It's not going up just because of the halving. That hasn't happened yet. It is going up because of the ETFs that have been approved in the US. If the investment companies want to have an ETF with Bitcoin as the underlying asset then they have to own that underlying asset so all the institutional investors having to purchase has been driving the price up. The halving is/will have an effect but it isn't marketing. The miners need a return on their investment or they won't mine and the halving means that only half the reward for mining each block is given so for them to get a return on their investment they need to sell at a higher price. It is just basic supply and demand because the amount of bitcoin available "for sale" is reduced which pushes the price up.
Yeah, I had heard about the ETF's, but I don't think that's enough of a reason for the price to double or whatever.
Prices move well in advance of any known upcoming events, just like they do in any market, from what I've read the halving is more of a factor along with timing. As it's so volatile people are and should be scared of getting in early before the halving, if the price could fall further before the market takes that into account.
There's also inflation too, everyone in the world or investing should have known we were at/ nearing the peak mid to late last year, and when people get confidence it's going to go down, and when, they start speculating more, it's part of the reason the stock market has been up since then also. Inflation coming down basically means interest rates will follow, at some point, and people become less scared they're not going to be able to pay their mortgage, and speculate more etc.
Just because the minors don't want to mine at that price, doesn't seem like enough of a reason for why the price of existing bitcoin should go up that much mind, the existing number of bitcoin available doesn't go down does it, other than people losing their wallet or access codes of course, which I did, which is a bit of a sore sore subject
Yeah, I know the halving isn't marketing as such, but it does seem to do that job. It gets people who have loads of bitcoin talking about it, word gets around, people start buying it and it pumps the price. The pump and dump aspect of this is what worries me, but not as much as there's nothing underlying the value of it, other than loads of wasted energy. The problem with crypto being so volatile helps those who trade it in large volumes, but also ultimately hurts it's potential use as it's too volatile to use as a currency exchange etc. Then there's no guarantee if crypto does get used, then it would be bitcoin or whatever. One might rocket, or hold it's price and the rest might go to zero. All seems like way too much risk to me, just seems so much like the greater fool theory, until it's actually going to be used and I don't see how that happens anytime soon.
It's not to do with age, it's to do with liquidising the investment. The closer you are to needing to convert into cash for a specific thing (and can't ride out peaks and troughs) then the less volatility you want for predictability. If you aren't planning on liquidating your assets and they are just going to be passed on via your estate then the level of risk is less important.
Yeah, I'm talking more about most people who get old who will be needing to liquidise most of their assets to use for a 10 year retirement or whatever, which might end up actually being 20 years if they live longer than expected. 10 years is not a long time, not if you're planning on burning through it at a steady rate over that 10 years. Obv if you end up needing 20 years of funds, you're not in a good spot to maintain the expected level of previous.
Sure, if you've loads of excess that you won't ever spend, and will be passing on then you can keep the risk level high, like 100% stocks or whatever, and would probably get a better return on this, and it's what I would do. I wouldn't be advising people to be passing on bitcoin mind, not if they actually want to guarantee to help the kids or if the kids aren't already loaded, but it's their money I suppose. It's the young uns who are already having to pay for old peoples wealth, gained from silly property prices, so personally I wouldn't want to risk not being able to help them out with a lot of certainty. Each to their own though.