bit of fictional inabilities to really tie such 4-year cycles to actual real world BTC price dynamics..
Here are a couple of recent podcast interviews in which Giovanni Santostasi argues that power law supersedes and is more important and relevant than his claims of stock to flow's inferior adaptation of power law.
Simply Bitcoin -
https://overcast.fm/+AA1uZKBe3D8Crypto Voices
https://overcast.fm/+AANK1lG6bqAI believe that, like you, market cycles merely change because of changes in market factors themselves - Like the entry of the Bitcoin spot ETF, which already may have changed Bitcoin compared from past cycles. But you're also right, more time and data is needed to see if that indeed is truly happening.
Furthermore, it seems pretty short-sighted to be selling at these prices or the sub $60ks that you mentioned, yet we know that prices move because people have differing opinions about fair market prices, and some people end up being wrong in their assessment, views and actions, yet in most cases, we don't know who was wrong until later down the road... all of us hope that we are on the correct side, especially if we have put money on our views, and failing to buy bitcoin might well also be one of those where folks have put money (even if they think that they haven't.. when the price goes up, those kinds of dollar worshipers frequently wished that they had some BTC, so they could sell it.. for higher than they paid for it... hahahahaha).
Surely all of us who are buying or holding onto our BTC hope that we are on the correct side of matters, yet there are no guarantees, even though historically the buyers and holders have been disproportionately more correct than those who had failed/refused to take a sufficient/adequate bitcoin position. Bitcoin's investment thesis does not seem any weaker, and there seem to be a lot of ways that its investment thesis is way stronger than it had been historically, even if the upside potential (in terms of percentage moves) is not as great as it had been in earlier times.
That's true, but Bitcoin may still have more upside than most investments you could find in legacy markets.
I am not even suggesting that there is any better place to put your money apart from bitcoin,
even though I also would argue that anyone is going to be foolish if they are not attempting to maintain some kind of balance in regards to having assets in cash and/or cash related traditional investments in order to attempt to account for needs to be able to live in the real world with real world expenses that are likely mostly reflected in dollars and having a decent amount of practicality to have cashflows and/or capital that is held in dollars and/or dollar-related assets - even when we know that the dollar is being debased anywhere between 3% and 20% per year depending on how such debasement is measured.
That's with the presumption that, of course, it's already considered when we talk about Bitcoin as an investment.
