all the fluctuations, corrections big and small rises that happened months before the halving (llike the 10 month rise you mentioned) can not be attributed to halving! if you do that then you are saying that bitcoin has nothing else going on for it, adoption is nothing, ... and it only has halving and price only rises because of it! that doesn't make any sense to me!
as for the rise itself it was in no way exponential in the times you mentions.
10 months prior to halving meaning first half of 2016 price went up slowly from $400 to $500 this is a 25% rise in 6 months in a bull market after a very long downtrend from Mt Gox bubble.
Bitcoin fell below $200 for a short while at Bitfinex in late August 2015. This is where you should start counting your percentages. But don't come with a reply that it is still not exponential as I used the term figuratively to show that the rise was pretty steep for a 10 month period given that bitcoin had been falling for a year and then stagnating for a half of that. Many people had lost there faith in bitcoin back in the day.
Ultimately, whether it was due to halving or because of the hype it provoked, or for some other reason or a host of other reasons, is irrelevant here as this is not my point. I see strange similarities in the price dynamic, and this is what I want to discuss in this thread, even though the causes of price changes may be entirely different and completely unrelated. Anyway, people started to talk about the halving long before it.
that is exactly my point! it is the hype of Futures that made the big rise. halving hype is no different. the real effect of halving which is different from hype comes afterwards with at least 1 month delay.
I don't remember a lot of buzz about bitcoin futures. If they had actually added to the price, that wasn't much. And you were talking specifically about the futures speculation, not about the hype they evoked.