|
Does anyone else find it interesting that these large lags only happen on the way down?? AFAIK (correct me if I'm wrong) recently lags never occur on higher volume during upward momentum. The market looked as though it was about to drop a few seconds ago and PRESTO, the lag magically appears. Lately, why does the lag always appear after the price starts dropping (not before) and never when the price is rising on even higher volume??
I'm probably alone here, but I'm not convinced by the Mt. Gox DDoS attack excuse that supposedly drove down prices yesterday. Sure, there may have been a DDoS attack. But I've watched the last two Gox malfunctions fairly closely and the only things I saw, in both cases, were the beginnings of natural, orderly sell-offs (although the previous instance on March 28th was more dramatic) followed by a trading lag (DDoS attack?) and cancellations that actually stemmed the sell-off.
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.....
Of course, there is an argument that a mysterious, nefarious group of Bitcoin bandits who hold enough coins to create simulated sell-offs are then DDoSing the system in an effort to buy cheaper coins (at risk of destroying the value of the coins they hold). And Gox is so competent that they have caught and resolved the situation before they became larger problems in both instances. But, I simply did not see anything remotely resembling this yesterday. On March 28th? Perhaps.
Gox has a vested interested in keeping this propped at the expense of angering current customers.....because they have many new customers with which to replace you all. Either they have an ridiculously inept system or they are extremely competent at quelling panic selling. I'm not sure if they are idiots or geniuses.....
|
|
|
|
I can't help thinking this Maltese guy Gatis Eglitis is somehow exaggerating the interest he gets. It seems his name is being spread all over the internet, especially following the FT-article. If someone wants to invest in Bitcoin, why buy a fund? Why not just transfer some money into an exchange and buy it yourself. And if you want to invest a $100m and need some help why not get Goldman Sachs to help you instead of some brokerage from Malta set up a few years ago that nobody has heard of before they started selling Bitcoin funds... Even he admits to starting it for fun, nothing too serious (with small $1000 subscriptions). He's probably getting a few phone calls simply because it's been in the news lately, but unlikely it they will ever proceed past the preliminaries. The only reason someone would start a fund is because other funds & institutions need a structure in which to invest (most can't invest directly for various reasons). And non-tech savvy individuals might invest simply because the fund offers secure cold storage, they don't want to deal with Gox, and they would at least have some level of recourse. |
|
|
|
If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes.....
Thinking that low volume affects bitcoin negatively is like thinking deflation affects bitcoin negatively. Bitcoin price could be $100,000 but you can trade satoshis. 1 bitcoin is 1,000,000 satoshis? It is not the volume of bitcoin traded that is important but the number of people and businesses using bitcoin and also the number of transactions made. But low relative volume and hoarding does create a massive barrier to large funds making BTC purchases, which is what were talking about. But, yeah....I do agree that businesses and people transacting with Bitcoin is much more useful than media hype driving speculation. |
|
|
|
Looking to find out what the strategy is behind the high frequency trading that goes on in Bitcoin marketplace like Mtgox (the ultra quick buying of many 0.01 BTC in succession)? Is it just to create a psychological impression that prices are going up and to trick people into buying in before the price explodes (because if you're looking at a site like bitcoinity or clarkmoody, it really does give you the impression that something huge is happening while in essence less than 1 BTC is being bought..
Or the tiny buys above the ask that push bid/ask up several dollars in the midst of large scale dumping. You'll see small .25 BTC buys that somehow counteract dumps of 100's of coins. It happens anytime BTC starts falling. You don't see it in reverse. |
|
|
|
Facepalm  , Greedy people will KILL Bitcoin adoption rate. Everyone is investing in the currency and no one is investing in adopting the system . We needs shops and more development in the Tech..... sigh..... lophie, the businesses are signing up. 1300 with bitpay last month alone! http://eon.businesswire.com/news/eon/20130402006123/en/bitcoin/BitPayThe first step is investing in bitcoins. The second step is investing bitcoin businesses that will make the bitcoins worth more. Bitpay is a great example of this happening. I have met with plenty of hedge fund managers and other asset managers about bitcoins over the years. A few of my favorites I go out of my way to rub their nose in it by reminding them of how much their investment would be worth if they had put $25k when I first offered them the opportunity. Currently, that figure is around $65m. And I keep giving updates on the state of the network, mining technology, Bitcoin economy, etc. There is huge money coming into this space of financial innovation. Everyone around the valley knows financial innovation is extremely ripe for making a ton of money. Why do you think Square recently raised another $200m? There are a ton of Silicon Valley VCs who have bought a ton of bitcoins. With the FinCEN guidance they are now investing or looking to invest in a lot of bitcoin startups and mostly in a very quiet way. I know of at least 5 startups that have received $500k+ funding within the past two months. Investing in BTC startups and directly into BTC are two very different things. I would love to hear more about VCs investing directly into Bitcoin. That doesn't fit their model (although perhaps they invested a little just to check it out.) I think it is other way around entirely....VC funds will start by investing in startups well before investing anything substantial directly into Bitcoin. I do believe the situation is ripe for VC into BTC, albeit still on a very small scale. As far as I know, no institutional money has invested in BTC startups as of yet (but correct if I'm wrong). Only angels, primarily. And nobody is denying that money is flowing into financial innovation overall. |
|
|
|
20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!
$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B
At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.
Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months. And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC. $2,376 is just the bottom end. O.O
Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does. Hey, I can dream, can't I?  It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:
"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."
If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes..... Tradehill dark pools... Not just Tradehill dark pool, there are many ways to buy offline, actually the "dark" market of bitcoin maybe larger than the "bright" one. Good luck finding the millions of coins needed for institutional and large hedge fund investments without driving the price to absurd heights. This little-known corporation alone has sold 250,000 bitcoins. But yes, there is no reason the price would not be driven up many-fold. Why should they expect to get them cheap? There are only so many coins, and anyone holding a large percentage of them is a potential market manipulator. Hence why they would not invest in large numbers. Do you think hedge fund managers are stupid? They typically don't chase performance. They would never indiscriminately start buying Bitcoins into the stratosphere. They already think this is a bubble..... Well, it's you who think they're stupid. Mind you, the total amount of fiats now invested into bitcoin is only about 1/10 of what some traders can lose in a single deal. It's only expensive to common folks like you and me. If bitcoin is a bubble has to ultimately depend on its value, which is not just the total economic activities it's supporting, as many of the people here believe. FYI I came very close to starting a Bitcoin hedge fund. I put it on hold after the price shot up too fast. I was hoping for gradual returns over 2013 and was aiming it at HNWIs (because I realize that institutions would not invest for several reasons). This parabolic action made me step back.......it's a much different risk/reward ratio at these levels. If it holds here for awhile, I may rethink. It would need to retrace substantially..... Yes, many many funds are larger than the entire market cap of BTC. That's the problem....I'm not saying it's expensive although this is a relative term. An overpriced piece of bubble gum can be 'expensive'. I'm saying there is not enough liquidity for any serious level of investment. You're acting as if funds would dive in at any price simply because they have the money to lose......No, it doesn't work that way. They must account to investors and have a compelling sales pitch. BTC is a very interesting story, so part of the pitch is there. But one has to think twice before buying into a parabolic move with enormous levels of systematic risk (Mt Gox, DDoS, etc), extremely low levels of liquidity, low transparency, et al..... I'm bullish BTC; I love the concept. That doesn't mean I would buy hand over fist. Perhaps there are money managers who feel quite differently. I'm not sure BTC can last forever on speculation, but I certainly see the short-term potential for a beautiful bubble. I would rather it gain traction in the marketplace, though. |
|
|
|
20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!
$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B
At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.
Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months. And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC. $2,376 is just the bottom end. O.O
Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does. Hey, I can dream, can't I? It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:
"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."
If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes..... Tradehill dark pools... Not just Tradehill dark pool, there are many ways to buy offline, actually the "dark" market of bitcoin maybe larger than the "bright" one. Good luck finding the millions of coins needed for institutional and large hedge fund investments without driving the price to absurd heights. This little-known corporation alone has sold 250,000 bitcoins. But yes, there is no reason the price would not be driven up many-fold. Why should they expect to get them cheap? There are only so many coins, and anyone holding a large percentage of them is a potential market manipulator. Hence why they would not invest in large numbers. Do you think hedge fund managers are stupid? They typically don't chase performance. They would never indiscriminately start buying Bitcoins into the stratosphere. They already think this is a bubble..... |
|
|
|
Facepalm , Greedy people will KILL Bitcoin adoption rate. Everyone is investing in the currency and no one is investing in adopting the system . We needs shops and more development in the Tech..... sigh..... Agreed. 100%. Everyone is so hell-bent on pumping the price (of course, this is the speculation area). The commodity aspect of BTC is a great investment (temporarily) but makes for a horrible currency. |
|
|
|
20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!
$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B
At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.
Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months. And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC. $2,376 is just the bottom end. O.O
Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does. Hey, I can dream, can't I? It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:
"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."
If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes..... Tradehill dark pools... Not just Tradehill dark pool, there are many ways to buy offline, actually the "dark" market of bitcoin maybe larger than the "bright" one. Good luck finding the millions of coins needed for institutional and large hedge fund investments without driving the price to absurd heights. |
|
|
|
|
Confused again.....people were dumping coins from 120 down to 117.....then a tiny 3.5 BTC buy bumps both bid and ask back up to over 125. It does this over and over again on the downside.....but I have yet to see this action in the opposite direction.
|
|
|
|
20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!
$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B
At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.
Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months. And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC. $2,376 is just the bottom end. O.O
Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does. Hey, I can dream, can't I? It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:
"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."
If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes..... Tradehill dark pools... Yes, as I've previously discussed on here....Tradehill is trying to address this issue (I'm glad someone is), but this would be difficult to accomplish even with dark pools. |
|
|
|
It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:
"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."
If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes..... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
