Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 4533. (Read 26630526 times)

Very easy for Musk to say "Yeah just build stuff and provide some services" whilst governments are systemically helping to destroy or close down certain industries and giving priority to Musk & co's industries.
The pandemic and the environment have been used as excuses to do exactly that.

Shithead Musk started Tweeting about Bitcoin again. Perfectly timed once again as we try to hold 60k. Bad sign.

Why the fuck is James from InvestAnswers wasting his time doing weekly shows with low energy Rob from "Digital Asset News"?  

"I am not investing in crypto right now because I'm investing in a multi million dollar property investment" "I'm Dollar Cost Averaging Out". WTF.

To me that's a red flag and should be a sign for James that he is working together with someone who doesn't really believe in Bitcoin and is only there to leech off some gains and YouTube views.



IMO: His Saylor interview was great and he should do more stuff with enthusiasts than waste his time with low energy leachers.

Even if he were to interview some imbecile like Peter Schiff it would be more interesting. I have no problem hearing from people with opposing views, as long as they are passionate.
Really can't stand the low energy drive on YouTube. Fuck sake.

Maybe I am worried about the next wave as opposed to OGs.. I dunno.  You have a point.  I've been through every one, and 2017 hurt pretty bad, but i didn't sell then, and I am not going to this time either.  I don't think.  But what I mean is after living through X number of boom/bust scenarios some people will be MOST tempted to try to time the market and sell x amount at what they think the top is with the plans to buy back in a X % drop.  The chorus of "Are you guys gonna take some profits this time instead of living through the crash again?  have you learned your lesson?"  seems louder than ever...

If I were to fall in this trap it would be for a significant sum of value, but not a large percentage of my holdings.  This is in line with what you are saying... but I could still take a pretty nice haircut if what I think could happen happens.

We see what looks like a blow off top.  Let's put it's peak at $320k (lol why not?).  And we see it drop hard... like 20%.  On the climb back up we sell X%.  We were right!!!  It drops again.. big one... these are dead cat bounces.  We don't want to lose so we set a conservitive target of say a 40-50% drawdown.  Bitcoin makes it back down to $180k, consolidates there ans begins to climb.  We've not reached out target, but we will.  We have seen this movie like 4 times now.

But we were wrong.  The world is onto us this time.  And EVERYONE is buying the dip.  Not only did our 80% drawdown only do 40% this time, but we are headed to a new ATH it seems?  And that's weird.. we are actually not quite to the next halving even!??!?

Well shit.  I just gave up a *insert item of great value, lambo, house, whatever* for that attempt...

That's kind of what I see as possible.  Or?  We go to 320, and crash back down to 60k just like all the times before.. for one more time?

The bear market is just a temporary fluctuation in fiat value.

Explanation

I think we may be beyond this now. For most true Bitcoin OGs, an 80% draw down from some future ATH means they are still rich and will likely stay all in btc, essentially forever (BYOB). They won't really care anymore about future bear markets. I know I don't.


The problem people have with Mark Cuban is that he is out there promoting stuff that he has absolutely know idea what it is, or what is does. He just jumps on a bandwagon and talks his book.

He has no idea with ETH is, what it is even good for, what it's major problems are, why its $37 transaction fees are terrible and only going to get worse, why NFTs are not the future and why they have no value, etc. And don't even get me started on DOGE. He has no in-depth crypto knowledge about anything.

The guy is just totally full of shit. End of story. And when challenged, he throws a tantrum like a petulant little child.

Bob... somebody.  Stop me from spinning up a clightning node to go with my LND node...  Good grief I am about to do this.  why?  why?



Hehehe

Yeah.  I wanted to talk about Cuban more than Bitcoin, because he seems to be SO INCREDIBLY wrong on the topic.  And kind of embarrassing.  I don't know if you followed the Twitter space, or the dick measuring stuff that led up to it, but it was embarrassing in my opinion.  Cuban was acting like a child.  And of course the bitcoin maxis were swarming around him like piranhas being assholes.  He is right there are plenty of assholes in bitcoin.  But he's wrong about almost everything he says about Bitcoin.  And the whole "How much Bitcoin do you own, Preston... let's compare with how much I own" thing just reeks of a big man with a little pecker.

So I was avoiding THAT conversation with my friend who is an employee of his, as well as someone who probably agrees with Cuban's position on BTC both because hes a standard finance guy as well as someone who has done very well with a traditional sort of approach to money.  My firned is also an iconoclast and would probably like Doge based on that alone, similarly to Musk.

I just think the conversation would go nowhere...  Or perhaps even to somewhere bad.  My buddy will have made a good deal of money the usual way... good job, right decisions, with a dash of skinflint thrown in.

And I will be well off because I made a retarded bet on magical internet money and got spectacularly lucky despite having no idea what I am doing and being in the right place at the right time in spite of my mistakes.

What frustrates me is Cuban is most literally a beneficiary of the above luck equation (though I imagine to hold on to what he gained took some good decisions) whereas from MY perspective my decisions have been VERY WELL researched, and understood.  I just don't see the argument of who was struck by blind luck to be productive.

Well gosh cAPSLOCK, we do have to measure the extent to which any potential audience might be receptive to talking about various kinds of discussions of what makes bitcoin a special investment, and if you might not be inclined to bring up the topic (largely because you have already been down some aspect of that road), and if they are not wanting to talk about those kinds of matters, then surely there might not be any kind of mutual interest in the topic.  There are likely a decent number of status quo well-to-do folks who are ongoingly feeling that they have a sufficient amount of extra cashflow that it does not really matter to them.  They cannot really see their properties or equities going down, so they feel that they are sufficiently hedged.. and sure they might not feel comfortable with nearly everything at retail (especially bigger ticket items) seeming to have price doubling issues.. but yeah, that may well be transitory - and just like Biodom mentioned, there are a lot of people (including Biodom his lil selfie) who believe that we are going through a time that is not really very much different from the 70s... we just have to get through it... and the rich will continue to fair well (at least that is what they believe).. and many of the costs of the various struggles are going to be borne by poorer folks in a variety of scattered ways.. which has historically been allowed to happen..

Oh by the way, this time around, the USA (dollar) is able to get away with causing the poor of the whole world to bear the costs of the money printing (since the dollar is way more dominant these days) rather than in the 70s, we were living in a more nationalized dollar situation..   so of course, having the whole world bear the irresponsibilities monetary policies behind the dollar does provide way more runway.. but a lot of the is irresponsibility is going to be recognized and appreciated higher and higher up the socio-economic ladder.. and surely the status quo rich (including those in decently great status quo positions of cashflow) might not appreciate the bottom up empowerment that bitcoin provides (and that those status quo elite would benefit more from getting in early, too.. rather than waiting another cycle or two.. or however long it takes before it starts to sink in their status quo elite noggens).

One more by the way, is that I have a good friend from childhood who has done really well for himself in terms of his business and his investment into a decent number of properties... My historical conversations with him seem similar to the kinds of conversations that you have been having with your exec friends.. .. they do not see it.. their investments are doing well.. their cashflow is way more than they need.. and it is nearly like talking to a brick wall in terms of broaching the investment thesis of bitcoin topic with them... you can give the best of arguments and presentations, and they just do not see bitcoin as any kind of meaningful hedge.. even putting something as low as 1% into bitcoin.. from their point of view, it would be better to buy property or equities with that 1%.. rather than screwing around with something so faddish (already had a big run) like bitcoin... that's part of the reason why we still have only about 1% of the world invested in bitcoin and even in the most bitcoin savey of areas (tech maybe?) in the USA, you are still likely only in the 5% arena, at best (not referring to the hoarders like Saylor who get it.. they do not take up a large percentage of the population even if they are engaged in ongoing hoarding of bitcoin practices).


He's ONLY saying similar things as what others had said before him.

He only put it in terms of data points and talking points on a model (he was already familiar with analyzing assets through stock to flow before learning about bitcoin, so he ended up spending a decent amount of time plugging bitcoin into a model that he already knew)..

So, sure he likely is going to go down in history.. so I do not really have any problems with that, but he still does not seem to be saying anything much different from many folks before him, except that he put it in a perhaps better presentable package...in which many of us can learn more than we previous knew from his better presentable package.

LMAO

Crazy night eh? I feel you as I've been there WAY too many times!
Did you check on your bike yet? Hopefully no lasting scars there.

Spend the day hydrating and it'll all be funny stories by the end of the week.

Explanation

Good idea, I like it! I created a buy order at €60, just for the hell of it
Now I wait for a fat finger flash crash.

I do not think my input on this really is very detailed or scientific. But I am reacting on a gut level to what I see out there as either an almost religious reverence for the model, or a complete rejection of it.

I think that kind of black and white thinking is common, and a place people make mistakes.  I think PlanB himself is very clear that his model will most likely break.  I am listening to his interview with Laura Shin (I wish she did not cause me such discomfort... she's the absolute representative example of the herd).

And they are talking about whether or not this cycle could be the supercycle and his position is it's still too early.  And to be honest I agree with him.  I think the chance that THIS is the cycle is lower than the chance that it is not.

But what I am saying is IT WILL eventually happen.  If not this cycle, then one of the next.  Simply because of the macro environment (gold USD inflation central banks etc) as well as the fact that the halvings are causing the reward to become exponentially smaller...

It really is the exponential aspect of this that is so interesting.  Bitcoin is the PARABOLIC asset.  Everything about it.the math behind it is astronomical, and every thing about the way bitcoin grows is parabolic.

Anyway.  I think PlanB is probably right that this halving will also have a draw down.  But I would also be kind of surprised if it is the same sort of 80+% thing we have seen in the past.

I also think there could be a time coming when OUR crop of "OG"s are going to be tempted to move out "at the top" and then be surprised to learn that the pullback we saw was shallower than we have figured and we lose our stake somewhat.  I think a max pain scenario for Bitcoin OGs is still on the horizon.

Anyway... my thoughts are all over the place on this stuff.

I appreciate this response, LFC... it seems to me that if we had a bit of change in the BTC price momentum to at  least pause the UP and maybe go sideways and maybe go down, the more likely short term spike would be down, if any.. not sure.. but getting a spike to the upside would take a bit of time to play out.. even a few days to start to get the momentum to change, and then the spike, if it were to come... Of course, we are getting a bit more down since your two posts (above)... ... so even could take a bit to get a spike up.. hate to say it.. and not even really saying that much more down is "needed" even if we are getting some ongoing short term downity pressures in the past few days.. .. ATH was only $67,017 was only 4 days ago, even if it may well be seeming like a "long time" when we are in a process of failing/refusing to resume up... .. I am still bias towards staying in noman's zone, and I doubt that the noman zone thesis is negated merely by correcting below $55k.. but would get put into to question somewhat - even if there were to persist some decent levels of lacking of resistance between $55k and $80k - that is currently being negated.. in the short-term.


I appreciate that you and I have gone back and forth in our discussion of the stock2F model, so my comments might not really be so much directed at correcting anything that you say, but attempting to flesh out some of my thoughts in this area - in terms of whether maybe I had been misunderstood in what I was attempting to say to both Torque and cAPSLOCK....  and I am not even really disagreeing in great detail with either Torque or cAPSLOCK - but sometimes, it just seems to me that ideas need to be fleshed out a wee bit more, especially when attempting to address something that is so attempting to be data driven like the S2F model.

Again, I may just be quibbling with the word "broke" too.. because we could either proclaim that the whole model is broken, or we can just proclaim that the price ends up breaking to the upside of the model or to downside of the model.. and of course, with any good scientific model (or scientist), PlanB already attempts to assert that the future BTC price can vary quite a bit from the parameters of the lines (such as his suggestion that the model suggests an average BTC price of $100k-ish for this 4-year cycle), and still end up NOT being broken... just ends up being a wee bit off if the average ends up being $90k or $110k for example.. still within very acceptable parameters, without actually breaking the model... how far we might be able to go in such deviation from the mean (or the expectations) would be other questions that could be asked..

Of course, we already know that short-term price spikes can go all over the place for short periods of time, and those price spikes could become problematic if they last for extended periods of time, but still might not end up breaking the model if they end up bouncing back after being pushed to extremes for a period of time beyond what the model would have expected to have been within the realms of possible happenings.

So, for example, as you seem to be suggesting, I have been ongoingly reluctant to accept too many conditions in which the model becomes broken, and I have frequently asserted that the S2F model is currently the best model that we have, and sure we can attempt to account for a few variables (or to emphasize) some aspects that the model does not seem to capture in order to explain short/medium/long term price moves (I consider those other supplemental models as four-year fractal and exponential s-curve adoption based on network effects and Metcalfe principles), so instead of conceding that the model would be broken under certain extreme factual scenarios, I have frequently proclaimed that the newly acquired data would merely cause the curve to shift (up down or whatever) based on new facts.


 You have said nothing disagreeable here, fillippone.

 

Actually, I will reiterate that there is surely something that is already broken about the S2F model in that we already know that it wrongly draws parallels to the mining of new gold, and there are no new bitcoin because we already know that they run out and we know exactly when the run out.. so PlanB puts the issuance of bitcoin as a parallel to new supply.. when it is already exactly known as an issuance rather than a creation... so yeah.. there is something that is already broaken about thinking about the matter in terms of actual new supply rather than an issuance of already known supply .. ... so in that sense, I agree with you that the model works for now..


The model would be pretty good if the odds are similar of it playing out wrong/broken to either the downside or the upside, no?


Surely part of the already known aspect of the shrinking new "issuance," and for sure the new issuance becomes a smaller and smaller portion of the already existing supply.....yes exactly a knows "problem" and even the shrinking to zero in 2140 is a known problem.. but surely there is a kind of presumption that the "problem" of the shrinking new issuance of supply id not going to take until 2140 to be felt.. like you already mentioned that a few more halvenings and it may well start to become obviously a factor that messes up a key underlying component of the S2F model.
 

ditto

buddy is letting us down

be prepared to buy the dip

Explanation

Bingo.

In my opinion the question is not whether it breaks to the upside or the downside, but rather will bitcoin succeed (spoiler: yes).  (edit - to explain this since it's a couple levels deep... if bitcoin fails, the model breaks... but that is also true if bitcoin continues to succeed in my opinion.  Because OTHER models are going to overtake this very pure S2F calculation.  Worldwide FOMO, for example could arguably break the model.  And is inevitable if Bitcoin continues to succeed. The scary bit IMHO is if that same FOMO might break Bitcoin...  but that's another topic.)

The other question is will this be the cycle on which it breaks, or will it be the next one (or even later??  ehhh... I doubt that though).

But my oft repeated position is it breaks, and it breaks to the upside.  And PlanB will go down in history as the person that figured out the natural progression of bitcoin's value until human nature pulverized his model.

Pit pat piffy wing wong wang!

(ahh.. I also just figured out what the end of this post meant...  I hope you are OK!  And yeah... some ibuprofen might be in order?)