Quote from: philipma1957 on Today at 10:34:37 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on Today at 10:02:01 PM

[edited out]

If I make it to 105 I won't give FUCK ABOUT THAT COIN. I will be happy to hand it over. With simple proof of A LIVING JJG or if not a living fillipone

Don't shoot the messenger.

I am largely just trying to repeat the idea regarding some kind of ballpark ideas for the replacement cost for that coin in 2062 as compared today which is likely going to have a pretty big difference, as I already mentioned my previous posts, as shown below.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on Today at 03:54:04 AM

And, that's probably going to be a lot of money.. My 200-week moving average fuck you table does not include a date out that far.. so I might have to update my table to see where I project the 200-week moving average to be at that time, and then in the end, how close the actual BTC price might end up getting to the projected price by such date.

Edited: I just did a quick look at my extended chart (on my computer), and the projected 200-week moving average looks something like this for late 2061.

(Date)	(RL_Price)	(BTC Bottom)	(%gain/time)	(% Rate ∆)	($ Amount ∆)	(#Coins/FU Status)
11/28/61		$8,225,050	3.28%	99.00%	$270,127	0.24315963

That would mean right around $86,363 for 0.0105 BTC. Seems like a lot to just give away, but hey, if you make it to 105, then surely that would be reason to celebrate, and stocking it away today ONLY costs a mere $273, and what is $273 between good ole buddies? Cheesy

Quote from: STT on Today at 11:33:11 PM

BTC quietly closing today above the 200 day average day is a nice ending to the recent negative action. Of course I may presume too much, one day is just 24hrs but every bit helps to turn the tide.

I am not sure how many shits can be given about the 200-day moving average, but the same statement about closing higher than seems to be true in regards to the 200-week moving average too, and so I suppose that those two are coincidentally in similar places.. but still being a long-term investor, it seems to be a bunch of noise to be taking too much account for daily indicators, including ones that go out as far as 200 days.. and sure if you think about it, the 200-day moving average is more or less the same as the 30-week moving average.. yet who gives too many shits the 30 week moving average either... especially when we have the 100-week moving average and the 200-week moving average as more steady longer term indicators.. with the 200-week continuously moving up (but sometimes at a lesser slope of upwards.. which might some day have some negative periods in the slope, but not yet) and the 100-week moving average actually moving both up and down. .and so they are currently getting to a point in which they are coming closer together with the 100-week moving average starting to get below $32k.