Interesting blog!
Congrats on the house being 'back in black'
The house yes.. but not all investors.
An interesting effect of investment dilution is that some investors who were in profit last time the site was at +1550 - are now in a loss once it's back up to +1550.
These investors were being rational in sticking it out - (because the site's luck at any point isn't dependent on what happened just before), but they lost out to investors who subscribe to a form of 'gamblers fallacy' and were 'lucky' enough to be less invested during the downside.
Are you sure this is what actually happened? Is this the case for your investment?
I'm doubtful for two reasons:
- I had increased (more than doubled) my investment just before the site took that huge dip; as a result, I had a loss of 10% at the lowest point.
I didn't divest, and now I'm againt at a profit (though smaller than before the dip)
- There was a big wave of divestments (approx 30%) on the way down, in particular when the house was already in the negative - and not
on the top of the profits as you suggest
I'm sure some investors are still in the negative, but I don't think these are those that were just sticking it out as you suggest.
Well ... I had the bulk of my investment in all the time.
I added another 20% during the slide down - and divested half of that right after the +/- 1300BTC celeste 'incident'.
e.g (not actual figures - but ratios correct) 100BTC in the whole time (starting at +1550). Added 20BTC some time on the way down (when investment loss at about -6 I think) . Divested 10BTC at the 1300 incident.
Result - by the time site was back at +1550: -0.7BTC
I was down 15% at one point. Perhaps more.. I didn't see the figures at the site's lowest profit point.
I don't think the 10BTC in/out contributed much in the way of profit or loss during the relatively brief period it was in play - but I suppose it's difficult to analyze without a complete log.