It is the "next month", and Cryptonote is alive. There is no real evidence of attack along those lines, but CN will certainly be attacked in the future using various paths. I would join NewLiberty in saying that our real test is how to make maximum good come out of this attack threat, which demonstrated our commitment to defend Monero, proved that the coin is not so easy to attack, and encouraged the owners to join the MEW in much higher numbers than anticipated. This is a good start.
I just caution you on celebrating too soon. You might end up being correct and BCX may be full of shit, or he might have been thwarted already by the checkpointing.
But I am not yet convinced that anyone has a model that can tell us there is no evidence of an attack. Apparently our models are blind and tell us nothing. Distinguish between null set (empty) and an undefined set (no information). Refer to my prior reply to xulescu and NewLiberty.
Perhaps I can be convinced we have a model that is telling us there is no evidence. I am open minded. Let me read any rebuttals that follow.
Edit: in short, don't confuse lucky hubris with repeatable science though I suppose your argument is speculators operate with imperfect information and form probabilities. Although we may not have technical information, you may have other information that is feeding your calculation, e.g. experience at analyzing personalities, motives, etc.
Edit#2: normally I would agree with "status quo" absent a model with clear information. But in this case, BCX has taken down coins in the past. I've read that he did threaten Litecoin and ended up not following through with the attack and instead profited on buying the dip. But did he actually say the attack had begun? Apparently Litcoin had then a much higher network hashrate than XMR does now.