Does not matter if it is noise or if we drop under 20k or even go to the original terrible predictions for this bear say 12-13k. Or if we bounce right back to 25k and then 30k.
Because of my discussions here and my mining setup I have decided to go about this in a different manner.
We all know btc will not do 120% on the button 20 years in a row.
For me at 66 I have decided that 76 is my time line for dca and buy the dip hodl moves.
And they are separate from my mining moves (this is due to JJG's influence)
I look at gold in the 1992 to 2003 range it was 200-400 the whole time
it hit 1848 by 2011 and from 2011 to 2023 it has been in a 1064 to 2050 slot
If BTC is to be in a 28.7 to 69 slot from dec 2020 to now.
the same rise of 4.5 to 5.0 could happen over next 8 years and maybe we push 300k by 2031-2032
https://www.moneymetals.com/gold-pricecharts of gold are interesting when cherry picked as follows:
1992 to 2003 = flat slot
2003 to 2011= big jump
2011 to 2023 = flat slot
so cherry pick btc and does dec 2020 to feb 2023 = 1992 to 2003 for gold
thus 2023 to 2025 btc could = 2003 to 2011 for gold
and we are near 300k really quick
I am thinking we do not see this speed.
So I set a 10 year plan for my dca + dip and hodl all independent of mining.
so 2032 nov or bust. for my current 'investment buys'
I cannot really argue with your attempt to make some kind of comparisons how BTC price could do both flat and stair-stepping moves in the next 10 years or longer, but it is still somewhat of an inadequate way to really attempt to consider what bitcoin is as a new paradigm shifting asset class. Whether we are talking about gold in the last 120 years or even talking about it in the past 30-50 years, like you want to do, gold was not a new asset class at that time, even though gold was being pigeon-holed into new financial instruments and there were various ways that gold was being suppressed and simultaneously being sent to the USA ("for safe keeping") and other national adoption dynamics between WWII and the 1971 rug pull.. and even somewhat allowances to have free market value while being "paperized" thereafter.
It seems problematic to be attempting to make too many parallel comparisons with what bitcoin might do as compared to what gold had done in part because bitcoin is around 1,000x better than gold - but also there are some attributes of bitcoin that causes a lot of difficulties for various powers that be to be able to manipulate bitcoin in the same kinds of ways that they had been able to manipulate gold - and I am not even saying that they are not going to try old methods or to attempt to be able to innovate, but lots of the powers that be manipulator wannabes seem to be a bit out of their depth if they really believe that they are going to either be creative enough to manipulate BTC in similar ways or that they even understand the powers of the ability to verify bitcoin quite easily and to take possession quite easily in order to put wrong doers, and manipulators into check.. Sure they can make paper markets and attempt to cause BTC holders to believe that some of the entities are holding BTC, but still there are ways to verify - and one of the ways is to just remove your coins from custodians and refuse to enter into contracts with custodians that force you to not be able to take possession, and governments are likely to get their lil selfies into trouble if they try to force the use of custodians when there are already ways that normies are able to hold their own BTC.. without asking for any possession..
So part of my point is that even if none of us are really able to have concrete ideas where bitcoin is going and how the various wars and battles are going to play out - including whether if "strong-arm" legislators (& perhaps banks too) are going to end up forcing BTC into "other jurisdictions," each of us has to be careful if we are trying to make too many comparisons of bitcoin to some of the other assets that might share some features and use cases, but in the end they are different asset classes with differing price dynamics, including a different historical context.
Even if stock to flow might be in low regard, I still consider that his model still helps us to appreciate bitcoin, even if maybe the curve needs to be shifted down, so using the three main bitcoin models of the 1) stock-to-flow, 2) 4-year fractal and 3) exponential scurve adoption based on Netcalfe principles and network effects still remain a better way of thinking about how bitcoin retains cycles with a kind of ongoing underlying explosive potentials that continue to put UPpity price pressures upon it, even if various status quo rich individuals/institutions of manipulators, legislators, and financial folks are fighting to both keep it down or stop it from going out.. and sure maybe they are going to be able to continue to have some success in keeping it down.. but I would not bank on the success of those efforts or the success to keep my lil precious in some kind of neat container that fails/refuses to explode UPpity from time to time with such power that it melts faces or whatever kind of contrary to expectations scenarios that we prefer to visualize.
Regarding your personal expectations of a 10-year investment timeline, you can do whatever the fuck you want. It's your life; however, it seems a bit strange to be investing with any kind of level of building and/or accumulation of a position with a 10 year timeline for anyone who is 66 years old, so in that sense, what you are saying that you are doing is likely not even really what you are doing. By age itself, you likely already realize that you have to take a less aggressive position.. You are forced into a situation in which you have funds that you can live off of.. and that you have some expectation that you might not be able to generate extra cashflow from work... otherwise what you going to do? Slave until you die? You should be winding down by now, and the ONLY reason anyone is going to be expecting cashflow from work when they are in their 60s or later would be that they are recognizing that they failed/refused to adequately prepare prior to that.
Maybe your situation becomes so difficult to argue because it is somewhat particular.. but it just seems problematic for anyone who is 66 years old to be suggesting a 10 year investing timeline, and it seems to me that you were even more realistic earlier (a couple of years ago) when you said something about your having a 5-year investment timeline.. I don't want to go back and search for the post.. but still.
Maybe one way of making sense out of what you are saying would be to suggest that BTC is something that you are merely doing on the side, and that you already have the rest of your investment portfolio (including that you are already drawing from it) in place. You know many retirement systems (in the USA) force withdrawal methods that are at least 4% per year starting from when the retiree is 72.5 years old... so any money that you have into those kinds of systems will have some forced withdrawal. I don't even want to get into all of this...that have to do with cashflow issues, but sometimes, there still might be some needs to consider if all living expenses are covered by various sources that are coming in (various kinds of pensions, social security, 401k and some of those have some preset amounts that are just part of covering cashflow), and there could be investments in property, equities, commodities and bonds that do not have presets, so there is ongoing discretion regarding withdrawing from them, and even liquidating all or part of them, and yeah the portion of your mining business might be considered part of that.. whether you were to have it set up as a asset that generates income without much of any efforts from you or if you are even able to retain any passive holding into it.. but seems that your agreement requires you to do some work in order to retain the current interest that you have... and maybe it is not that much work.. and like you said earlier, you enjoy "keeping busy."
In some sense, I feel like throwing up my hands, yet if we are trying to discuss these kinds of matters in general applicability ways, then we do not necessarily need to get into too many details - in order to recognize that ways that any of us invest when we are in our 20s is going to differ from when we are in our 40s or in our 60s, but it just seems unrealistic to be talking about our 60s as if we have a 10-year investing timeline.. . .it's just off and doesn't seem like a good general way of talking about how anyone in their 60s generally might be considering these kinds of matters.. unless we might just be saying that Bitcoin happens to be some smaller portion of what we are doing (or systems that we already have in place).
Maybe I can give a bit of an example to attempt to particularize some of my frustration when dealing with the elderly? I have at least a couple of relatives who currently are in their mid-70s, and I had been having similar conversations with at least a couple of these relatives of similar age categories since about 2014-2016, so each of the relatives would have been in their mid 60s at the time of my earlier conversations about bitcoin, so I had never really changed my perspective, and I used to consider that you need at least a 4-10 year investment timeline with bitcoin, so usually when accounting for their age, I would kind of bow out of any kind of aggressiveness/assertiveness in attempting to tell them that they "need to be 'in bitcoin' " because I was worried about their abilities to really dedicate some value into bitcoin that they can mostly NOT obsess about whether it is liquid or not for at least 4-10 years... and I also used to recommend getting the fuck off zero, so an allocation of between 1% and 10% into bitcoin.
More recently (since sometimes after March 2020), as a general applicability idea, I upped my "get off zero" from 1% to 10% to a more aggressive (less whimpy) 1% to 25%, and at the same time, I started to feel that I could still recommend bitcoin to elderly folks, while proclaiming that they would just need to gravitate more towards the lower end of my recommendation spectrum, rather than NOT investing into bitcoin... So in some sense, I started to tell everyone, unless you see some immediate need for cash and you have various other investments, to get some bitcoin, even if you have to gravitate more towards the 1% rather than 10% or 25% that you might have done when you were younger.
So part of my point is that I am not against elderly folks investing into bitcoin, but based on timeline, the elderly have to end up gravitating more towards the lower end of the investment spectrum and should not be talking about their investment timeline as if they were in their 20s if they actually are in their 60s.. Elderly folks are forced (or should be forced, kicking and screaming) to invest less aggressively into bitcoin because they need to retain higher levels of liquidity (or potential for liquidity) than anyone in their younger years.. and the need for liquidity might kick in for other reasons (such as health or even just uncertainties in cashflow based on the kind of skills a person has. .in terms of his/her ability to earn money through work.. and yeah, other financial expense that could be part of someone's current status)... So, even if a mid-to-late 60s person can do whatever the fuck they like with their own finances, especially if they have adequately examined their own particulars, sometimes their choices are not really going to be very typical (or applicable) for the overwhelming majority of 60 year olds who are likely getting into winding down stages of their finances (or maintanence) rather than much if any emphasis on accumulating positions.. especially in a potentially risky asset and especially if there could be situations in which they are not really able to project 4-10 years into the future, even if they are engaging in such seemingly irresponsible (pie in the sky) projecting that seems to be based on "best case scenarios" gonna live until 94.5 years and banging 10s all the way.. blah blah blah.
