Another big year for Bitcoin, if you bought on January 1 2019 your cost would have been $3693 and we closed 2019 with a Bitcoin price of $7160, which is about a 90% gain.
How about a buy once a year strategy, here is Bitcoin price at beginning of each year going back 5 years
2015 $321
2016 430
2017 966
2018 13,880
2019 3693
If you have bought 1 Bitcoin each year at the opening price above your 5 Bitcoin would have cost you $19,290 and as of today’s price those Bitcoin would be worth $37,250
whatever your time frame is for buying , the key here is buy and hold
1 Like
It’s never too late I’ve been buying just 25 euro of BTC since 2017 and have been in profit since I will continue to do so until a single BTC is worth 100K
1 Like
Cant argue with those figures. Longterm holders are the real winners in Crypto
1 Like
price has broken above the downward trend line, is this the end of this bear leg, to early to tell but I will be watching it closely, we saw buyers come in 3 times at the 7,000 level so that is our floor for now. Next, I want to see a close above 10,000 followed by a higher low on the next pullback
1 Like
Really enjoying your BTC analysis my friend.
Have you any longterm BTC analysis or projections if you have the time to share .
I am just a trend follower and everything tells me this up trend has a long long way to go, you just have to have the stomic to hold through the dips and buy more, if you can’t handle the dips then this is not a strategy that will work for you.
Good luck my friend
Nice up candle today, stockmarket down and Bitcoin up, I like that correlation, Bitcoin is looking like a good hedge should the stock market crash on a Bernie Sanders win
Bitcoin is moving in an uptrend now. The Ichimoku lines lined up in a parade of three lines. Let’s hope that bitcoin will continue to move up.
1 Like
Dennis does not realise that BTC is not bitcoin anymore, it has not been bitcoin since 2017 when it forked off by implementing the SegWit protocol. I am of the belief that once regulators enter the space BTC will lose the Bitcoin brand name. It is quite obvious to see if you just look.
I posted a little more in depth about it to Van Tharp on twitter…
I have owned Bitcoin since before 2017, my Bitcoin is still Bitcoin plus I own the spin-offs from the various forks along the way so not sure what you are trying to say
What I am saying is this…
Technically and legally BSV is Bitcoin.
If crypto was a regulated space with real exchanges and not bucketshops, BTC would not have been able to fork off from the original protocol as described by the whitepaper and keep the Bitcoin name. It is now something else. Maybe it will be called SegWitCoin.
As you will find out this year, Craig Wright is Satoshi, he has the copyright to the orginal whitepaper and code, and I predict that he is going to take legal action against the exchanges that do not list BSV as Bitcoin. Check my twitter posts or the link above if you want to learn more. If not. Good luck.
Bitcoin SV (BSV) market cap 5 billion
Bitcoin (BTC) market cap 171 billion
This is as bad as arguing over who is the real Cleveland Browns, the current team calling them selves the Browns or the Cleveland Browns team that moved to Baltimore and changed their name to the Ravens
Your argument for market cap determining a protocol is weak.
A better analogy than a football team would be if the TCP protocol for the internet changed. One, it would be completely different, two, the internet would no longer run or there would be serious compatability issues for people running the old protocol.
Bitcoin is a protocol, it is set in stone, no changing, so people can reliably build upon and use it in the long term.
You can’t fork Bitcoin. You can fork off of bitcoin, and that is what the protocol trading under the BTC ticker has done with SegWit.
Regulators will easily understand this, especially when there is a known creator with the intellectual property to the original code and whitepaper.
Another issue is that what made bitcoin unique and innovative was it’s economic security model, the on chain activity protects the network. BTC have limited the network to 1MB seriously compromising the network security.
As the block ‘reward’ (subsidy) goes to zero, the network is more and more protected by fees - miners, nodes, are profit seekers. If there’s no profit there’s no network.
So there’s two options. Either there is huge on-chain transaction volume and low fees. Or low transaction volume like 7 per second as it is on BTC and extremely high fees.
Now the BTC has no utility at 7 transactions per second as a global finance network, it will have even less utility with extremely high unpredictable transaction fees.
BTC is secured by 'number go up’
That is a very weak security model.
Bitcoin (currently trading under the BSV ticker) is secured by large scale. They have already done 1,000 transactions per second on chain. Test net has mined a gigabyte block that contained millions of transactions that equaled 9,100 transactions per second. The return to genesis upgrade is Feb 4. Expect to see that acheived on chain soon.
It took me a while to wake up from the Craig is a fraud hypnosis. I hope you and others look beyond that narrative. I would suggest you watch or skim through the coingeek conferences on YouTube to see the calibre of entrepreneurs and developers building on BSV.
I hope you realise the truth if my arguments also. They will become more clear as time goes on and the reward keeps shrinking. The sooner you understand this the sooner you can act and the greater your profit. Profit seeking is more successful when you understand things about the future before others.
Highly doubt this will happen though. You think it will? 
There is a large group of Americans who think the sole job of the Federal Government is to give them free stuff, free healthcare, free collage, free, free, free. Sanders is trying to appeal to that thinking. Let us hope there are still enough Americans that understand “free” is not really free
It is large but I think Trump has a huge followership plus I think he has the “powers that be” on his side for a reelection… 
1 Like
