I've been mulling this over & I think that your analysis is largely correct, but lacks a small (but pivotal) piece of nuance; we all know the mining issuance halves, so for this purpose we need to slightly reframe "supply" as "supply for sale" (and not "supply in existence"). 🤔
We all know that price is simply an equilibrium between supply & demand. However, #Bitcoin is the first asset (that I know of) that hasn't respected this simple fundamental dynamic. 🤷♂️
From a sheerly technical perspective, ALL the historic #BTC price increases have all happened in an environment with an INCREASE in both demand AND supply for sale (which is an obvious anomaly/deviation from conventional wisdom about markets because the orange coin loves to break all models). 🙃
Really stop to think about the significance of that last paragraph. 🤯
Last cycle was actually the first cycle where the asset started overlapping with traditional supply/demand expectations (falling supply for sale & increasing price), but the price still rose during increasing AND decreasing supply-side trends. 👀
EVERY prior cycle has seen increased demand, but there has NEVER been an entire cycle (counted bottom to top) that experienced a decrease in the actual quantity of coins for sale…
…UNTIL NOW. 💁♂️
The amount of coins for sale now is the same as it was at the 2017 top, but the price is 5x higher; we have never actually achieved anything even vaguely resembling price equilibrium & "fair value" is still just a tingle in the balls of the free market gods. 🫠
I agree with your thesis of increasing demand, but Bitcoin has already proven that it is so unreasonably undervalued that it can simply not give a fuck about supply/demand mechanics & is capable of marching the price higher regardless. 👆
That's what I REALLY mean when I say " Bitcoin has never seen a supply shock". 🫴
However bullish we all think we are, not a single one of us is anywhere near bullish enough; thank you for coming to my TED talk. 🤙