ITT people see what they want see...
I'm leaning towards 'more downside' as well (expecting to see sub-200 again, for example), but you'll note that luc didn't say "New lower low incoming", but rather "Further price collapse is possible, but not required".
Also, prices an order of magnitude lower than current price (i.e. ryn's myself chart) are pretty unlikely in my opinion, unless catastrophic protocol failure or "global crypto ban" happens. It took more than a year for price to deflate 75% (as measured by a 20 day average), and we're already showing signs of selling exhaustion, so I wouldn't bet much on pre-2013 prices.
I'm leaning towards 'more downside' as well (expecting to see sub-200 again, for example), but you'll note that luc didn't say "New lower low incoming", but rather "Further price collapse is possible, but not required".
Also, prices an order of magnitude lower than current price (i.e. ryn's myself chart) are pretty unlikely in my opinion, unless catastrophic protocol failure or "global crypto ban" happens. It took more than a year for price to deflate 75% (as measured by a 20 day average), and we're already showing signs of selling exhaustion, so I wouldn't bet much on pre-2013 prices.
a) 208 not hit (yet?). Keep the salivation reflex in control
b) Even then, still missing what luc's main point was. Relevant parts again:
1. Further price collapse is possible, but not required, and
2. Very fucking long "silence phase" (after final collapse)
My reply was for the bolded parts of your reply.
Imo you read luc posts with a bit too strong bull classes. Luc could comment, but my interpretation from example H&S pattern that luc has showed also, is that luc thinks that new LL <166 is likely.
We could see capitulation <100 then upper weekly BB then "very fucking long silent phase" at middle weekly BB.