The media was extremely positive (hence the rise in BTC price) up until a few days ago. BTC went from unknown to novel to known during this quick media burst. There are still mostly positive stories coming out, but I have definitely noticed a barrage of negative/bubble articles over the past few days. Bitcoin was probably over-exposed in the short-term, IMO. Too many Twitter mentions. Too many articles too quickly. There was even a story released a day or two ago that mentioned the bursting of the bitcoin 'news' bubble. Magazine cover (contrarian) indicator has produced mixed results: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine_cover_indicator |
|
|
|
hello timetraveler: the year is 2013. also the other thread has the wrong year …
What year is it?? Where am I? |
|
|
|
You seem to ONLY post press topics that shed negative light on bitcoin, why? What is your angle Because nobody else does. Do you not want to see what detractors are saying? We have enough cheerleaders on here. I've been wondering if the mainstream press would eventually turn on bitcoin after the over-exposure. Lately I've been seeking out negative stories. I don't think they are completely turning, but I'm beginning to see a pattern. I was posting positive news until only very recently. So, I guess that's my angle. |
|
|
|
I said in various posts three or four weeks ago that this could easily go up to three digits (although I was cautious), so I don't think it was that far fetched.
The problem here is that you are assuming those account holders will be indiscriminately buying bitcoins at market price. Doubtful.
I'd like to know more about these accounts. Is 57000 the number of bonafide, funded accounts? Or does it include people that have simply signed up out of curiosity? I know several people that signed up at Mt. Gox but never funded their accounts.
ok so lets say three out of ten dont ever put money into mt gox. but if you think there arent people signing up to put 10 k or 100k into there account than your crazy. thats why i think its fair to average all accounts to 1,000. Speculators should be wishing for 1000's upon 1000's of tiny accounts. The masses of people gambling with fun money ($500 here, $1000 there) who don't care about losing it is what might drive this higher. The savvier the investor, the less chance they would buy into recent action. Assuming a river of 60MM is flowing in to buy BTC hand over fist with complete disregard for the recent run-up is crazy. This would need to be a full blown massive panic/bubble for that to happen. If it does happen, it will be interesting to watch. We are currently 10 fold higher than we were in January. At $300, we will be 20+ fold higher than we were in January. Have fundamentals changed by a factor of 20+ in the past 2 1/2 months? If 60MM did rush in to buy indiscriminately, I guarantee the bubble that would be inflated would come to a violent end fairly quickly. When everyone hoards and, at some point, there are no longer buyers....that's when things go south, especially in such a niche, non-ubiquitous market. There are masses of people that will probably never warm to the idea of BTC as digital gold, certainly not anytime soon. Slow growth would serve BTC in the long-term and win over a lot more people, which would be needed to sustain any massive run-up. I do think there is a chance for a last leg, though. Still highly doubt we will see $200 & $300 on the previously mentioned dates. |
|
|
|
I said in various posts three or four weeks ago that this could easily go up to three digits (although I was cautious), so I don't think it was that far fetched.
The problem here is that you are assuming those account holders will be indiscriminately buying bitcoins at market price. Doubtful.
I'd like to know more about these accounts. Is 57000 the number of bonafide, funded accounts? Or does it include people that have simply signed up out of curiosity? I know several people that signed up at Mt. Gox but never funded their accounts.
ok so lets say three out of ten dont ever put money into mt gox. but if you think there arent people signing up to put 10 k or 100k into there account than your crazy. thats why i think its fair to average all accounts to 1,000. additionaly why wouldnt they just look at mt gox and see any info that there is, signing up is a hastle and you would only wast your time if you were going to put money into it. its not what people do for fun....hahaha want to go golfing? no want to go to a movie? no want to go snowboarding? no I just want to sign up for a mt gox account thats way funner!!! yay. that was better than sex! now lest not put money in it as we see the price continue to increase. hahaha Out of curiosity....it takes two seconds to sign up. That's exactly what I did when I first heard about bitcoin. If the average person reads a news story that mentions BTC/Gox, they probably go to the site to see what the fuss is about, spending the two seconds to enter their email. I didn't say it was America's new pastime. |
|
|
|
|
Only in BTC would 2.19% daily growth be considered the 'happy medium'......this is an absurd growth rate by any standard.
|
|
|
|
I am bullish BTC, but this media driven speculation + hoarding is not helping BTCs long-term prospects IMO. I personally don't believe it can exist as a purely speculative asset. I would much rather see a gradual rise. There is too much risk in buying into a parabola.
If you care about BTC, you really don't want it to go to $300 by April 15th......
If you think the price rises too fast at any moment, you should sell your BTC and get back in after it has corrected. That is the idea of a market where price = opinion of thousand/millions of people. The speculators that are best at estimating the correct price will gain the most and the market gains because it resembles a better price. In other words, put your money where your mouth is. If BTC goes to $300 by April 15th, I would sell, wait and buy back later. I think that would be a no-brainer. |
|
|
|
|
I assumed this chart was part of the joke....
|
|
|
|
I am with BitcoinTate: "bitcoin" is now the most searched term in Google Israel, MtGox+CoinLab, Bitcoin ATMs, news everywhere ( including from Mastercard).. You hear that, Mastercard? That is the sound of inevitability. I'm not even sure what this blogger at Mastercard has to do with anything other than someone blogging about a topic that's been in the news (unless I missed something, please enlighten me). I am bullish BTC, but this media driven speculation + hoarding is not helping BTCs long-term prospects IMO. I personally don't believe it can exist as a purely speculative asset. I would much rather see a gradual rise. There is too much risk in buying into a parabola. If you care about BTC, you really don't want it to go to $300 by April 15th...... |
|
|
|
I could see someone with a lot of money dumping 10 million in purely for egotistical reasons. Just to mess with Bitcoin.
I'm sorry you're having those delusions. Wealthy people are often much more frugal and/or careful than the average person, especially when it comes to their investments. How long would someone stay wealthy if they threw money around at every little deal that popped on their radar screen simply for the sake of ego?? Sure, it's possible we could go up higher than $300 one day......but not by April 15th. Increased use of bitcoin for its utility is what will ultimately bring us higher in meaningful way. I wouldn't waste time hoping for some sort of dimwitted, wealthy savior to bring BTC up to $1000. |
|
|
|
|
Why does everyone think that wealthy investors are idiotic enough to single handedly drive the price up 10x? Why would anyone do that in a relatively illiquid market (at those quantities/levels)?
|
|
|
|
I said in various posts three or four weeks ago that this could easily go up to three digits (although I was cautious), so I don't think it was that far fetched.
The problem here is that you are assuming those account holders will be indiscriminately buying bitcoins at market price. Doubtful.
I'd like to know more about these accounts. Is 57000 the number of bonafide, funded accounts? Or does it include people that have simply signed up out of curiosity? I know several people that signed up at Mt. Gox but never funded their accounts.
Good point. But it only takes 1 person to dump 10 million in  True, point taken. I've debated several people on other threads who think that hedge funds will magically drive the price of bitcoin up by multiples.....but one has to assume that anyone injecting a large sum (fund manager or private individual) is probably smart enough to realize the incredible risk involved in single handedly driving the price up to astronomical levels. BTC is not liquid enough for big movers. The best all of these speculators can hope for is having masses of little people nibble at the market to keep the price up. This sea is too shallow for whales. |
|
|
|
|
I said in various posts three or four weeks ago that this could easily go up to three digits (although I was cautious), so I don't think it was that far fetched.
The problem here is that you are assuming those account holders will be indiscriminately buying bitcoins at market price. Doubtful.
I'd like to know more about these accounts. Is 57000 the number of bonafide, funded accounts? Or does it include people that have simply signed up out of curiosity? I know several people that signed up at Mt. Gox but never funded their accounts.
|
|
|
|
|
I can't tell if this is a joke......but no, $200 and $300 are not happening by their respective dates.
|
|
|
|
If these 'DDoS attacks' were meant to drive down the price substantially, clearly it's not working. It looks more like planned lags that act as trading curbs. Trading curbs are meant to halt sell-offs, giving everyone time to regain a clearer head and trade with less emotion. These 'DDoS attacks' have become the perfect excuse on which to blame any natural sell-off and subsequent trade curbing mechanism, IMO. The problem is that these last two lags occurred only after the sell-offs began, not before.
Pair this with the bizarre pricing action on Mt Gox, where minuscule sub-coin buys above the ask move the bid/ask up several dollars and counteract 100's of coins being dumped......no, I think Mt Gox is doing everyone a favor in doing everything it can to keep the price up. I have no evidence (only empirical); this is unfounded conjecture.....
It could also be an effect of the inherent friction of the system, it just tends to bump its head every time there is an overbought condition because everyone is trying to do everything at once. I would rather credit the height to which the market has reached to improvement in Gox's systems to handle the exponentially increasing workflow. But yes. The lags are extremely frustrating. It is interesting though, to compare the current price action to the price action surrounding the $32 peak. Uncanny, in fact. Yes, I've noticed the similarity . Nice money flow analysis, btw. |
|
|
|
I'm glad OP put this in the Speculation section because all of it is speculation.
Here is my speculation: I think Mt. Gox is doing its best to ward of the DDoS attacks. They even hired a firm to handle it but even the firm could not stop it 100%.
There is big money involved now so people will do anything, include DDoS attacks to bring the price down, and as Mt. Gox said they can only do so much but they cannot stop DDoS attacks 100%.
Most exchanges have been hacked in one point in time or another. CampBX has not been hacked, I don't think.
Bitfloor, Mt. Gox, bitcoin-central, they've all been hacked. Pick your poison.
The solution is P2P exchanges. With litecoin, ripple, bitcoin etc. some can make a P2P exchange a reality.
Yes, 'unfounded conjecture' as I stated. Oh, I did not dispute the fact that there are attacks on any of the above entities. I dispute that these attacks are causing price drops. The price began rolling over and dropping before either attack. And these lags, while understandably unavoidable, seem one-sided. I've only noticed bizarre, mismatched pricing action on the downside. I'm not debating the existence of DDoS attacks. Even if they exist (certainly), these lags (DDoS, Gox induced, or combination of both) serve to muffle panic selling. Lags are doing quite the opposite of what everyone here is thinking IMO. We were overbought (among other things), due for a pullback. Everyone is blaming the DDoS attack on the drop when it was largely due to technicals. We would probably have dropped harder if it weren't for lag (DDoS or otherwise). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
