The moment you catch yourself referring to those who sell some asset that you are trading as "tards" you can conclude with certainty that you just aren't cut out for the business of trading, and possibly neither for that of (speculative) investing. Sorry, OP.
Maybe the OP is neither a trader nor a speculative investor, but rather someone who is interested in Bitcoin as a decentralized open-source peer-to-peer protocol, or as a disruptive economic force, and follows the speculation forum (and BTC prices) out of intellectual curiosity. Sometimes there seems to be an assumption around here that everyone's a speculative gambler. Why, you're right. What a preposterous idea of me to make that assumption... and on the speculation subforum, of all places! |
|
|
|
Never understood this lines but I drawed one from the sight of an optimist  [...] That's pretty much my point too. I see a lot of posts here with screenshots of Bitcoinwisdom with randomly drawn lines but not so much explanation/detail/Actual TA behind it... Usually the lines are simply placed in a manner that supports the poster's sentiment. I'd like to know who everyone thinks does the best TA here (or on Tradingview etc) because I don't really have time to sort the wheat from the chaff myself... That's quite lazy (although at least honest) and short-sighted: ask that question in here, and you'll get 10 different answers. Now you're faced with the same problem: who do you trust to give you a good recommendation about who's best at TA. That said, watch out for masterluc (posts infrequently recently) and TERA. Both are rather bearish at the moment, draw your own conclusions from that. |
|
|
|
|
The moment you catch yourself referring to those who sell some asset that you are trading as "tards" you can conclude with certainty that you just aren't cut out for the business of trading, and possibly neither for that of (speculative) investing. Sorry, OP.
|
|
|
|
[pic]
There have only been two bubbles in bitcoin. Bubbles are actually a series of multiple bull-runs (about 4). Inbetween bull-runs are short consolidations and inbetween bubbles are deep prolonged crashes. It's somewhat like EW theory. Every rise in itself is not a "bubble" - this is a misnomer.
We already had 3 bubbles: y-axis is ln(price/exponential trend) (see my thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470453.0) [pic] There's are sure a lot of conclusions on this forum and a whole branch of 'bitcoiner trader science' based on a perceived and assumed 'trendline', which in reality is all based on guesswork and a misapplication of this one straight line of an average of the past, or some formula that risto the $1,000,000-per-coin bull wrote. I don't base any of my TA on this 'trendline', it is not something that any real traders acknowledge anywhere outside of this forum. Anyway, my drawing is based on a series of minor waves within 2 larger waves. A large wave (or 'bubble') is a collection of smaller waves. A small wave is defined as one that only has a 1-3 month consolidation after it and does not enter into a downtrend on the 1-week chart, and has the next small wave within the same large wave leading to an even higher high. A large wave is defined as one that has a 4-6+ month downtrend on the weekly chart and probably has the next bull right not leading to a higher high than its last bull run. This weekly-chart-type downtrend has only happened twice in bitcoin, 2011 and now. I tend to agree with jl2012. Or more accurately, I believe a case can equally be made for 2 "bubble cycles" in which the last one consisted of two segments, or 3 cycles in which the 2nd and 3rd were separated only by an unusually brief correction. That view doesn't have to rely on any log trend line, but can e.g. be argued for by looking at volatility:  That is convincing thank you. Volatility means a lot in any market. It means too, that if we have to see the minimum volatility between 2 bubbles, there will be a long time before the next rise. Volatility is still very high. No, look again... That graph is gox data, so the end of the last volatility spike is irrelevant. Last time I checked, weekly bbw was quite down again, so by volatility alone the December cycle could end already. But it's not a precise enough indicator to say when a correction is done, it can only tell that well after the fact. |
|
|
|
[pic]
There have only been two bubbles in bitcoin. Bubbles are actually a series of multiple bull-runs (about 4). Inbetween bull-runs are short consolidations and inbetween bubbles are deep prolonged crashes. It's somewhat like EW theory. Every rise in itself is not a "bubble" - this is a misnomer.
We already had 3 bubbles: y-axis is ln(price/exponential trend) (see my thread for details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470453.0) [pic] There's are sure a lot of conclusions on this forum and a whole branch of 'bitcoiner trader science' based on a perceived and assumed 'trendline', which in reality is all based on guesswork and a misapplication of this one straight line of an average of the past, or some formula that risto the $1,000,000-per-coin bull wrote. I don't base any of my TA on this 'trendline', it is not something that any real traders acknowledge anywhere outside of this forum. Anyway, my drawing is based on a series of minor waves within 2 larger waves. A large wave (or 'bubble') is a collection of smaller waves. A small wave is defined as one that only has a 1-3 month consolidation after it and does not enter into a downtrend on the 1-week chart, and has the next small wave within the same large wave leading to an even higher high. A large wave is defined as one that has a 4-6+ month downtrend on the weekly chart and probably has the next bull right not leading to a higher high than its last bull run. This weekly-chart-type downtrend has only happened twice in bitcoin, 2011 and now. I tend to agree with jl2012. Or more accurately, I believe a case can equally be made for 2 "bubble cycles" in which the last one consisted of two segments, or 3 cycles in which the 2nd and 3rd were separated only by an unusually brief correction. That view doesn't have to rely on any log trend line, but can e.g. be argued for by looking at volatility: |
|
|
|
So you need to devide the transaction volume in USD by the product of the exchange rate and the number of coins in circulation  This would at least partially deal with the decline in the running average. if the goal is to dismiss, or value less, certain spikes then minimizing R^2 might be a better idea than taking a (moving) average.
You can have both: Regress over a rolling window. Leaves you stuck extrapolating over the length of the window at one or both ends, but no worse than a moving average. That's what I meant in my later post ("running regression", no idea if that's the correct term. I'd say a 30d window could be a good candidate). The bigger problem is, imo, what to use for the 'fair price' calculation... calculate the TV/price ratio (or a similar metric) over the entire history, as ET does now, and you won't pick up changes in the fundamentals fast enough (which is what ET might be picking up right now, with fair price being well below actual price). Adjust the ratio more readily on the recent past, and you just have another short-term indicator. |
|
|
|
Sucks that I pulled my $425 bid, it would be perfect
Don't worry too much, I'd say. Pretty decent chance you'll get another go at it There will come a time when one won't get another go at it.  Agreed. I just don't expect today (or this week) to be that time. But I'm not stubborn... if we manage to get back to 480/490 and stay there for a bit, I'll start to be more optimistic again. |
|
|
|
Sucks that I pulled my $425 bid, it would be perfect
Don't worry too much, I'd say. Pretty decent chance you'll get another go at it :) |
|
|
|
2) there are strange spikes in TV that seem to not correspond to price changes. question: what are good ways to smooth them out. This might in part be due to the fact that what is being measured is blockchain transactions, and a) not all of them will be actual economic transactions, they could just be people shuffling their own money between wallets. Could a couple of large exchange movements have caused the spikes? b) blockchain transaction amounts are always artificially inflated due to having to always transfer entire previous outputs, so change ends up getting counted as spent money Not really obvious how you could filter either of these effects out, except in the simple case of change being sent back to the original address. My idea was to smooth those out, not filter them out. I thought of using a running linear regression for transaction volume instead of an average, which should give less importance to those extreme outliers. |
|
|
|
So yo need to devide the transaction volume in USD by the product of the exchange rate and the numbver of coins in circulation Or, since transaction volume in USD is vol_btc * price anyway, he can take V = vol_btc/total_btc, i.e. the fraction of the total amount of btc in circulation transacted per time unit, unless I'm mistaken. |
|
|
|
What have you learned from it?
That scenario thinking and probabilities are very hard to understand for many people, even in threads dedicated to it. Further education is necessary, but any serious and accountable predictions by anyone should be taken here, with a consistent and uniform methodology, and cash prizes (all entry fees go to the pot + my 1,000m BTC bounty and perhaps windjc's also..) You're missing the point. The risk of dropping below $435 was much higher to many of us than it was to you. Your estimation was off. Those of us who thought the risk was higher than you thought it was had good reason to think so. You may have had good reason to think it would never go that low again, but it did go that low again. Your prediction was wrong. Why? Why did you fuck up? Why did you blow it? simply because the future is unknowable? Do you think we are just lucky idiots? It's ok to get a call wrong. We all do. That's when we learn. Have you identified a way for your forecasting ability to be improved? Show some fucking humility, Man. You're bleeding credibility when you do shit like that. Quit defending yourself. It just makes you look worse. People who might otherwise want to invest in Bitcoin will be reluctant to do so if they think it's going to enrich people of low moral character. If that was Jorge's point all along then I finally get it. You and I were smart for seeing early on the value of Bitcoin, but trading day trading is getting more sophisticated, more complicated and more difficult every day. This community needs elder statesmen and you should be filling that roll instead of making reckless predictions and ego-driven bet proposals. Quoted for, well, truth. But I get the impression this is the wrong thread for that sort of commentary. Risto tells the permabulls what they want to hear, so they're willing to ignore the obvious character flaws. Snake oil for everyone, baby! |
|
|
|
I have been having less and less dreams about bitcoin charts lately. The interpretation of this is probably that I am going to be quitting bitcoin trading, which I have been seriously planning lately and am only waiting for the bottom of this latest 1 month drop cycle to take my final position. I did have one dream about the retracements to $475 these past days which was accurate mostly.
Where do you reckon Bitcoin is going to correct to? Mid-Higher $200 range? A price range where apparently it would be unprofitable to mine and which would endanger the integrity of the entire p2p network? I suspect that when you get your 'final' position filled, that you will be watching Bitcoin very very closely. If Bitcoin were to drop into $100 range, it would only be history repeating itself. I'm not hunting for the bottom. I'm just waiting for the next spike down. I don't know what the price will be; I just want some volume and a little uptrend on the daily chart to start. I don't want to buy right now right after all of these trends just went down. I'll have an easier time leaving once it's on the way back up and I'll have more coins too. Not to be a dick, but is that really a position you'll be happy with? Say we'll see another (mini) capitulation, and another attempted reversal. You'll be happy leaving the market 100% in btc when there's serious doubt whether it'll just be another failed attempt at breakout? I didn't say I was leaving 100% in btc. I'm keeping about 25% in BTC as my minimum long term holding investment, and removing the rest in fiat (which I'm already almost complete with). I may buy back in later with coinbase if I see a 1W MACD cross. So I will be reduced to checking the charts once a week. This is more about my career as a software developer and my quality of life and sleep than about investing. Makes sense. Didn't really expect that you'd leave the market all-in anyway. Still, I know I've vowed to myself several times that I'd give up "bottom hunting" and would just leave with my cold storage plus my eyes on some ultra-laggy-ultra-secure indicator signal to get into the game again, but it turns out to be a remarkably difficult decision for me to follow up on. I guess the perma-bullish conditioning of BTC is hard to break... |
|
|
|
|
Giving it one more bump, after being reminded about it by your post on the wall thread.
Recap: I can see two problems with it, or maybe better: 2 possibly problematic assumptions.
1) the fact that currently, your 'fair price' is well below actual price is largely explained by the overall trend of falling TV/price ratio. Question is then: if you instead calculate 'fair price' based on a "shorter leash" average, will your overall accuracy suffer or not? If not, the current result of fair price < actual price becomes less interesting imo.
2) there are strange spikes in TV that seem to not correspond to price changes. question: what are good ways to smooth them out.
I'll play around with your idea myself if you don't mind, as soon as I have time for it, and will post the result here.
|
|
|
|
I have been having less and less dreams about bitcoin charts lately. The interpretation of this is probably that I am going to be quitting bitcoin trading, which I have been seriously planning lately and am only waiting for the bottom of this latest 1 month drop cycle to take my final position. I did have one dream about the retracements to $475 these past days which was accurate mostly.
Where do you reckon Bitcoin is going to correct to? Mid-Higher $200 range? A price range where apparently it would be unprofitable to mine and which would endanger the integrity of the entire p2p network? I suspect that when you get your 'final' position filled, that you will be watching Bitcoin very very closely. If Bitcoin were to drop into $100 range, it would only be history repeating itself. I'm not hunting for the bottom. I'm just waiting for the next spike down. I don't know what the price will be; I just want some volume and a little uptrend on the daily chart to start. I don't want to buy right now right after all of these trends just went down. I'll have an easier time leaving once it's on the way back up and I'll have more coins too. Not to be a dick, but is that really a position you'll be happy with? Say we'll see another (mini) capitulation, and another attempted reversal. You'll be happy leaving the market 100% in btc when there's serious doubt whether it'll just be another failed attempt at breakout? |
|
|
|
Hey! Look:  We can now play ping pong between the 5 month log downtrend (resistance) and the 5 month linear downtrend (support). wheeee... :D (disclaimer: no, I'm not really saying that's the most likely path. probably just an amusing coincidence.) |
|
|
|
Nobody compelled me to compose memoirs, so they are there for a purpose. Perhaps I will tell, perhaps not.  So you made a bold prediction - "won't go below 435!" Then you wanted 7 to 1 odds against it. LOL! Are you even listening to yourself? I'm not trying to be hard on you and yes, I admit I called you out, only to try to get you to take the bet quickly. You don't like to take reasonable bets, only unreasonable ones, so I thought I might gode you into a reasonable one. But you are making yourself look bad here, not me or anyone else. 7:1 odds are a bargain, very reasonable indeed to even the slightest bear. you should have taken the bet. He never offered him 7:1 odds, for one thing. He only mentioned that is what he would be willing to accept after the fact. If you're talking shit that it's NEVER going to break 435 again, putting your money where your mouth is would be taking pretty much any bet for any odds that came your way, assuming you weren't bullshitting, which he obviously was. Not taking an even money bet on something you perceive to be a lock is ridiculous, so his mouth said "never below 435" but his money said "eh, like 20% chance of not under 435." See the difference? This is a great way of expressing the situation. Canonical summary of the betting situation achieved. Now, maybe let's move on. Dat wall at 435 has scared everybody for like 3 hours already  A movie can scare people for three hours. Three hours is nothing. It's a speed bump on the road to $400. What is not scaring anybody now is fear of missing the train. That's what you should be concerned about. One of the best comments in here during the last days, and completely ignored unfortunately. Selling pressure is noticeably going down, even the bears will admit that much. What is however not happening is increasing buying pressure at those "super cheap prices per coin". Which, btw, the bulls /don't/ readily admit. I wrote in here about 6 weeks ago (too lazy to dig up the post now... sue me) that we are in the process of "normalizing" 400. We're pretty much there now. Bitstamp is trading in the low 400s, and we're seeing what... 7k btc volume on the largest Western exchange, compared to the 100k+ volume on the earlier capitulation days, when those 400 coins were still a rarity. What exactly the consequence is of normalizing 400 is not clear yet, imo. In the best case, it builds a solid base from which we can (slowly, at first) recover from the bear market. In a less favorable outcome, we will see normalization of 300 coins next. |
|
|
|
Honestly seems like a health problem or a family emergency or something. Its not like he ran off with a huge amount of coins or something.
Agreed, but you will also notice that no one in here started shouting 'scam' yet. Still, it's a service I and several others paid for, and we're not receiving said service right now, and neither are we informed why that is. So some level of disgruntlement is to be expected. |
|
|
|
It has already been shown the the model is useful, and that it is in fact reasonable to infer that bitcoin's value grows as the square of its generalized user base. Realizing that I am using the terms "bitcoins value" and "generalized user base" in a technical way, the task moving forward in time is to find ways to estimate N that simultaneously support the Metcalfe model without stretching the common-sense meanings of the words "value" or "user base." If we have to stretch common-sense too far, then the model will no longer be useful.
That's the relevant point here, though. The "usefulness" i.e. the explanatory power, is your motivation for using no. of addresses for N. So far that worked out pretty well. There's not that much history however to test that usefulness on so far, I hope you will agree. If in 3 years it'll turn the no. of addresses was a decent estimate for the initial phase of the market, but now it is not anymore, because it inflates the estimate (or underestimates it), you wouldn't be too surprised I guess. But I see your point, also: you are not commited to this particular way of estimating N, and are willing to replace it with whatever gives the best results (while still being motivated enough to count as a proxy for user base) |
|
|
|
|
Alright... Let me be clear that I'm not gloating. I really wouldn't mind seeing a reversal either finally.
That said, the situation is starting to look pretty different from July 18 (which I guess some of us were hoping for)... Back then: bottom, sharp rally, sharp drop, found support, next rally. This time, it's more like: Bottom, quick rally, sharp drop, little support, fizzle out.
We need fresh fiat. Maybe I'll start walking around with a sandwich board in town that says 'Invest in Bitcoin now' :/
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
