I dont really think i can cope with this, if an economic crashes and panic selloffs happened then that means the reputation of the investment instrument also at risk. Why would anyone want to invest in an instrument that crashed as soon as it surge, it didn't take a month to crash bitcoin since it highest peak. Also i dont think any wannabe traders sell of their coins when the price is low because their volume didn't even mean anything in the market.
We're talking about huge amount of money that could drive a market into a trend, its not about whether the prices will grow because of people buying or selling but how the price will grow "IF" bitcoin still has a meaning and future in the community.People didn't invest in the price, they invest in a value of something. If something has value much and now the price is undervalue then it would be a good decision to invest but a decrease in price didn't have the same meaning as a price crash.
You may not like it but this is how matters stand nowadays anyway. Besides, i don't think we can actually speak about "reputation" here. Price crashes don't hurt it because there's nothing to hurt. Rather, they reveal Bitcoin's true nature, that of a purely speculative asset. In other words, whatever reputation Bitcoin may have built, metaphorically speaking, it was all false and deceit. One shouldn't expect too much from such an asset apart from extreme volatility and rampant speculation. The leopard can't change its spots. Its true by nature, and thats why i said that i can't agree with this statement that we need price to crash so that people can buy at lower price and hoping bitcoin will rise once again because as we know that bitcoin or any investment assets are at stakes of reputation if they crash. Once that happened there is no turning back, it already happened once last january and i would say that its just a minor crash so basically there are still lots of faith left in bitcoin. However if there would be another case of price fallout, then there is no doubt that bitcoin won't survive long in term of investment instrument. Well, myself, I wouldn't use the word 'reputation'. As you yourself say later in the post, it is more about faith. And then I certainly agree with you. When Bitcoin crashes so hard, people lose their faith. But that's how things often happen with faith in real life. People who blindly believe in something, which is what faith is all about, typically end up being deceived. So you shouldn't actually be surprised with how the events have been unfolding since December. It was sort of set in stone and written on the wall at that. |
|
|
|
For me those both situations only make market better for investors to just catch some coins at good prices for trade or just hodl next months.
In fact, I don't want to say that it is better for investors but that's the thing that speculators may be looking for exactly. These are not the same. Holy moly thats a really negative view you have there. Bitcoin has been established a fair while now and its done its job every day of operation. Where exactly do you see the problem with its operation that it deserves such a poor view. The failure that occurs in price is not part of the protocol itself, this is part of exchange transactions and its mostly down to the people themselves how fast price rises or falls. Truth be told, I don't have a tooth against Bitcoin. It's how people are using it. But I have nothing against that either. I'm just pointing out that you wouldn't expect a lot of stability from a speculative vehicle. Indeed, that has nothing to do with Bitcoin itself or its protocol. Though I don't think that it's going to work out or just change anything, to an appreciable degree. I mean fixing transaction fees and making transactions instant, for example. The problem is a way deeper, and I'm not sure it can be solved. |
|
|
|
Why do I need not to give up my bitcoins? How does that going to benefit in the long run??
No one can tell you that because no one can predict with certainty what will befall Bitcoin and crypto in the future. If the cryptoverse collapses in a major way or even in its entirety, then there is no reason not to sell right now while the prices are still high. But if the price picks up where it left off, then it will pay in the future if you keep your coins now. In other words, if it doesn't hurt you badly in a financial sense, stick to your guns, thats is, bitcoins. |
|
|
|
Crash and panic is not something you want in a normal market. Think of a market as a crowd of people talking and perhaps exchanging ideas and prices obviously. These two elements of extreme price movement and emotion over reason mean these ideas are ignored and little discussion and price discovery takes place.
If nothing else a price that moves too rapidly will not be open fully to the range of buyers and sellers around the globe and as Bitcoin is part of a large market that is always partly sleeping we do need some development time for free exchange and benefit to occur for all.
Orderly market is something you will find the Federal reserve always refers, they dont essentially care about the dollar worth but to lose a market completely even for a day or so is not profitable long term as it disturbs holders and investors who are not trading constantly
But what is a normal market to you? Apart from the dotcom bubble some 20 years ago, there was no market as speculative as that of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies in the modern era, at least not what I remember of. Commodities are backed up by, well, commodities, currencies are supported by their governments, but the only support that crypto enjoys is faith in its future growth and expansion. This is a perfect speculative environment and it is "normal" for the prices to behave chaotically in this kind of environment. In a nutshell, you can't order Bitcoin to be more stable or somewhat less volatile. |
|
|
|
Dude I’m always in support of panic sell offs, they are very important. This is a market that we are into and not play thing. There will always be buying and selling for the market to progress, and some people will have lose for others who are more smart to earn from it. So I never advise people not to sell their Bitcoin, all I say is that everyone should sell whenever they think is right. That’s it, nothing else.
Sometimes it is needed for the price to decline and we get a chance to be able to buy when price is cheap but the prolonged panic sellofs are not a good thing for the market. I'm afraid the panic will spread to many users and make mass panic and chaos happen. hopefully the price crashes only lasted briefly, not happen for a long time. Well, I can't actually say there can be prolonged or extended panic sell-offs because panic, as the word itself suggests, is an action or behavior which happens on the spur of the moment, without planning in advance. Otherwise, how can it be panic, right? Other that that, I generally agree that long price declines is not something which traders should be happy about, unless we are talking about aggressive shorters, of course. But then, they could be blamed, at least partially, for forcing down the market price of Bitcoin or whatever asset traded. Over time, panic sell-off become exhausted on their own since people get somewhat used to low prices and downward volatility. |
|
|
|
I think you do have something there, I can see the point and it feels somewhat true because we
see and experience Bitcoin's eccentric rise and sudden rapid fall more occasionally now. As long
as bitcoin stays decentralized it will create and trigger more panic selloffs and at some point crashes
especially with altcoins whom in recent times developed an uncanny link with bitcoins fluctuating patterns.
The crashes and panic selling of investors does have a bit of constituency with bitcoins increasing prices,
it's price' recovers more better as an aftermath to the whole ordeal. Seems like a cycle to me.
I'd sooner say that Bitcoin's speculative nature contributes to its volatility rather than its decentralization or lack thereof. If we had goods bought and sold for Bitcoin in appreciable amounts, that would definitely help stabilize prices and diminish volatility. On the other hand, though, I'm more inclined to think that proper decentralization actually adds more toward price stability than volatility because at uniform distribution (an ideal situation, or best case scenario), there would be no points of shameless price manipulation via financial muscle. |
|
|
|
I dont really think i can cope with this, if an economic crashes and panic selloffs happened then that means the reputation of the investment instrument also at risk. Why would anyone want to invest in an instrument that crashed as soon as it surge, it didn't take a month to crash bitcoin since it highest peak. Also i dont think any wannabe traders sell of their coins when the price is low because their volume didn't even mean anything in the market.
We're talking about huge amount of money that could drive a market into a trend, its not about whether the prices will grow because of people buying or selling but how the price will grow "IF" bitcoin still has a meaning and future in the community.People didn't invest in the price, they invest in a value of something. If something has value much and now the price is undervalue then it would be a good decision to invest but a decrease in price didn't have the same meaning as a price crash.
You may not like it but this is how matters stand nowadays anyway. Besides, i don't think we can actually speak about "reputation" here. Price crashes don't hurt it because there's nothing to hurt. Rather, they reveal Bitcoin's true nature, that of a purely speculative asset. In other words, whatever reputation Bitcoin may have built, metaphorically speaking, it was all false and deceit. One shouldn't expect too much from such an asset apart from extreme volatility and rampant speculation. The leopard can't change its spots. |
|
|
|
In order for BTC being the ideal medium of transaction, it is pretty bad that we have these crashes and panic sell offs. As for the sake of trading we need this because this is where most of the traders got their earnings, at the crash and dumps.
We are still at the early stage of crypto, that's why some panic sells specially for the whales are critical in order for the supply to be distributed to millions of people. If they will not sell, then there will always be a threat in the market in every moment because a single entity can make a dump and can ruin a stable price if he has a lot of coins.
To be honest, that's what I'm thinking myself, though the outcome largely depends on the causes of these massive panic sell-offs. If they are caused by a big whale and we discard collateral damage in the form of panic sellers at that, the net effect can in fact be a more even distribution of coins after all. The negative side effect may be that, though, more coins may actually be bought by fewer hands, so we can't say it conclusively whether panic sell-offs really contribute to a "productive" redistribution of coins in a major way. |
|
|
|
And most people will not know that since they have no strategy and all they do is gamble anyway. I would consider it a gamble for someone who really just sees it as gambling. Buy low, sell high, no strategy and they just feel they can always just keep doing that and depending on luck, wishing the market will work in their favor.
Those who see it as a real business obviously know how to play smartly by learning, and then using the opportunities to make a lot of profit. And from the look of things, you can never have that in the real gambling world.
In fact, trading should be considered far more than the normal sense people have when it comes to gambling. You have great opportunities to make it more in the profit side if you know what you are doing than gambling that you will only have to rely totally on pure luck. Yes, with the meaning of gambling which makes life itself a gamble generally, but you can always make it a calculated one and a smart one.
I don't have much to add because you have basically said it all. The only thing which may be worth saying is that just like you hope for good luck in gambling, you hope not to meet bad luck in trading. You can make a calculated and smart move but still fail simply because of someone trading against you who is smarter or just luckier than yourself. In a metaphysical sense, the more knowledgeable and experienced you become, the less you care for good luck propping you up and more about bad luck not meddling with your trading ways. |
|
|
|
I've been one of those people, the people that buy at the high points of crypto and then sell low, losing my money and then later on losing out on a good amount of profits which I could've made. I'd like to know some of the reasons that people do this, besides doing it to cut their losses as that one is my reason.
Thanks guys!
I don't know what your reasons are, but I think I can explain why most newbie traders end up buying high and selling low. There is an old trading wisdom which says that you should cut your losses short but let your profits run. However, many inexperienced traders busy themselves with pursuing small profits here and there while completely ignoring the second part of this wisdom. Then a major price drop arrives but instead of cutting their losses short according to the wisdom, they keep their losing positions until they have to sell at a big loss. So in the end it turns out like they buy high and sell low. |
|
|
|
Bingo on the part where you mentioned about wannabe traders. You do realize that like 75-95% of traders are like that. Prices going down is healthy but if traders lose money, then more money goes to the whole which then defies the whole point of decentralization concept as in markets not being controlled by anyone.
It works both ways actually. On the one hand, there is an accumulation of cheap coins in fewer hands when many small traders are panic selling, and this is apparently a bad thing. But on the other hand, if the price crash is caused by some big whale cashing out, which seems to be the case with Mt. Gox coins, it also leads to a more even distribution of coins and more hands having bitcoins, which is definitely a good thing. How many hands will have coins in the end, when the dust settles, remains to be seen, though. |
|
|
|
Regulation follows centralization which antagonizes the nature and ethics of Bitcoin operation. For Bitcoin to be regulated, it must have to be controlled which is impracticable. Peradventure, regulation protects any form of transaction, association, economy, commodities, services and so on. What I think can happen is Support and not regulation. By its support from Government, policies and various sanctions can be set in place to cub, checkmate and reprimand the scammers, Hijackers and the rest of them.
That's not true at all. It can be regulated without being controlled. The SEC regulates all companies that sell their securities to the public, but the SEC doesn't control any of them. That's just one example of how regulation doesn't necessitate control. As it relates to Bitcoin, there is already regulation. New York has the Bitlicense for any company dealing in crypto in the state of New York, and it doesn't require any control over Bitcoin or blockchain at all. The fact that it was happening already and you seemingly didn't know about it shows how regulation and control of Bitcoin aren't related at all. I think there is a subtle difference between regulation and control. I agree with you that the SEC doesn't control the companies which issue securities and sell them to the public. But the SEC controls the market where these securities are being sold. In this manner, regulation comes about as a desirable and intended side effect of control over something else. On a more practical note though, if this commission changed their attitude toward stricter regulations, that would make lives of these companies heavier, up to a point where they would be cut off from the money of the crowd. Thus, while regulation doesn't mean control, it still weighs a lot in a practical sense. |
|
|
|
Stocks has been around before cryptocurrencies, so I don’t think cryptocurrencies will be able to compete with them. Another thing for sure is that stocks attracts more investors than Bitcoin and I believe that lots of profits comes from it. Even in trading, people trade a lot of stocks thancryptos. I’m a fan ofcryptos,cause it favors me a lot than stocks.
I don't see a connection here. Would you care to elaborate on that one? Why won't cryptocurrencies be able to compete with stocks and what do you mean by competition here more specifically? If cryptocurrencies are better in risk/reward department, many traders will eventually turn their eye and money to crypto. Moreover, isn't that what's already happening today? Indeed, cryptocurrencies are not as rock solid and reliable as, for example, blue chips. But the latter are not the only kids on the block anyway. There are many other stocks in the stock market and with these crypto can successfully compete for investors money. Well what they are just trying to ask is what is more profitable, of course it does connection because a lot of people who were interested and focus in stock market in the past years has now swift their investment to cryptocurrency which gave them more profit than they are earning in the stock market. Yeah, that's the point I was trying to deliver. Indeed, crypto is of no particular use to such monumental investors as Buffett or high-profile speculators like Soros, but to small traders like most of us crypto became a viable alternative in the last couple of years, a Holy Grail in terms of profits. Truth be told, we should be grateful that these folks stayed away from crypto because otherwise it wouldn't have been easy money for us. When crypto turns into something like a currency market and big guns finally get into Bitcoin, it will be a way more difficult to look for profits here. |
|
|
|
Canis, your thinking is valid and you got a point. You are thinking out of the box, I like that.
However, I think you got it just a little bit wrong. Yes, if speculators want big profits it is indeed beneficial to them for the market to correct (this should be the right term, not "a crash", a crash means that the market went past the possibilities of a quick recovery and it never happened with Bitcoin, at least not so far). It is also normal to see the market rise in steps, the market just rising up is an ideal that cannot be reached in the real world (although Bitcoin's run from the end of the last year was crazy. Well, opinions may vary but as far as my opinion is concerned, I think that a price fall as low as 30% of December highs pretty much counts as a crash. And we are still half the maximum price of $20k. We haven't seen a fall that massive since the Gox fiasco, so it is not something which can be called "normal" whatever yardstick you use. Anyway, right now it is definitely not about "market rising in steps". What Bitcoin needs is for the weaker hands (Poker expression is deliberate) to leave the market thus leaving only the strong holders - albeit corrections this actually stabilizes the market. You can consider the market mature only when it stabilizes and that would mean that generally only strong holders are left and the 1-5% percent of weak holders and daily speculators cannot hurt/destabilize the market. The current situation when you have the market reacting to almost every news out there shows us that Bitcoin is far from maturity and that is the ideal situation for experienced investors to take opportunities and take all the money from the fish (Poker expression is deliberate yet again). This is the interesting part of your post. Your main omission is that weaker and stronger hands are a relative notion. I remember I have already mentioned it somewhere and maybe even in this very thread. In a nutshell, there will always be strong and weak hands, there cannot be only strong hands in the market. It's kind of a given. While weak hands leave, less stronger hands remain, but it takes even higher volatility to shake them out. In other words, it works in the opposite direction toward more volatility. Obviously, this is applicable only to speculative markets, but Bitcoin undoubtedly belongs to this category. |
|
|
|
If trading is a gambling then i will put my bet in trading not in gambling simply because i never know anyone that they become rich because of gambling instead their lives become ruin almost losing everything including their families but i know a lot of people who become rich because they joined trading investments in which they are now living in harmonies with their families.
I don't disagree with your view but this is not what I'm trying to say here. You can't defeat a casino but for luck and timing. I mean the longer you gamble the higher are your odds of a complete failure in the end, so your only chance is luck and running away immediately. But this is not to say that, first, there are no winners in gambling, and, second, there are no losers in trading. As a matter of fact, both in trading and gambling alike most players are losing in the long haul unless they chance to win and call it a day. And never look back. |
|
|
|
After spending many years as a financial advisor, I find the ravings of many "experts" today as banal. There are those that speak of coins as a "Ponzi" scheme and denounce the validity of the new form of economy. There are also some that want this world to go back to the 50s, and with it all the junk that we have been working to rid ourselves of.
Looking at the new order, I can see many similarities to the monetary base that we are used to. Our economic base is not tied to any metals or valuables, but believed to be of value and tradeable as though it were tangible treasure. We have not backed our currency for many years (since 1971) but our currency has been the standard of the world.
Why then are these "old-timers" so afraid of crypto? Because they are afraid of change. The same reason that we still have racism in this country and others, the same reason that we still have wars. The world has changed, and not everyone is comfortable with that. But to not change with it is socialogical death.
Yes, it is prone to swings in value. Anything that has potential is. But we need to have a universally accepted basis so that sane commerce can prevail. It is the future, and there will always be something that is new. But by understanding it and working within it, one can determine whether it is something to stick with or ignore. I choose to stick.
Both market are very good place to invest. But I will put cryptocurrency as the highest possible profit because it is new and the market is still growing. For this reason, many traditional investors will make effort to discredit the future of cryptocurrency. BTC is revolutionary currency that poises threat to traditional currency. Those who hold large amount of this currency will be left out if crypto will rule the financial market. "Traditional", or old-school value investors don't keep their wealth as money. They have invested in companies and corporations, so they are kind of agnostic as to what currency will be used in the future: crypto or fiat, at least as long as it doesn't slow down economic development. But here's the catch. Crypto, if used instead of fiat, however unlikely it may be, will be a boat anchor to an expanding economy that will drag it down and a major roadblock that will impede its expansion. |
|
|
|
I'm more interested in the causes of these failures. When the stock market falls, there are reasons for this. It is possible to analyze this phenomenon and to make some predictions. But I can't see the reason for the bitcoin price drop. It bothers me. Of course I also do not like a long period of price decline, but this is not the most important for me.
When it comes to bitcoin and the price movement,it all depends upon the news coming out of a country,if the news is negative the price will go down and so on,it is entirely dependent upon current events and anything can happen at any given time,there is a massive sell off from the old MTgox and i think that is holding the market down for a while and it might continue like this for a while. It seems that for a while might take a long time to complete. Remember, nothing is more permanent than the temporary. If only one whale was able to crash Bitcoin almost 3 times, what will happen if a dozen of them decides it is time to cash out? Bitcoin will likely fall to 3 or even 2 digits. News can affect prices to a degree but in most cases their effect will be limited and short-lived. Whales and their actions affect prices by far more dramatically. |
|
|
|
I'm more interested in the causes of these failures. When the stock market falls, there are reasons for this. It is possible to analyze this phenomenon and to make some predictions. But I can't see the reason for the bitcoin price drop. It bothers me. Of course I also do not like a long period of price decline, but this is not the most important for me.
And I would say you definitely have the right to be bothered or even get worried. You don't see the reason because you are searching in the wrong place or rather at the wrong time. You are looking for explanations in the stock market of today but you should sooner be looking in the stock market of the dotcom era. The cryptoverse today is much more like the dotcom bubble of late 1990s than it is like today's stock market. Bitcoin as well as other cryptocurrencies are just too speculative without any real value in Warren Buffett's terms to support their price in the long run. Stocks, on the other hand, have at least some value because companies behind them are producing real shit, not just vaporware as it was with dotcoms back in the day and now with cryptocurrency coins and tokens. |
|
|
|
Yes trading is also gambling but at least with a small risk. Gambling is a game that if you lose you lose all that you have gambled. But in trading it is a buying and selling formula in which you can get more profit when the value will soar high but if not you can at least get a little profit and the invested money is still intact or at least a little bit lesser.
This is an argument which I already heard a few times in this thread alone. I had been gambling a lot in the past (dice to be sure), and believe me this is a wrong conclusion in general. Indeed, if you bet all you can lose all, as simple as it gets. But if you think that if you don't close a losing position in trading, then you will be able to make a profit or at least break even one day, this is a wrong assumption too. This has been the case with Bitcoin till recently but if the price never reaches your entry point, you are stuck. And in that very case, it is not particularly different from losing a bet in dice, even if you close your position, since a loss is a loss no matter where it happens. |
|
|
|
Major mistakes that a traders makes was when they don't know how to control themselves or how to discipline themselves, well all of us here has started with less understanding or even zero knowledge when it comes to trading so it is up to us how we will gonna study it.
It is not only about controlling your actions and bridling your emotions. This is nowhere near enough, though it is definitely a required prerequisite for a successful trading journey, one of. It is not about just acting in cold blood, in a purposely ruthless and unfeeling manner, it is also about choosing the right direction of your trading decisions. And personally, I would rather stick with the latter still being emotional and all that. Really, what's the purpose of being emotionless if you are losing, even though in a somewhat disciplined and controlled way? This seems to be another interesting facet of trading. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
