The model of adoption we are using is based on Addresses. It is a proxy but it is a good one. What matters in the end is activity in the network. Many subtle points need to be pointed out. 1) There is much activity that is not recorded directly by the addresses. Social posts on Bitcoin in different media, podcasts, conferences. 2) These activities do contribute to price discovery. The price is in the end determined by these activities. Remember we are discussing long term growth. People are orange pilled at conferences, or because of some video they saw on YouTube all the time. Eventually this orange pilling shows up on the chain. 3) Even existing "users" are influenced by social activity because we gain more conviction by interacting with other Bitcoiners, discuss price action, hear news about Bitcoin and then take action as DCAing for example. Also we orange pill even more pill by being active in the network. 4) New activity of any type (even from existing users if they create new addresses) is recorded in the chain. 5) None of these dynamics can be represented by a simple, school book supply-demand model. We are not discussing toilet paper on the supermarket shelf. An adoption model and Metcalfe like response reproduces the dynamic of Bitcoin adoption and price much better. 6) HODLING is an activity indirectly because a large number of users need to be retained for this model to work.