[edited out]
I think I got kind of confused at some point and misunderstood the whole aggressiveness stuff, as related to Bitcoin investment, but your explanation makes a lot more sense now and has provided a more vivid and clearer picture of what you meant. From what I was able to understand and grab from your explanation, aggressiveness in Bitcoin refers to how much of an investor's discretionary income is allocated to Bitcoin accumulation. When we consider an investor to be more aggressive in their approach, it means that they have prioritize Bitcoin investment or accumulation more heavily, but there's actually a very thin line between being overly aggressive in one's approach and overdoing the whole thing, and this can potentially lead to mistakes like investing beyond one's means.
Sure yes. Choosing to invest aggressively is a choice that might relate to personal preferences, and also relate to how strong the investor has organized his cashflow management systems and practices. The stronger his cashflow management and existence of various back up funds, then the more aggressive he can afford to be, yet anyone could be at risk of overdoing their aggressiveness if they either miscalculate or they allow their emotions to get them overly excited, which sure is just another form of making mistakes.
According to your suggestion, you're implying that it's way more better to invest in Bitcoin, even if it's actually whimpily or sluggishly done, than not investing at all, and I find this to be very true and agreeable. You know, there are a lot of investors or should I say those who plan to invest, but they've not been able to make any step towards getting started, maybe because their idea of Bitcoin accumulation is being aggressive, so they can reach their long term goals faster, and since they currently do not have the resources to invest in that pace,
I would think in the majority of cases it is not good to start out investing into bitcoin aggressively unless you already have a lot of investing experience and/or you are a fast learner when it comes to what would be a good approach to quickly getting a decently large position in bitcoin.
Most people are better off to hold back a bit in the very beginning and put some kind of a reasonable bitcoin accumulation plan into practice, so for example, a guy with $100k investment portfolio might want to get his bitcoin allocation to 15%, which would be $15k, so maybe he decides to invest around $1k per week for the next 15 weeks (3.5 months), and then to reassess at that time. There are other ways to exercise some conservativism in the beginning and surely a lot of folks might not be sure about what is their total budget and/or their discretionary income, so a guy who pretty much knows that he could invest $100 per week without having any problems, he might purposefully decide to start out at $30 per week while he is assessing the situation and then when he becomes more comfortable, he might increase his weekly investment amounts... maybe after a few weeks of studying the matter.
they choose not to get started, and this is way worst than investing whimpily, especially given the historical performance of Bitcoin, even with a whimpy investor, it'll only take time and dedication before they'll reach their goal.
Sure getting started is important, even for someone who might later change their mind about bitcoin, but if they at least can put some systems in place such as figuring out their sourcing for their bitcoin buys while they are looking into the bitcoin matter, they may well be better off.
There have been guys who have done quite well with even whimpy allocations to bitcoin, and yeah, sometimes the amount that is invested is so whimpy (or small) that it might not make a material difference. Let's say that the example of the guy with a $100k investment portfolio. He earns around $50k per year, so his investment portfolio is worth about 2x his annual income.
Maybe the guy decides to put $10 per month into bitcoin or even $10 per week into bitcoin, and based on his finances, either of those positions seems way too whimpy in order to make much of a difference, based on his own financial abilities.. yet he is the one to decide how whimpy or aggressive to be.
The key I believe lies within finding a balance based on the circumstances and position of the individual and their financial stability. I see that you also emphasized on the importance of having a discretionary income to invest in Bitcoin, rather than using money meant for other expenses, which would seem more like trading or gambling, and I see a lot of sense in what you've said, because if an investor forfeits his expenses and uses the money to invest in Bitcoin, it might later cause him some financial strain, and maybe even lead to using money from your investment to foot those bills/expenses.
Sometimes it can take a bit of time to put good systems and practices in place, and in the very beginning a guy might not even realize what is the difference between trading and investing, and even if he hears that others believe that bitcoin is a 4-10 year or longer investment, the idea might not sink in with him personally, so he might not actually understand it, even though he still might start out by investing into bitcoin with a shorter than 4 year timeline... but then as he learns more about bitcoin, he may well come to understand and accept that bitcoin investing is 4 years minimum for any of his new investments into it... and not a shorter timeline, so his ideas may well change as he better gets to know bitcoin and some of the ways that bitcoin is a relatively unique asset.
From what I understand, the level of aggressiveness is more of a personal choice, and although there could be some consequences to these choices, judging from the historical view of Bitcoin, it has always been rewarding to invest in Bitcoin, especially when a balanced approach is employed.
Historically guys have been rewarded for their aggressiveness in bitcoin and mostly holding their BTC as long as they did not end up losing their BTC or trying to trade or engage in margin and/or overly leveraging of their coins. History does not guarantee future performance. .even though it can help us to better understand an asset like bitcoin.