In my July 2025 article I wrote what the bears and bulls predict Bitcoin prices will be in the future. I also gave my assessment and subsequent price action aligned more closely with my moderate thesis than either extreme. That raises an uncomfortable question: was this analysis heard at the time or did it meet the fate of Cassandra?
In Greek mythology, Cassandra was granted the gift of prophecy by Apollo. She could see the future with perfect clarity, but when she rejected the god, he cursed her so that no one would ever believe her warnings. Cassandra foresaw the fall of Troy, warned of the deception of the Trojan Horse, and predicted disaster after disaster yet her words were dismissed as hysteria or pessimism. She was not wrong; she was simply ignored.
The Myth of the Extreme Thesis
In July 2025, when a Bitcoin price crossed the ₹1 crore mark, the debate around its future hardened into two extremes. On one side were critics who had long argued that Bitcoin had no intrinsic value and would eventually go to zero. On the other were vocal proponents predicting that Bitcoin was on the verge of reaching a million dollars (appx ₹9 crore) within a short span of time.
In that article, I laid out what both camps believed and why. What followed over the months after ₹1 crore is instructive not because Bitcoin rose or fell, but because neither extreme thesis played out. Bitcoin did not collapse to zero, nor did it sprint to a million dollars. Instead, it behaved exactly as a young, volatile, global monetary asset tends to behave: sharp rallies, painful drawdowns, and a constant tug-of-war between belief and skepticism.
The bears like Peter Schiff (gold bug), Nouriel Roubini (subprime crisis prediction) and Michael Burry (big short fame) keep repeating how bitcoin will go to zero or will collapse in some fashion. The bears have consistently argued that Bitcoin’s lack of cash flows, sovereign backing, or traditional valuation anchors makes it fundamentally worthless. Their warnings have been intellectually consistent, even if relentlessly pessimistic.
The bulls like Mike Novogratz (Hedge Fund), Tim Draper (VC) and Michael Saylor (Strategy) kept predicting how bitcoin will reach a price of a million dollars by 2025.
Both turned out to be wrong in the short term. And I guess they will be wrong in the long term too.
Wealth Creation vs. Trading Cycles
My own thesis on Bitcoin has never been about price targets or trading cycles alone. It is rooted in a broader belief about how wealth is actually created and what is money. I always had an investment thesis and a trading thesis based on if I would have invested or traded. Both require different strategies.
Consider how enduring wealth was created through companies like Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Nvidia, Reliance, or Bajaj Auto. The defining factor was not predicting quarterly prices, but the conviction to hold through volatility for 20 years or more.
The same applies to individuals such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Elon Musk, or Jensen Huang. Their wealth was not the result of trading brilliance, but of sustained belief and ownership over long time horizons. Of course, long-term investing carries real risk. Companies can fail. Technologies can become obsolete. Assets can go to zero. Survival is never guaranteed. But without the willingness to endure uncertainty over long stretches of time, meaningful wealth creation is almost impossible.
If my objective were to build wealth using Bitcoin over a sustained long term horizon, my approach would be straightforward: I would accumulate Bitcoin consistently; month after month over a period of twenty years. Long term investment benefits not only from compounding but also from tax efficiency. Each trade incurs capital gains taxes that gradually erode returns, whereas wealth held and not realized avoids this continual leakage. Time, patience, and disciplined accumulation matter far more than frequent activity.
The strategy would be fundamentally different if the objective were trading rather than long term ownership, or if the capital involved belonged to others and carried fiduciary responsibility as discussed in my earlier article. In that case, I would pay close attention to Bitcoin’s well documented four year cycle, which, while never identical, has shown a remarkable tendency to repeat or at least rhyme. The historical price patterns associated with these cycles were outlined in detail in that piece. Based on those signals, an exit toward the later stages of the cycle and re-entry after a prolonged correction would have been a rational trading approach.
At present, Bitcoin trades at approximately $68,000, nearly 50 per cent below its most recent cycle peak of around $126,000. Similar drawdowns have occurred in previous cycles, where euphoric peaks were followed by extended and painful corrections. Past performance, of course, offers no guarantees about the future. Yet history is the only empirical guide markets provide, and all forecasts, whether bullish or bearish are ultimately rooted in historical observation. Each cycle is declared “different” in real time, but in retrospect, familiar patterns tend to reemerge.
10-Year Bitcoin Chart
As I wrote earlier, I cannot predict precisely how the next phase will unfold. What I do have is a strong conviction, formed through repeated observation that these rhythms continue to assert themselves.
Trading, unlike long term investment, is both a science and an art. Data, mathematics, and charts provide structure, but intuition plays an equally important role. Markets communicate through price, sentiment, and behavior, and the ability to interpret these signals cannot be fully taught. Elite athletes routinely make plays that cannot be reduced to coaching manuals. In much the same way, exceptional traders sense market undercurrents before they become consensus. The information is rarely hidden; it is usually visible to all. The difference lies in whether one is willing and able to recognize it amid the noise.
The more practical question, once this understanding is in place, is how to act on it. Should one short Bitcoin directly? Should you buy put options? Trade perpetual futures? Or express a bearish view through instruments such as spot Bitcoin ETFs? Each strategy carries different risks, payoffs, and assumptions.
In the next article, I will examine these approaches in detail, outlining how each works and the tradeoffs involved.
Reasons for Bitcoin Price Declines
It is easy to become the Monday morning quarterback and explain what should have been and sometimes it is hard to explain in the markets why prices declined. At best you can come with some vague guesses and hypothesis.
The Mechanics of the 2025 Correction
The Bitcoin four-year cycle seems to be in full control at the moment. Every time it reaches there due to some reason. In 2018 it was the bust of the ICOs. In 2022 it was the collapse of FTX and Terra Luna implosion.
There was a massive October sell off in the crypto space which was driven by Trump’s announcement of 100% tariffs on China. It caused a market panic and the crypto world has degenerate gamblers and speculators who have over leveraged positions. There was a 19 billion dollar liquidation in 24 hours. The market was highly leveraged, exacerbating a “snowball” effect as prices fell. Following the initial crash, institutional investors in US spot Bitcoin ETFs began reversing their positions, leading to significant capital outflows in the following months.
On the macroeconomic side concerns over inflation, slowing labor markets, and broader geopolitical conflicts contributed to the negative sentiment. The crash triggered the largest liquidation event in crypto history, with 70% of the $19 billion in liquidations occurring within a 40-minute window.
On the equities side, multiple companies followed the Michael Saylor strategy to hold bitcoin or crypto assets in their treasury. They have issued convertible bonds or raised debt to buy these assets and they are under water most likely. They will be under pressure to sell these assets as prices decline which will put pressure on asset prices they are trying to sell. Marathon digital, Strategy and Galaxy shares have all declined and might have had to sell their assets. Robinhood and Coinbase which rely on investors trading all the time will lose revenue once people stop trading.
Michael Burry says Strategy as a company will be in major trouble once Bitcoin goes below $60,000 as they will be forced to sell their holdings to meet debt requirements and that will cause a death spiral. There will be high scrutiny from investors for corporate digital treasury holders. I think the number we have to watch out for is the $30,000 price and once that gets breached.
Lower bitcoin prices compress miner margins. The miners are at a loss at these prices and that will put pressure on them to sell their bitcoin holdings.
This time compared to previous cycles, there is a lot of derivatives action and participants that are in play using the perpetual swaps and options. They use extensive leverage also. Even small price movements can cause a death spiral. Many whales have sold a lot of their position once the 125,000$ barrier was crossed.
China has a launched an expanded crypto crackdown. The new rules make clear that no entity, Chinese or foreign, may issue a stablecoin linked to the renminbi abroad without government approval. That includes overseas branches of domestic firms. The rules also tighten control over tokenization, the fast growing trend of turning ownership of real world assets like equities, real estate or funds into digital tokens. In the US, the clarity act has not been signed which introduces comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets.
The Rise of the ‘Immediate’ Market
Another development worth noting is the behavioral shift within speculative markets.
For years, crypto attracted high risk traders seeking volatility, leverage, and rapid price swings. But a portion of that speculative capital appears to be migrating toward event based prediction markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket. The appeal is structural. Prediction markets offer immediate resolution. A sports game ends tonight. An election result is known within days. A policy decision has a defined timeline.
Unlike crypto assets, which can drift sideways for months, event contracts settle quickly and decisively. The feedback loop is faster. The hormones are released quicker and the mind is satisfied quicker in this attention seeking attention deficit world. They also tap into something crypto cannot: narrative participation. Betting on inflation data or regulatory decisions is abstract. Predicting the outcome of a championship game or a political race is socially engaging.
These markets become shared experiences, discussed with friends, debated at work, and followed in real time. In many ways, prediction contracts behave like short-dated digital options; binary payoffs with asymmetric returns. For traders seeking high engagement, clear timelines, and defined outcomes, they may offer a more compelling alternative than holding volatile tokens through long, uncertain cycles. Whether this shift is permanent remains to be seen, but attention and speculative capital increasingly follows immediacy.
The Future Bets
In the near term, particularly through late 2026, risks remain elevated especially for traders operating with leverage. Extended drawdowns tend to place sustained pressure on highly margined positions, forcing liquidations or defensive hedging. Periods like this test capital discipline more than conviction. If historical patterns offer any guidance, Bitcoin’s four year cycle has often required a full cleansing of excess leverage and speculative exuberance before a new expansion phase begins. Whether history repeats exactly is uncertain, but markets frequently rhyme. Should that rhythm persist, stabilization and eventual renewal would likely follow a period of continued volatility. Weak hands need to be exorcised.
In the meantime, volatility itself becomes the dominant feature. For derivatives traders, wide price swings can create significant opportunity but only for those who understand that options are primarily instruments for trading volatility, not simple directional bets.
Misunderstanding that distinction can be costly. For the seasoned professional volatility traders this period is like the “Bumper Catch” during season for fishermen in the Konkan Coast. It’s printing money all across just like they get fish anywhere and everywhere they throw the nets.
Over the long run, Bitcoin’s survival appears far more probable than its disappearance. Yet expectations of dramatic near term price milestones should be tempered. Markets rarely move on our preferred timelines.
Bitcoin is unlikely to disappear or fall to zero, not because of symbolic price floors. Adam Beck has a 21 million dollar order open for bitcoin at 0.01 dollars. This is because it has achieved something more durable: global distribution, institutional participation, deep liquidity, and regulatory engagement across major economies.
Assets with that level of infrastructure rarely vanish overnight. That said, survival does not guarantee exponential appreciation on a fixed timetable.
Could Bitcoin eventually reach $1 million? It is possible over a sufficiently long horizon if adoption, scarcity dynamics, and macroeconomic conditions align. But expecting such a milestone within the next four years would require assumptions that may prove overly optimistic. Markets tend to reward patience more than prophecy.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the real lesson from the Bitcoin debate at ₹1 crore is not about who made the loudest prediction, but about how difficult it is for measured thinking to compete with certainty in an uncertain world. Whether investors listened then is less important than whether they are willing to listen now.
Financial markets often treat sober, non-extreme analysis in much the same way. Nuanced views struggle for attention when bold predictions, whether of total collapse or instant riches are far more compelling. Caution is boring. Balance is forgettable. Extremes travel faster.
Disclaimer:
Nithin Eapen is a technologist and entrepreneur with a deep passion for finance, cryptocurrencies, prediction markets and technology. You can write to him at neapen@gmail.com
The website managers, its employee(s), and contributors/writers/authors of articles have or may have an outstanding buy or sell position or holding in the securities, options on securities or other related investments of issuers and/or companies discussed therein. The content of the articles and the interpretation of data are solely the personal views of the contributors/ writers/authors. Investors must make their own investment decisions based on their specific objectives, resources and only after consulting such independent advisors as may be necessary.