Fascinating, we almost hit the volume of the NYSE  Soon bitcoin will be the biggest financial market in the world. Source on what you're referring to here? NYSE dwarfs bitcoin in terms of number of trades, and most especially, value of trade. It's not even close. |
|
|
|
|
The thing I don't like about the article is it's all speculation and loosely correlated coincidences, it's not based on any hard numbers or well-developed hypotheses, and it just throws out lofty pie-in-the-sky sentiments like Just imagine what would happen if a fraction of the hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens bought bitcoin. Bitcoin adoption is so low, that hypothetical would hold the same result with just about any national population, including the United States. The article relies on what-ifs to capture that to the moon mentality bitcoiners are susceptible to. It's an interesting idea, but I'm looking for something more authoritative to support the hypothesis.
|
|
|
|
Via Zero Hedge: Bitcoin, at $444, is now up over 100% since we suggested, in early September, it would become the conduit for Chinese capital outflows following China's crackdown on capital controls. This afternoon's sudden BIS-induced plunge, taking the virtual currency down $50, has been entirely retraced and more as BTCC (China's leading Bitcoin Exchange) announced it will now accept direct deposits (making it significantly easier for Chinese to rotate their Yuan deposits into the virtual currency and out of the potential clutches of capital controlling communists). As BTCC details, Recent bitcoin price increases have reignited enthusiasm in buying bitcoin. BTCC is confident this trend will continue. As such, we are pleased to announce that we now accept direct deposits.
Customers now need only log in, click on “Account,” then “Fund,” and then select the “Bank Deposit” option to fund their BTCC accounts through their bank accounts. All customers who have Chinese bank accounts will be able to make direct deposits through ATM transfers or online banking. And adds, even more crucially... BTCC will stop accepting customer deposits through agents on November 15. Which appeared to provide further dip-buying impetus to the recovery off the day's earlier mysterious plunge...  Lifting BTC to $444 highs, more than double the September levels when we suggested it. Notice the rally is on rapidly increasingly volumes also (as word spreads and ease of access is enabled)...  As we noted previously, this is the validation that, just as predicted here two months ago, bitcoin has become the go-to asset class for millions of Chinese savers seeking to quietly and under the radar transfer funds from point A to point B, whatever that may be, in the process circumventing the recently expanded governmental capital controls: While he didn’t provide any concrete numbers, he did comment last week on what was driving the adoption. “Some Chinese traders are expressing a view on the CNY exchange rate after the last devaluation and you have interest by mainland speculators to move to other assets after the stock market fallout,” he explained in an interview with Bitcoin Magazine. Which again brings us back to our conclusion from two months ago: ... if a few hundred million Chinese decide that the time has come to use bitcoin as the capital controls bypassing currency of choice, and decide to invest even a tiny fraction of the $22 trillion in Chinese deposits in bitcoin (whose total market cap at last check was just over $3 billion), sit back and watch as we witness the second coming of the bitcoin bubble, one which could make the previous all time highs in the digital currency, seems like a low print. As of this moment, the total value of bitcoin is up from the $3 billion two months ago to a little over $5 billion. That means the ratio of Chinese deposits (at around $22 trillion) to bitcoin, is down to a far more "conservative" 4,400x. And now, again, imagine what could happen if these same Chinese depositors realize they have been lied about the non-performing loans "backing" their deposits and that instead of the official 1.5% bad debt ratio, the real number is really far greater, somewhere in the 20% ballpark as we will show shortly, suggesting major deposit impairments are no longer the stuff of Cypriot nightmares but just the thing hundreds of millions of Chinese depositors have to look forward to, and that they have just two possible choices to avoid said impairment: reallocating their savings into bitcoin or, of course, gold. * * * How will the Chinese regulators and government react to this? Especially as the volumes are start to become relevant. Everything I've seen so far has been speculation about the halving. |
|
|
|
Isn't a prepaid credit card called a debit card?
it isn't really credit when you aren't borrowing it.
Generally, debit cards are hooked to an perpetually existing bank account. A prepaid CC is a temporary account that you can discard after use, it's not linked to your bank account. Prepaid CC is a more anonymous form of electronic payment. |
|
|
|
1k was already surpassed in 2013, it was 1200, i dunno why people keep thinking about 1k, when it is not a real target anymore
if everything goes well we can hit 10k, with the next halving already...
You'll be lucky to make it back to $1000 at the next halving. That's why everyone keeps talking about it. Every zero you add to an already sky-high valuation is another stage of delusion. |
|
|
|
|
My signature has been upgraded to hero. Please change my designation in your records.
|
|
|
|
Simplest way to secure your future is to buy two (or more) houses.
You rent out the other houses to pay for all your expenses for your primary house (it is not likely that rental return will ever be zero nor is it likely that rental return will be much less than the expenses needed to maintain an equivalent house).
Your only problem with multiple properties will be taxation (as eventually I think all governments are going to tax properties as things like "income tax" are going to become defunct in the future).
So even if you buy multiple houses - keep some BTC for the taxes!
My grandparents owns 3 houses in the province and lease them. So far it's been giving them a passive income aside from their pensions. Also, real estate and houses tend to increase their value over time, so I think we're good right now. It would be awesome if they can pay taxes in bitcoin.  When you deduct out the housing bubble, houses have generally appreciated at the rate of inflation, so you're not making anything so much as keeping what you started with in terms of purchasing power. |
|
|
|
If Bitcoin goes up very high should i buy a house?
Ive been thinking if it went into very high figures i could cash out 80-90% of bitcoin and buy a house outright with no mortgage. Is that even a good idea though? - basically 80% of networth in a house hmmm. On the other hand i dont want to have a mortgage and im fed up with renting due to landlords, letting agents and lack of control.
Man when Bitcoin reaches these high value I swear you need to convert into fiat. You will be able to buy a house with Bitcoin!The seller will accept Bitcoin!  Yeah i know but maybe not on this next bull run. Lets say we hit $3k- $4k in the next few months which could happen i doubt everyone well accept bitcoins for houses. Some people will sure. Bitcoin has risen $70, or roughly 30% recently, and is still $800 below it's all-time high bubble price. What makes you think that rising another 1500% to 3x the old bubble price is feasible? |
|
|
|
I am wondering why has the world agreed that an ounce of gold is worth 50 U.S. dollars?
Even in other currencies this price stamped on the one ounce gold coin holds true. Like the chinese panda, 500 yuan which is basically, approximately 50 USD. And the silver ounce is worth 5 USD... or similare amounts in other currencies... if you stack, you know this... it's like price hasn't moved since the 1940's... what do the banks and governments know that we don't? Are they planning to confiscate it all for that amount for each coin?
Or would they just confiscate the gold and let us peasants keep our silver...?
The world hasn't decided that an ounce of gold is worth $50. A gold ounce currently trades over $1100, and that is what the world has decided an ounce of gold is worth currently. You can stamp whatever denomination you want on a one-ounce gold coin and it will not affect the worth of the coin, which is based on the amount of gold in it, not the denomination stamped on it. |
|
|
|
It is too early to be very positive about current prices. It does not show long term rise to higher points.
Just hold your breath guys. It is still early. Be ready for downwards trend.
Nothing the comming year 2016 will show what the price is up to in the very longterm. Currently everything you see is short term. Every long term starts somewhere. It could have started right now. A solid and stable uptrend until in June we have an huge panic selling rally pushing Bitcoin to 5K a coin is perfectly possible given the current coordinates. I might suggest that you keep stacking Bitcoin at any price under 500 dollars, then start buying slower but steady. Bitcoin community in a nutshell: price rises 30%, suddenly people are talking about how "reasonable" or "possible" another 1500% rise is. Stay grounded in reality my friends! |
|
|
|
Keynesianism relies on the fact that the economy can outgrow debt, which is silly.
It is silly because the GDP grows linearly, but the debt grows geometrically or even exponentially, thus it is by definition a ponzi scheme by design.
This isn't such an absurd notion when the government is fiscally responsible and runs surpluses when the economy is healthy. However, despite extremely beneficial economic conditions over the past 60 years at times, we've never run a surplus when the economy is healthy. Rather than repaying the debt that was borrowed during slow times, republicans insist on cutting taxes during good times. We run deficits to grow the economy, then deficits when the economy is "recovered" because we slash taxes to celebrate how great the economy is. The current debt picture might look radically different if just the tiniest bit of fiscal common sense was injected. |
|
|
|
Probably Gemini as you suggested, but if the pump cannot even be sustained until launch (tomorrow) I'm not sure how positive of a signal it is.
it's already going down again. we can't even maintain to keep the price at the $247-$248 levels. we'll probably fall back to below $240 again today. This pretty effectively illustrates the futility of looking at 5 minute price moves and trying to discern any longer term impact or momentum... |
|
|
|
|
From an institutional standpoint, the currency is of little use and the real promise lies with the blockchain. Nasdaq is already experimenting with blockchain technology to settle trades. From Nasdaq's perspective, the currency doesn't solve any issues, and this is true of most organizations. If people want to pay with bitcoin, most companies can easily accept bitcoin payments if it gains a critical mass, however they're going to immediately convert to fiat because there is substantial business risk in holding a volatile asset like bitcoin. So from a currency standpoint, it's very uninteresting and inconsequential even if the currency gains a critical mass. However, the blockchain technology has applications outside of the currency, and this is where the real promise for change and revolution lies. Nasdaq is experimenting with blockchains in an attempt to cut down the trade settlement time from 3 days to nearly instantaneous. A change like that would revolutionize trading, and that's just a start of potential blockchain uses.
|
|
|
|
How do you think guys, should I invest to NVC (the price is very sweet now)? It is trading on BTC-e, gives ~25%/year from PoS mining and as main holders say, developing of NVC-antispam mechanism with mail server should significantly increase capitalization soon.
If the coin serves no market purpose, you should stay away from it. 99% of all alts are on a slow death march to zero. Litecoin might be the only alt that survives. Gimmicks like PoS mining and "antispam" are flashy ideas up until they prove inconsequential and fail because the coin ultimately doesn't solve a problem left unaddressed by any of the real players in the crypto space. |
|
|
|
The economics of professional ticket scalping is interesting to me and I thought this dramatic drop in ticket prices was interesting. All the hype over the Cubs had tickets to their games reaching insane levels.
I prefer to see scalpers doing well. Profitable scalpers only improve the distribution process. I don't see this at all as they serve no market function. There's no improvement to distribution by them buying tickets and reselling them. Almost all tickets are delivered electronically anyway, so they don't improve distribution at all as electronic ticketing is as efficient as the process can get; they offer no incremental improvement. Their speculation only drives up the price for people who actually want to attend the game. If the ticket price is too low then there will be a shortage of seats. This will cause the event to sell out before everyone that wants a seat can get one. We'll often see extended queueing for physical tickets or a rush for digital tickets. This is inefficient distribution. If the ticket price is too high then we will have a glut. So few people will want to pay the high price that there will be empty seats. This is equally inefficient. Profitable scalping helps to reduce these effects. There are a shortage of seats in this case irrespective of scalpers. Face value is the price of the tickets set by the venue, and there is always a shortage of seats at the true price. Scalpers rush in to speculate and artificially drive up the price. This does not do anything to alleviate the shortage, just capitalize on the money the venue willingly left on the table, because the shortage of seats at the true price remains. This does not make the market more efficient. The scalpers provide an artificial price after creating more of a shortage than would otherwise be with artificial demand/speculative demand. This is not efficiency. |
|
|
|
so, what id like to do is invest bitcoins to a stock or mutual fund account, but am not sure the best way to go about it. any tips/advice?
Investing bitcoin is risky I wont deny it but it is worth all the risk because it pays off more than you expected when it is done right. Buying bitcoin isn't "investing," it's speculating. There's no business that underlies bitcoin, so it doesn't generate income or profit. Speculating is always more risky than investing in an actual business or company. Would you say there is a strong business supporting gold ? True, some people use it as jewllery and it has some industrial use, but most of people who buy it, hold it as an investment or inflation hedge. There are some people who trade gold (or derivatives based on gold) as a speculation. Isn't it similar with bitcoin ? Similar in that gold "investing" is also speculative, but gold also has a long and reliable history of serving as a hedge against inflation. Nothing could be further from the truth for bitcoin, which is highly volatile and has fallen more than 70% in the last three years. |
|
|
|
The economics of professional ticket scalping is interesting to me and I thought this dramatic drop in ticket prices was interesting. All the hype over the Cubs had tickets to their games reaching insane levels.
I prefer to see scalpers doing well. Profitable scalpers only improve the distribution process. I don't see this at all as they serve no market function. There's no improvement to distribution by them buying tickets and reselling them. Almost all tickets are delivered electronically anyway, so they don't improve distribution at all as electronic ticketing is as efficient as the process can get; they offer no incremental improvement. Their speculation only drives up the price for people who actually want to attend the game. |
|
|
|
The economics of professional ticket scalping is interesting to me and I thought this dramatic drop in ticket prices was interesting. All the hype over the Cubs had tickets to their games reaching insane levels. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-cubs-fans-tickets-wrigley-met-1021-20151021-story.htmlTickets to see the Chicago Cubs take on the New York Mets were expected to be the most expensive National League Championship Series tickets in the past five years, but the average price of a Game 3 ticket is down more than 57 percent, experts say.
The average ticket price for Tuesday's Game 3 at Wrigley Field was $526.28, according to TiqIQ.com, a website that aggregates ticket prices on the secondary market. After the Cubs triumphed over the St. Louis Cardinals in the National League Division Series last week, tickets were listed at $1,233.01, TiqIQ spokesman Chris Matcovich said.
The drop may be in part because the Cubs trail the series 0-2, Matcovich said. However, there is typically a drop in ticket prices closer to the day of the event.
"This one is a bit more steep than normal," he said.
Some of the cheapest seats on resale sites were around $265, a 47 percent drop from the end of the NLDS.
The most expensive ticket was a club box seat listed at $1,900, Matcovich said.
Dozens of Cubs fans, like Joey Lipps, of the city's Lakeview neighborhood, lined up Tuesday afternoon outside the Wrigley Field box office in hopes of getting face value tickets after hearing the team had some left over.
"Once I heard that I got my (butt) over here," said Lipps, who also attended the wild-card game in Pittsburgh and an NLDS game in Chicago.
"Everybody and their mama wanted to get tickets, but once it became flooded with tickets, prices dropped."
Some are attributing the drop to the fact that the Cubs couldn't clinch at Wrigley after they dropped the first two games. Either way, it's nice to see scalpers get burned, since they're a big reason ticket prices are so unreasonable. |
|
|
|
Still, Samman acknowledged Gemini's liquidity problem is one that faces the entire industry, due to weakening demand for bitcoin as an asset and what he called a "distrust" in existing exchange options. Further, he suggested that Gemini's by-the-book approach to launching in New York may have turned off avid traders, including those with libertarian or anti-government leanings.
Because unregulated exchanges were working so well? How many disappeared with bitcoins? Regulation is not always the enemy, and in this case it's inevitable and carries the benefits of legitimizing and stabilizing the currency to a very large and reluctant population of non-adopters. Net good > bad. Sure, regulation brings good things in some cases, but let's not kid ourselves here, the people that is using now Bitcoin are usually libertarians, anarcho capitalists, or hackers/geeks, the normal folk are still unaware of Bitcoin, so this means, most of the people that is inside Bitcoin are ok with unregulated exchanges. Once Bitcoin goes mainstream then Gemini will see a lot of new users over there. You should ask the people who lost money in Mt. Gox what they think of unregulated exchanges. Perhaps all that outrage was just a misunderstanding by all the libertarians and anarcho capitalists. I'm even a libertarian and I would never trust an unregulated exchange. |
|
|
|
so, what id like to do is invest bitcoins to a stock or mutual fund account, but am not sure the best way to go about it. any tips/advice?
Investing bitcoin is risky I wont deny it but it is worth all the risk because it pays off more than you expected when it is done right. Buying bitcoin isn't "investing," it's speculating. There's no business that underlies bitcoin, so it doesn't generate income or profit. Speculating is always more risky than investing in an actual business or company. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
