In a widely-shared comment on Reddit, u/MisterYouAreSoDumb's predicted:
Mid 2024 we will go through the ups again [for bitcoin and ethereum]
This resolves based on whether that prediction appears to have come true.
Here is the graph of Bitcoin, truncated to show only the period of time that we all agree counts as "mid 2024". A generally flat trend is not "the ups".
And here is the same graph for Etherium. A little more arguable due to the jump in the middle, but it's a relatively minor jump, and it was higher a few days earlier in March anyway. Not exactly something I'd be excited about as a holder of the currency.
Prediction was clearly not born out for bitcoin, and arguable but learning towards not born out for ethereum, so overall this seems like a NO.
The strongest argument I think is that, while there were no significant increases in mid 2024, there were such increases shortly beforehand, meaning that "2024 will be a good year for crypto" would have been an accurate prediction. But that's not the prediction that was made; the word "mid" actually means something. So it seems to me that if we're not jumping through mental hoops trying to look for creative interpretations under which this could resolve in the way we want it to, the most straightforward interpretation is that this did not occur.
@IsaacKing I would say the vibes were clearly correct but yeah, it's hard to defend the letter of the prediction.
@IsaacKing Nothing creative about it, you simply misrepresented the prediction as "it will go up in mid-2024" when it's clearly "it'll be way up by mid-2024 from here [late 2022]."
Your argument implies you would resolve YES had it tanked from 15k to 5k but in mid-2024 recovered from 5k to 6k, clearly a disastrous prediction. Never seen a worse call here.
@MichaelWheatley Did you actually read the letter in context, I mean the actual post? What's hard to defend is this misrepresentation. Clearly, had it gone up from 5k to 6k mid-2024 would have proven a terrible prediction, yet a YES here. How do you defend that interpretation?
@IsaacKing Thanks for unblocking. Reposting this from discord to keep other traders in the loop:
deagol — Yesterday at 10:45 PM
@Isaac King you asked for feedback/counterargument from the YES side on this market. I am the largest YES holder but you have me blocked, so I can't comment. The argument is simple: "the ups" happened throughout the whole year from 40k(Jan) to 108k(Dec). Saying it didn't happen mid-2024 seems crazy.
And biggest rally was from Aug(49k) to Dec(108k)
Isaac King — Today at 7:58 AM
Don't remember why I blocked you; unblocked. Not sure what you're talking about; there are two clear jumps in price, one in Fabruary/March and one in November. It decreased through the rest of the year. You can't just take a snapshot of the beginning of the year and the end of the year, note that it's higher at the end, and say that means it increased in the middle. By that logic I could say that Bitcoin was higher in 2021 than it was in 2017, therefore it increased in 2019. There's a better argument for Etherium since there's also a jump in May, but it's just reclaiming the price it reached in March.
deagol — Today at 8:53 AM
Yes there's two rallies but you're focusing on the middle-end of the moves, or perhaps on whether an ATH was achieved, while I'm looking at when it started going up, which was in Aug for the bigger rally. I guess the issue is how narrow you interpret "the ups" in the claim, granted it's not specified further but I broadly interpret it as "generally going up in the context of a +2y earlier prediction at the very worst of the 2022 collapse" and I conclude mid-2024 is broadly "the ups" compared to when the prediction was made, Nov 2022 indeed precisely calling the bottom. The correctness of that claim (whether prescience or lucky guess doesn't matter) is uncanny and saying it was wrong (resolving NO) due to a narrow sense of what mid-2024 means and what constitutes "the ups" (say reaching an ATH) seems to me extremely pety. The 2017-2021 example you give is quite diffferent as that was an immediate 70% collapse in <2mo then a >2y protracted grind/consolidation and only in mid-2020 started rallying. Far from the short-lived and relatively shallow 2024 correction you see as justifying why the original prediction fails.
deagol — Today at 9:13 AM
@MichaelWheatley bought it late Feb, never sold even after I sent it to 92%. What you say, was the prediction wrong?
@IsaacKing I'm also hoping to hear from the NO holders if they too see it as you do, but looking at the trades log I couldn't find a single NO share bought in almost 2y (excluding bots), including all of "mid-2024" when the price here was 67% but BTC was "not going through the ups" as you claim, nor at the end of 2024 when the price was a most attractive 92%. Their trading silence speaks much louder to me.
@deagol If someone says "bitcoin will go up in 2030", and what actually happens is that it goes up 3 months from now and then remains at that level through 2030, do you believe this person's prediction was correct?
@IsaacKing Obviously depends on what happens in and around 2030, not 2025. Not sure why you keep providing extreme, straw man examples of obvious NO cases, when this is nothing close to that.
The argument is not that it went up in Jan-Feb or Nov-Dec so it's a YES. But it is a fact that it went generally up throughout the year (always positive medium term trend in mid-2024), and in particular it went up in May, July, and early August, albeit with a flattish or slightly negative short-term trend (which in any case is not relevant for a 2y prediction) and that short-term trend again turned positive in September.
Another interpretation of the prediction, perhaps more generous but still perfectly logical and in line with the gist of the whole post, could be that the price would be way higher in mid-2024 than the collapsing level in late 2022 (~$15k) and likely approaching or surpassing the ATH at the time (~$69k). This is possibly implied by the somewhat vague "through the ups". But I know that's way more arguable. My main argument is the previous.
Still, to me the essence of the whole post and prediction is, don't worry about this collapse, better times will come and in a couple years you'll make tons of money if you avoid shitcoins just stick to BTC (maybe ETH) buy these dips and remain patient. Even though all of 2023 was quite positive, the bulk of those gains would have been realized by mid-2024. It's an exceptionally successful mid-term prediction in cryptoworld which is known for schemers, hacks, and BS-ers, in that it nailed the timing and a sweet 7x return in a couple years. Concluding it was a wrong prediction would completely miss the point, and anyone would see it as myopic and obtuse.
If we want to be inappropriately strict and literal, we can agree that May, July, and August are part of mid-2024, and it is a fact that the price went up during those months, then it was indeed "going through the ups in mid-2024" but obviously that was not the intended meaning. To give an extreme example proving that the meaning is not "will the price rise through mid-2024," had it gone up from $5k to $6k in Apr-Sep 2024, would you agree the prediction made at ~$15k is a complete fail?
So imo what makes it successful is that indeed the price was way higher, recovered the old ATH, and was much less volatile in that exact ~2y timeframe.