Reason to trust
How Our News is Made
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Ad discliamer
Morbi pretium leo et nisl aliquam mollis. Quisque arcu lorem, ultricies quis pellentesque nec, ullamcorper eu odio.
With Bitcoin trading around $85,000, Jeff Park, Partner and CIO at ProCap BTC, used his Nov. 20 conversation with Anthony Pompliano to argue that the drop may be valuable for reasons that have little to do with short-term “dip buying” and everything to do with narrative regime change. His central claim is that the classic halving-anchored rhythm is losing its foundation.
Why The Bitcoin Crash Is Necessary
“The four year cycle is almost definitively over,” Park said, because what it was “based off of historically, which is the halving, is just irrelevant from the additional marginal demand that comes from other channels that have opened up.” In his framing, the market is being pulled into a different cadence: “logically and fundamentally the four-year cycle should no longer exist and a new cycle should emerge that is more in sync with institutional risk capital appetite.”
Park is careful not to treat that as a clean break, because beliefs still move prices. He stressed that a large legacy cohort continues to trade as if the four-year script is real. “There is still a big group of investors that believe it should exist,” he said, describing them as early adopters with “characteristics that almost feel like the occult where they have prophecies.”
The key, in his view, is their supply control: “the biggest Bitcoin holders in wallets that are 10,000 [BTC] and plus in size still control a good chunk of the market […] they are still a third of the Bitcoin market.” That concentration makes the cycle potentially reflexive: “if a third of the Bitcoin holders believe the four-year cycle is true and they act like the four-year cycle is true, well then it doesn’t really matter because they’re the price setters […] these things can be self-fulfilling.”
From there, Park pivots to why weakness into year-end could be constructive. He noted that Bitcoin is now “below year to date […] in 2025,” raising the prospect of a red close. In a deliberately sharp line, he joked that if 2025 ends negative, “that breaks the four-year cycle because now we have a red [yearly candle] and so it’s a three-year cycle.”
The humor masks a strategic preference: “maybe we do need this red [candle] right now so we could have the ability to unleash the super cycle for Bitcoin to come without ever having to talk about the four-year cycle again.”
Park framed a marginally green close as the worst of both worlds. “The last thing I want honestly is […] an up 5% year to 2025 where we close at like $98K or $99K or $100K and that counts as a green year,” he said, because then “the next year everyone’s going to talk about […] this is the down year now,” leaving 2026 under the “harrowing weight over your head that we’re actually going to have another down year.”
Pompliano pressed the obvious counter-scenario: “Is there a world where it could just kind of rip right back […] and go to $140,000 or something?” Park didn’t rule it out. “It’s absolutely possible. Anything can happen,” he replied. But he summarized the trade-off starkly: “we either have to hope for […] that it either goes up a lot to make the year count or we just try to notch in a small loss here for the year so we can just wipe out the four-year cycle altogether.”
For Park, Bitcoin at $85,000 is “good news” only insofar as it increases the odds of breaking a self-reinforcing calendar myth, clearing the way for a market driven less by halving folklore and more by institutional risk cycles.
At press time, BTC traded at $84,469.
