Most people in the speculation forum don't understand anything about Bitcoin mining. The first thing you need to understand is, nobody running a current process node miner actually turns them off no matter what the price does. You're either an ASIC dealer that spent millions on research and design to make it, or some random Joe that paid a big premium for one. Turning them off makes no sense for anyone since Bitcoin is an asymmetric investment. Unless you're mining with crazy expensive electricity, your current generation miner will either pay off eventually, or Bitcoin will go to 0. There's no purpose in turning it off.
If you're mining, you likely already own coins, and increasing hash power just drives the price up of the ones you already have as well. Trust me, I've rented out like 80% of the hashpower of entire altcoins, I'm an expert on this from firsthand experience. Since the amount of miners deployed increased a lot with the recent price increase, this means the floor miners will stop selling at raised too. If the majority of the network is composed of ASICs that are supposed to be technologically viable, or even near their ROI period at all, but the sell rate is not favorable to that, they will simply stop selling, supply withers to nothing, then the price boom occurs.
Miners also tend to mine at a loss in hopes of future returns (being a deflationary system and all) long before turning their miners off. If the miners do begin to mine at a loss ,they will then also go buy coins off the wall to dollar cost average because we've already determined they aren't turning the miners off. It is 100% inevitable price increases after halving. Post halving price is a function of what the market can bear pre-halving. We've already seen the Mike Hearn R3 propaganda scare dumps where the market didn't drop that much then rebounded anyway. There's not a problem with the market supporting this ballpark of pre-halving price of around a 410 floor.
No matter how you look at it, post halving, in one way or another, through multiple dynamics, the supply will decrease propotional to demand. Mining is a form of demand. Mining is a decentralized exchange, Coinbase is a centralized exchange. The price could increase 50%, it could increase 100%, or depending how elastic demand is, it could go much higher through a big shock in supply side distortion. Around 75% of Bitcoin has already been mined, so the hard part, the putting money up front to capitalize the accumulation period, is already done. Now the people who have accumulated just wait for inflation to drop, like it's about to do, then send the market higher. The market will move through both predictable laws of economics and whale engineering at the same time.
OK, I don't necessarily disagree with any of that. It's been many years since I mined, and a lot has changed, but I recognise mining-at-a-loss - when I purchased my first "rig" (known as a fancy graphics card back then) I knew I could spend the money on BTC instead, and - initially - have far more BTC. I knew that difficulty would push ROI back further and further. Despite that, I mined at a loss in the hope that - one -day! - BTC would be worth more than the few dollars it was then.
So - good analysis, interesting and thought-provoking discussion ensues.
What I don't get is - what does that have to do with the subject of the thread?
The big struggle I have trying to get people to understand that markets take known, future events into account is getting them to understand that traders don't live in a bubble, that they have access to the same data, the same analysis we have (not least because there's an overlap between "traders" and "us"). The premise here seems to be (1) we know that supply will reduce relative to demand, (2) ?, (3) Profit. What's step 2?