Bitcoin prices surpassing the $60,000 milestone undoubtedly woke up a massive wave of joy across the crypto community. However, such an accomplishment didnâ€™t bring happiness to a married couple, who split up after a dispute on whether to sell bitcoins at that price level or not.
Wife Left the House to Stay With Her Sisters
According to a post on Reddit, a user named â€œParking_Meaterâ€ gave his particular testimony on how the bitcoin (BTC) bull-run ended up hurting his marriage. His wife left the house as he didnâ€™t agree to sell the BTC when prices posted the new all-time high at that time.
In fact, Parking_Meater was caught by his wife adding more money to his bitcoin position. He detailed how the marital situation worsened in a matter of minutes:
So far, the Redditor hasnâ€™t disclosed the total amount of cryptos traded during the infamous â€œbuy the dipâ€ transaction that provoked his wifeâ€™s anger.
Story Attracted More Jokes Than Words of Support
When BTC crossed the $60K threshold on March 13, the quote managed to exchange hands circa $61,318. Afterward, bitcoin plummeted over 15% since then. As usual, in most Reddit threads, Parking_Meaterâ€™s particular story wasnâ€™t exempt from comments joking about the situation.
One user suggested he should â€œsave a few sats for the divorce lawyer.â€ Another one even told him that â€œbitcoin mooning can be a wife changing event.â€
Although Parking_Meater ended up his brief testimony by asking help to the community in finding â€œa good place to pick up girlsâ€ in his Lambo, it seems like nobody read that sentence, as one user suggested.
What are your thoughts on this particular story? Let us know in the comments section below.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.