The next BTC halving is scheduled form ~ May 21, 2020. The block reward (subsidy) will be reduced from 12.5 BTC to 6.25 BTC.

This event has not been taken very seriously among most crypto-enthusiasts (a.k.a. shitcoiners) since that in the past, the USD price has risen to compensate for the offset in miner subsidy. Watch how worried Roger Ver is about the event next year below:

However, this time the circumstances are different as we have not just one, but three (ok, maybe two) competing SHA-256 Proof-of-work chains all claiming to be 'the real Bitcoin'.

The reason for the existence of three versions of Bitcoin are the radical protocol changes which have had some interesting impacts on miner behavior.

The DAA implemented by the Bitcoin ABC development team is likely one of if not the biggest protocol changes made to Bitcoin since it's inception . This algorithm adjusts the difficulty over an average of the blocks mined vs. every 2016 blocks mined.

This change creates a situation where if the fiat price of a SHA-256 chain rises disproportionately against another, miners will switch from mining one chain to another because at that time it is more profitable to do so:

On 6/22 we see some 'Unknown miner' come over to BSV and rapidly mine 15 blocks in only 41 minutes after the price has risen to $240 (near all time high). This situation will continue to occur while the DAA remains implemented and static block subsidies.

Once the difficulty adjusts to adjust higher for the rapid blocks found, the miner leaves and dumps the coin for fiat causing a rinse-and-repeat scenario for when these fiat price spikes occur.

Once one of these chains consistently has a higher now block reward in the form of transactions fees to create an unbalance among the three chains, then we will see events play out differently. If one chain begins to scale and provide greater incentives for miners to switch chains more permanently, then miners will not leave the chain that is most profitable, they will stay.

The above graphic and absurdly high hash rate on BTC is proof of this. BTC/BCH miners mine whatever is most profitable, they do not actually care about the long-term health of their chain. If we see this type of behavior when the BSV price is only 2.2% of the BTC price, what will happen when a sharp increase in fees further increases that proportion?

Well, how will BSV increase their transaction fees?

Credits to Brendan Lee for this very appropriate and amazing quote, way back on February 24th.

While BTC hodler's are taking advantage of their coin's price rising on speculation and market manipulation and consuming , BSV investors are understanding their role in Bitcoin and producing .

Like miner's, BSV investors role is also to make Bitcoin more valuable. Instead of hodling and buying 'moon lambos' they are making Bitcoin more valuable producing content, providing goods and services, and reinvesting their profits back into the ecosystem, increasing the value of theirs and everyone else's holdings.

The intended effects of this will lead to a higher transaction count, thus higher miner fees:

We already see this happening. By making Bitcoin more valuable, more users are entering the ecosystem via transacting and connecting with others.

The last hashwar fought in November 2018 was miners vs. miners. This hash battle upcoming in May 2020 will be BTC miners vs. BCH miners vs. the BSV society .

With potential and ability to broadcast many transactions, the mining incentive model now changes drastically.

We now have a scenario where users of the coin can now have an impact in the next battle. By increasing the amount transactions on the network, we are signaling to other SHA-256 miners that our chain is most valuable.

The miners in the system are fulfilling their role, paving the way for us. 'The Return to Genesis' protocol upgrade, which seeks to restore the original Bitcoin protocol and remove all arbitrary limits was moved up to (coincidentally?) three months before this battle.

Now it is time for the investors to fulfill theirs.

Perhaps it now makes sense to wait to broadcast many transactions until a certain date and time. (credit to a certain friend for this idea)

Perhaps it makes sense for users to work with miners to subsidize a large volume of transactions on a certain date and time.

Perhaps it makes sense to time to withhold the release of certain products and services that will entice users until a certain date and time.