This is FAKE

Source:

We received your bid request. As your bid request met some of our volume and frequency thresholds, we will have to kindly ask you to help us better understand the nature of your relationship with Bitcoin. In order to do so, we require that an additional KYC (know your customer) procedure is completed before we can proceed with the processing of your bid.

We kindly ask you to answer the following KYC questionnaire:

1. How did you learn about Bitcoin?
2. The purpose of buying Bitcoins?
3. When and how did you obtain your USD?
4. What is the reason for your activity - depositing BTC, selling, withdrawing?
5. What are your future plans and activities planned during your life?
6. Do you plan more of such bids in the future? If yes, how many and why?
8. Which bank are you using? Please provide the complete address and SWIFT code.

We kindly ask you to submit your answers and documents in a reply to this ticket.

Those factors seem to be completely arbitrary. I think the argument can be made that some of the exchanges fake their order book to inflate their apparent volume, in order to appear more liquid than they are, but that argument could be made for btc-e and a lot of the altcoin exchanges too.

The exchanges that run without fees should be expected to get a much larger volume of all trades, since you can dump large walls and buy back $1 later. So if you've arrived at the same volume for western and eastern exchanges, I think your discount factor is too big.

I'm sure someone more mathematically inclined could at least do a preliminary analysis of the order books so find out how much is "too" random, or if many trades have a common divisor, or other obivous methods. I doubt the cheating is very sophisticated. Has someone done this?


I believe I read some representative from Finex somewhere saying "we will begin to slowly cut our ties to Stamp, so I think you are completely right there. They still push a lot of trades onto Stamp's order book. The question is how much.


A bit arbitrary, don't you think?

How did you arrive at those percentages that 90% of OKcoin's volume should be discounted and 80% of Huobi's? Seems kinda arbitrary to me. Why not 50% or 30%?

I'm guessing enough of it is real to be significant - perhaps 20-50%. Even at just 20% it is still equal to the west, which makes it highly significant. Also, there are frequently several 500-1000BTC walls moving around the order book - those can't be faked, meaning that there are in fact players with millions of dollars (worth of btc or yuan) playing on these exchanges, which leads to belief in at least some legitimacy in the volume.

well, in a blind bid it only takes 1 person to feel they are worth more than the exchange rate to actually have them get sold for above exchange rate value.

So f only 1 person has any reason at all to percieve those coins as more valuable, they are.

I don't think it's such a longshot to expect 1 guy to bid above market price. You see $1000+ bids at localbitcoins all the time, even though the going price has been sub $600 for days/weeks now.

I think we'd be pleasantly surprised by this auction and i hope the bear market will reverse after it is know how much the coins sold for.

Now top 4 currencies by volume of 7 days are listed.

IMO it's mostly just amateur knob day-traders (hello Speculation forum participants!) following the Mantra "he who dumps first, dumps best".  

[...]

Exactly, it's just pathetic.

Which simply means you don't understand that HNW investors are not stupid troll day traders.

Can we make your post a sticky in this sub forum?  Or maybe we need a bumper sticker or something.  Like you, every time I hear someone say that these buyers are going to immediately dump their coins on exchanges, I feel like I'm trapped in that movie "Idiocracy."

Also, since the last 2 pages this thread has become a pointless bear circle-jerk.

His paradigm is still beyond your grasp. 
I'm not against new hypotheses, but TA is simply pattern seeking behavior with no utility. I have my own Bitcoin pseudoscience I call "Rule of Thirds and Superstitious Numbers." It's just as useful as TA. I just don't take it seriously.

I have not much to say about this, it's pretty decent post about the situation, but this bold one... Of course it can be that "easy". That's the power of capital in right place, good investors "just" sit their money on right address and that's it! And this is completely different thing than what improvements has to be made in that investment and investor doesn't necessarily have to do none of these things. This is how money works in our world. I'm not saying that it's right or wrong, just trying to describe power structures.

I understand the power of bitcoin (based on today's state of affairs and today's fundemantals in 2014) and I understand that not all of bitcoin's potential users have been reached. However, my statements aren't really about market sentiment analysis or forum sentiment. They are about the attitude I've been told that I'm supposed to have, and how this conflicts with my own sentiment as an investor.

Someone gives me a commodity investment with really good fundamentals (well as of today in 2014 at least) and tells me that due these fundmanentals ,a destiny has been obtained. That's it. I don't have to do anything. The investment doesn't have to do anything (except reach more users). No real effort has to be imparted at all by myself or bitcoin. I just get to sit back and watch it grow - next year it'll be 10x, the year after that it will be 100x, and then a year later it will be 1000x - it's a destiny and it's 100% guaranteed to be fulfilled... this does not compute.

First of all, it's too easy. I'm just supposed to sit on coins and don't have to do anything. Bitcoin also doesn't need to do much either - it just stays as exactly what it is maybe some minor code fixes here and there. You're basically sitting on a commodity (Warren Buffet hates this). Most truly good investments involve a company that is making drastic improvements to itself and it's products or the investors themselves are doing something. Just sitting on a commodity is too easy. It also makes one wonder about the nature of the other investors who are sitting on a commodity - they are all mostly in it to do nothing and sit on a commodity to make profit, and are doing nothing for Bitcoin - they would probably dump really easily if the right conditions were met.

Second of all, this destiny thing does not compute to me as an investor. Nothing is that certain, or guaranteed. Some kind of hurdle is going to show up, some wall will be hit, or some new thing is going to be revealed, some X-factor. It always happens. Every great investment is a new paradigm, until it isn't. A trend has held for 5 whole years and you feel elated over the information you have in 2014... but what about 2015? 2016? Something can always change - and often it does. Never let yourself get so psychologically carried away with your ideals that you forget about the nature of reality.

I'm not trying to be bearish, say that prices are going down, or that Bitcoin doesn't have a bright future from here. I'm just tryign to stay grounded in reality, and am saying that nothing is guaranteed, and $100,000 would be a fantastic accomplishment but is not a destiny.

I do not believe that there is a chance SR btc will be sold above the market (unless market suddenly crashes after the bids were made). I also think many /most of the bidders will be opportunistic buyers: for likes of SecondMarket, Bitpay or Coinbase, it always makes sense to buy btc at considerable discount.

I do not understand why many people think that buying these btc from US government should be such "once in a lifetime" opportunity for institutional investors  ???. There are many other options for them to buy substantial amounts of btc perfectly legally and safely. The second condition likely excludes exchanges ;), but they can still buy from big miners, SecondMarket, early adopters, btc processors (e.g. Bitpay) etc

For sure.

However I say chart-based extrapolation still doesn't work longterm. Extrapolation can't predict major mood changes of market participants or sudden events. Whatever type of extrapolation you use, it is always just projecting the main trend into the future.

Such methods may work quite a long time, but suddenly they will fail. For better predictions you would have to monitor constantly the fundamentals that drive market mechanics (for example adoption rate, adoption pool (people likely to become adopters), transaction volume growth, businesses accepting btc).

As someone who is long Bitcoin, would it not concern you a bit that a break downwards, would mean breaking that trendline which dates back to Jan 2013, the very beginnings of the massive bull run that peaked in November 2013. When looking at charts through the lens of EW analysis, the breach of such a trendline would generally be seen as confirmation that the market was in a correction phase.