You are fucking quasi-delusional Philip.  You and your buddy Biodom.

 

Nohomo.

The thing is that any of us should be attempting to figure out some kind of meaningful plan that works for him/her.. and DCA is the most likely to get anyone into the door and get the fuck started.  you can supplement with lump sum investing and buying on dips, and surely you may well be able to figure out ways to improve DCA, and even figure out that you don't really need to DCA for periods of time because you had already bought a bunch of BTC at way lower prices, and you are able to focus on other things (which is another way to substitute buying the dip for DCA and to calculate that you got enough BTC for a certain period of time in which the BTC price might either be going up, down or sideways, but you make personal determinations to discontinue your DCA for a period of time based on the fact that you have already accumulated a decent amount of BTC around that price (and perhaps even at higher prices, but you have concluded that you do not necessarily need to buy more for the time being).

Of course, in theory there are pure forms of one BTC accumulation practice versus another form, and so if some normies might not have time to figure out these kinds of matters, then they are quite likely better off to DCA on a regular basis until such time that they might want to research into their particulars and to perhaps figure out ways to tweak in their favor.

And, I am not even suggesting that going down a tweaking route has high chances of leading to better results, and maybe that's part of my contention with Biodom (and even you part of the time).  There are some times in which any of us could end up being guilty of overthinking matters and trying to maximize our number of sats per dollar, and in those circumstances, we may well have been way the fuck better off just to buy regularly and try not to over think the matter because we hardly have any clue and perhaps we perceive that overall the BTC price is overall down relatively speaking, even if that is only 30% down that ends up going down further to 80% down, but we had already considered that 30% down was good BTC prices but we end up kicking ourselves because we blew all of our load and it ends up that we should have saved some dry powder for further down.

When we fuck up and we run out of money, some folks start to think that they might be better of selling a little bit of BTC,^** even though the BTC price is at historical low levels because they think they are going to get a bargain and be able to buy back at lower prices, and surely, we can agree to disagree about these kinds of considerations regarding how much of a good idea that it might be to sell BTC on the way down merely because we might have concluded that we fucked up at a earlier time by either buying too much on the way down or failing/refusing to sell at higher prices or failing/refusing to sell on the way up.

**Actually, I should note that I have no reason to NOT believe Biodom when he says that he has not been engaging in practices to trade and strategically sell his BTC, even though I understand that he is considering such sales practices for in the future and on the way up.. so I don't have any problem with the consideration or employment of such practices of selling on the way up.... Also, I am not trying to be overly judgemental in regards to a variety of practices that involve selling some BTC along the way and taking off some risk at various points, even if some of that might be on the way down (or not on the way up), and even an approach that recognizes/appreciates that fuck ups had been made, so in order to avoid getting totally reckt financially/psychologically, sometimes it is better to take some off of the table, even if there might be some losses involved - and perhaps not going as far as the pickle that mindrust had gotten himself into, and it seems that a lot of mindrust's mistakes were similar to some of the mistakes that had been made by some of the BIG players in 2022 who had made bets that the BTC price would not go below a certain price such as below the 200-week moving average in 2022 (or sustainably so), and in Mindrust's case his likely consideration that $6k-ish was a kind of bottom that had been visited so many tijmes that it was not going to break and then his seemingly unreasonable belief that once it was broken that BTC prices were going to go below $2k or some dumbass number that he was gambling on.. just like some of the sub $20k BTC sellers, this  time around were considering sub $10k or at least something in the $12k price arena as something close to inevitable, which is now showing itself for being pretty damned close to ridiculous, even though we have current trolls like Save the RF who seems to believe that $10k is back on the table.. blah blah blah.. don't be listening to delusional twats like that.. just like mindrust was listening to Masterluc.. or some similar ideas/sorcerer wannabes.

So some of these practices can become confusing and even overthought, which frequently in those kinds of circumstances there is likely a decent amount of value to just suck it up and to DCA.. so who the fuck cares if you have some dumb ass theory that lump sum used to be good and now DCA is better blah blah blah.. when the fact of the matter BTC has always been a good investment as long as your investment time horizon has been long enough.. such as 4-10 years or longer and the longer the better and the more you invested into BTC (in a kind of aggressive/assertive way) at earlier times, then the more likely that you are doing well (better) too, especially compared to someone who might be still building their BTC position because they fucked up earlier by failing/refusing to be sufficiently aggressive/assertive.

I am not the ONLY one who seems to have a pretty seemingly solid theory that almost any of us whether normie or otherwise is going to be able to be way the fuck more aggressive/assertive in terms of our BTC investing (accumulation) approach when we DCA (or we do not blow the whole wadd in one shot) than if we engage in lump sum investing, unless we happen to get lucky in terms of when we had made our lump sum buy and we did not screw up in other ways.. so even the earlier example of Michael Saylor shows that he had pretty much hit the ball out of the park with his earliest of lump sum investing, but then on a psychological (or perhaps retrospective) perspective, he come to believe that he had not bought enough.. so he kept fucking buying and buying and buying.. so that he diluted the average cost of his earlier lump sum buys.. and sure, no problem with any of that, because as long as he does not get purged out of his BTC buys, he likely is going to be quite a bit better off by being aggressive and buying more BTC, even if his average cost per BTC had gone up by 3x from right around $10k per BTC to around $30k per BTC... but instead of having 30k BTC he has something like 130k BTC... and yeah, the way that he holds his BTC (his company's BTC) is not exactly direct nor unencumbered, but still, there seems to be decent chances that his more aggressive stance (even though raising his average cost per BTC x 3) is likely going to be judged well by history (no guarantees, of course), so I am not even sure what point that makes in terms of lump sum versus DCA, but it does have some support for the idea of the value of aggressiveness/assertiveness in terms of BTC stash accumulation/management and also probably suggest to be as assertive/aggressive as you can without putting ur lil selfie into such a position that you are going to have your BTC taken from you... or that you are forced to have to sell any or all of them at a time that is other than your own choosing.. and preferably in some state of profits rather than at a loss (discretionary items in terms of how to play some of the matters so long as you are not forced into some position that you had over done it with gambling rather than reasonable/prudent forethought).