Uploading fresh readings from his price forecasting tool, the ‘Mayer Multiple,’ the serial commentator and bitcoin proponent said that current trajectory should favor an end-of-year bitcoin price of $21,000.
This, while below the estimates of other industry figures such as Fundstrat’s Tom Lee, still places the largest cryptocurrency ahead of its record high set in December 2017. There is this apparent fascination and obsession of determining what bitcoin's "fair value" or "natural value" is. I think that this is completely unnecessary, and even potentially bogus analysis. First of all, there is no proof whatsoever that what they are doing in terms of analysing and drawing these indicators is actually through valid TA or whatnot. Secondly, bitcoin's "fair value" as a currency is solely dependent on its utility, which can be reflected directly through demand. I personally do not believe there to be a natural price for bitcoin, or even a set underlying value. I'd analyse fundamentals instead of trying to figure out something that doesn't even exist. |
|
|
|
Hi all,
I have money in a UK bank account and I would like to send it to somebody in Malaysia.
It seems simple enough to go GBP -> BTC then BTC -> MYR.
But the recipient is unwilling to open any crypto related accounts currently and, due to AML, I cant use, for example, Local Bitcoins combined with their local bank account (as it's in a different name and would fail verifiation).
Is there any other way currently? Or must I wait for the industry to mature further?
Since he is unwilling to open any crypto related accounts, then you essentially have to perform both the buying and selling for him. I still think that selling for MYR through p2p trading will make the most sense, although you can buy through a licensed exchange at a better rate. I highly doubt that you're going to be flagged by sending it to a p2p exchange like LBC, and then putting in the recipient's bank details directly. Most of the time, the account holder information is completely irrelevant anyways if you're on the receiving end. In fact, you don't even need to get verified to sell to most ads on LBC. I'm not sure about the current state of Paxful, however. |
|
|
|
i just bought $10 bitcoin from neteller how to withdraw it? it was just to pay a bill and now i cant find any button to withdraw thats so strange  As far as I know, the crypto exchange service that they run is kind of misleading. To save costs, and to comply to regulations at a lower standard I guess, they decided that instead of allowing their customers to withdraw their crypto, in order to spend any sum of it, they would have to convert the bought crypto back into Neteller funds. So essentially, you need to find a merchant who accepts Neteller funds to conduct this, or exchange your Neteller on Paxful/LBC at a lower rate. Neither of which is ideal, which is why I don't recommend using Neteller. Personally, I have had a pretty bad experience with them after they limited my account a year or so ago. |
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, this is the trend right now. Regulations are tightening to the point of which certain exchanges are asking completely personal questions (e.g. Bitstamp, HitBTC, IIRC) that are unrelated to identity verification, like source of funds, income level, etc.
I doubt that appealing to the agency that is going to make these regulations happen is going to do much, either.
However, there is always a scope of which these regulatory agencies can operate with. Even when you look at draconian states when it comes to crypto regulation, like India, you still see p2p transactions occurring, because these types of decentralised trading that is made possible by the distributed nature of BTC itself makes censorship almost impossible.
|
|
|
|
The popular opinion has it that short-term traders are essentially gamblers. But that's simply not possible due to the very nature of short-term trading as losses in this trading setup are set to accumulate quickly, so whoever tries it and fails has to wind up and do that fast unless he loses all and is stopped by his empty stomach. In this way, short-term trading brutally weeds out those who can't earn consistently in the long run. It is a type of natural selection where short-term traders are selected to be successful if they are to remain in the game, and this selection works fast at that
On the other hand, long-term traders have the option of turning into long-term holders and ultimately into bag holders if they are unable to earn consistently long term. Ironically, it is also kind of natural selection, though in this case in works in reverse, i.e. it is a negative selection which essentially favors losers, even though it takes years to reveal itself. Considering these two types of selection and their effects on different strata of traders, we have to conclude that the percentage of successful short-term traders should be way higher than among other types of traders
The bottom line is that whoever claims that short-term traders are losers en masse has probably fallen victim to a number of biases, misconceptions and prejudices as these traders definitely know what they are doing. Otherwise, they simply can't stay in the game for long and that's it for now
I don't think that short term traders are gamblers at all. Given the fact that they probably need to rely on more technical indicators, as opposed to the fact that you can much more easily analyse the fundamentals if you're investing for the long run. Nor do I think that short term trading is necessarily something that is unprofitable for everyone. If you have the necessary capital (extremely important if you want to influence the market), knowledge, and leverage - you can certainly be successful. However, the point I think most people try to make about short term investors is that there is a lot of traders with absolutely no knowledge, that base their trades off pure emotion and no technical indicators or fundamentals that play in the short term markets. Not to discount short run swing trading or the like as a profitable long term venture at all. |
|
|
|
What prompted them to say that "we are not shills"? Did you go out of your way to insist on including something positive about your site? The deal was to be delivered by Saturday and today is Monday. We had been talking since 5 days about this.
It was a PR post, but genuine from editor's point of view. If the deal was indeed this, then Paypal will most likely entertain your case. And assuming that you paid as goods and services, the dispute will most likely settle to the benefit of your side given Paypal's track record of siding with the buyer the majority of the time. In the future, when dealing with someone that you don't personally know or trust, always set out clear contract details especially when it comes to these review pieces, which can be heavily based on opinion. |
|
|
|
IMO the U.S. SEC is stepping out of its boundaries by filing a lawsuit against a foreign company, KIK. is owned by Kik Interactive a Canadian company who has its messenger being operated in within their borders, having them launch a token sale within Canada doesn't officially make their Kin tokens primarily available to U.S. citizens, even if there are U.S. citizens who participated in the sale I don't think that it makes them liable on the actions of their own citizens. I don't even think that SEC has a proper jurisdiction on this case.
multiple sources are reporting they did not prohibit USA investors from their ICO. the SEC is alleging that $55 million of total token investment came from USA buyers: https://www.thestar.com/business/2019/06/04/sec-sues-kik-for-us100m-for-illegal-securities-offering-of-digital-tokens.htmlif they didn't explicitly prohibit USA investors and didn't implement IP restrictions to prevent them, this is probably a slam dunk for the SEC. agencies like the SEC always operate on the basis that if a company serves or issues securities to USA residents, that they are under USA jurisdiction. good luck to KIK; i don't think this will end well for them. a settlement and very hefty fine if they are lucky. If they did indeed offer their securities/tokens to US residents, then I don't see any chance of Kik's case holding up. Even if they did prohibit U.S. IP addresses and so forth, I don't think the case is too bright for them given the fact that at the very least, SEC's expectations is most likely to conduct KYC to filter out all the investors in their jurisdiction. If SEC doesn't have jurisdiction over this matter, then why would they even be bothering to investigate it the first place? However, it will be a complex issue given that this goes across borders. I don't think that a buyback for tokens is likely, so imo a hefty fine is still the most likely outcome out of this situation. |
|
|
|
Good morning I was robbed by the paytrust.top exchanger for 0.005 BTC. Case description: I sent to the exchanger paytrust.top 0.005 btc to exchange for etherum. I sent to the wallet: 3KagtQgw2YR61nc3ULmv2qkQ1JYNN1dpea id: 094f4a022c5555c33e66674ba80356801561c1ea1bbd7890174dfeb5b407b762 I have not received the exchange until today, I have not received a refund of this amount. I have sent a mail to support@paytrust.top and I had the mail back to gmail as undelivered. Can I still get this money somehow? What need of evidence? I have a wallet address and transaction ID. I can introduce myself from my name. Is the Paytrust, top exchanger belongs to the Paytrust banking institution or is it just impersonating this institution ?. Greetings Thomas Paytrust.top has absolutely nothing to do with the Paytrust service run by Quicken. I'm not sure though whether the creator of paytrust.top intentionally chose this name to impersonate them, though, because the two services are not remotely related. I am almost certain that this is a site that is run by conmen, because if you look on their front page, all of their "latest transactions" are completely fabricated and made to update randomly every minute. Furthermore, they don't have any background info whatsoever that is available about their company. Stick to well known exchanges/instant exchangers. Don't go out of your way to find random ones, since there is a high likelihood that your transaction will turn out like this. |
|
|
|
|
I've used them once without issues.
I had to use them as a last resort though given the fact that no other exchange at the time was willing to swap IOST ERC20 tokens into mainnet ones. I was really expecting the worst, but everything was fine. The conversion process was seamless and I wasn't asked to verify myself.
Though, that's just my experience. They most likely have clauses in the ToS stating that they are allowed to ask for KYC at any given moment, so there is always a risk even if there is a no-KYC threshold.
|
|
|
|
This is something like an interesting fact but nothing more.
It doesn't really matter what is the price of the national currenty. The most important thing is its stability. You can earn $100 per monts but you will be still more poor than the guy that earns billion of his cheap money.
From usability point of view BTC deflation is a bad thing.
I agree with the first statement. Comparing the value of currencies with each other without taking into perspective the economic fundamentals of each country, even something as simple as the CPI and the liquidity of these currencies is completely useless. However, I don't agree with your statement about bitcoin's stability, and deflationary nature. BTC will prove to be a better long term store of value than the majority of fiat currencies given the fact that it is unaffected by inflation, and currency debasement especially in countries where the banking system is not robust and the central bank uses their jurisdiction to finance governments. Furthermore, it is important to note that bitcoin is not deflationary - it is inflationary, just at a decreasing rate. |
|
|
|
|
I think that even though it is possible to write this into legislation, it's still somewhat of a scare tactic from the government.
The fact is that when you pursue these draconian measures and regulations surrounding bitcoin, you'll find that if you want to have any kind of enforceability you'll need to invest millions of dollars into transaction tracking mechanisms, investigations, etc. They're still essentially relying on people to follow these laws, which in practice probably will not happen even if they were implemented.
It still baffles me why they would go to such lengths to try and ban bitcoin, as opposed to integrating it as a legitimate part of their economy instead.
|
|
|
|
The growing gig economy is firstly facilitated by the birth and massive adoption of internet connectivity anywhere in the globe...this remains to this day an evolving revolution that pole-vault many industries into what they are today. What was previously impossible is now one of the best options for people to work, to study and even to play. The coming of bitcoin 10 years ago put a very important layer on top of the internet hence bitcoin has become the money of the internet greatly enhancing the gig economy as anyone can seamlessly be paid with this currency wherever he/she can be in the globe. Plus the whole cryptocurrency revolution opened up a big can of opportunities to work and do business with crypto-focused fintech companies. I think that what bitcoin does in terms of helping the gig economy is not only just from the aspect of lower transaction fees and not needing to deal with wait times. These benefits lead to much more in terms of connecting the global labour markets. The barriers of entry for labourers are essentially lowered as a result of BTC as a form of payment, which in the long term can even start bridging the gap in wages between first world and second/third world countries. People may talk about Paypal as a more integral part of the gig economy, and right now, they may be right. But as more and more disgruntled users see that Paypal's reversibility and policies are a pain in the ass and sometimes unfair, as well as the fact that their exchange rates are complete garbage, they'll turn to alternative means. Also, remember the fact that Paypal verification isn't something that everyone can do, especially with the unbanked. Again, this contributes directly to the barrier of entry that's preventing people from accessing the global labour market in the first place. |
|
|
|
Here I like to share my experience with the bitcoin mix service. I have tired few website unfortunately I have been scammer by majority. Important first . Don't believing the feedback from https://bestbitcoinmixers.com/ (Build by scammers) I suspect the bestbitcoinmixers.com/ is scammer website as well, it give you false information make you trust the scammers. Paid 0.2 bitcoins to https://coinmixer.es/, you will receive a shit. If you try to email them, no one answers. https://bitcoinmixer.eu/Paid 0.08 to https://bitcoinmixer.eu/, unfortunately still a scammer website. Fortunately, I have been tried https://bitcoin-laundry.com/ once with very small amount of bitcoins , I mixed 0.15 BTC it works to me. But i checked on Google a lot of people complains they will steal the large bitcoins. Guys becareful when you do mix your bitcoins. Don't trust https://bestbitcoinmixers.com/Later on I will post the signature information and my bitcoins paid screenshot at here. These review sites are built for one and only purpose, to mislead people. It's almost certain that they are the exact same people that built these scam mixer sites to begin with, or at the very least affiliated with them. Given that a lot of services are closing down recently, be extra careful - don't just go around google and use the first mixing service you see. There are tons of both fraudulent and phishing sites, both on these fake review sites and especially google ads. Always check back on the forum for their reputations. While we report such incidents here on the forum, lets also take it up to ourselves to report their websites to google so that once abuse is cited. Google can remove them from the search results or put up a warning of a scam/phishing site a head the next time someone tries to search for Best Bitcoin Mixers.
I'm not sure how sure how effective this is. Reporting the coinmixer.** site as a phishing site will likely get some response from google, however, the mixer review site itself isn't a phishing site, but rather one that promotes scams. I'm not sure how Google will deal with this issue as they don't seem to delete potential scams off search results (as it could potentially lead to censorship concerns). |
|
|
|
In CNBC’s Future’s Now “Search for Safety” episode on June 4, 2019, CNBC’s reporter pointed out that Peter Boockvar, Chief Investment Officer at Bleakley Adviser Group is of the opinion that Bitcoin is a good place for investors to hide. Boockvar, on the other hand, said Bitcoin is a good signal indicator as to what may happen in the Gold market even though he would rather encourage clients to invest in Gold. See more for yourself here... Guys, what is your thought on Peter Boockvar's opinion? Let's discuss. I completely disagree with the highlighted statement. Firstly, most of bitcoin's price movements have absolutely nothing to do with gold and the commodities market in general. People have been trying to draw connections and conclusions between BTC and other global markets for years now, and I'm still not sold on any solid, founded, tangible connection as such. Furthermore, I think that BTC, given its rate of adoption and the trend towards virtuality will see a lot more growth in the network usage alone compared to gold as an investment vehicle. I don't see why then someone would encourage their clients to invest in gold without at least looking at bitcoin's fundamentals. |
|
|
|
can anyone vouch for em.escrowmen.com Please help me, I am planning to start an escrow service and the seller informed me to use this service as they do not keep any logs. Are they legit? Thanks.
I would really avoid any off forum escrows, there are simply too many risks involved. Even with more established entities like escrow.com, if you are not familiar with their processes, and a dispute arises, your money could be stuck in limbo while having no clue who's going to win the case. Same with services like Bitify. Let alone these obscure, unknown escrow sites. Most of them are created for the sole purpose of providing a facade of protection and trustworthiness to the buyer, while in fact, they are operated the exact person that is trying to 'selling' you a certain good/service, i.e. trying to con you. Be careful. |
|
|
|
I tried to register in Blueshare.io and they re-routed me to another platform called Altcoinomy.
They state they are financial institution and compliant with Swiss laws ,etc.
Anyway is there always the need to pass KYC in order to invest in an STO?
If they are fully compliant and they are literally calling their own token a security, then yes, most likely they are required by the relevant regulations to conduct verification on their customers or investors. It also depends on who and which regions they are offering their tokens to, if they bar people from the U.S. or other sensitive areas where tokens are treated as "securities" and as such regulated by the SEC and other bodies from participating, then there could be a chance that they can legally offer their tokens without KYC. At the end of the day, it's up to their discretion. You as an investor has really no control. If you aren't comfortable with providing your info, don't. |
|
|
|
I've used them for storing small amounts of ERC20 tokens that I wasn't bothered to set up a new myetherwallet for, and wasn't supported by exodus. It went generally without issues, though there was a hiccup where I had to move these tokens to Huobi in order to get them converted to mainnet coins (but really, that's not their fault). However, would I recommend it as a long term storage option? No. Firstly, it doesn't have the reputation of other multicoin wallets like Exodus. Secondly, I don't think the source code is disclosed publicly. The company itself isn't the most well known either. If I'm storing large amounts for longer terms, I would certainly avoid them. |
|
|
|
When it comes to recognition as "money" and a "store of value", Bitcoin out-competes gold on its practicality and versatility, said Clem Chambers, CEO of ADVFN
"I could not take enough gold out of the country for it to be useful to me if I had to leave the country; if I was a South Korean and I thought the North was going to drop a bomb on my city, if I was an Iranian that was running away from people in Iran. There are all sorts of reasons why I would want to take a lot of money abroad. I can’t take more than $10,000. In gold, I can’t carry enough, it’s too heavy. I can’t take, say, 20 kilos of gold to the airport". I think that bitcoin has already surpassed gold as a form of actual currency - it is simply too inconvenient and impractical to be transacting with gold in small to medium amounts, while bitcoin thrives in this area. However, I wouldn't say yet that bitcoin is a better store of value. People are still psychologically wired to accept gold as a representation of money itself. Though, if you look at fundamentals alone, I think that it is safe to say bitcoin pretty much has all the aspects (limited supply, decentralised mining) that makes gold a long term inflation proof asset. I wouldn't be surprised if more countries in the future adopt BTC on a massive scale as a reserve asset. |
|
|
|
P.S. The current price of bitcoin has a very different price floor and risk level than Feb 7. It is good to know where the true floor is. Currently I am short, but I know EXACTLY where I am long. I am trying to educate people on what is actually happening, and hopefully stabilize the crypto markets. Please let me know what you think!
Hindsight is always 20/20. What is difficult is predicting where the "true floor" is, which I think a lot of the times TA alone is unable to do so if you don't take into account a lot of the macro factors alongside with some technical analysis. I think that the easiest way to realise at that stage where the market was at and why it was bottoming was looking at the mainstream investor sentiment, which was extremely bearish, and there was a general fear and uncertainty within the market. Heck, you've got Tom Lee lowering his outlandish predictions - that how bad things were getting. Going against the market sentiment and looking at the fundamentals of bitcoin at that stage was the rational thing to do, and if you did so, you would have realised that bitcoin was vastly undervalued, and looking at historical trends of bear markets bottoming out at around 20-25% of the peak price beforehand, you would have came to the same conclusion, without any TA. |
|
|
|
I'm missing a link here and things don't seem to add up.
Most places say that a bank gets the money for inflation and has to pay it back, but if this is the case the system would topple much faster than it does when it's just with its fractional reserve ponzi shit.
Is the government given this money? I'm talking about the UK but if there's the same or different elsewhere then feel free to discuss thst too.
I don't really understand your question here - are you asking where the money goes after inflation occurs? If yes, then I think the answer is just values of goods/services/assets. When the purchasing power of your dollar goes down, it means that more people have more dollars to throw around in the marketplace, pushing prices up for goods since the supply of these stay relatively the same. However, if you're asking about who benefits from money creation that exists as a result of fractional banking practices, I think the answer is still banks. Given the fact that with a lower reserve requirement, they are essentially able to lend out multiples of their deposits, which wouldn't be otherwise possible. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
