Topic: Summer dip?!, December price outcome? ---> JOIN and guess the price GO! - page 7. (Read 7383 times)

Well?

Exactly 4 weeks for this thread target time-frame to run.. and getting up to $80k is merely 23.3% above the mid-April ATH of $64,895...

That seems a pretty conservative range, especially given that we were up to $68,564 yesterday, and $68,564 is within 16.7% of the $80k maximum that you are proclaiming Charles-Tim...

Pretty conservative to speculate that bitcoin can ONLY go up another 16.7% in a 4 week period, especially when it currently seems to have a decent amount of UPpity momentum that we could claim started around the end of July - even if there were a few pauses along the way, but getting a bit more UPpity steam around October 1, no?

Of course, I personally do NOT bet higher on any kind of UP prices happening or continuing, but just in an attempt to look at the price momentum for what it is.

To me it seems that there is decent momentum to fairly reasonably take us another 20% or more beyond $80k.. and for sure, I would not presume the absence of resistance at $100k, but even bullwhales (to the extent that they actually exist) can start to act strange in the vicinity of those round numbers and there could be some desire to just get above $100k merely "for funzies" - even if staying above $100k might not be able to hold in the short-term  (don't label me as a bear for saying that....)...  

I will be surprised if bitcoin can be bullish than this before the end date:


Hmmm

pooya87 of course!

Closing in towards end date, who is favorite atm ??

No. Why would I turn bearish now?

Then what more can I say if there isn’t any basis? There’s nothing more to debate. It’s your opinion, I respected it, and left it at that without debate, without comment.


What happens to the different assets-market all over the world is simply part of an “expression” of the “macro factor”, and the Bitcoin market is a part of the global asset-market.

Already feeling $100k vibes for this game?

Anyone else?

Yes, it would be nice if you could at least attempt to stick to the topic that you raised (or responded to) before merely ignoring the topic and moving onto some other new question.. as I already mentioned. 

I do not have any basis for my numbers that I would like to attempt to elaborate.. and I likely need no basis beyond asserting those approximations to be my opinion about what I considered my best estimate of the probabilities at the time that I made the post.  Of course, if data changes and time passes probabilities likely change too, including assessments about what is happening and/or perhaps more important questions that might end up coming to the surface.

By the way, your adding of a macro factor that you believe is not likely to happen but affects when the bitcoin cycle might top seems a bit strange... Yes any kind of certain future event may or may not happen.. and sure you can suggest that kind of event (or any other event) might end up affecting all of the estimates.. depending upon when it happens, if it were to happen - to the extent that it is currently not known and merely something that could happen.. there are a lot of things that "could" happen that may or may not cause the tweaking of estimates.. to the extent that they might not already be considered in the current estimates..

You want me to give you a reply, but where/how did you get 5% probability? What’s the basis for those probabilities?

I believe it would definitely be less than 5% if the Fed Chairman Jerome Powell tapers/increases rates, which I believe they won’t. More than 5% probability if the Fed continues the balancing act.

Hey.. as soon as I figured I have addressed your earlier question, you get into some other area.

Do you have any comments on the main part that I already addressed?  Asked and answered no?  If there is a time to quibble then at least if we stay topic, then that would be better, no?

Furthermore, you seem to want to get into the weeds of events that I have already outlined (at least from my perspective) to be quite unrealistic anyhow.. so who should give any shits, besides you Wind_FURY, about those outlier events that drags us way further in the weeds?  Sure it could affect how you think about what may more may happen by December 7 of this year? 

In other words, should we not be attempting to focus on more likely scenarios than talking about some thing that I have already labelled to have less than 5% chance of happening (if that)?

I mentioned that the actual cycle could end up getting dragged out as late as 3rd quarter 2022 rather than happening within the range of the calendar year expectations.. yeah, if you want to get into supercycle theories, then that surely does seem to be a new topic.. and maybe perhaps you are also assigning higher than 5% odds that this particular cycle could drag out beyond the 3rd quarter of 2022 (which also seem to be the opposite of what you were asserting in your earlier post when you seemed to have been poo-pooing my supposition that this particular cycle could even go beyond this calendar year).  I personally don't see any need to get further into the weeds than we have already gotten.

Perhaps at the start of this thread even OP and some others were suggesting the top of this cycle may well end up being this calendar year?  and surely we can already see that concern in this thread would at least be around something like what's happening this calendar year, such as by December 7.

That’s why it’s called a “probability”.


Plus what should we consider a cycle “a longer” than average cycle than that of a historical cycle of the past? More than 6 months, 12 months, or 24 months? Because a cycle lasting by merely 3 or 4 months more shouldn’t be considered a “longer cycle”, no? If 12 more months longer, what would be the probability of that happening?

For sure, whether we are referring to bitcoin price cycles or even various price points on the cycles there can be a lot of deviation from expectations in terms of how far from the expected mean whether we are referring to whether the price is above or below the mean or the quantity.

The combination of the three models that I have liked to attempt to use because they seem to be most credible in current times would be the stock to flow, four year fractal and exponential s-curve adoption based on Metcalfe principles and networking effects.. so yeah, both the stock to flow and four-year fractal contain the four-year cycle built into them, so quite a bit of weight is given to the prognostications that stay within the confines of the four year parameters, so yeah more weight would be given to expectations that would keep the price runs falling within time frames that they had occurred in the past - again within 4-year parameters.

Am I making no sense yet, Loyce?  I agree it does not make a lot of sense to plug percentages into whether BTC prices peak in this calendar year (less than two months left - presuming the peak is higher than it has already gotten - $67,017) or whether the price peak for this cycle drags out until 1st quarter, 2nd quarter or 3rd quarter of 2022..

But as I think about it, maybe I can force myself into a way of reconsidering the whole matter and come out with assignments of probabilities something like this:

Already peaked out in 2021 at $67,017: 41.5%

Peaks out higher than $60,017 at some point in 2021: 18.5%

Peaks out 1st quarter 2022: 17.5%

Peaks out 2nd quarter 2022: 10.5%

Peaks out 3rd quarter 2022: 7%

Peaks out after 3rd quarter 2022: 5%

Sure, somewhat I am shooting these numbers out of my ass, but they do add up to 100%... and to answer your question Wind_FURY, it appears that my numbers for peaking out in 2021 add up to about 60%, so that leaves about 40% odds that they peak out after 2021.  

And as I think through the matter.. assigning percentages did seem to help me to attempt to put some more specific context in my thoughts... so it appears that even if we might not be able to verify exactly how right we are, we still can assign probabilities to timeline and to price (here's one that I did regarding BTC price 5 days ago).. and sure the more that we attempt to structure those matters the harder it is to exactly pinpoint them.. and we can ONLY do our best to attempt to estimate from our own perspectives (which is also something that does not exactly stay static).  So, not being able to verify whether we were right or not because we are not making 100% assignments to black or white on x date, but it still seems to help us to get through some of our thinking about if we might be assigning (even on a personal level) too high or too low towards the occurrence of certain scenarios.

Members here are going to have differing views on how they assign probabilities to these matters, and maybe few of us have thought about how to specifically assign to timeline in a similar way as we might assign to price.... but it makes sense that we do need to consider both timeline and price, and just calling one might not be as helpful as being able to attempt to assign probabilities to both (each of them).   We can move this over to another thread, too because it seems to be deviating quite a bit, no?

Based on bitcoinaverage.com, I wouldn't be surprised if bull cycles continue to occur less frequently (and thus become longer):

I don't think guessing the probability makes sense though: it won't be possible to verify this prediction afterwards anyway.

You’re right that “no one knows”, but it’s not merely a “yes or no” situation either. There’s only probabilities. Then what, in your opinion, would be the probability of this current bull cycle to continue longer than the length of the historical bull cycles of the past? More than 70%?

That's because you used supply not money supply.
When we are talking about total money supply in the world (ie the $5 quadrillion) we are counting all currencies of all countries in the whole world. But we can't just add their total supply, for example Venezuela if I'm not mistaken has printed 2100 quadrillion VEF which is already bigger than the total 5 quadrillion total.
So what we do is that we convert them all to a single currency using the exchange rate (VEF to USD) then sum it all up. Which is the same as calculating market cap for bitcoin (supply * exchange rate).

There are currently 18.8 million bitcoins in circulation with price of $63k which is equal to about $1.18 trillion in USD. $1.18 / $5000 *100= 0.0236%
$26.5 million * 18.8 = $498 trillion / $5000 trillion = ~10%

The total bitcoin supply, including lost coins (and coins not yet issued), equals 2.1 quadrillion satoshis, so less than half of the current 5 quadrillion that you pointed out.  So using your $5quadrillion number.... 5/2.1 = $2.38 per satoshi...  You said $.26 per satoshi  - our numbers are not matching.

Let's start using money supply instead of market cap when it comes to bitcoin.
The problem with using market cap is that people compare it with stocks (that have market cap) then see their total market cap is smaller and it scares them when they compare it with bitcoin's that has surpassed $1 trillion and what it will surpass when it goes above $1 million price.

Using money supply makes more sense for a currency and it helps us make more useful comparisons such as the fact that the world's total money supply is said to be around $5 quadrillion ($5000 trillion) while bitcoin's money supply is only $1.18 trillion.

In other words this one of a kind global decentralized currency only has 0.023% of total money supply!
I say it will reach at least 10% in the next decade as we get closer to mass adoption which means a price of $26.5 million per bitcoin or better said 26 cents for 1 satoshi.

I see that Charles-Tim already addressed your misunderstanding regarding what he was referring to in regards to Bitcoin's market cap.

From your overall comment, I get the sense that you are not quite grasping what bitcoin brings to the table in terms of your idea that bitcoin might not currently be a good investment based on how its price has recently gone up.   An investment might also consider 4-10 years or longer in terms of both getting a stake in bitcoin and other actions to either build the stake or maintain it.. prior to even considering selling or liquidation plans that are further into the future... long term, again.

A lot of people are going to fail/refuse to take adequate steps to preserve their own wealth because they either fail/refuse to buy into bitcoin and/or try to time short-term BTC price moves that likely are not going to mean much of anything in terms of both figuring out an investment plan and following through with some meaningful action such as buying regularly to build up a stack of bitcoin to the extent that you are able to - whether that is $10 per week, $100 per week or some more aggressive investment approach.   

Sure this thread is talking about short-term speculation regarding the BTC price on December 7 (slightly more than a month from now), so we are a bit off topic to be getting into the investment topic - even though frequently even investors speculate in the short-term too... but may or may not change their actions (such as ongoingly buying/investing in bitcoin) based on such short-term price predictions.

The 2 to 5 trillion that I meant is the marketcap not the price. At a price of $63400, bitcoin marketcap is 1.2 trillion. At 2 trillion marketcap, the price will not be more than $120000 or will be around that price. Marketcap is completely different from the price.

This can be useful for you:

Market Cap = Price x Circulating supply

Price = Marketcap ÷ Circulatory supply