How are the lower and the upper lines chosen? You just pick a price starting point from January 2013?
Starting points do not matter, since the idea is to illustrate a slope, and compare it to the BLACK SLOPE of 200WMA.
I just think the slopes are approximately similar.
Of course the 200 WMA should be the most factually ladened of the lines and the 2x lines seem to be largely attempting to make a projection of where the BTC price might be going based on where the BTC price has been.. and surely whether starting in 2011 or 2013 or which price is chosen can be interesting thought experiments, even if somewhat randomly chosen.. and I will sometimes choose my own representations of BTC prices at certain points in time based upon where BTC prices might seem to be gravitating over that period of time (which is not unlike what others do, even if they might arrive there based on different kinds of maths and sciences), so in that regard, to me it seems that some numbers are more significant (because of their seeming representativeness) in terms of bouncing off points in comparison to numbers.
Similar to the recent subject about when should we start to measure BTC's price because of course, one of the very first transactions to buy two pizzas for 10k bitcoin might not be as representative as prices a few months down the road when larger numbers of trades are allowed and even locations for conducting such trades become more common.. so in that regard, there is a kind of product of the number of transactions and maybe the passage of time, and I do have some troubles gravitating on any price analysis that uses 2010 data because it seems so sporadic.. but it seems by the time that we are getting to 2011, even if the BTC price discovery is relatively immature, it seems fair enough to start to use that data rather than waiting for 2013 or some further down the road date - at least in my thinking.
I am wondering if a large number of these folks really mean 100% per year, even though they are saying 200% per year...
No, it started with some recent article, that compared recent prices with the prices 10 years ago, and claimed that it triples every year. Everyone started repeating it, even Saylor who is smart enough to know better. So they're basing this conclusion on going way too much into the past, into unreliable territory of tiny volumes/prices.
I do agree that going too far into 2010 is going to give way too tiny of numbers that it is not a fair representation, so yeah maybe we can still agree to disagree whether 2011 numbers are helpful in this regard or if the earlier dates are just way too inflammatory in their representations because the starting out points do end up being so small, even in 2011 when we don't see BTC prices above $1 until about January/February 2011, but once BTC prices went above $1 they did end up staying there, even after the mid-2011 price peak to $32-ish that ended up correcting to $2-ish.. and gosh.. maybe we could start measuring from $1, even though there are still prices in January 2011 that are below $1.. but still even if it is seeming somewhat random, starting from $1 does seem to have some calculation ease within it, and it would be after there had been a decent amount of quite rudimentary price discovery for 6 to 9 months prior to that...
Are you annoyed by their seeming to get the numbers wrong? or are you annoyed because they are stealing your idea without giving proper credit?
The first.
I just think it's important to establish a rough estimate of a multi-year trend for such volatile asset. Since it's based on 4-year halving cycle, I think considering the last 8 years is fine, like on that PlanB's chart. His black 200WMA line is also fine, since it roughly keeps the slope year-after-year. It's almost linear.
Of course the 200WMA keeps moving up and its slope is greater during periods of greater price divergence.. and sure there might be some extended time that BTC prices do end up going below the 200WMA.. but so far has been quite rare.. and even in March 2020 when prices dipped down to $3,850, we really ONLY had a few days below the 200WMA.. which was around $5k at the time of that March 2020 dippening.
