Jokes are perhaps less funny when explained, and sure, I suppose it could be possible that Richy_T was attempting to make some kind of a substantive point about silver and gold and Litecoin and Bitcoin, yet he seemed to have had been somewhat attempting to make a sort of joke to play off of Litecoin's slogan from it's earliest years in which it was claiming to be the silver to bitcoin's gold... so instead Richy_T just reversed the words to show that it still kind of makes sense (as a slogan - not necessarily a serious one, I hope).

Substantively, I would suggest that both gold and silver are inferior to bitcoin by 1,000x or more (at least 1,000x for gold) in terms of monetary attributes, and sure there might be exceptional cases in which gold and silver might be used as money, and surely they have industrial usages, so they are not going to completely lose their value, yet still a large amount (if not all) of their monetary value is going to flow into bitcoin as the soundest of monies, even though it could take 50-200 years for the relative monetary values to work themselves out... so in the meantime continue to enjoy monetary value to flow into bitcoin, since it is the soundest of them in terms of verifiability, transportability, scarcity, various cost efficiencies and other lesser monetary characteristics.


I am not going to claim to be an expert in regards to which model is superior and/or why, yet even Giovanni claims that PlanB's model is a Powerlaw model with a few extra bells and whistles to attempt to account for 4 year cycles, so Giovanni is proclaiming that PlanB just has a lot of irrelevancies. 

I don't see anything wrong with trajectoring forwards and continuing to attempt to account for the 4-year cycles, and if we remove some of the personality matters or the seemingly guarantees of UPpity, I don't see why not to continue to attempt to account for the 4 year cycles and adjust the curve up or down as we go.. and sometimes the BTC price is going to overshoot expectations of the range and sometimes it is going to undershoot expectations of the range..   

Maybe sometime in the future we will not be so bound by bitcoin's supply schedule, yet it still seems to be a real dynamic, and I even thought that you LFC were a bigger proponent of the 4 year cycles than a lot of other folks especially since you have been continuously emphasizing BTC price tops within expected 4 year time cycles.. seemingly more than some other folks... so I don't see why you are so down on PlanB since he is not even that different from Giovanni and PlanB includes the part of bitcoin in his model that you seem to also gravitate towards so much.

None of us are going to get the exact 4-year top correct, whether plan B  or anyone else, but even the last cycles have been continuing to follow a pretty damned close to exact 4-year cycle, in spite of so many folks on either side continuously proclaiming that this time is going to be different because we need to account for x, y, z, and blah blah blah.. but even with ongoing increases in various kinds of adoption and crazy-ass kinds of attacks, it all still seems to balance out and still fall into 4-year cycles, which seems to be just as good to be using Plan B or even who cares  use the powerlaw model and they are not that much different from one another..


I hate to be a party poop, or maybe I do?

Unless you switched to buying, leasing is not the same as buying. 

Also, you frequently talk about your various expenses and even whatever you were doing with your trading during the 2022 corrections, I have difficulties appreciating how you are supposedly getting 20-30x profits on whatever bitcoin you are spending to lease that car.. .and sure yeah, leases do have options to buy at the end of the lease, so some of the stuff that you are saying does not really add up.. even though a lot of guys with your tenure in bitcoin could have had 20x to 30x or even greater profits, but surely not as likely when you were going through so many previous fairly big selling events... 20x to 30x would be required to maintain something like $3k to $4k in average costs per BTC. which I suppose could be possible, but even seems a stretch under normal circumstances that had involved your various trading around stories in the past.

Maybe I should not poo-poo too heavily, since there could be decently justification  to start to live off of your BTC, especiaally for guys with average cost per BTC less than $10k, and there like are a decent number of us who had been able to achieve that, especially if we may well have had accumulated most of our BTC prior to November 2020......so I would speculate that many guys take a bit of time to accumulate BTC and establish a bitcoin position, yet I would think that most guys who had been able to accumulate most of his BTC stash prior to November 2020 (even if he made several mistakes along the way) could have had reasonably achieved average costs per BTC below $10k.   

Even guys who might have had started accumulating BTC in 2020, might not have had been able to keep his costs per BTC below $20k unless he was able to somewhat front load his BTC investment.  Of course, there are some guys who are able to bring down their costs per BTC by trading rather than just ongoing accumulating of BTC and buying on the dip, yet no way am I going to presume anyone to either be a successful trader or to be able to beat any guy who is just engaging in ongoing BTC accumulation.. .... Nothing wrong with trying to buy BTC on the dip, yet I think that a lot of times even the buying on the dip does not tend to outperform the guys who are consistently, persistently and ongoingly buying BTC.  So yeah, I take with a grain of salt any claims of guys proclaiming to have costs per BTC that ended up being lower than the guy who just persistently accumulates BTC through ongoing buying of BTC.