When I described my statement with "just a thought" and "there is a possibility", I hoped it to be obvious that it's not a prediction. I was merely brainstorming some thoughts.
That's what she said.
So you support the theory that we can't all be rich, so if there's a large enough group thinking that bitcoin will go up, it will go down, so that the majority can be squashed and the one that swims against the current can win. I could give you a number of cases in the history of bitcoin where this wasn't the case. For instance, after falling 60-40k, at least half of the traders felt like this couldn't be the end and more likely a correction before another move up, and it was. If you bought at 30k, or held through the correction, there was a new ATH just around the corner. It wasn't the high most of us expected, but it was a new high.
I hope I don't misunderstand you. But you will always find examples where the expectations of the majority came true. But that's not the common situation in markets. Otherwise John Doe would just follow the herd and be rich, which obviously is not the case.
Everyone getting rich might be a rather a childish idea, but Bitcoin is probably the best shot to achieve that.
Probably by hodling. Certainly not by timing market movements.
For sure some ongoing consistency and persistency is likely needed in regards to dee cornz.. which largely would involve either ongoing BTC accumulation.. or buying (could be a kind of lump sum approach?) and waiting for a long enough period of time... and even though there are no guarantees, the asymmetric bet regarding the UPside likelihood of bitcoin's price dynamics remains quite strong, if not amongst the strongest of investment asset classes that is currently and widely available to most of the world's population... even though there are likely quite a few people who do not actually realize what bitcoin is (so that would be the asymmetric informational component of it).