The main rebuttal is long-term vs. short-term thinking. Let's assume the worst case: Miners dump everything every day, all assertions in Willy report are absolutely true, and merchant-selling pressure is in $millions every day. ... Ok, what does *any* of that change about bitcoin's potential market size, the trajectory of adoption, VC investment, ecosystem development, etc? Does that have any influence on the core proposition that bitcoin is a key advance in the technology of money, that the protocol works and is battle-tested, and that bitcoin has huge potential to increase the efficiency of global transactions, as well as to eat into gold's status as the go-to fiat-inflation hedge?

Now, what are the market sizes of those targets, what would 1BTC need to be worth in order to satisfy a reasonable portion of some set of those markets, and what is the probability that bitcoin will get there? Those are the questions you need to ask and quantitatively answer in order to arrive at a rational decision as to whether you think bitcoin is currently undervalued or overvalued.

tl;dr: At least for me, the bull-case is not about short-term dynamics, it's about the long-run (10yrs+). But I've never been a trader, so interpret as you see fit.