Do you know what DCA means? The exact opposite of timing the market. Good luck in predicting the price of #Bitcoin in the future.
Discussion
DCA is an acronym that stands for Dollar Cost Average. I use it accurately here to describe the average cost at which Nayib has purchased BTC.
You're right that, like most words and acronyms in the Bitcoin orbit, DCA has been absolutely pretzeled beyond the regular meaning of terms -- this time into a verb that means a regular periodic purchase, typically monthly.
#[4] The average dollar cost that Nayib Buleke has spent on BTC is $42,842.23 -- which is 52% higher than it's dollar cost today.
That's what https://nayibtracker.com/ got for listening to https://saylortracker.com/ and "getting in early". Saylor is down $1.3BN, or in your terms, could buy $1.3BN more in BTC if he HODLd USD through all your FUD until today (Mar 2023).
Keep checking the trackers for another few years troll.
You forgot to answer my questions, BTW.
And no, Saylor isn't down, he bought under $10k per coin. MicroStrategy is.
Coulda woulda shoulda. He is in this for 10 / 20 / 30 years not a single quarter π
That he's down 34% is a realized fact. That he could buy $1.3BN more BTC with the same USD today is a realized fact. He fucked up to the tune of negative 34% already. Realized fact vs. if he entered the market March 2023.
But I'm sure your Aunt Jenny will outperform Saylor. Are you? If not, you're fucking her up with eyes wide open.
Arguing with you is a waste of time. He bought when he can not when he wanted to. He borrowed funds at less than 1% interest rates. If he were to do it today he would pay 7X - 8X that. He knows BTC will be 2M each in the future.
What difference does it make buying at 50k vs 20k. You do you and keep waiting for that 1k BTC. π
So Bukele is (I guess) buying at today's prices too, not just the higher ones. Nobody knows the exchange rate tomorrow, next month nor next year. That's why DCA is the best way to accumulate #Bitcoin
Are you having trouble to understand that? Are you capable to time the market correctly?
Totally. This is something many of us have gone through and nobody explains it clearly. I wish I could have known a few years ago. In the end, it wonΒ΄t matter: 1 sat = 1 sat
That's not insight, that's called a tautology. A = A doesn't communicate any wisdom, just the illusory response of feeling right, which our monkey brains associate with wisdom.
#[4] That Saylor and Bukele lost is a realized fact of history. Both expected the price to go up because they thought a wise central planner (whose identity is hidden) could mathematically enforce deflationary effects, through centrally planning the rate of supply and deploying Keynesian tactics such as "the halving".
So you can skip pretending this is a case of a few people failing to "time the market". It's a case of a central plan shown to have no clothes when it meets the market.
"Nobody knows the exchange rate tomorrow, next month nor next year" is a sly change of tune for someone who tells the world Bitcoin is mathematically guaranteed to increase in relative value over time to other goods and services. Central planning fails. This central plan failed. Bitcoin has even managed to outpace the dollar's inflation.
Saylor is $1.3BN down and you're trying to imply he would have bought early anyway if he knew what the price would be today. Bukele down over 50% and you suggest the same? That's some serious cope, can I have a hit?
You're wrong. 1 #Bitcoin = 1 Bitcoin because it always will be 1/21,000,000
1 dollar will always be 1/β
No, there's 4 quadrillion units. The 21M is a psyop that doesn't apply, because the units are divisible without losing utility.
If you cut a banana in half, it doesn't full two people the same as a whole banana each. If you cut a tractor in 10 pieces, you don't have the same utility as 10 tractors.
Not so with Bitcoin. A division of a Bitcoin fulfills the same purpose as a whole Bitcoin. It loses no utility on account of it's division.
If you could slice a banana into 100 pieces and each piece still satisfied the same wants as a full banana, you have effectively expanded the supply of whole bananas.
The supply of units on the Bitcoin blockchain will be 4 quadrillion, if we imagine it will never ever change (tho that requires less sign-off than a Fed interest rate hike).
If you cut one #Bitcoin into 100 pieces, you don't have 100 bitcoins.
Or are you willing to sell me one bitcoin for 1 satoshi?
Answer this question before writing down another retarded opinion, please.
Never said you did. You maxis are so economically astute you can't tell the difference between utility and valuation.
The cent is the indivisible, fundamental unit of USD.
USD is then simply a collective noun for "100 cents".
There are 1.5 trillion USD aka "150 trillion cents" in total circulation.
The sat is the indivisible, fundamental unit of BTC.
BTC is then simply a collective noun for "100 million sats".
There will be 21 million BTC aka "2100 trillion sats" in total circulation.
There will be 14 X more sats than we have cents in circulation.
100,000,000 X 21,000,000 does not equal 4 quadrillion.
I was surprised to see that number too but #[4] seems to struggle with more than a simple math.
Well done! It's only 2 quadrillion 100 trillion.
2.1
2,100 trillion fundamental units of BTC.
Know how many USD cents there are in circulation? 150 trillion
As in, total amount of USD in circulation is estimated at 1.5 trillion dollars
x 100 cents per dollar = 150 trillion cents, the fundamental indivisible unit of USD.
There are 14 X more fundamental units of BTC than USD.
Well, there was never a hard cap on any currency, fiat or backed. If backed by gold or some other precious commodity then they would print more as it was pulled from the ground. If fiat then, well, you know.
Why would it ever need to be raised to inflate vs the cent? Is Earth's population gonna 14 X?
PS: The BTC cap is easier to change than the Fed interest rate. 6, now 5 devs with write access. No one ever called a fork the real deal. The 21M cap doesn't even appear in the white paper. Sorry, The 2 quadrillion 100 trillion cap.
#[9] Cents after 110 years are 14 X scarcer than sats after 15 years.
#[9] the USD could keep printing at the median rate since its founding and it would take 1540 years before sats are scarcer than cents LOL!
You need to talk to the bitcoin pizza lady.
You realize that Lightning already subdivides sats into millisats...
You just turned his tractor into dust!
How many? Then the situation is even more dire!
There are only 150 trillion cents in global circulation, The fundamental indivisible unit of USD. There will be 2,100 trillion sats in circulation, and it's not even the fundamental indivisible unit? That's already 14X
Tell me if you play chess and all of a sudden I move my pawn diagonally are we playing the same game? Or am I changing the rules thus creating a new game?