.
.All Credit to ChartBuddy
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 1249. (Read 26731493 times)
February 24, 2024, 02:23:01 AM
February 24, 2024, 02:03:22 AM
February 24, 2024, 01:44:52 AM
Free time at work so Mastercam2024 silliness...
You know, I was thinking that if you cropped the boarder and pinched in the sides a bit...
February 24, 2024, 01:11:21 AM
February 24, 2024, 01:01:18 AM
February 24, 2024, 12:01:15 AM
February 23, 2024, 11:20:23 PM
Whoa! That image ^ prints out pretty nice on the Laserjet.
Albeit, on an ink printer, it will probably drain all one's cartridges.
Albeit, on an ink printer, it will probably drain all one's cartridges.
February 23, 2024, 11:01:15 PM
February 23, 2024, 10:01:18 PM
February 23, 2024, 09:59:50 PM
Free time at work so Mastercam2024 silliness...
February 23, 2024, 09:21:47 PM
It high time we star doing crazy things for BTC
Like this:
Sorry I had to take you through the link
Like this:
Sorry I had to take you through the link
Quoted for image.. and yeah that image is likely at least a few years old.
I've never saw something like that I was going through some btc videos and I had to pick the perfect spot out because I was so amazed by the level he took it too
February 23, 2024, 09:05:06 PM
It high time we star doing crazy things for BTC
Like this:
Sorry I had to take you through the link
Like this:
Sorry I had to take you through the link
Quoted for image.. and yeah that image is likely at least a few years old.
February 23, 2024, 09:03:25 PM
February 23, 2024, 09:02:25 PM
It high time we star doing crazy things for BTC
Like this:
Sorry I had to take you through the link
Like this:
Sorry I had to take you through the link
February 23, 2024, 08:03:37 PM
February 23, 2024, 07:04:19 PM
On the other hand, the majority of participants call for around 150K and almost no one talks about the "supercycle" as being likely.
The market rarely does what the majority expects.
The market rarely does what the majority expects.
That $150k is pretty damned whimpy...
February 23, 2024, 07:03:29 PM
February 23, 2024, 06:01:15 PM
February 23, 2024, 05:31:12 PM
When I mentioned forum member AlcoHoDL's perspective on ways to analyze BTC value, I was largely referring to some of his posts on the topic from last week and my interaction with him on the topic, which some of our interactions could be traced back through this post (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63680822).
Yes the link Said it all, my bad for taking AlcoHoDL's in another form probably I need a bat slapping 
February 23, 2024, 05:22:49 PM
Hmmm did you read what I posted, I mean how would I be able to continue dca’ing into Btc if my emergency fund wasn’t denominated in fiat currency. At no point did I say my emergency fund was denominated in btc. An emergency fund should be completely liquid. Maybe in my case I’m overly aggressive(my enter the world date might preclude that or not), I have said this before but I adjust my emergency fund for inflation and have added to the monthly expense list a btc dca amount. I don’t consider any assets I hold as part of the emergency fund, asset is not liquid in the sense of an emergency fund and like you mentioned market could be against you in your time of need.
My aggressiveness with emergency funds is more in the term of fund, its sitting at 18 months. I have had to use over my lifetime, always replenishing it. I haven’t ruled out increasing one or two more quarters but so far(from enter the world date) have only ever needed it for 8months.
The hardest thing about an emergency fund is avoiding temptation to dip into ie through some form of relaxing your risk mgmt. I would be much much more Btc “richer” if I had of reduced the fund to 12 months back when I got into btc but I didn’t. I have maintained a very risk averse emergency fund mgmt style and you can see here I’m thinking about increasing the risk aversity. The question I’m pondering this year is do I increase it to 24months or do I use that capital to go into btc more.
An emergency fund needs to be liquid indeed. But unless your emergency fund is peanuts, Bitcoin is the better emergency fund. However, if your funds are so low that 20-30% dips would put you at serious risk (meaning you have an emergency which you cannot pay for because the fiat value is now too low), then fiat is the better emergency fund.My aggressiveness with emergency funds is more in the term of fund, its sitting at 18 months. I have had to use over my lifetime, always replenishing it. I haven’t ruled out increasing one or two more quarters but so far(from enter the world date) have only ever needed it for 8months.
The hardest thing about an emergency fund is avoiding temptation to dip into ie through some form of relaxing your risk mgmt. I would be much much more Btc “richer” if I had of reduced the fund to 12 months back when I got into btc but I didn’t. I have maintained a very risk averse emergency fund mgmt style and you can see here I’m thinking about increasing the risk aversity. The question I’m pondering this year is do I increase it to 24months or do I use that capital to go into btc more.
I think most people would profit more from having a BTC emergency fund, as in the next few years we can expect a Bitcoin price of >$100k (and we might not visit 50k again.)
Anyone betting against Bitcoin at this point has not realized the reality of Bitcoins inevitable future.
Personally, I agree with being aggressive, and even overly aggressive in your investment into bitcoin, but people have to be careful in regards to how they treat their emergency funds, especially if their only two investments are bitcoin and cash.
When I mentioned forum member AlcoHoDL's perspective on ways to analyze BTC value, I was largely referring to some of his posts on the topic from last week and my interaction with him on the topic, which some of our interactions could be traced back through this post.
Check out this prediction (From Bob Loukas) video:
https://youtu.be/8ZM1WyHDiIs?t=875
TL;DR: He shows two main possibilities: either a sharp up to above 150K in 8-10 mo (he calls it a "left-translated" cycle) OR a "classical", but VERY strong cycle terminating at 400-700K or even higher by the end of 2025 (~18 mo more to run). We would know if it is scenario #1 vs #2 based on whether we get to a proximity of ATH in 4-6 wk. If we do, then it is likely to be a shortened cycle and if not (stay where we are or even slightly decline in a chopping fashion), then it is likely to be a longer and stronger cycle (which is commonly referred to as a "supercycle").
https://youtu.be/8ZM1WyHDiIs?t=875
TL;DR: He shows two main possibilities: either a sharp up to above 150K in 8-10 mo (he calls it a "left-translated" cycle) OR a "classical", but VERY strong cycle terminating at 400-700K or even higher by the end of 2025 (~18 mo more to run). We would know if it is scenario #1 vs #2 based on whether we get to a proximity of ATH in 4-6 wk. If we do, then it is likely to be a shortened cycle and if not (stay where we are or even slightly decline in a chopping fashion), then it is likely to be a longer and stronger cycle (which is commonly referred to as a "supercycle").
I will watch it, but I personally am not very likely to latch on to the term supercycle, even if BTC prices were to go up to $400k to $700k or even higher by the end of 2025 - because that is no fucking supercycle.. that is merely a peak within the cycle, and yeah, if the BTC price does not correct more than 60% and even stay in a bit of a lull for a year or two, then maybe I might be willing to concede that dumbass inaccurate term...
In other words, we are in cycles until we are not and don't be telling me about dumb ass theories until after they already have evidence to have had happened.. .until then, they don't have any real basis in fact and there remains little to no evidence that bitcoin's 4-year cycles are either disappearing or going to disappear, which another underlying presumption of the "supercycle" theories.
I don't buy it. Call me a denialist of fantasy, if you must.
Personally, I think that scenario #1 is more likely than scenario #2.
I almost feel like taking the other side of that bet, but of course we would have to figure out our parameters, and it may well end up not being very bettable if we end up working out our details.. .and I don't even feel very strongly about it, so you might have to come up with a bit more absolutisms to make your siding with the shortened cycle theory to become bettable.
I also don't buy your claim that the April 2021 top was the real top rather than the November 2021 top, even though I will concede that the April 2021 top did have more blow off top characteristics than the November 2021 top that was both nominally higher and even arguably within inflation-adjusted terms higher than the April 2021 top (since we are showing around a 6.33% difference between the April 14, 2021 top and the November top of $69k).
On the other hand, the majority of participants call for around 150K and almost no one talks about the "supercycle" as being likely.
The market rarely does what the majority expects.
The market rarely does what the majority expects.
That $150k is pretty damned whimpy...
Jump to: