[edited out]
Ofocus yes there must be enough reserved fund to be able to get a better result in terms of increasing your DCA strategy. I think what I_Anime said is true about increasing your DCA accumulation as time goes on. Sometimes issues like this need to be raised for people to get a point that DCA strategy is not just being accustomed to $10 weekly, when JJG emphasis on $10 weekly he assumes it as minimum which may as well increase in due time after people may have increased there reserved fund. If people are sticked to that minimum $10 weekly they may never yeald a good accumulation power and year ofcus btc price is increasing steadily and a time will come where the minimum DCA amount will not be even enough to buy a goods numbers of SATs considering the current or future price of Bitcoin.
Of course, in recent times, I had been emphasizing $10 per week as a kind of absolute minimum and $100 per week as a more reasonable target, yet of course, there are folks who may well not even be able to do $10 per week or even $10 per month because they have no or almost no disposable income.. So for anyone who does not have any or hardly any disposable income, it may well be quite difficult to justify investing in bitcoin or anything else.. and so they are in a position in which they have to try to figure out if they are able to and/or how to increase their disposable income, even if it is merely getting up to a point that they are able to start to set aside $10 per month or some other reasonable amount - and to be able to set such an amount aside for 4-10 years or longer (if they are wanting to take it out of cash and put it into bitcoin), so they are not going to necessarily be disadvantaged because of their being so poor as long as once they decide to commit some quantity to bitcoin, they recognize and appreciate that they are putting that amount aside (and out of reach) for 4-10 years or longer, which likely means that they have to build their emergency fund at the same time and even get to a point that they have reserves and a float.. which largely means that they might have to struggle to figure out if and how they are able to increase their disposable income and how much they are able to put away.. and none of this is easy for anyone who is living on the edge of barely having enough of an income to cover all expenses, and if they are never able to get to a poiont that they are able to have a bit extra to put into bitcoin, then they likely will not be able to invest into bitcoin.. which disposable income happens to be a requirement for being able to invest in bitcoin. and the only other way to accomplish it, would be to receive a lump sum - such as robbing a bank
(not promoting the commission of crimes) (which is also like a form of disposable income - because it ends up being extra beyond the needs for expenses).
So, even if I have been pushing a kind of minimum target of $10 per week and also the goals of increasing those amounts since they are not a lot, people still have to do what is within their means, to not over do it and they are still likely to be better off by investing into bitcoin rather than not, as long as they are taking from disposable income rather than income that they actually need in the coming 4-10 years or more.
so there is need to increase our accumulation process to boost our portfolio. surely overdoing it is not when you have enough to invest in bitcoin and having enough for reserved and floats without investing, overdoing is when you don have enough and you try to invest what you can't afford, or Investing agresive with all you have and may come back to sell your HODLing. So investing aggresively is good when you are capable of doing it.
All of this seems to be correct. Each person should be trying to invest into bitcoin as aggressively as he is able to do without over doing it.., so if someone is concerned that he might be investing too aggressively, it is better that he backs off a little bit and even puts some of that money into his emergency fund, reserves and/or float rather than putting it into bitcoin, since it is not going to be any good for the bitcoin investor if he ends up having dip into his bitcoin investment at a time that is anything other than his complete own choosing.. and surely anyone in his early BTC accumulation stages might have a couple of cycles or more before he is even in a position to start to consider to change his strategy away from BTC accumulation - especially folks who have a relatively low disposable income.. and think about it, a disposable income that rises to 10% of your salary/expenses will allow you put away 100% of your annual salary/expenses in 10 years, and if anyone is investing even lower than that, then it is going to take way beyond 10 years just to get to a point of having a whole year's worth of income/expenses invested into bitcoin. Those kinds of facts do not mean that the person should not be investing into bitcoin, but instead those kinds of facts show that it can take a whole long time to get to a point of having a decently sized investment portfolio, and even a year's worth of income/expenses is not a lot, but it is surely a lot better to have that money stacked aside than to not have it stacked aside, even if it might not seem like a lot.. sometimes the slow and ongoing process will still end up putting the really poor person in a much better place if he is able to manage it well and continue to allow the BTC portfolio to grow through the years.
Aggressive approach may sometimes bad if you don't know what you are doing but there are times that its good to execute this especially if our knowledge is enough and you have confident that there's something good will happen on your bitcoin investment in long period of time.
Like I said agresive approach is not bad expecially if you are capable of it. And there is no special skill or knowledge required what really matters is where you get you source of income from. You may not be well knowledgeable about bitcoin but provided you have a higher paying job that can be able for you to increase your investment strategy, you are good to go.
Having good and reliable income sources does help a lot, yet we cannot presume that people have good and reliable income sources, and sometimes they have to spend a decent amount of their free time searching for back up income sources and sometimes even doing fairly bad paying work while they are trying to improve their situation, and maybe trying to improve the kinds of jobs that they are able to do when working for someone else or when establishing their own business (that sometimes will involve building your reputation and doing work that does not pay very well in order to potentially be able to get better jobs in the future).
Let me say a person who receive $1300 as a salary may be investing $50 on DCA weekly or $100 depending on his programming. He may as well increase it to $300 weekly if he has a higher paying job of $4000 so it may seam to be an aggressive investment but it's not a bad one because he is capable to invest and have enough in his discretionary or reserved and floats. When it can be addressed as a bad aggressive Investment is when he is aiming $1300 and investing $200 weekly.
Of course the income is one side of the ledger and the other side of the ledger is expenses, so sometimes, a guy is able to keep his expenses down, but sometimes he may have to incur various kinds of expenses including needs to eat decent food and to live in areas that are not too dangerous or otherwise costing him more money, there sometimes might be needs to spend more money in order to stay healthy, energetic, social and perhaps sometimes money needs to be spent to be able to get to work or a guy might have to buy a car for the kind of work that he does (and having a car might get him extra work), and sometimes, he might have to have better electronics and communication systems in order to become more employable.. so working on language skills and computer skills or whatever might be some of the kinds of work that he might be able to do might sometimes cost extra money to even take some courses to get higher skills and to be able to get higher paying work.. .and courses can cost time and money, but might end up being good investments to help increase cashflows, even though increase expenses in the short-run too.
[edited out]
Surely if you over invest in Bitcoin, the $500 available amount you will not be enough for emergency and reserved.
Surely this part of your post is confusing, since if we are suggesting that a person has right around $500 per month in discretionary income, then he can choose to put all of that into bitcoin, and generally speaking there is no real need to use any of that money for emergency funds and/or reserves, unless the person is still building either the emergency funds and/or reserves.
The idea of emergency funds and reserves and even float, is that they are already in place, unless they are being built and/or replenished from earlier usage... surely there might be some months in which the reserves and the floats end up being used or even depleted, but it should be pretty damned rare that any bitcoiner every needs to dip into his emergency fund, absent either some actual emergency or some kind of a mistake, and so the mistake implies that the reason that the guy ended up dipping into his emergency fund is because he had failed/refused to sufficiently/adequately manage other aspects of his cashflow, whatever investments that he was making and the various funds that he had set up.
No problem that in the earliest stages of getting into bitcoin, it might take 6-12 months or even longer to really get your emergency fund, reserves and cashfloat into a relatively healthy state so that you are able to really become more aggressive in the way that you invest into bitcoin, and surely some of the sadness in the time that it can take to get your finances in a decent order is that the BTC price might end up going up during that time in which you might have wanted to be more aggressive in terms of investing into it, but your finances were not really in a state in which you really could afford to be as aggressive as you would like to be, so there can surely be some tensions in regards to getting some of your finances in order.
Another area that people might have messed up finances is in regards to outstanding debt that they might already have at the time that they start to invest into bitcoin, so there could be some tensions in regards to either paying down some aspects of the debt or at least getting the debt into better order, and sometimes it may be o.k. to let some debt ride as long as the terms of the financing is not overly burdensome, so having a 6% annual or lower interest rate is not as burdensome as having an interest rate that might be 12% or higher, so there could be instances in which debt might need to get sorted out, including if some loans might be coming due there could be questions of paying them off or rolling them over in the event that the rolling over terms might be reasonably acceptable.
[edited out]
I will say that I agree with most of what you said Sim_card (maybe even everything), but your quotes are messed up... especially the second part of your quote that you are quoting Samlucky O, but it looks like you are quoting Perfectbaby.. .. it took me a bit of time to figure it the quote source and who said what.
[edited out]
The one thing that always gets me in the variance of opinion, is general the BFTD person goes back in time a picks out a historical period that suits/backsup their assertation that BFTD is better. Then assert what they would have done to get all the different dips. But in a future price pattern is hard to guess, and really know are you getting it at the correct dip price. When we hit the ATL this cycle, I remember alot of people were waiting for <12k when we are about 15-16k mark, and probably missed the boat. The dca'r would have got some really close to it for a bit. When the market started rising I would be fairly certain the dip buyers probably got in at a higher price some where in the >20k. I think this scenario plays out quite a bit more than people are willing to admit during all cycles, and price volatility in bitcoin.
I agree with you. There tend to be a lot of people who are busy strategizing their dips rather than consistently buying, and they likely end up doing way worse off because they are spending too much time trying to strategize, rather than just acting in a way that involves continuous and ongoing BTC buying.
It is a whole attitude thing too, and it can be quite difficult to prove and/or to show, especially in the short term, but there could end up being some guys who end up getting lucky with their wait to buy the dip who are able to buy near the bottom, but they are likely way less prevalent than they are claiming to be.. and their poo-pooing of DCA.. .. which ultimately there has been quite a bit of bitcoin history in which the somewhat aggressive, ongoing and persistent DCA buyer of BTC has likely ended up accumulating more BTC than the waiter/strategizer, even if his cost per BTC might have had ended up being higher... and even part of the deal is not even if there might be some guys who might have had done better by waiting and buying the dip, there are a enough situations in which it is way better to be buying BTC at higher prices in order to prepare for the possibility of more UP, even if that strategy practice ends up costing more per BTC.
For the experiment the future market is a complete unknown, for both the dca'r and the dip buyer. It creates a level playing field and simulates reality, I think the experiment would help show some of WCS(woulda,coulda,shoulda) side of dip buying that you dont really have privy too.
Even though I mentioned that I think that the same information can be see though backtesting (which yeah, I understand your point about the selectivity of woulda, coulda, shoulda.. so yeah I agree that those guys are a bunch of twats), yet as I already mentioned, I would rather see such an experiment over a whole cycle or longer rather than merely a year, but whatever (I know it is difficult to have that much staying power, whether it is with a thread or even keeping up the employment of an investment strategy for a whole cycle or longer).
Alternatively, you could have someone who buys and sells weekly too, and sure some traders lose their money fairly quickly, but frequently it could take a whole cycle or two to play out.
And yeah, if you are emphasizing buying strategies ONLY, then surely even the variance in buying strategies could also take more than a whole cycle to start out.
I do like the idea of $100 per week, and I like the idea of having a lump sum in the beginning, so there could be someone who starts out in bitcoin and largely knows that he has $100 per week coming in for the next year, so that would add up to $5,200, but maybe he even starts out with another lump sum amount that is $4,800 - so then the total amount over the year is $10k, he has $4,800 available right away, and he has another $100 coming in every week for the next 52 weeks, and still I have some troubles understanding what is being proven by the whole project, since we can go back and back test historical performance on DCA and many times we can see that it may well take many years before the DCA method really shows its power, perhaps a cycle and a half or more.. .yet on shorter timelines, the results may well be a bit more ambiguous, especially the first few years.
buying strategies only, no selling or trading just pure accumulation.
Fair enough. That isolates the issue to buying and not fucking around with trading or the complications of it.. which surely in a thread like this, we are largely attempting to emphasize various buying strategies, so whether you talk about it in this thread or create another thread, focusing on various buying (accumulation) strategies surely would be a reasonably related focus that should be important to any bitcoiner in their first cycle and maybe even longer than a whole cycle.
I think the term is something could look at changing, I just put something down to start the conversation. Also the $ amount is completely arbitrary, you can slice and dice it anyway ya want. DIP buyer could load up everything into one buy right now if they truly believe the current price is the maximum dip in the next 12 months.
I think that it is a bit unrealistic to suggest ONLY a budget from the start without having a cashflow, and the fact of the matter is that an overwhelming number of normies do not even have a lump sum from the beginning that they are able to invest into bitcoin or into anything else, which is part of the acknowledgement going on in this thread when we end up spending so much time describing DCA as amongst the best of strategies for an overwhelming number of normies because they do not tend to either have lump sums and they might not even have reasonable amounts of discretionary income that they are able to set aside and wait for the dip, even though surely I believe that this thread was inspired by the idea of allowing your cash to build up in order to buy dips and with less appreciation of DCA buying (which seems to somewhat be Wind_FURY's inclined way of thinking), yet I think that over the years, Wind_FURY has become quite a bit more receptive to the DCA strategy, even though he seems to also consider some value in holding funds and trying to buy the dip in order to attempt to get a better deal (which truly I have my doubts in that approach and his ongoing sympathy to a belief that there is more value in that approach for poorer people).
Another thing there can be various ways to deal with the initial lump sum including buying right way, add it into the DCA or set some or all of it aside for buying on dips, and even if one method performs better than another, there might not be any real way to argue that it was better merely because it performed better, since in the end, the best system is one in which the guy has comfortably tailored his ways of accumulating bitcoin, and surely some of the buys on dips may or may not end up filling. but that does not necessarily mean the guy did anything right or wrong based on performance in something like a 1 year timeline.
By the way, there have been so many forum threads in which a forum member says that he is going to buy bitcoin regularly and track his portfolio as he builds such BTC portfolio, and many of those kinds of threads don't even last half a year, even though surely they can be very popular kinds of threads, and they probably would be even better if they were pursued and followed through for something like a whole cycle or even longer.
Absolutely agree, there is so many different ways to approach your accumulation strategy. Lump sum, dip buying, dca etc they all ultimately help you get to your accumulation target. Its not so much about which one performs better, I'm just interested in a future unknown how well will dip WCS buys at.
I doubt that you are going to resolve any issues with such a proposed thread, but I am not opposed to the idea.. especially if there were to be a kind of lump sum budget and then a monthly discretionary income and perhaps bonuses twice a year.. .. and yeah, the overall budget might add up to $12k per year or maybe even $6k per year in the various categories... and so there surely could be ways to do it to make it interesting, and I am not sure how many participants you would want to have or if you believe anyone other than yourself is going to be able to stick with it.. yet like I said I doubt that you get much of any kind of meaning out of a mere year's performance.. .. and I have given so many back tested hypotheticals in which I attempt to be fair about these matters, and it seems that the real differentiations start to appear on longer time lines, especially once we start to get past a whole cycle.. and personally, I believe that differentiation is going to continue to really show itself in 4-8 year timelines rather than even in the first 4 years.
Like i said above its too easy to go back into historical data and say oh yeah i definitely would have done that when in reality they probably didn't.
Yeah, but I have already been in those kinds of arguments many times, when guys are attempting to proclaim certain times in which they would have had bought, and even very reputable forum members will make those kinds of arguments, but when push comes to shove, they won't really commit to those kinds of arguments in terms of trying to show replicability.. so I still consider it to be a fairly fruitless endeavor, even though I don't have any objection of you attempting such a thread, given the caveats that I already outlines.. but in the end, you can do what you want in terms of setting the various parameters, including if you are going to end up wasting your time on a period of time that is less than a whole cycle.
Yeah people could back out of the thread and stop doing it. Is there some other way could do it to make it easier to do, I'm all ears if you have any suggestions?
You could suggest that you are doing a thread and that it is going to have a certain start date that is maybe 1-2 months into the future, but in the meantime, you get a few members to potentially enter into the competition, so maybe limit it to 10 members, and you might even want to get a member to help you with the creation of a comparison table... I am not sure if a deposit, like a bet might be helpful.. Something like 0.001 BTC that would be held in escrow for the winner after a certain period of time... it could even be a self-moderated thread.. and maybe there could be some extra amount that is donated or thrown into the pot... If you design it well, then there may be some folks willing to sponsor it.. .. and if you have a sponsor or a pot like that, then maybe you would not need to receive any entrance fees from any of the members, yet a small entrance fee might not be a bad idea to help to show "seriousness". .even though my preference of something like 4 years might be a long time for something like this to run..