You make some good points, however, are there enough institutional investors to sustain the rally? There are millions of retailer investors. How many institutional investors are there?
I agree, but the lot sizes of institutional investors simply dwarf retail investors at this point (IMO). Michael Saylor makes a comparable point in one of his interviews, but I personally think the amount of institutional money not invested in BTC is so staggeringly huge that garnering even a fraction of a percent would utterly dwarf all retail investment combined. IMO, we'll see the transition continue this cycle, with most retail rotating out of BTC and into ETH and other alt coins that are "cheaper," whereas most institutional investment will pour in BTC. If my intuition is correct, then I think retail FOMO/FUD will exacerbate existing price trends, but retail alone will not start trends nor cause trend reversals. Long and short, I think there number and size of institutional investors is much greater than perhaps you do, but it's an empirical question. We'll see/know soon enough. Thanks for the question/comment!
A lot of people on CT have been saying that there will be no more bitcoin cycles and prices will just continue to move up because of institutional investors. What are your thoughts on that? I personally don't subscribe to that notion. I think the bitcoin cycle will still continue due to the fact that institutional investors are still human beings and still act out of fear and greed.
Anyways, love your articles and twitter posts. You should have 10x the number of twitter subscribers you currently have. Keep up the great work.
Thanks for the compliment. To answer your questions above, I fall somewhere in the middle between you and the CT folks you mention. First, I completely agree that institutions are nothing other than fronts for humans, and humans are humans, so... Having said that, I do think institutional investors are professionals and are generally less price sensitive and more stable in their positions than the average retail investor. As such, I absolutely think we will have cycles beyond this one - at least one more typical one, starting in 2024 - but I also think dips will be less severe this time because of institutional investment. i.e., I think the days of 85% corrections post blowoff-top are in the past. That said, there's no question we'll have a cycle peak at some point followed by a considerable correction before the next halving. IMO, anyway.
I still expect btc to top out at the end of this year (~$300k) and then we have a big correction until the next halving and then prices start moving toward $1 million. Human nature will never change.
I think once btc hits $1 mill then we start stabilizing. In the meantime keep on stacking. I'm terrible w TA and I'm never able to time my buys so I just DCA every pay period.
"Given that BTC has a fixed supply (or more correctly, a very slowly inflating supply), PA is most correctly estimated by how (in)elastic the market is relative to the lot sizes that the current crop of buyers is seeking to acquire." - this is a profound insight
"the generational transfer of coins from OG whales to new whales is nearing its completion" - I am curious what data you have to support this claim?
"virtually all new institutional investors entering the market here forward will be able to buy their desired lot sizes from only one source: the 20% float, which is held mostly by mid- and small-size retail investors (along with the +/- 900 new coins minted daily)" a great reminder when tempted by FUD.
"If the average retail investor during the late-2017 mania could afford to buy only 0.5 BTC when the price was $10K, what would the price of 1 BTC be if the current crop of institutional investors could afford to buy only 0.5 BTC?
ONE-HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS ($100M/BTC * 0.5 BTC = $50M)." - I believe I understand the math, but I am not following why this is relevant. Probably just missing something. Where did you get $100,000,000 (I assume this is the pot of $ the institutional investors would bring in aggregate)? If so, why is it relevant that it would take $100,000,000 to buy one Bitcoin? Surely as they pile in they will but it cheaper than that. Thanks for any clarification on this.
"Not all of you are likely old enough to remember the so-called Great Financial Crisis in detail, but I remember it vividly. So many pundits at the time were calling for rampant inflation due to Fed quantitative easing, including our favorite punching bag, Peter Schiff, and yet it simply never materialized. In retrospect, it seems obvious now the reasons we didn’t experience (hyper)inflation." - for those of us not old enough to remember, and not precious enough to see the obvious reasons - why did we not experience (hyper)inflation?
All in all I thought the article was brilliant - thank you!!
You make some good points, however, are there enough institutional investors to sustain the rally? There are millions of retailer investors. How many institutional investors are there?
I agree, but the lot sizes of institutional investors simply dwarf retail investors at this point (IMO). Michael Saylor makes a comparable point in one of his interviews, but I personally think the amount of institutional money not invested in BTC is so staggeringly huge that garnering even a fraction of a percent would utterly dwarf all retail investment combined. IMO, we'll see the transition continue this cycle, with most retail rotating out of BTC and into ETH and other alt coins that are "cheaper," whereas most institutional investment will pour in BTC. If my intuition is correct, then I think retail FOMO/FUD will exacerbate existing price trends, but retail alone will not start trends nor cause trend reversals. Long and short, I think there number and size of institutional investors is much greater than perhaps you do, but it's an empirical question. We'll see/know soon enough. Thanks for the question/comment!
A lot of people on CT have been saying that there will be no more bitcoin cycles and prices will just continue to move up because of institutional investors. What are your thoughts on that? I personally don't subscribe to that notion. I think the bitcoin cycle will still continue due to the fact that institutional investors are still human beings and still act out of fear and greed.
Anyways, love your articles and twitter posts. You should have 10x the number of twitter subscribers you currently have. Keep up the great work.
Thanks for the compliment. To answer your questions above, I fall somewhere in the middle between you and the CT folks you mention. First, I completely agree that institutions are nothing other than fronts for humans, and humans are humans, so... Having said that, I do think institutional investors are professionals and are generally less price sensitive and more stable in their positions than the average retail investor. As such, I absolutely think we will have cycles beyond this one - at least one more typical one, starting in 2024 - but I also think dips will be less severe this time because of institutional investment. i.e., I think the days of 85% corrections post blowoff-top are in the past. That said, there's no question we'll have a cycle peak at some point followed by a considerable correction before the next halving. IMO, anyway.
I still expect btc to top out at the end of this year (~$300k) and then we have a big correction until the next halving and then prices start moving toward $1 million. Human nature will never change.
Hard for me to put numbers to it, but I agree with your sentiment with respect to the rhythm of the cycles. And absolutely, humans are humans...
I think once btc hits $1 mill then we start stabilizing. In the meantime keep on stacking. I'm terrible w TA and I'm never able to time my buys so I just DCA every pay period.
DCA indeed. Keep on stacking!
Some quotes and thoughts:
"Given that BTC has a fixed supply (or more correctly, a very slowly inflating supply), PA is most correctly estimated by how (in)elastic the market is relative to the lot sizes that the current crop of buyers is seeking to acquire." - this is a profound insight
"the generational transfer of coins from OG whales to new whales is nearing its completion" - I am curious what data you have to support this claim?
"virtually all new institutional investors entering the market here forward will be able to buy their desired lot sizes from only one source: the 20% float, which is held mostly by mid- and small-size retail investors (along with the +/- 900 new coins minted daily)" a great reminder when tempted by FUD.
"If the average retail investor during the late-2017 mania could afford to buy only 0.5 BTC when the price was $10K, what would the price of 1 BTC be if the current crop of institutional investors could afford to buy only 0.5 BTC?
ONE-HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS ($100M/BTC * 0.5 BTC = $50M)." - I believe I understand the math, but I am not following why this is relevant. Probably just missing something. Where did you get $100,000,000 (I assume this is the pot of $ the institutional investors would bring in aggregate)? If so, why is it relevant that it would take $100,000,000 to buy one Bitcoin? Surely as they pile in they will but it cheaper than that. Thanks for any clarification on this.
"Not all of you are likely old enough to remember the so-called Great Financial Crisis in detail, but I remember it vividly. So many pundits at the time were calling for rampant inflation due to Fed quantitative easing, including our favorite punching bag, Peter Schiff, and yet it simply never materialized. In retrospect, it seems obvious now the reasons we didn’t experience (hyper)inflation." - for those of us not old enough to remember, and not precious enough to see the obvious reasons - why did we not experience (hyper)inflation?
All in all I thought the article was brilliant - thank you!!