Bitcoin Prediction: How High Will It Go Ahen When?

**Nenad** · 31 January 2021, 1:26 pm

Originally Posted by Jambo

But the terrible situation in our world is one of the reasons why bitcoin increased so much. We will see

I can agree with that as well. You can be right. We will see.

**Sherlock** · 31 January 2021, 1:46 pm

Absolutely.
But the terrible situation was here in 2009 when bitcoin was made and it was present here for much longer. In other words it is not new. People think that the terrible from 2020, but the corona is just the last drop. Whole last decade was a total bs. Money printing even when there was some growth etc.

So the terrible situation is priced in, because people who buy or ever bought bitcoin were reflecting it (at least the people who have some substantial money).

It is a completely different path from 1 USD to 200 (200x up) and from 200 to 40K (also 200x up).
In concrete numbers to move btc from 3 or 6k to 30K it was relatively easy, but BTC did it only with halving support. I was buying at 3-6K range because of that on the top of my affiliate revenues.
But now from 30k to 150k... well... a lot of money, lot of energy and also this implies a lot of political changes are needed.
Bitcoin time will come, but now is rational to look elsewhere. E.g. why gold for example is nearly flat for whole last year.

Also in other words - there is incredible money flowing now into BTC (1M+ USD/hour net inflow) and the price stabilised. So even (much) more money has to be poured in for BTC to go up and even when it happens there will still the unstability on energy market. The bitcoin price is very volatile, but it is not a complete random walk and there are always short term and mid term limits and the range is narrowing as price is rising.

**Sherlock** · 31 January 2021, 2:00 pm

The perverted situation of many people here (gambling affiliates and BTC holders) is that we as capitalists, should cheer for the most socialistic policy of governments and mad monetary policy and money printing. Because the newly printed money go very much directly into gambling and crypto (other form of gambling; not that people gamble with crypto but crypto itself is the gamble).

I absolutely hate to be in this position, but I can not help myself.

It is kind of a similar situation of one online guy I follow, a businessman with green energy, who thinks that all the New Green Deal is a total bullshit (in a way that it should save the planet and humanity), but at the same time it is his business, so he has to support it and suffer amongst the stupid left youth people, who think they are saving the planet, but in fact they are just creating another tycoons.

So that poor guy is posting his honest views on one leftist server, where he is laughed at, so the situation is comedy gold. He takes it as his personal punishment - to deal with the hope of innocent idiots.

I think when situations like this occur, when people who have power and money are forced to do perverted decisions, some giant change can occur.

When BTC hits the 1M in future, I know I will be much more wealthy, but I will be able to buy much less things. I already wrote about it, how I can not fly whenever I want for infinite money now or buy cauliflower. Few days ago I spoke to a guy who was building a simple house. He can not buy OSB. Such a simple thing and not in a whole country.

Some kind of Midas death is inevitable when BTC passes 1-10M. (Midas was the guy who changed everything he touched into gold and therefore he could not even eat and drink, because everything was transmutated into gold.) We will be eating bullets.

I forgot to mention that my local company stopped deliver water from tubes 4 months ago. So now I keep ordering water cisternas every week. They say just to be patient... Can I pay them 1 BTC, 10 BTC? Even 100 BTC will not deliver me a water.

**econfox** · 31 January 2021, 2:11 pm

If this article is correct. It could go up sooner than later.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/billyba...-new-gamestop/

**Nenad** · 31 January 2021, 2:13 pm

I think that the Sherlock's post above explained everything so well!

**Sherlock** · 31 January 2021, 2:26 pm

Originally Posted by econfox

If this article is correct. It could go up sooner than later.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/billyba...-new-gamestop/

This is indeed interesting. Retail vs hf over BTC it is not a proxy war but a direct nuclar war, or ideologically it seems so.

But if true, we know only one thing, either the price will go up or down a lot. The win of retail is not granted.

But before the battle for bitcoin will start, here is the GME/AA/Varta. This battle is far from over and the retail must win this battle. Over this weekend they all hold and on Monday we will see more.

Then they were jumping on silver.... The retail does not have that much cash, it is a guerilla war, they must forcus on one or few targets IMHO and they must get decisive wins.

-------------------
Now another thought and please this is not where I am certain what I am saying, but I am thinking loud and I will be happy to be corrected.

Another issue is that OI over 1B is IMHO nothing. And overall the liquidity pool for crypto is very low. Therefore I am not sure if the hedge funds are already in position to short BTC heavily. Because they should see it is very risky. The article is very thin. For making conclusions I would like to see some evidence that the hedge funds are the (net) shorters here. After surge I would expect shorts from some long term hodlers.

**MMM** · 1 February 2021, 1:56 am

Originally Posted by Sherlock

Now 150K USD without inflation would be nearly 1000 Exahashes per second equilibrium energy consumption. Many millions of miners have to be produced, when already market with graphic cards is destroyed. 500 TWh approx has to be wasted = bitcoin would use as much energy as whole France at 150K USD price.

So not very probable at this moment. But on the other side in times of WSB, who knows...

Hey Sherlock,

Can you explain this part?

**Sherlock** · 1 February 2021, 5:12 am

Sure. Only if someone explains to be a difference between betwaypartners.com and betway.partners...

It is a simple cross-multiplication.

Price now is 30K, considered price is 150K.

Hashrate now is approx 150 EH/s https://www.coinwarz.com/mining/bitcoin/hashrate-chart
Hashrate @ 150K has to be therefore 150k/30k * = 5* higher; 150*5 = 750 EH/s (here comes the nearly 1000 Eh/s from)

BTC miners mine approx 10 TH/s (https://www.bitdegree.org/crypto/tut...mparison-table) [and cost few thousands / piece].
So at 150 EH/s, there is about 15 million miners (each consumes roughly 2kW of energy). At 750 EH/s 15*5 = 75 million miners have to exist.

The energy consumption atm 80 TWh https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption/ is roughly between Chile and Finland. At 5* higher price and therefore 5* higher energy it will be roughly 400 TWh (not 500 TWh I wrote it offhand). So somewhere between France and UK.

---------------------------------

There are many variables indeed when considering price impact on energy consumption. Some variables are diminishing the factor 5, some are actually making it greater. It is possible to discuss indeed. But talking about 150K now under ceteris paribus is really premature. Whoever is talking about 150K now has to say where the energy will be made, who will create the miners or at least come with alterantive economic POW model that is securing the network.

When I am thinking about it as devil advocate I see the only 2 ways how 150K can be achieved:

- Some giant short squeeze when this price will be achieved only for a second at some exchange, while we know during even moderately big spikes cause all exchanges to go down, so this record would merely academical and nobody (just the exchange itself) would be able to sell.

- Alterantive economic model; assumptions of that model would be that the correlation of energy and price would decouple (https://www.iea.org/data-and-statist...rate-2010-2018), because there will be no more cheap energy to be spent and/or no massive amounts of miners HW can be produced. Then the BTC would be again produced on small sites, even at home; price of HW would go through the roof and bitcoin would be much more secured by the price of hardware and price of bribes (where miners even now bribe 3rd world regulators to get the access to the energy of Chile equivalent) and less by price of direct energy. I like this model. It would be also great for bitcoin. But we are far from that and the transition to it is imho impossible within months. Also that model looks unstable from many sides. I can discuss it but I am really not sure whether someone gets it.

The only important thing to know is the last chart or in other words that if price goes up by X, then energy consumption must go up by X [X is always halved by halving]. If someone does not know this or wants to neglect it without alternative economic model, he should not discuss anything about bitcoin price.

It is tiring to read tirades from moronic nocoiners how bitcoin is a tulip mania.
It is equally tiring to read random numbers how high BTC will go, when energetic impact is not considered (or worse, when the moonboys do not even know that there is some energy consumed that has to go up with price).

**StanislawTomaszewski** · 1 February 2021, 5:49 am

There's nothing to predict, it will go down, then it will go up... It's all cycles

**MMM** · 1 February 2021, 6:47 am

Thanks a lot.

So for dummies like me:

When price goes up, naturally more miners join as it becomes more profitable.
As the blocks supposed to be mined every x minutes, the network increases the complexity of mining.

So that's why (ignoring more efficient power supply, more efficient equipment and so on) the power required per mined dollar remains the same? whether the price is $1000 or $1M.

**Azureus** · 1 February 2021, 8:46 am

Another issue is that OI over 1B is IMHO nothing. And overall the liquidity pool for crypto is very low. Therefore I am not sure if the hedge funds are already in position to short BTC heavily. Because they should see it is very risky. The article is very thin. For making conclusions I would like to see some evidence that the hedge funds are the (net) shorters here. After surge I would expect shorts from some long term hodlers.

Good point, I believe the hedge funds aren't as short as the article would like you to believe.

In the stock market, it is very easy to find out that someone is short let's say Gamestop because it was disclosed in the latest report to the SEC and we know Melvin bought like 1 million puts or whatever.

In Bitcoin there is no official data and disclosures, just random incomplete numbers thrown around. For real data it is possible to check some on-chain data such as https://studio.glassnode.com/dashboa...-core-on-chain but I'm not sure how to turn it into something useful.

Now the more important question - how to explain the amount of shorts in the Forbes article? The only data mentioned is open interest on the Chicago CME Exchange and that says it is $1.25 billion short. Is that a problem? Not necessarily, I think institutions may play a huge role, in a good sense.

If you are an institutional investor, you may have access to something called Grayscale (ticker GBTC), basically an ETN that takes in cash (or Bitcoins you already own) and for that gives you their shares, the ratio is something like 1000 GBTC = 1 BTC or something. After getting cash, they buy Bitcoin on the spot market over the counter and put it into cold storage with Coinbase. You can do this only as an institution, if you now decided to buy GBTC as a private person in your brokerage account, that's something different.

Now the funny thing is that
1) the Bitcoins NEVER get out of GBTC and
2) there is a 6 month (used to be 12 month) lock up period during which you (as an institution) cannot sell your GBTC
3) due to large interest of everyone, GBTC usually trades at a premium: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...AgXtyI/pubhtml

The premium is sometimes up to 20% or 30%, now it is just 5%. This allows everyone (who is permitted to buy GBTC directly, not on the exchange) to get like 40 % (now only 10 %) risk-free return per year if you do a simple set of transactions.

Simply get some brrrrr fiat money (or borrow Bitcoin from someone), put it into Grayscale, at the same time hedge with being short BTC futures on CME. Wait 6 months, sell your GBTC to retail buyers - there is quite a lot of retail interested because e.g. Americans can put GBTC into their pension funds tax-free and there is no other way to put Bitcoin into your retirement account. Rinse and repeat twice per year. The result will be that you will make a risk-free return of up to 40% p.a. and the price of Bitcoin will likely go up.

Maybe I'm not explaining it very well, check out this guy's article: https://adventuresincapitalism.com/2...will-continue/
I recommend reading it even two or three times if you won't understand. He hates Bitcoin and says it is the dumbest thing ever invented but he explains the economy behind it (in 2020 and 2021) brilliantly.

**Sherlock** · 1 February 2021, 9:09 am

Congratz. You are nothing like a dummy at all. Just few people were at least able to listen and comprehend up to this point. And you are able to come with the right question. And come with the right answer.

Yes, to sum it up, the higher the price -> the higher the ROI revenue per kwh/miner/money invested-> it attracts more investment into HW and mining -> lowers the ROI.

The miners of competitive cryptos do not opearte under huge revenues. I read they make net profit just like 1%. I do not think this is correct estimation, they make much more. But it is hard to calculate. Their main costs are the HW (fixed) and electricity (variable). The Chinese / Venezuelan miners have the lowest variable costs, the lowest electricity costs. But they spend some sources on bribes, overall on unstability of economy around them (Venezuela is a failing state, in China I just guess they are faced pressure against mining and using the cheap energy as well).

In high income countries the costs of electricity are much higher, but everything is much more predictable, they can get funding from investors etc.

Then there are special countries like Iran/Pakistan where the governments itsef mine [there is now probably shifting the hashpower]; or Iceland [low energy costs&developed country].

Nobody indeed knows what exactly will happen, but if the price has to keep surging, something has to happen.

Even now the chart is pretty weird and maybe the decoupling of hashrate and price started (so the trend to 150K might continue). But I think it is premature to count on it.

If you look at chart of hashrate during last year: https://www.coinwarz.com/mining/bitcoin/hashrate-chart

And the price: https://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bit...zm1g10zm2g25zv

If we discard the fluctuations, we can say that price went from 8-10K to 30-35K (3.5x hike). More importantly the prehalving price stayed around 8-10K for very long time, so the hashrate was most likely stabilised and at equilibrium with price at around 100 EH/s. Now the mining is around 140EH/s. But there was the halving, so the hashrate should go up only 3.5x/2=1.75x. So far we got with lag 1.4x. Maybe it is not a significant difference, maybe it is. Absolutely it is the ratio to watch.

If the price can keep up growing without hashrate growing at the same pace, there is the decoupling of hashrate and price and something unknown but new is happening on mining market. That would be good for wild price growth, but also that might be a warning for big correction. So far I do not see that and price looks solid. What we saw was posthalving pump and from mining perspective I think this can be it for 4 years. Indeed some fresh 1.9T money of angry young people can make a difference, but then is a question if the hikes of prices are sustainable or not. And there can be a most likely will be even bigger supply shocks than defacto Universal Basic Income in 1st world. Opposite can still happen and it is already happening in 3rd world. Countries run out of money and a negative shock can happen. The positive and negative shocks can go one against each other.

Another important thing is lagging of HW production.
1. There is an overall lack of production of mining HW and graphic cards
2. If in the past was a hike of price, let's say the 400%, theere had to be 400% more miners/cards produced. But because the base price was low, the 400% were hundreds of thousands or millions of miners. Now it will be many tens of millions. Who will produce it and where and how fast. With corona chain disruptions. (I do not even know whether some rare metals are needed for that.)

That said the lagging HW production can be after all even beneficial for price. Simply when production of miners is fixed, the price of HW will go through the roof. The BTC/POW network security is then made less by electricity and more by directly fiat that is spent on overpriced HW. Also less energy is then used. Also more denetralisation happens, because the big centralised miners have lower cost advantage.

**Sherlock** · 1 February 2021, 9:34 am

Originally Posted by Azureus

Maybe I'm not explaining it very well, check out this guy's article: https://adventuresincapitalism.com/2...will-continue/
I recommend reading it even two or three times if you won't understand. He hates Bitcoin and says it is the dumbest thing ever invented but he explains the economy behind it (in 2020 and 2021) brilliantly.

Interesting link and all the write-up.

I did not start with the GBTC arbitrage, because I did not understand the risks and also no dinner is for free.

In fact after reading that article the arbitrage is even more appealing (even more appreciated is that the article is written by intelligent hater).

I am not sure about the reflexivity part. For me the GBTC arbitrage is caused by the US tax system and outside people doing the arbing can mine those taxes (+tax of lazyiness of people=custodial fees) out of USA.

Still my biggest problem was to find the right bankers who are able to do the compliance side. Now I have found one, but somehow even the approx 20% revenue is not so appealing, because I really like to have control of the coins and the market is like a volcanou that can explode or implode (here I mean The Market itself, that is covering all markets and institution of market and "capitalism" itself, where the main purpose of bitcoin is to carry the value over throygh the Reset).

For the adventurers here is the historical premium chart: https://ycharts.com/companies/GBTC/d...premium_to_nav

The trend is really down now, once the arbitrage started to be a thing on Reddit I guess. 5% premium =10% p.a. now make no sense, at Hotbit and similar exchanges is 12% p.a. BTC lending (indeed with greater counterparty risk probably).

---------------------

Again, playing a devils advocate, GBTC maybe is or can be a ponzi scheme, like was Tether and many other scams around bitcoin. But to me it seems that everything really is like the strangelet. Scams blow up, but bitcoin is just surviving and getting higher. I do not understand the end game of GBTC&BTC here. There is always max 21M BTC and it will stay so. If GBTC somehow blows up (how?), where is then the pressure to sell the bitcoins? GBTC will have to keep selling somehow in downward spiral/long squeeze or something? I do not understand that mechanism.

**MMM** · 1 February 2021, 10:23 am

Originally Posted by Sherlock

Another important thing is lagging of HW production.
1. There is an overall lack of production of mining HW and graphic cards
2. If in the past was a hike of price, let's say the 400%, theere had to be 400% more miners/cards produced. But because the base price was low, the 400% were hundreds of thousands or millions of miners. Now it will be many tens of millions. Who will produce it and where and how fast. With corona chain disruptions. (I do not even know whether some rare metals are needed for that.)

That said the lagging HW production can be after all even beneficial for price. Simply when production of miners is fixed, the price of HW will go through the roof. The BTC/POW network security is then made less by electricity and more by directly fiat that is spent on overpriced HW. Also less energy is then used. Also more denetralisation happens, because the big centralised miners have lower cost advantage.

I wonder if due to that the correlation won't last. Probably will in the really long term as things like that level themselves but even then not in the same way.

Swings of 30% around $7000 vs swings of 30% at $100,000 generate much higher risk factor in terms of investing in HW and so on. So high risk factor will bring lower number of miners and higher profit margins and then the ratio would change and become lower with time.

P.S. I found this interesting in regards to Grayscale: https://hackernoon.com/grayscales-gb...t-slow-0gu340l

**Sherlock** · 1 February 2021, 10:40 am

That makes sense. The new HW purchases should lag more as price goes up. But in long term everything should level up.

Still the 150K is too much incentive from 30K or 10K few months ago.

There are many other factors in play like that miners nowadays (can)switch and mine the most profitable coin.

I thought even before this run that 50K should be expected posthalving. At 70K was my target to start selling. 100K would be a miracle ans at 100K I wanted to have sold like 10% of my BTC holdings and keep selling.

I do not change my estimations that much, but because of the economical situation that is much worse than on surface, I will not be selling at so low level. So even when 100K - 150K is a very optimistic scenario I would most likely sell there just a bit if at all and convert all to gold. Because those levels will imply big problems and those problems will threaten all other investments than crypto (inflation, nationalisation, new taxes, no investment opportunities).

**Azureus** · 1 February 2021, 2:27 pm

Originally Posted by Sherlock

Interesting link and all the write-up.
Again, playing a devils advocate, GBTC maybe is or can be a ponzi scheme, like was Tether and many other scams around bitcoin. But to me it seems that everything really is like the strangelet. Scams blow up, but bitcoin is just surviving and getting higher. I do not understand the end game of GBTC&BTC here. There is always max 21M BTC and it will stay so. If GBTC somehow blows up (how?), where is then the pressure to sell the bitcoins? GBTC will have to keep selling somehow in downward spiral/long squeeze or something? I do not understand that mechanism.

Well he's not claiming that GBTC is a Ponzi, he claims that Bitcoin itself is a Ponzi, in some interview he directly said it is the most stupid thing he has ever seen and it is the quintessential definition of Ponzi. I disagree on that but the rest of his blog shows he can spot trends and react to them extremely well. He's just a trader and will trade anything, from crude oil tankers to gold mine in Mongolia to Bitcoin.

It is a bit of a stretch and broken logic but you can consider everything to be a Ponzi. The pay-as-you-go pension system? Yup, ponzi. The debt-based monetary system? Yup, ponzi. Greek government bonds yielding 0.35%? Yup, ponzi (that never collapses if you can go negative). Bitcoin? The biggest ponzi of them all.

I don't understand you question about GBTC end game, there probably is no end game. What is the end game of fiat? GBTC concept is pretty simple. Imagine you are a rich Westerner that wants to put some money into Bitcoin but you don't want to handle your private keys and you want to defer taxes on any capital gains. Probably a lot of people happened to be in this situation so GBTC was invented, it takes in cash (not continously, in bursts; and only from rich people), buys Bitcoin and puts it into Coinbase. They take 2 % per year for this service and the fund also trades at a premium most of the time.

Afaik right now they are not selling anything and there is NO WAY to get the Bitcoin out, not for you as an individual and not even for Grayscale. Perhaps they are considering it will be enabled later.

There is no pressure to sell Grayscale Bitcoins and the fund itself probably cannot "blow up". If what they claim is true, they store 500k+ Bitcoins in Coinbase with their institutional custody which should be like... eh, mega-advanced. "Armstrong [Coinbase CEO] said that customers?funds are stored in a geographically distributed database and that the exchange is building the “generation four?of its cold-storage system—wallets that holds customers keys offline—which is rebooted every 18 months."

So in a funny way Tether behaves like an unregulated bank (adding liquidity to the base-layer system) and Grayscale behaves like a thrifty hoarder (removing liquidity from the base-layer system). By doing this, they both also create a weird secondary layer that is connected to the traditional financial system.

Originally Posted by Sherlock

I am not sure about the reflexivity part. For me the GBTC arbitrage is caused by the US tax system and outside people doing the arbing can mine those taxes (+tax of lazyiness of people=custodial fees) out of USA.

Here I understand Soros' reflexivity as the opposite of efficient market hypothesis, or the proof that EMH doesn't work. Soros explains it somewhere he believes that EMH is invention of academicians and PhDs in economics but in the end the entire theory/hypothesis is bullshit, otherwise he wouldn't be rich (his words, not mine). He would probably consider Bitcoin a bubble but bubbles are formed thanks to reflexivity. You don't need GBTC for that and you don't need GBTC to be reflexive - it is not a necessary condition but it definitely helps.

When you look at WSB/Gamestop price last week, I think that is another great example of reflexivity. Perhaps not over yet, maybe we'll see GME hit $10,000 and hedge funds and clearing houses going bankrupt.

Originally Posted by MMM

I wonder if due to that the correlation won't last. Probably will in the really long term as things like that level themselves but even then not in the same way.

Swings of 30% around $7000 vs swings of 30% at $100,000 generate much higher risk factor in terms of investing in HW and so on. So high risk factor will bring lower number of miners and higher profit margins and then the ratio would change and become lower with time.

P.S. I found this interesting in regards to Grayscale: https://hackernoon.com/grayscales-gb...t-slow-0gu340l

I actually wanted to post the exact same article and you beat me to it. This guy (Ben Lilly/Jarvis) definitely understands the Bitcoin cycles, understands the behaviour of institutions and even has some data - both from regulatory GBTC reports (from 8K) and from the blockchain itself - to back it up. According to his scenario, the bull run should continue from mid-February and it should be significant. We'll see.

The problem with models is that they are all wrong, only some can be useful. The model in this article (quoted by MMM) doesn't consider miners' behaviour and incentives. The stock-to-flow model (from PlanB) doesn't consider demand and only cares about supply. The mining hashrate ratio model (correlation of energy and price) doesn't consider demand either.

**Sherlock** · 1 February 2021, 4:08 pm

No, sorry, I wrote it wrong. But in the end you understood me well and you answered my untold question. (As expected from someone who said some time ago iirc that until humanity will reach some higher state of consciousness we move nowhere.. well done).

Yes, I wanted to ask how exactly is bitcoin a ponzi and how is GBTC helping to that ponziness as part of BTC ecosystem.

Ok, his answer is GBTC is legit and bitcoin is ponzi as everything else is ponzi. That is f-ing poor answer! Let's get a bit philosophical:

I remember how I was at university almost thrown away from the room when I said PAYG is a ponzi scheme. It was 90s, so even when it was the same PAYG, the problems were one generation further, so we could pretend the PAYG is not a ponzi. Not just we could, but we should, because we were the economists and we have to come with the assurance that PAYG pensions/fiat etc is not a ponzi scheme, so all other common people who believe in us and do not want to see the reality will construct the symbolic order and everything will go on (until we all see it really is a Ponzi, the reset comes and new symbolic lie is being constructed). It is exactly the same role as being a priest who does not believe in god, but he must pretend that god exists, so his sheeps will construct reality on the top of the fake god (here I do not want to go to the debate that god really exists pls; he does exist, but not for most priests how C.G. Jung concluded).

This debate about EMH is endless and forever will be.

Soros explains it somewhere he believes that EMH is invention of academicians and PhDs in economics but in the end the entire theory/hypothesis is bullshit, otherwise he wouldn't be rich (his words, not mine).

This is not from Soros, it is old joke of economists, older than him. Soros just retold it probably. The joke (not funny): 2 (Jewish) economists walk during busy weekday on 5th avenue and one is saying: Look there is 100 USD bill, what a luck, we will have a free lunch and even we can give a tip to that busty waitress. The other economist says: What a bullshit, if there were the 100 USD bill in the centre of NY, someone would have picked it up already! So they leave the bill on sidewalk and go away. </end of joke>

Not long ago I recommended here a book of Kirzner about markets. There he explains (as PhD, doc, prof etc btw, so real academic economical theory is stupid but not at level of Samuelsson, it is one step further, but no one is using this advanced still stupid theory, because even that a bit smarter economy would destroy whole economy, because nothing can be build upon it; again just like no one wants a hesitant priest, even when he is closer to God than the orthodox one) how efficient makets hypothesis indeed is a bullshit, BUT he does it so briliantly, that he also gives a credit to EMH. If we have to learn something about the world and about the models, we simply must feel the context. EMH in real world never works, the intention of all maret participants is exactly the opposite of EMH, because if EM happen, there is no profit... but we all work for profit. However the Kirzner point is that EM is something where the markets naturally flow to. It is the centre of gravity (and here is the difference with the new left where the new left says well, maybe there is not even the centre of gravity of markets). It can be perfectly applied to the miner/price economy of BTC. Mining and price of course is NEVER in equilibrium. Not even close, price fluctuations are too crazy for miners to switch on/off he miners all the time. Yet the correlation of price and hashrate during last years is remarkable and if there is something we should count with in bitcoin economy it is exactly the correlation of price and hashrate/energy consumption. That should be the point number one of any btc price analysis. And I am even more sure about it, because nearly nobody is doing it. (The only people who talk about energy consumption by BTC are classic doomsayers who want to f*** Greta.)

But one more thought about what you/Soors/that guy call reflexivity. It is also purely psychological problem. I remember the counter-argument against bitcoin: what will happen once 21M BTC are mined? What will happen in 2140? (Let's discard the classic reply that the miners fees will be enough to secure the network)

The question comes from deep insecurity of atheist man, who needs to have something solid when God died. I am really sure about it. One unnamed poster from this forum is all the time looking for good old capitalism, that never existed, yet that Eden is needed for him so the world would make sense. Simply humans have troubles to accept that everything perishes. The Soviet Union was forever, the German 3rd reich was for thousand years (at least). The stupid pro bitcoin argument was, that fiat is all the time failing and degrades into inflation, so we need bitcoin until the end of the universe. Etc etc. But we do not need the bitcoin to create the wonderful stable world, really no. In fact if BTC will be the reserve currency everyone will be nostalgic - remembering the good old stable and fair fiat world.

Either way from this "knowledge" or rather desire of stability comes The Trader. The trader is overcoming the philosophical and also his own existential problem of finiteness by avoiding it. He finds the stability in denying it. The perfect arbitrage is the god. (Here I remember R.D. Laing and his write-up about suicide, where the ultimate attempt to overcome the fear of death is to kill oneself.) He is just trading those perishable things. He is agnostic, just making a profit. In fact the traders are cowards, I can say that because I was the one of them. The only real agnostic trader is the one that is doing arbitrage. Anything else than arbitrage (pls not the debate here that perfect arbitrage does not exist!!) is putting himself at least a bit on line, risking a bit and therefore at least some belief has to be shown. And that is the weak spot. The Achilles heel where the chaos is coming into the life of trader.

So yes, you are totally right, everything will end, even bitcoin, in fact I think much sooner than 2140, but that does not make bitcoin a sucker bet. If that guy has just this argument against bitcoin it is laughable, I was hoping for something better but my bad. Those traders really go on my nerve (as I explained, it is ofc purely personal thing, because I see my old myself failing at this Hegelian antithesis). Because first we have to believe something, like that someone says BTC will go to XXXXXXXXXX USD. After we believe, after we gain experience, after we repeat on forums "I think bitcoin will go to XXXXXXXXXX USD", we have to come to conclusion that everything is bullshit. Nothing makes sense, we can just arbitrage the gaps made by stupid people who believe in something, that we know is idiocy (like HODLing BTC). But in the end there is another twist: we really have to believe in something, even when we know how everything is fragile, perishable and how bad are all our models that we create to understand the world.

So I believe in BTC. I do not believe it will go much up now because of the rigidity of mining ecosystem (here I am really not so sure about POS!). But at the same time BTC can spike really a lot up and it can happen anytime, even in 5 minutes and that even will be then correlated with event equal to bankruptcy of hedge funds, clearing houses and central banks. And if that happens I can tell you I do not want to have coins trapped in GBTC and some hedge options. Because for that moment to overcome the reset and to keep slivers of my old world I bought the BTC. It was based on my irrational belief and experience and this is why I am conservatively in top 100 BTC holders.

And it is a relief, really better than trying to keep together a reality where one does not care what he is trading, just chasing the profit that will be smaller and smaller and then, something will change and even the profit will be gone. The first trades or years of trading are great, somehow clear. But then it is going downhill. 1st slowly then faster and faster. Suddenly the arbitrages that are not arbitrages, but always have some risk, that is not very probable or visible, are hit in the weak spot. The models are no more models, but part of the identity. And that is the downhill of trader. There are brighter spots, when trader is able to reflect that and correct, but it is getting more and more tough and then the time to throw the towel to ring is inevitable.

I believe now the world. we all, the hedge funds and also the people who hate the hedge funds, but also the people who trade in between them, will be reminded a big lesson. Lesson that deep f***ing value matters. That humanity can not go on just on apes managing index funds, hedge funds and arbitrages and such empty philosophy around all of this. Maybe and I think most likely even the bitcoin in brainwallet will not be enough. But symbolically the bitcoin is the most resilient vehicle so far and this is why everyone, who wants to live and survive, should bet on it.

**nikolasbp** · 1 February 2021, 4:23 pm

Many factors can affect the price of Bitcoin in the coming period, currently prices vary, constantly rising and falling. Estimates of some major experts are that it could go up to $ 140,000, and that work is underway to make Bitcoin the official currency in the coming period. My estimate is that by 2023 it will be at $ 100,000, we'll see.

**Sherlock** · 1 February 2021, 4:38 pm

(facepalm)

**nikolasbp** · 1 February 2021, 4:48 pm

This is for my reply, or?

Thread: Bitcoin Prediction: How High Will It Go Ahen When?

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

The Following User Says Thank You to econfox For This Useful Post:

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sherlock For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to MMM For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to Sherlock For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to Sherlock For This Useful Post:

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions