Topic: HODL bitcoins, you can do it! Look at HODL camp map to build up strong hands - page 8. (Read 3172 times)

Hodlimg Bitcoin is a good investment to take but it seems difficult for some people maybe because they lack the patience to hodl bitcoin.  But some people don't know the waiting to make  profit from Bitcoin is worth it. The profit you get in hodling Bitcoin is what you can never get saving your money in the bank. Instead of getting profit money will be losing it value while keeping it in the bank.  Hodling Bitcoin is good indeed.

No problem.  I had been trying to highlight some of the area where I perceived us to be thinking about some of these matters differently, and even my assessment of the difference might not be correct, since sometimes meaning and/or intention can be lost in writing.


It can be a bit strange because I had been attempting to add some presumptions, and surely some of the budgeting matters are intended to have some relations within the timelines and then maybe even showing that even if a later entrant comes into BTC, they are likely going to need to have a BIGGER budget than the guy from the earlier timeline, and even with an earlier budget, the later entrant guys might not have much if any chance to actually catch up to the earlier time guys who might have even had a smaller budget. 

I had been thinking about attempting to get into some comparisons with some of the earlier arguments that you seemed to have been making about a kind of preferably for lump sum, and it does not seem easy to really show my counter-arguments with examples, and one of the defects with the current hypotheticals as they all currently stand is that there is they all include DCA.. even the Lump sum guys of Hypos 1, 4, 7, 10 & 13 are including DCA.. so they do a lump sum and then they DCA thereafter.

I was thinking that maybe even with Hypos 1, 4 & 7, there could be another hypo added that might be labelled as Hypos 1a, 4a & 7a, and so the underlying presumption would be that if we can already figure out their total investment, then we can figure out the amount that they invested per year, so 10 years, versus 5 years versus 2.5 years, and perhaps, our Hypos 1a, 4a & 7a would ONLY invest in BTC with a lump sum of 1 year's investment amount, and then they would thereafter just sit on their investment.. so they have pretty much invested a whole year of their investment budget at time 1, and so presumptively, they are going to end up with a lower cost per BTC, but they are going to have way fewer BTC, and so part of my point would be to attempt to show that it is not always advantageous to just invest one time in a lump sum kind of a way (even if you are able to do it), and the ones that supplement with DCA and even the ones with a lower budget may well end up spending way more on their BTC (even per BTC), but in the longer run, may of us would have rather been the guy with more BTC, even if our costs per BTC would have had been higher than the lump sum only guys.


It seem that I already took your advice on the point of having a place to reference these hypos, and that was part of the reason that I added the hypos to opening post 2 of my investment ideas thread.

So tentatively, I am considering the possibility of adding Hypos 1a, 4a & 7a in order to juxtapose a lump sum ONLY example.. but then also I had been considering adding Hypos 16, 17 & 18,  and those would be no coiners who have neither any BTC but they have no plan to get into BTC.  Of course, these guys could convert into Hypos 13, 14 & 15 by merely creating a plan in which they would be able to act upon, but they are not yet to that stage, and it could take many years or even many cycles before they finally convert into Hypos 13, 14 & 15.

One of my concern with so many hypos is that they can start to feel a bit cluttered and maybe even confusing - since why do we need so many examples, and surely another problem is that the examples capture a point in time, so there could be some aspects in regards to the information that is less than evergreen... meaning that the information for some of the timelines might need to be changed from time to time.. once every 4-year cycle, perhaps?


It seems to me that Hypos 1, 4, 7, 10 & 13 are largely meant to show the situation of guys who already have some amount of money that they are able to lump sum invest, and the earlier guys Hypos 1 and 4 are relatively less wealthy than the later guys, which is largely attempting to show that there is a need for more capital as a later investor in order to attempt to even come close to catching up to the earlier investors, yet at the same time, I am not attempting to be exclusionary with my use of larger amounts for any of the guys, especially since there could still be cases in which relatively poor guys have come to bitcoin and have already built up some investment funds, so maybe a guy who had been investing $10 to $100 per week in non-bitcoin investments in the last 5-10 years may well have been able to build up both investments and even an emergency fund, but that same guy might not have a lot of money, but he would still end up fitting into the category of Hypos 1, 4, 7, 10 & 13 - since he is a guy who is able to lump sum invest. 

Maybe such guy built up $10 per week which is $520 per year which is $5,200 in 10 years, and yeah, if he built up 10x that amount with $100 per week, then he would have built up an investment portfolio of $52k, and both guys fit into the same category even though the amounts are different. 

Another assumption of Hypos 1, 4, 7, 10 & 13 is that they have their finances in pretty decent order with an emergency fund and reserves and likely manageable debt, even though I don't get too much into discussions of debt in these hypotheticals, even though these days, debt problems are quite common accross very many of the segments of society.
 

That makes sense.  I do frequently presume the registration date, and it would not be easy to keep track of the circumstances of all the forum members, so sometimes we might need to be reminded about the circumstances, especially if the guys might be suggesting that they fit into one of the hypotheticals more than the others, which you ended up doing that in your earlier response by saying that you fit with hypo 7.. which surely would have had been problematic if your timeline was not close to 2.5 years.


So, yeah, if you are only getting close to 1 year investing into bitcoin you would be closest in terms of comparing yourself to Hypos 10, 11 & 12.. and maybe if I end up adding hypo Hypos 10a, then you could be close to that... Probably the more difficult hypotheticals are the ones with the shortest period of time investing, and even the 2.5 year hypotheticals don't really have a very long track record like the ones with 5 years and 10 years... and so I have been criticized for being too random and arbitrary in terms of the facts and the conclusions of what I am attempting to show, and surely there is some truth in those kinds of accusations, yet at the same time, guys have to try  to decide these kinds of matters on their own, to plug in their own facts and hopefully come to the seemingly more correct conclusions that it tends to take a whole fucking lot of time to build up an investment portfolio, even if you do everything right and even if you attempt to be aggressive with your approach, and there could be ways that guys build up their investment portfolio  and then end up getting lucky with a lot of BTC price performance in a short period of time, but at the same time, there still need to be choices in regards to how much to put into the investment and perhaps to even attempt to see if too much risk might be being taken if you might be investing beyond your budget or something like that... because even though it can take a long time to build an investment portfolio, it may even take longer to recover, and/or recovery might not be possible if some guys are gambling rather than investing with their time, energy and financial value.


I am not sure if you are reading those correctly, because largely with Hypos 7 and 10 I am attempting to describe the state in which someone comes to bitcoin, and of course, hypo 7 has 2.5 years into bitcoin and hypo 10 has 1.25 years into bitcoin, so they are already building from the state in which they came into bitcoin.  So either you are already at that state when you get into bitcoin or you are not. 

The state of hypos 7 and 10 already have emergency funds and reserves in order, so they are presumptively already in a good financial state when they start to invest into bitcoin, and that is why they are able to start out with a lump sum and then to supplement with DCA.

Of course someone could start out fitting within a state that more closely resembles hypos 8 or 9 or hypos 11 and 12, which are those who have 2.5 years and 1.25 years in bitcoin respectively. 

However, already with the hypos, I am also presuming that any of the guys who do not have an ability to lump sum invest, then the first year or two of investing into, they would be building their emergency funds and reserves... and of course, the presumption is that hypos 8 and hypo 11, are already in a better position than either hypo 9 or hypo 12 at the time of getting into bitcoin.. so in the process, they are already investing into bitcoin and building themselves into a better position in terms of the solidness of their emergency fund and reserves.

Another thing is that there are presumptions that at the time of their entrance into bitcoin, hypo 7 has an emergency fund and reserves, hypo 8 has an emergency fund and no reserves and hypo 9 has neither an emergency fund and reserves.  However, after 2.5 years investing into bitcoin hypo 8 should have had gotten enough of his shit together to establish a reserves (but a reserves is not really mandatory until there are desires to start to buy on dips and things like that, so there could be cases that hypo 8 just continues to maximize his disposable income into bitcoin so he would not establish a reserve) and the same with hypo 9, after 2.5 years he surely would establish an emergency fund, but not necessarily a reserve because a reserve presumes holding back some of the DCA.. and so the longer that any of them are into bitcoin the more likely they would transition into having a reserve as well as their emergency fund and an emergency fund that is 3-6 months or more is way more basic than having reserves.. and the more aggressive that a person is in his investment or the more unstable is his income, the more likely that he is going to need a larger amount of an emergency fund and/or reserves.


I am not sure if that would be completely correct except for there is a kind of passage of time, so if a person is brand new and starting out, then he might start at hypo 15, then go to hypo 12 and then go to hypo 9 and then go to hypo 6..  .. and the main thing would just be the passing of time and attempting to stay consistent with his investment.. and so he might not reach the exact same levels but he might have comparison points with where he should be and whether he overperformed or under performed.


But you seem to be going backwards, but at least hypos 7 and 10 are in the same category of someone who had already started out in bitcoin with an ability to lump sum invest.


That part is true..,. and maybe there have been quite a few of us longer term bitcoiners suggesting that getting through a whole bitcoin cycle (4 years) can really show a certain amount of evidence in regards to how any person had been able to get through that whole cycle and then if he might need to consider the extent to which he might need to reassess what he has done and whether the next 4 years (or whatever additional period) is going to be in need of further adjustments in terms of ongoing accumulation or if maybe the person had gotten into a maintenance stage at some point within the first 4 years, which surely seems less likely with a pure DCA strategy, yet surely there are going to be differences in terms of if someone had already been able to bring other financial resources into bitcoin within the first 4 years. 

And, in the end, these are all discretionary matters, in which each of us has complete control over our own approach towards investing into bitcoin and the employment of BTC accumulation strategies.

 Indeed, the emotional aspect of investing has been often overlooked but it happens to be one of the most important aspects of Investment, it can indeed be very tempting to make certain rash decisions concerning your investment due to a few reasons you feel should be tackled immediately, but that's often a recipe for disaster. But with the help of long-term Investment, you'll be able to take a more levelheaded decision because those decisions are not products of tension and anxiety. Rather than getting caught up in the dramatic trends of the market, you'll focus more in the big picture with your eyes on the goal and that's what will help you make the right decisions.

Short-term Investment on the other hand can be really emotionally draining and very stressful too, especially for new Bitcoin investors and newbies.
Long term investment is a lot more stable and less stressful, you can just set it and forget about it and then you just have to check in on it periodically which isn't even mandatory, because whether you do or not, the Investment would still be going as it should.

Indeed, JayJuanGee has been an incredible advocate for Long-term Investment and DCAing. And without a doubt, his levelheaded approaches has definitely inspired a lot of  people on the forum and has also provided helpful guidance for people to make the right decisions on the right Investment approach to employ to ensure they minimize the risks involved in Bitcoin Investment. It's amazing to see how one person makes such an impact to this community.


It is possible to view Hypos 7 and 10 as distinct turning points in the Bitcoin accumulation process, and time is definitely an important factor. It's critical to have a realistic perspective on your current stage of the journey and avoid putting yourself ahead of yourself by making comparisons to those who have traveled a longer distance. Nevertheless, even if you are aware that reaching your objectives will take time, it is still crucial to set and work toward them. Thus, it is reasonable to aim for both Hypo 7 and 10.

Long-term goals can benefit from being visualized in terms of stages and levels. More like a video game. Think of each stage or level as a kind of "boss fight" that signifies a distinct turning point in your adventure. Hypo 7 would be equivalent to Level 1 in this instance, and Hypo 10 to Level 2. As you advance through the stages, you gain strength and resilience. Each level has its own set of obstacles and rewards.

There is nothing wrong with it. Humans have this nature, we have different interpretation of same thing.   


Fair enough, since this is crux of Hypo - 7



Jokes apart. You must preserve this in one thread. So it may be readily available for reference. Also it may be referenecd again and again so more people will get to know about that.


There is nothing harsh JJG.

Hypo 7 has invested 3 million while Hypo 10 has invested 2 million dollars into Bitcoin and honestly I am no where near to that money. Date of registration doesn't mean we start accumulating from that date. I already said that even after you register here, it takes time to understand Bitcoin and how to accumulate it effictively.
If I talk about myself, I am started accumulating Bitcoin in DCA manner less then year ago.

Basically, investment ought not to be done with emotions that's why beginners are always adviced to go for a long time investment rather than short term investments or trading because long-term investments gives one the ease to make investments and watch it grow as time goes on whereas a short term investor is just after the short term peanut (profit) that would be gotten forgetting to understand the high risk that is associated with it and they always get acquainted to monitor the activities of their investments thereby not giving them time for other things rather always watching the activities of the market.

JayJuanGee have been a good motivator of long term investment in this forum and has made few who are interested in the buying and hodling process to understand the basics of being a long term hodler. With the use of the DCA have also made it easier for everyone to be involved in buying and hodling at regular intervals unlike some persons that only wants to buy and hodl at ones and maybe stop buying again and the consistency in this DCA method have even helped a lot of Bitcoin investors to acquire as much Bitcoin even more than their expectations.

It does seem that you understand these hypotheticals fairly well MusaPk, yet you and I are still interpreting the situations differently, and perhaps part of the reason remains that I am striving to incorporate several investment presumptions that I consider to be best (or better) practices, while also leaving a bit of latitude into the hypotheticals and at the same time showing the role of DCA in each of the scenarios.

Accordingly, we should attempt to recognize both some of our assumptions about Hypo 7, and also appreciate where his BTC portfolio is in comparison to how much he has invested, and surely we should be able to recognize and appreciate that even someone with 2.5 years invested into bitcoin has not had enough time for his BTC's value to really begin to show the power of compounding - so in some sense you seem to be getting overly distracted by the quantity of BTC accumulated rather than where the BTC holdings are in comparison to the historical performance of this asset class.  Yeah, of course, I am neither saying that history is going to repeat itself or that there are guarantees to future performance - yet I am saying that over the last 2.5 years, this Hypo 7 guy has been building up his BTC holdings within his own capacities and surely the evidence should support that 2.5 years is hardly enough time in the market whether we are talking about continuing to build a BTC holdings and/or considering a time in which starting to cash out (versus something like BTC portfolio maintanence) would be amongst reasonable/prudent and/or longer term investor kinds of considerations.

Again, let's look more specifically at what kind of guy Hypo 7 is (which in my series of hypos should be relatively similar to Hypos 1, 4, 10 & 13, even though his main difference would be how much time in the market he had and also perhaps his perception of BTC market status that differs from Hypos 1, 4, 10 & 13 because the BTC market would have had been in a different place for each of these guys as compared to the others, which surely should have some kind of an effect on the initial stages of their BTC investing approach).   In this particular case, Hypo 7 likely came into bitcoin 2.5 years ago with a goal to get his BTC investment amount to be somewhere between 5% and 25% of his overall investment portfolio holdings, and surely these guys - set 1 of Hypos (1, 4, 7, 10 & 13) - share a kind of presumption that they have already established a decent-size investment portfolio, so they are ready, wiling and/or able to lump sum invest into bitcoin, which is not likely the case with the other two sets of hypos - either set 2 of Hypos (2, 5, 8, 11 & 14).  or set 3 of Hypos (3, 6, 9, 12 & 15).  And, from my point of view, they are also better off to figure out ways to DCA into bitcoin as well as their lump sum entrance.. and surely DCA could be something steady and/or it could also be supplemented with buying on dips.. which may be an extra side budget and might not exactly fit into a DCA definition.. even though sometimes the practices of DCA and buying on dips could end up playing off on each other in terms of how much a person might want to buy at any given time; however for the sake of these kinds of hypotheticals, I am largely attempting to avoid fucking around with too many variables (that would involve buying on dips) and so it is much easier to project a kind of general average amount of purchase by use of historical DCA estimations... using historical DCA estimations likely makes the results more pure and objective rather than attempts at overly spinning results in terms of figuring out when a guy might have had figured out that we were in a dip or we were not in a dip, which those kinds of measurements would be all over the place.

So, if this Hypo 7 guy is aiming for 5% to 25% of his investment portfolio to be in BTC, there could be decent presumptions that he should have had been able to reach his target levels somewhere between 1-2 years, unless some guys might hold back somewhat in their in getting to their full BTC investment allocation target level based on their own views of what they might believe the BTC market to do - which surely hardly should be the case of the last 2.5 years, especially since this particular timeline ends up involving both a top and a pretty damned BIG correction right in the midst of it, so there could well be some presumptions that these kinds of guys would have ended up meeting whatever their BTC investment allocation target levels within 1-2 years and even more so within 2.5 years - yet at the same time, we can see that the Hypo 7 guys is still not even in profits, when it comes to measuring the value of his holdings in terms of the 200-week moving average. He has invested $3 million, but in terms of the 200-WMA, his holdings are still only worth $2.666 million, and even though spot price valuations are in profits with a $4.472 million valuation, the guy may well continue to be inspired to continue to buy BTC, since the actual BTC price (and the 200-WMA) are still pretty close to his average cost per BTC, which is nearly $35k.  

Surely, I would not suggest that it is obvious what the guy is going to do, and maybe it depends on the size of his overall investment portfolio whether he is currently overly allocated or if he might feel that he is right on his target.. so if we consider a $3 million investment amount, then that would perhaps suggest that if he were within his target then his overall investment portfolio would have a size of somewhere between $12 million (for a 25% BTC allocation) and $60 million (for a 5% BTC allocation), and so if he might have overshot whatever his own allocation goals were, then he may well end up feeling that he has enough BTC, so he might convert into more of a maintenance mode rather than an accumulation mode, but in any case, it seems way too soon that he would be ready for getting into any kind of liquidation mode, unless he were to have some unusual circumstances of either some kind of health emergency of himself or his family or an age concern (yet we should be able to rule out the age concern since any kind of normal or base case kind of guy with best (and/or better) kinds of BTC investment practices would not have had been investing into bitcoin under normal kinds of circumstances with less than a 4-year investment timeline.. so the elderly situation would have had been an exceptional situation rather than the normal kind of situations that I am trying to present a hypo 7 kind of guy).


Well MusaPk, either you meet the timeline requirements or you don't, and sure you could end up having a position that is somewhere between one timeline and another timeline, yet hopefully you understand that in this particular Hypo 9 situation, this guy would have had already reached right around 0.5 BTC if he had been investing for the 2.5 years, and the link within the hypo shows where the history would have had gotten a guy who would have had been able to be consistent in his DCA investment in that kind of a $100 per week amount starting from August 15, 2021 to present.  So if you have been into investing in bitcoin for a similar amount of time, you can look at your own performance results and compare with Hypo 9 to see if your results are similar to his or if you might have outperformed or under performed him.

Your forum registration date @MusaPk shows August 2022 and not August 2021, so shouldn't you be comparing your own results to Hypo 12 rather than to Hypo 9, unless you had been investing in bitcoin for right around a year longer than your forum registration date, which I am not going to deny to be possible. In my own situation I started investing in bitcoin right around 3 months prior to my forum registration date.. so my first investments in bitcoin were late November 2013 and my forum registration date is late February 2014.

For some reason through my ongoing back and forth interactions with you, it seems that I keep having to repeat that past performance does not give us very much evidence regarding future performance, except probably that we might presume that it takes more dollars to get similar results, but it still does not negate that DCA is likely going to continue to be amongst the best of the performance vehicles for bitcoin in terms of what normies would be both be able to practically apply towards their BTC accumulation and while at the same time attempting to invest as aggressively as they are able to accomplish without overdoing it.

And maybe another thing that I should point out (or repeat) is that with any of these examples (whether referring to sets 1, 2 or 3 of the hypos), we should be able to extrapolate guys with differing budget sizes, whether their budget size might be 10x higher, 10x lower or some other variant in the middle of those, and merely multiplying or dividing by 10 is going to give very similar results in terms of returns, yet we might not really know the extent to which any guy who is employing these DCA practices is falling more on the side of aggressiveness or more on the side of whimpiness, and the examples show that only the guys in set 1 of the hypos is in a position to start out with lump sum investing, and the guys in set 2 of the hypos likely already has a very good income with a decently large amount of discretionary/disposable income and the guys in set 3 of the hypos are likely struggling a lot more in terms of making sure that they actually have discretionary/disposable income on a regular basis.. so in terms of emergency funds, set 1 of the hypos has all kinds of emergency funds already in place and is already used to managing those kinds of things... set 2 of the hypos is in a place that he mostly has emergency funds and/or can fairly easily build an emergency fund, reserves and float, and set 3 of the hypos is likely in a lot of need for a lot of work to build and maintain emergency funds, yet even set 3 can catch up and surpass set 2 and/or set 1 especially if he enters into bitcoin at earlier dates.  

You see hypo 3 (which is a set 3), and you compare him with either hypo 10 or hypo 13, we can see that hypo 10 had to pay nearly 25x higher prices than hypo 3, and sure he was able to pass up hypo 3, but there surely are going to be a lot of folks in the same class as hypo 10 who were not able to pass up hypo 3, and so hypo 3 is putting himself into a higher class of wealth of person and surely some folks in set 1 are losing their status because of either their whimpiness in regards to bitcoin, or their waiting around too long before getting started in bitcoin, and it may well be the case that there are many folks who fit hypo 13  (and perhaps I need to make another series of Hypo 16, 17 and 18 who still have not gotten into bitcoin) will never be able to pass up hypo 3 - even though hypo 13 and hypo 3 come from different classes of investors, and in bitcoin there are going to surely continue to play out variations of those kinds of wealth redistribution matters and also that relatively poor people will continue to move into the rich class based on their consistency, persistency and their ongoing action in regards to accumulating and holding bitcoin as compared with rich folks who still have not even reached newbie status in their bitcoin journey because they continue to fail/refuse to act to create a BTC buying plan and to act upon such plan in order to accumulate bitcoin and so through their failure/refusal to act to accumulate and hold bitcoin, they choose to keep themselves as either no coiners or low coiners and continue to be on the losing side of the wealth redistribution that seems to be currently taking place.


In my response to this post, I am now starting to think that it could come in handy to attempt to describe the situation of Hypos 16, 17 and 18 in terms of their continuing to fail/refuse to actually plan and/or to act.. and surely the most important part seems to be the action part, but there could well be a planning part too... and so it could be interesting to consider the situations of the no coiners who still have not either gotten into the BTC accumulation planning stage or the BTC accumulation acting stage.

At some point I may well need to stop with this.. or maybe I would need to convert it into a book  - or a chapter of a book.. ... hahahahahaha


You are ONLY closest to Hypo 7 if you have been in BTC for 2.5 years, and if you are somewhere in the ballpark of August 2022 for your registration date, then from my perspective, you would be closer to hypo 10, even if you are working towards getting closer to hypo 7 - especially since one of the main factors in terms of differentiating 7 and 10 is how much time that you have been in the process of accumulating BTC.  So you tell me?  What is your time in service (BTC accumulation)?  Are you really closer to 2.5 years as compared with 1.25 years or is it that you are prematurely presuming your results prior to doing the time?

Am I being too harsh on you?  hahahahahahaha  

Hypo-7 With 86 Bitcoins one should feel comfortable that he has adequate number of Bitcoins. Its a good position but to reach there you must have good amount of starting capital.

Hypo-9 This is where person like me fits in i.e. 100 dollars per week. For me if I have 0.5 Bitcoins in the 2.5 years then that's not a bad deal. Since we are investing 100$ per week.
 

All Hypo's are excellent way to understand different scenarios of investing into Bitcoin. It's just about spending some time and effort.
Kudos to your effort of editing it with time to time.  


I am happy that I am in Hypo 7 i.e. the one where wealthiest lies.

I find it remarkable that you paid attention to the emotional side of investing. This is very significant, yet I believe it is frequently ignored. DCA can help you control your emotions and make more logical decisions during the sometimes difficult and emotional process of investing. I think that fostering discipline is another way that DCA may assist with the emotional side of investing. It can assist you in staying true to your goal and preventing hasty decisions because you're investing a fixed sum of money on a regular basis.

The way you addressed the issue of those who believe they can "time the market" with Bitcoin or any other investment is also very impressive. These assertions contain a great deal of survivorship bias: individuals who timed the market well will talk about it a lot, while those who didn't will probably say less. Since most people are unable to time the market effectively, DCA can help reduce the risk associated with attempting to do so. I really appreciate how you make the point that it's not reasonable to anticipate that beginners will create a profitable trading method. DCA is a considerably more approachable and controllable tactic.

If anyone is giving advice to newbies (no coiners and/or low coiners) to wait rather than getting the fuck started, then that would not be good advice.  That would likely be bad advice, even though people can do whatever they like in terms of their own level of preparedness for UPpity that may or may not happen. 

In other words, you are not prepared for UPpity at all if you either do not have any coins or if you are low on coins (by definition if you are a low coiner you are not sufficiently/adequately prepared for up).  The most practical way to prepare for UP is by having some coins.. even though there could be some other ways that might be less efficient to get some (or perhaps a sufficient/adequate) BTC price exposure to be prepared for up.


Where are you presuming bitcoin to be right now?  Bull or bear? and which part? and how do you know?


There are no guarantees and yeah you cannot time the market, so part of the reason to get started right away, even though you cannot really know if the BTC price might go up or down from the specific BTC price point in which you get started.  If you think that you have some theories about price direction, you could adjust the amount of your invested amount at your entrance point and you can attempt to assess your level of preparedness for either UP or DOWN based on your own circumstances.. and surely, it is important to be prepared for both UP and for DOWN, but if you have no coins, you are only preparing for UP, which surely would be problematic and not advisable, even though people are free to do whatever they like (including sitting around like a dummy), even if it ends up being wrong.


Waiting for down that might not happen is not a demonstration of patience, it is demonstration of dumbness.

 


That is true.  But it might not, too. It might go up and never come back to these prices ever again. Which is more likely and are you prepared for either?  Hopefully you are prepared for either rather than just waiting for one side and that side may well not end up happening.


4-10 years or longer might be a good idea for anyone just getting started... so yeah, shorter terms might just be gambling, even though if you have an investment timeline of less than 4 years, then maybe you could just adjust your position size downwardly in order to account for your being a trader rather than an investor.


Sure.. not everyone is an investor.... so those kinds of situations are going to have a lot of variables.  A part of the reason that it is easier to talk about investment theses in bitcoin is to understand bitcoin in that sense, even though surely you are correct that there are a variety of short term use cases, and there are also some people who are good at trading, but those kinds of people should be able to figure out their shit themselves.. or maybe go to threads that talk about those kinds of topics..


I appreciate any comments, feedback and/or criticisms of those hypos.. so yeah, thanks for looking through them.

Yesterday when I went back to them, I was having a little bit of difficulty remembering why I had created them in the first place, and I had thought that they had some other information in them, so I was a bit frustrated when I needed to add a summary regarding the results of each of the categories. 

I believe that my initial idea in creating the categories in the way that I did was because once the frameworks were established, then guys should be able to extrapolate other kinds of results.. but the main points were being made that involve showing how various investment approaches would vary over time, and of course, I wanted to be able to mostly emphasize ongoing DCA into each of the models because historically it has remained an important constant in bitcoin that can be measured in terms of its historical results, and I still believe that historical results does not guarantee future results, even though we can see through the various hypotheticals where guys would currently be based on varying timelines and perhaps whether they might have had some abilities to lump sum invest and/or DCA.. and most people should be able to employ some version of DCA as long as they have some discretionary/disposable income.

There surely are going to be some guys who would have had been able to beat strict variations of DCA, even within the timelines of the given hypotheticals, and so I don't have any problems with that, but I do have some problems with guys making arguments that proclaim some kind of generally applicable system that involves suggestions that they are able to beat DCA.. or they have it all figured out when to buy and when not to buy, and to suggest that newbie normies should follow such systems that they are likely not even able to articulate with any kind of clarity, and likely more than 90% of people are not even capable of developing some kind of a BTC trading system that would match or beat some variation of ongoing consistent buying that involves DCA, especially over longer periods of time such as when we are getting into 5-10 year timelines.

Sure there are ways to trade and even be profitable and even to be able to consistently beat the market or to beat some kind of a strict DCA approach, but those tend to be both specialized people and also not applicable to around 90% of the population who might not have time and/or abilities to engage in such tactics or to learn such tactics.

Mate, you raise a very good point. In fact, one of the most popular pieces of advise offered to novice Bitcoin investors is to wait for a bear market and purchase at lower prices rather than making a purchase during a bull market. This is due to the fact that Bitcoin prices frequently rise sharply during bull markets before plunging once again during bear markets. Of course, timing the market isn't always simple, and there's no assurance that the price will rise again following a collapse.

However, this method may have a flaw in that it takes a lot of patience. The price of Bitcoin might decline for several months or even years in a bear market. So, this might not be a good choice for those trying to make a quick profit. It's also important to remember that not everyone who obtains Bitcoin does so with the intention of investing in it; some use it for other things, like making purchases or sending money internationally. Therefore, while waiting for a bear market can make sense for some people, it might not be the best course of action for others.




I appreciate the effort you've put by  taking the time to clarify this. It can be tricky to present complex information in a way that's understandable and easy to follow. I appreciate you also taking the time to go back to edit the Hypos, and I think your approach of separating them into three different categories based on the wealth of the person is really helpful. Could you tell me more about why you chose to include lump sum and DCA strategies in the wealthy category, and only DCA in the other?
Not just me, I believe some other persons would be curious to know.

I just added a link to the above linked post, since yesterday - in this post, I clarified Hypos 1-6 and added scenarios for Hypos 7-15 (which largely bring down the timeline with Hypos 7-9 as 2.5 years, Hypos 10-12 as 1.25 years and Hypos 13-15 as newbie status.

Even though the overall theme is to attempt to show both how the difference of time can play out, but also how the difference in wealth at the time of getting started with bitcoin, I realize that some of the information might be a bit too confusing for some people to follow, so I may go back through the Hypos from time to time to try to edit and clarify the presentation of the contents. 

You are correct that they all use DCA, but also ONLY the wealthiest incorporates both lump sum and DCA, since he can.. the others are exclusively DCA.  The wealthiest who starts out with both DCA and lump sum is reflected in Hypos 1, 4, 7, 10 & 13.  The medium only does DCA is reflected in Hypos 2, 5, 8, 11 & 14.  The poorest only does DCA is reflected in Hypos 3, 6, 9, 12 & 15.

Right now everyone is happy with Bitcoin price as its going up (52k$ as I am writing). But not everyday is Sunday, there can be times when Bitcoin goes bearish and it can last for months. What should be the strategy during that bearish season and what to do when Bitcoin goes bullish? These are all questions one has to address when investing in Bitcoin. One can answer these questions only if he has sound knowledge about Bitcoin.
Also one don't need to study books or go for extensive study to understand Bitcoin. There are very simple scenarios out there that tells how Bitcoin has behaved over a period of time. Based on these scenarios one can easily define his future strategy.

One scenario is JayJuanGee 6 different Hypo's that gives idea of accumulating Bitcoin for 5 to 10 years in DCA manner.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63394117

You are spreading false information in what seems like a gambler's mentality.  

You do not necessarily need to take a lot of risks in order to gain a lot of profits (especially with something like bitcoin and/or with any other asset that is a good asymmetric bet/investment), even though you might have to make sure that whatever risks that you are taking, in terms of the level of your aggressiveness in terms of investing into bitcoin would not cause you to end up losing your bitcoin because you either did not have your expenses adequately covered or you might have been "betting" on the price going only in the UP direction within a certain timeframe that you would be needing back some or all of the money that you had invested.

The meaning of a non-leveraged asymmetric bet would be that the most that you can lose is 100% of your investment amount, yet at the same time there may well be many multiples of your investment amount as potential profit amounts.  So someone who had $100,000 in 2015 might have had decided to invest 10% into bitcoin, right around the time that bitcoin was $250.

So that $10k would have gotten him 40 BTC, and right now throw 40BTC would have a spot price value of a bit more than $2 million.  I would not consider investing 10% in 2015 to be taking a lot of risk, and sure the guy could have lost the whole $10k.

Right now the surrounding facts might be different, yet bitcoin seems to continue to be a good asymmetric bet to the upside, so people have choices about how to deal with that factor, including they can do nothing or they could choose to accumulate BTC with DCA, lump sum and/or buying on dips.

You have rightly understood that investment is necessary for every person, according to our status we should invest according to what principles.  Investing is critical to building wealth and powering financial stability.  In my view the ones that have the potential to give higher returns are shares, focusing in bonds is a more consistent source of income, but the returns are lower.

In Bitcoin  If we use a good strategy and professional investment method, we can get good profit in short period of time, but the higher the profit, the higher the risk.

Alts are launched with so many attractive features. They roam around for sometimes and then lost in the darkness forever. I had a crush on MATIC (POLYGON) last year after reading its features like side chains, low fees and more. The token is still there but wasn't able to take off despite so much marketing about its attractive features and now the team is launching new token with new features to generate more capital. The story may be different for other alts but the aim of all Alts are more or less same. There is no Alt that has survived the length of Bitcoin.

Of course, imprecise in terms of both measuring the number of actual people - and then also figuring out the extent to which bitcoin might be fractionally reserved in a variety of ways since some of the BIG bitcoin wallets are connected to various 3rd party custodians, such as exchanges or various financial product providers (ETFs and those kinds of institutions)...

So we surely have measures in regards to how much adoption is increasing in a variety of ways and we can infer usage from quite a few of the various metrics, including make inferences about the kinds of users through tracing some of the histories of wallets... and perhaps even identifying various black holes with lightning network private and public channels that may or may not be traceable... and maybe i am not quibbling as much about these kinds of matters with you, even though I am quibbling with your overall assertion that there are fewer gamblers in bitcoin now and even that there are more adults in the room because the BIGGER players are coming into the picture, and surely your assertion is NOT totally untrue, but I don't like it because it is seeming to generalize too much and to accept too many mainstream characterizations that even implicitly criticize earlier adopters for being gambler types and immature - even though there is some truth in it, I still consider it to be an unfair picture, including that it seems to imply that richer players and institutions are not acting like that (when they are able to, and sometimes subtly scandalously and also playing with others money, too)... and sure maybe in the end, I am quibbling over relatively small details since we largely don't disagree.


The mere fact that bitcoin has a lot of large impacts also goes towards various attempts to manipulate it and to use it in a variety of ways and spread misinformation.. so, even though I agree that there are all kinds of disproportionate impacts that bitcoin is having, there is also all kinds of misinformation pieces out there that characterize bitcoin in negative ways and continue to disproportionately negatively affect normies from getting into bitcoin when they should... so probably since I got in, there have been all kinds of characterization that bitcoin is growing too fast and its mature and all kinds of bullshit that cause a lot of normies to conclude that they are too late and even if they invest into bitcoin, they are also quick to pull out because they wrongly conclude that any continued upwards price movements are not sustainable.. I hate to create any impression that bitcoin is anywhere close to mature or to imply that people have missed the boat or two suggest that bitcoin's irresponsible days are over. . or that even bitcoin's ongoing violent volatility (in either direction) is over.. even though surely more and more rich people are getting into bitcoin in attempts to front run retail and normies..

but so far the numbers of entrance of even the rich people into bitcoin are still relatively small even though it is seeming like it is BIG... and also there likely are a small numbers of the rich folks and institutions that truly are stocking up on bitcoin (like Saylor - outwardly open about it).. and so those who are coming to bitcoin earlier are still able to front run a lot of normies (retail) and also able to front-run a lot of institutions, including blackrock, even though surely Blackrock is currently publicly ongoingly taking BiG chunks of bitcoin and surely anyone still acquiring bitcoin right now is lucky that the BTC price is not moving up as fast as it could be, even though the window to 5 digit bitcoin may well end up ending soon.. and surely no guarantees.. . .but it seems that any newbies should be ongoingly striving to get as many bitcoin as they can while 5 digit prices last, whether that is the next month or two or maybe it could last for another whole cycle (such as 4 years), but I have my doubts.


Failure of incentives to transact is not completely the fault of bitcoin, and so if countries are unfriendly to bitcoin, then they impose disincentives in regards to transacting in bitcoin... Technically, it pretty easy to transact with bitcoin.

So criticizing bitcoin for its ease of transactability, or lack thereof is more likely a political problem.. and sure there also can be some claims that bitcoin fees are too high, yet there are likely some less than organic forces pushing that direction... so surely, a lot of smaller players might be discouraged to adopt bitcoin because of fee matters and confusion about fee matters and confusion about how to hold their coins without creating hundreds of $10 transactions.

Bitcoin's stronger value proposition has to do with the difficulties to censor it.. which is quite threatening to various powers that be that don't like people to have freedom or privacy and they want to get into the middle of transactions to be able to try to control them and to extract value from the transactions, and so in a variety of regards battles are going to continue, but it is not going to stop richer people from trying to front run retail, when bitcoin is more likely a tool for poor people rather than rich people, even though rich people are in a better place to take advantage of it and also not to be discouraged by misinformation regarding the ongoing needs to send $10 transactions on chain...

So yeah there are likely going to continue to be barriers towards both adoption and poor people realizing that bitcoin is something that they should be acquiring.. and likely even a lot of current bitcoin holders are low coiners who don't realize that they don't have enough bitcoin, even though you don't necessarily need a lot of it, but still there are advantages to actually realizing that bitcoin is no where near to a mature asset class in terms of adoption or a variety of important variables, even though there are some bitcoin hoarders who are pushing up the prices for everyone else and some of those bitcoin hoarders (the rich folks) might also be contributing to various negative dynamics that put informational and even financial obstacles in front of normies, no coiners and low coiners in terms of benefits that they would get from getting more bitcoin price exposure and/or owning bitcoin directly.


I am tempted to say that is a dumb framing, even though you are not wrong.  Anyone who is wanting to get into bitcoin and to benefit from it better start accumulating it and as much as they can.. like an investor and/or like a speculator. and yeah surely down the road more and more abilities are going to continue to develop... and yeah, these problems have existed in bitcoin since I got in and maybe even merchants who adopt the ability to receive bitcoin and then give up and some of them got screwed by having hundreds of $10 or less transactions that might be currently difficult (and maybe even financially unfeasible to move)... but so what?  I think these dynamics continue to show bitcoin as early days and sometimes having both forward and backwards steps, and it is difficult to expect that progress is going to be continuous and linear.. even though BTC price growth is exponential, especially if you look at it from 2012 to present.. or even if you might choose some other dates and zoom out a bit beyond various ongoing persistent short-term dilemmas.


Maybe I forgot to say fuck crypto.. we should be trying to focus on bitcoin here.. but yeah, there are various kinds of gamblers related to bitcoin and scammers and it is likely that that dick-twat Kwon Do already knew about the technological problems in both the way that he designed his scam coin, the way he marketed it and the way that he supposedly bought bitcoin to peg the value.  and gamblers are going to gamble and scammers are going to scam.. and when there are all kinds of potential for loop holes for pyramid schemes for rug pulling regulars, including that likely venture capitalists (such as Mike Novogratz with that Terra/Luna tatoo) twats were part of various aspects of these kinds of scams that got their money in early, pumped the shitcoin project and got a lot of their money out prior to regular folks who some of the regular folks got burnt more than others and sure some rich people got burnt in it too. but there have been systemized ways to pump scams in the "crypto" and bitcoin space, which is probably not so much a criticism of bitcoin, even though bitcoin does empower the abilities of scammers to scam..so you better be careful.. and you might or might not end up on the right side of the crash. .which I think my earlier examples have those kinds of stories in which some individuals have been able to escape getting reckt and others not.. which also is likely not going away in this upcoming cycle. merely because there are perceptions that adults are in the room.. but the bigger players also try to fuck around with systems, so they are going to fuck around and find out with bitcoin too.. and we will find out the extent to which bitcoin is able to sustain the ongoing fuckery that is likely to continue in similar ways, different ways and even ways that are still to be learned(discovered).


Surely they did not even have bitcoin... and they were faking value by printing their own coin (FTT).. which ended up coming to bite them in the ass fairly rapidly, and the level of shenanigans and likely insider dealing that includes people who have not been prosecuted and held to account continues.. so let's see what happens with that slimy little unsympathetic virtue signaling narcissistic twat.. SBF.


Bitcoin is decentralized and open source, so it is likely best to consider it in terms of it is what it is.. instead of thinking about if it could be implemented in some other way.. it is not really being implemented (except maybe it was implemented in 2008, 2009 and maybe into 2010 until satoshi disappeared. and thereafter, it was left to exist and to be developed upon.. .. so yeah, people will find ways to use it or to build upon it.. and to propose changes that may or may not end up getting adopted... some people might be more influential than others, so if you think something needs to be implemented or changed, then you can make proposals.. or to try to make changes that build upon bitcoin. . or other possibilities is to fork bitcoin into another form an try to get people to come over to your fork..

Indeed, there isn't a precise metrics to gauge how widely Bitcoin is adopted. Some may choose to consider the quantity of daily transactions or the number of Bitcoin wallets that are currently in use. However, these gauges are limited to certain factors.

However, despite its rather low adoption rate, Bitcoin is nevertheless having a significant effect on the financial system. For instance, the collapse of FTX has effects in both the traditional finance and cryptocurrency sectors. Therefore, even if just a small portion of people use Bitcoin, its impact is far bigger than that statistic would imply.

 Well, I think On the one hand, Bitcoin has been around for more than a decade now, and it's had a number of major price fluctuations, crashes, and comebacks. So it's certainly not a new technology. However, until it becomes  commonly used for transactions, there is still a long way to go. As of right now, the majority of its users are investors; regular people use it less frequently for tasks like paying bills or buying groceries. Therefore, I believe it to be in the middle of the "early" and "mature" areas.

It also appears that ignorance of the underlying technology contributed to some of the mistakes committed in the past. For instance, the Terra/Luna scenario resulted from a crash caused by an algorithmic stablecoin design error. Also, FTX's inability to accurately account for customer deposits was a contributing factor in their bankruptcy. I don't really think there are many fundamental flaws with Bitcoin itself, I believe it's more about how it's being implemented, which I believe could be readjusted as the day goes by.

I doubt that it is a good framework to suggest that bitcoin investors are more mature now than they were in the past, because there were surely a lot of people who got into bitcoin for the tech and maybe they also ended up getting rich along the way, yet it is not fair to generalize about the gambling tendencies improving because there are always going to be gamblers and there are always going to be different types of investors..and even the new players who might be very rich, they may well also make a lot of the same mistakes that earlier investors made - and I would still suggest that we are very early stages to bitcoin, even though we also know that bitcoin is continuing to get stronger the longer and longer that it exists including that bitcoin's network effects (referring to the 7 network effects described by Trace Mayer) are continuing to grown. 

It is difficult to know what level of adoption bitcoin has, and I have my doubts that it has even reached 1% of the world's population, even though we have rich folks and rich institutions currently coming into bitcoin, including some of them entering through the newly approved Spot ETFs.  These guys are neither imuned from gambling tendencies or making mistakes of the past, including but not limited to mistakes made that led up to a lot of the 2022 cascading crashes of Terra/Luna, Celsius, Blockfi, 3AC, Voyager, FTX, Alameda Research,  Genesis (perhaps involving Grayscale) and probably some others that I am forgetting about...

I don't include Binance in my criticisms, even though Binance and CZ were persecuted and likely coopted by the US Govt.. which who knows exactly how that is going to play out, and it appears just a few days ago CZ's sentencing was delayed for 2 months until the end of April.

https://www.ccn.com/news/binance-founder-czs-sentencing-pushed-back-reasons-unknown/

You can learn a lot about and refine your strategy by comparing historical portfolios, (your own or others'), to hypothetical portfolios. It's also interesting to consider the potential earnings if one had chosen to invest in Bitcoin at different times rather than other assets. This could be a helpful exercise to weigh the possible risks and rewards of potential future investments.

It's not just about buying and selling in the short term to try and make a quick profit, but rather about making a commitment to accumulating Bitcoin over time, understanding that the true potential of the technology may not be fully realized by using the short-term approach.

In the early days of Bitcoin, there were a lot of people who were drawn to the idea of getting rich quick by investing in this new and mysterious technology. These were often referred to as "get rich quick" investors, and they tended to focus on short-term gains rather than the long-term potential of the technology. However, over time, the market has matured, and many people have realized that Bitcoin is a long-term investment, and that to really see the benefits, you need to be patient and committed to accumulating over time, but a lot investors are still myopic about this fact and still holding on to the old and outdated technique of Bitcoin investment.

Yes, you are right, and it could only take people like us who have had a good knowledge about cryptocurrencies to know the difference about investing and gambling as regards to crypto, and by that I mean (i.e buying Bitcoin = Investing) due to it's low volatility likely to increase in value when hold over a longer period of time, whereas (i.e buying shitcoins = Gambling) due to it's high volatility nature, likely to either skyrocket so high, low or probably crash, depending on the nature of project and market support. Hence, it remains a wise decision people keep a handful of their investment into Bitcoin (above 90%), while they gamble not more than 10% on coins with a strong social media presence and total supply not more than 20 millions coins.