BTCUSDT20240403P67250
Bitcoin / Tether USD Apr 3 2024 67250.00 Put
crypto

It's up 20% in 30 days.
Appreciate that's small news to people in since last year, but I DCA'd from February to June so it feels very exciting.
I've been in BTC for many years and never timed the market well, success was just from time in the market over anything else, so this feels like I could have actually made a good call.
Up 20% in a month is like what BTC felt like years ago.

So me interesting narratives coming out RE ai agents transacting with crypto.
Personally, I think the bottom for BTC is in, a few more minor liqs on the horizon & then we start to climb out. Different macro conditions compared to the last bear cycle too.
Think people waiting for October bottom will be wrong footed!

100% correct! Purchase BTC only, do not chase the hype that goes with alt coins. They have no use case and are worthless!

I'd strongly suggest taking a look at us - **GoCharting (gocharting.com)**.
In terms of **pure value for money**, it's hard to beat for BTC perps:
1. **Web-based & Smooth:** Runs right in the browser (no heavy desktop app or GPU strain), but still streams sub-second tick data directly from Binance, Bybit, and Coinbase.
2. **Full Order Flow Suite:** Gives you proper footprint/cluster charts, bid/ask imbalances, CVD, volume profile/POC, and delta bars.
3. **Price:** Significantly cheaper than running desktop add-ons or heavy subscriptions, plus they have a generous free tier if you just want to test out how the charts feel first.

Planning to trade BTC perp wiht orderflow: MMT or Mobchart ?

On-chain data shows a divergence between whale and retail BTC activity curious what others think

This was only possible because of the crippling and the subsequent pivoting to fiat gains as the only goal of BTC.

I'm all in on BTC long term, but my casino stack is... separate stablecoins,Keeps gambling volatility from touching my core hold

LINK's tech is solid but price action has been frustrating for years, your not wrong there. the thing is "big future potential" applies to like half the top 50 and most of them bleed against BTC over full cycles. If you're gonna do it, at least scale your entries based on where risk actually sits instead of going heavy all at once. I track LINK risk on alphasquared and it helps me size positions without the emotional guesswork. Right now alts in general are in a weird spot where adoption metrics and price are completely disconnected, so patience matters more than conviction here.

I wasn't clear. I meant best case for BTC is he doubles his money in 3-4 years.
There are better options through good stock investments for that time horizon that would most likely wipe the floor with 'only' a 100% increase in four years.

While I'd agree that the money is sloshing from one area to another: from MAG8 to LAG7. Saaspocolypse to semi run up to semi crash. From BTC/ETH last year to Gold/Silver to energy/crude.
It doesn't mean the market isn't healthy. Maybe you can say the economy isn't or that the market is divorced from it but the market is in a 4th year where it's volatile but up >8%YTD, off back-to-back-to-back +15% return years, and with a lot of strengths despite the election cycle, multiple wars, and political chaos. Now it's also seeing market breath, the S&P500 is actually MORE diversified than other national indexes, and there is a good amount of skepticism/bearishness in the market. If you don't call this "healthy" then I don't know WTF you think is healthy.
I say it's more of an issue with the rate at which tech prices have run up, record high valuations be it Buffett index or Shiller P/E, the persistent looming fear of inflation forcing investors into invest, gold/RE/international/smallcaps/pokemoncards/etc all also getting ran up in multiples leaving a TINA feeling, Trump admin's gilded age 2.0 stuff, the US cracks coupled with geopolitical chaos, and a lot of things happening under the surface leaving a general sense of insecurity.

I'm currently DCAing into BTC, and it's been going well so far. This is already my second year since I started last year.

The pause isn't surprising if you understand how the funding mechanism actually works. Strategy buys BTC by issuing ATM equity offerings and convertible bonds — they raise capital first, then buy. If they're not buying, it usually means they're either between capital raises or the ATM offering is exhausted for the current tranche.
The "propping up the market" narrative is mostly reddit canon at this point. Their purchases are large for a single entity but they're small relative to daily BTC volume on the major exchanges. The price impact per buy is real but it's not structural support in the way people describe. The chart between their announcement days and price action has never shown a consistent pattern.
What's actually interesting about five weeks of no buying is what the capital allocation decision reveals. If they genuinely believed $65k was undervalued relative to their average cost basis (~$75k), you'd expect them to be raising and buying aggressively right now. The pause either means they think the price goes lower, or they're constrained by available capital, or management's confidence in the thesis has quietly shifted.
The $75k average cost is the problem. They're underwater at current prices and every week they don't buy is a week they can't lower the average cost through DCA. Meanwhile the convertible note holders have coverage concerns. The strategy only fully works if BTC keeps going up from here.

BTC cycle ???

Future of BTC

I built a small Bitcoin automation tool called autocrypto.site and I’m looking for honest feedback from people who actually follow BTC.
The idea is simple: you can set automation rules based on Bitcoin price surges and dips (for example, trigger actions when BTC drops 5% or pumps 8%).
I’m still improving it and would genuinely appreciate constructive criticism on what would make it more useful for Bitcoin users. UI, features, strategy ideas, or anything else.
Would love to hear what you’d add or change.

All fair points on risk management. Anyone borrowing should model downside scenarios and have a repayment plan that doesn't depend on BTC price.
But the platform I used is non-custodial which is a key difference. My Bitcoin never left my wallet or went to a company holding it on my behalf. That removes the counterparty risk entirely.
"CoinRabbit holds your Bitcoin for you". That's a different risk profile on top of the market risk you already mentioned.

You're wrong, you can use DEX aggregator like [https://switcher.finance/](https://switcher.finance/), it has better rates than CEX and no counterparty risk (I lost 6 figures on MEXC when i deposited BTC to just convert to USDT..)

The Saylor comparison is apt but there's one structural difference that makes the ETH version more interesting from a network perspective: if Bitmine stakes that ETH, they're not just a price-concentrated holder, they become a significant validator.
5% of staked ETH is meaningful. Current staking participation is around 27-28% of supply, so 5% of total supply translates to roughly 18% of the staking pool if they stake it all. That's in range to start influencing things like block proposal rates and MEV extraction patterns. It doesn't give them consensus finality power (you need 33%+ to threaten liveness), but it's enough to matter.
The no-debt point from r/euro347 is the key variable. MSTR's vulnerability isn't the BTC concentration, it's the convertible note structure — if BTC craters, they can't service debt and have to sell into a falling market. Bitmine without debt just sits through a drawdown. The house of cards analogy only applies if there's leverage behind the position.
The real question is what they actually do with the ETH. Buy and hold on the balance sheet is one thing. Stake it, run validators, and participate in MEV supply chains is a fundamentally different entity.

> Why waste energy killing something that is withering away into nothing on its own?
😂😂😂 EVERYBODY brings that excuse, yet the keep raging over BCH non-stop.
>BCH isn't "free to develop", it is free to centralize itself out of existence.
That's just your opinion as a hater.😎 The truth is BTC is very much captured as we get demonstrated by the BIP-110 movement. BCH recognized the lack of procedure to upgrade as the source for drama used by the hijackers and implemented a process that since then lead to consensus about upgrades. Wich excelled its development speed without centralizing.
>Thinking that a decentralized protocol is superior because it forces smart contracts and high transaction volumes onto the base layer is completely illogical.
Say who and with what argument. Show me ONE network that doesn't grow its throughput and still lives.
>Expanding block sizes to absorb all activity directly causes ledger bloat.
Bullshit, it grows usage.
>This prices out independent node operators and centralizes the network around massive data centers.
🙄🙄🙄 This bullshit again.
>The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms. The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate.
> \- Satoshi
As Bip-110 is currently finding out Non-PoW nodes are just repeater nodes with no voice on the network anyway. BUT pruning and UTXCO commitments do away with this argument anyway. With UTXCO commitments and pruning node running cost will forever stay flat instead of growing with the bockchain.
You BTCers live so much in the past you argue for driving steam cars.