[edited out]
It was merely a shower thought, don't take them seriously.
Anything that you post is fair game, whether you believe it to be trivial or not.
Plus I'm the stupid one in the forum, you know that. Hahaha.
Fair enough. I won't argue with that.
Back to our favorite sport, talking about/debating/guessing Bitcoin's price, I believe the next bear narrative might be guessing when and where the DIP might end to find a good price-point to start buying, instead of the old "Bitcoin is dead" narrative which was common during the last bear market.
Well, yeah. It does seem that the proclamations about bitcoin going to zero are seen way less regularly, and perhaps it is becoming much more difficult to either believe those kinds of projections or to even figure out ways to say such a thing without looking like a total nutjob.
I do believe one of the better ways of denigrating bitcoin does end up being when bitcoin is not differentiated from the many retarded, scam, smoke & mirror, "crypto projects out there.. not sure if there is any need to name the so many variations of such deceptive projects and the ways that bitcoin is lumped in with that crap - while at the same time, there is some truth to the various claims that bitcoin had enabled (and maybe even continues to enable in some indirect ways) the abilities to carry out so many ways to lull people into not really necessarily knowing the differences, but then even perhaps getting invested in some kind of way.. mentally or financially into the so many ways that technology is adapting in the real world.
Regarding bitcoin, for sure in the past couple of years, if not longer, with the exception of March 2020, there have been quite a few struggles to even get the BTC price down to the 100-week moving average, and currently that 100-week moving average price is nearly up to $35k, and even in June/July 2021 when we got down to $28,600, the 100-week moving average was at about $20k, so surely the 100-week moving average has continued to hold up pretty well in the past couple of years, and perhaps it had not really been breached since March/April 2020 when it was at about $7,200 at that time.
You can see the historical 100-week moving average prices
here.
I am not saying that the 100-week moving average might not end up breaking, and surely we seem to be getting quite close to it - because it continues to slowly move up to higher prices, yet I would not be putting any kind of meaningful value in terms of either believing that it has to be met - even though we surely do continue to have a lot of worrying macro-events ongoingly taking place as well as the seeming precariousness of the juggling of various fiat systems (possibly better known as bubbles?).
I continue to argue that the 100-week moving average tends to serve as a bottom price for corrections during a bull market, and perhaps the fact that the 100-week moving average has not really been preached for nearly 3 years (absent the short-lived March 2020 liquidity event) supports the theory that we have been in an ongoing bull market since 2019... while at the same time, the use of those kinds of longer term moving averages, such as the 100-WMA.. does end up serving as a lagging indicator to tell us where we have been rather than where we might be going, so in that regard, if the 100-week moving average ends up getting breached for a decent amount of time, then we might be able to proclaim that the bull market may well be over and we are in a bear market - for however long that new status of a bear market might end up lasting.
So, then the 200-week moving average becomes the likely extreme bottom for when we end up being in a bear market, and currently the 200-week moving average is just moving above $21,500.
You can see the historical 200-week moving average prices
here.
For sure since early 2021, there have been quite a few folks proclaiming that bitcoin has to get some kind of a correction back down to the 200-week moving average, and holy shit.. the 200-week moving average has more than doubled in the time that those proclamations have been being made..
Even though quite a few more finanancialization tools have been introduced into bitcoin (including but not limited to futures/options products) that have been allowing for the naked shorting of bitcoin, so there is likely some truth to the matter that some of those tools can be effective in keeping bitcoin prices down.
Historically, those same kinds of tools have been successful in keeping PM prices down ( such as gold), while at the same time, bitcoin is a different kind of asset than PMs such as gold in terms of the ability to easily claim possession and to verify it without expensive third-party processes.. so in that regard, some of the bitcoin shorters and those who do not have the bitcoin that they proclaim to have (or that they are using in their various bets) may well get caught with their pants down in terms of their inabilities to cover the value of the coins that they are betting as if they had them.. which are ultimately client coins.,. but if they do not have them to give to clients, then there could end up being some pretty BIG wreckenings that are not are not really resolvable.. and maybe even some of the institutions/governments might not be ready, willing or able to cover those kinds of games that rich folks believe that they can get away with largely based on the fact that they have been getting away with that kind of fuckery for a decently long time.. ... so surely who knows if such wreckening scenarios will end up playing out or not.. even though I personally believe that there continues to be greater dangers in bitcoin than in other asset classes for the rich and/or even governments to be fucking around with trying to hold bitcoin prices down through those kinds of financial instruments (or even new variations) that have worked for them historically.
I suppose that my punchline is merely just to watch one stage at a time and perhaps there continues to be some questions about whether the 100-week moving average is going to be breached.. and if it is breached, does that 100-week moving average start to serve as resistance (rather than support) which largely would just mean if the BTC price were to be able to stay below the 100-week moving average for any kind of meaningful length of time beyond a few weeks, that is if it even were to get there. I have my doubts, but I don't want to be caught off guard in terms of presuming too much regarding where the BTC price might go and how long it might stay there.