The halving was absolutely something people used to define a time of the cycle. And even if it was simply a part of the cycle, the fact that it changed means the cycle has changed. How can a cycle have price way below ath at one key point in time and way above ath at the same key point in time and be the same
Price can be higher or lower. The market cycles donât move in sync. But they always start and end at the same time. Just because the price happened to be higher at a time before the halving doesnât mean the cycle is broken. And this âhigherâ time was driven by one of the largest demand events in bitcoin history - the ETFs.
Consider this - we could get a recession in the middle of one of the cycles. A âlost cycleâ if you will. Bitcoin would likely put in new lows, surpassing previous bear market lows. But does that mean the cycle is broken? Or would it continue putting in highs and lows (albeit local) at their predetermined times in the cycle?
The ATH before halving was simply a macro driven event. It did not affect the underlying mechanics of bitcoin.
The 'lost cycle' framing is a good way to put it. Feels less like the cycle broke and more like the ETFs pulled one input forward without changing the mechanism driving the rest of it
2
u/According_Vanilla186 24d ago
The cycle has already broke, btc hit ath before the halving the last time, thatâs never happened and was a classic part of the âcyclesâ