pull down to refresh
- This could be checked. Have other assets with similarly huge runups followed a power curve this closely for this long?
- If some rapidly appreciating assets do tend to follow this curve, then that's a reason to expect bitcoin to follow this particular curve, too, rather than the infinite set of other possible curves.
- If damn near every asset follows this curve (with different parameters, obvs), then it's the fit parameters that are the interesting parts.
Conditional on bitcoin not dying, it's kind of a high probability that it'll trade within their stupidly large range
This isn't right. If bitcoin stabilized at $60k, it would be highly divergent from their bands very quickly.
Now, if you're saying that it can't do that without dying, then I think you're sort of making their point.
reply
I'm not convinced that's particularly relevant. Also, they should provide some goodness of fit against actual prices then — because there's quite some variability there — not an artificially smoothed-out line.
Here's my conceptual problem:
If I take a growing industry of any kind, and slap an exponential or power law function on its growth, AND give it wide bands (e.g., these guys say 0.5x multiple = bargain, 3-4x = expensive), as long as the thing doesn't die — big question mark for bitcoin on that one currently — I'm pretty much bound to look like a genius.
Again, kind of trivial: you've set yourself up for a massive goal, expanded the target zone of the bullseye to cover almost the entire wall
add-on: unfalsifiable aspects. If bitcoin dropped to outside their lower bound (at 61k currently), would that invalidate the thesis? No, they'd just say it's massive value... at any and every price down to zero.
Conditional on bitcoin not dying, it's kind of a high probability that it'll trade within their stupidly large range
Tldr, they've set themselves up to look good, it's mostly just luck and mathematical theatre