The 'investor' class here might argue that it ain't so and mining reacts to price and not vice versa, but bitcoin network IS based on mining, so I would respectfully disagree with such opinions. Who knows, maybe the price is sniffing out this possibility.
I don't see your point in trying to denigrate the "investor class" by suggesting that they might not know what they are talking about, especially when you seem to be stating a wrong theory. You believe that miners, such as philip, know what moves the direction of the BTC price better merely because he happens to be a miner and merely because he also seems to subscribe to such nonsense thoughts that the miners are pushing BTC's price direction?
Sure, in the end, you can believe what you want, even if it hardly makes any sense... and I am not even going to proclaim that have no influence on price, but suggesting that they are driving the price seems like nearly pure pie in the sky thinking... because they are ONLY like one in 7 effects.. so perhaps 1/7 effect.. or maybe 1/3 effects could be reasonable rather than asserting that they have some kind of majority influence or some other simplified nonsense like that.
with no new miners there will be no significant bitcoin price appreciation (let's make it a proclamation #1).
Sounds like nonsense to me. Yes, I understand that you would like to roll your own price prediction models, no matter how fantastical they might be.
Accordingly, if we are looking at medium to longer term, and let's say four-year cycles, then our currently top three credible models remain some kind of combination of 1) stock to flow, 2) four-year fractal and 3) exponential s-curve adoption based on Metcalfe principles and networking effects... yeah, sure even with some kind of attempted hybridization of the top three models, there is still going to be probability assignments based on whatever time frame that we might be looking at and then short-term BTC price movements can mess up momentum or even a kind of need to shift the curves - so with all kinds of short-term happenings such as momentum, happenings in the shitcoin space, various bearish or bullish news, pulling of hashpower or increases to hash power or other factors, these could well have some affects on short term momentum in one direction or another, but still the overall underlying pressures involving factors of the three above listed models are likely to continue to have pulling effects on the BTC price that surely continue to cause BTC to be a great asymmetric bet to the upside (aka number go up (NGU) technologies)....
Yes, longer term is a much different story. The context was short-term analysis and get-rich-quick noobs.
If you cannot recall correctly, we were talking long . Torque was poo-pooing stock-to-flow and suggesting that newbies are too reliant upon S2F being 100% correct.
Furthermore, many times we are mixing our short-medium-long term proclamations, so in that regard, if you had not noticed, there are a lot of regulars in this thread who spend a lot of time both downplaying short-term BTC price movements and a lot of the seeming messiness that comes within a lot of 4-year cycles, and even when longer term members try to stay focus on the long term, there can be a lot of additional confusion regarding at what stage of any 4-year cycle that we might be and even reasonable questioning whether the 4-year cycle still applies... So, even when there might be a lot of short-term noise going on, even concerns that bitcoin might be dead for real (or forever) this time, it really does not seem to hurt a whole hell of a lot to be both attempting to identify the existence of longer term theories and attempting to highlight factual circumstances that help us with figuring out our current location in such cycle, if that is even identifiable.
...and I thought I had a weird sense of humor....
And, I did not know that anyone could actually learn something from Save the RF..
