That is disappointing. Looks like it is going to crash.
If we don't get a great reversal adoption is on hold for at least another year.
|
|
|
I think i prefer it hugely when the heroes and legendarys post on this forum.
|
|
|
A few more dollars and we get above the earlier dead cat..
|
|
|
huobi trying..
yeh time for bed. hopefully the chinese drag us up over 340 over the next few hours.
EDIT: stamp not moving up bid walls..grr
|
|
|
![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) sorry..revealing my bull side there
|
|
|
little nibbles..might see a slow drift upwards if we are lucky some twat on stamp with a 1k wall at 340
|
|
|
Huobi support has moved up. 6K to 2000. 6k to 2340.
Just need a bit of buying..
|
|
|
Roubini will be at it next. That quote about scientific breakthroughs not being agreed upon by the chief thinkers and scientists of the day but outliving them instead seems appropriate. It is the youth who will make cryptocurrency a part of global economy, not the old guard seeing the light. Or perhaps even more appropriate from Upton Sinclair, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!".
|
|
|
That money will never pour into BTC, since Gross, Wall Street guys and other smart people don't invest in pyramid schemes. They're not interested in making cultist neckbeards rich.
Jesus exo, stop with the trolling negative posts. Half the board has you on ignore for being a cunt. The other half see right through it. The only reason I haven't /ignored you is because I want to see if you stop being a miserable sourpuss when you finally buy in.
|
|
|
I thought all the trolls were saying the early adopters were dumping?
Another hero on the forum posted something about the Chinese buying fresh coins off mining farms there and transferring the bitcoins offshore to be sold on exchanges for dollars. That might explain why this bear market has lasted as long as it has against a backdrop of otherwise incredibly bullish news (and potential developments). Everyone is hoping bitcoin can become big in the remittance markets. Perhaps the Chinese are a few steps ahead and defeating capital controls with btc as we speak. Thinking about it though, that would only account for a maximum of 3600 coins a day selling pressure on the exchanges. It is likely to be less than that as not all miners will sell. However this added sell pressure could continue unabated until the next halving. My gut tells me this the down trend in price is a combination of large speculator manipulation, technical small speculators trading the momentum (shorts at ATH for year, most small specs dumped already..though chatter loudly on here), increased mining supply on exchanges and a tiny amount of merchant selling. I am not sure the general public is adopting in a big way as the price is going the wrong way to attract attention. I am not selling now, and will make one more purchase of 80 coins upwards depending upon how low the price drops this time round. My expectation is that we probably are in for more pain, flash crash downwards but turn upwards around 300, on massive volume, after some btfinex long capitulation, with shorts above ATH before they are burned very heavily by a surprisingly quick bounce back up into the 400-500 range. I expect the ETF to be announced at some stage that looking back will show it allowed insiders to accumulate at a very convenient low price. Predictions are dangerous cypherdoc, but do you have any of your own?
|
|
|
I am curious about long term scenarios. We all know about 21 mil max bitcoins. However, if and when COIN or BIT will start trading, what would prevent Wall Street to multiply the number of supposedly strictly restricted number of units 10 or 100 fold? Nobody ever challenged GLD ETF to show that they actually own the amount of gold they supposed to have. Brokerages already using hypothecation for stocks, which together with other techniques in case of heavily shorted stocks is rumored to vastly increase the number of shares for some companies. On the other hand, Bill Gates could sneeze in the morning and "accidentally" use one-one and a half day worth of his dividends and bitcoin will be above $1000 ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) . It's impossible. There is more GLD ETF then ever has been mined. GLD in its fine print says that they will settle accounts in cash if it comes to that. It is fraud sanctioned by the US government. It keeps the price artificially suppressed so their fiat lives on. There is no audit trail. It is kabuki theater. The only ETF that I know of that has audited gold with serial numbers is Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS). Same thing with silver. SLV is a fraud. PSLV is legit. If so, the same nonsense might be repeated with COIN. It should be trivial to provide blockchain verifiable evidence of holdings in realtime. In fact I expect this before I send them a penny from my tax free stocks wrapper. it should be trivial to document gold holdings as well. Perhaps you know this, but Joe public does not have the knowledge to check the blockchain to verify. Even for an expert, it would take a while, and they will say that it is proprietary info. Well some exchanges reveal their holdings in a blockchain verifiable way. The same will i am sure be true of COIN. You think a major investor is going to send them millions of dollars and just accept that they have the coins without proof? Lol. It is totally different from gold. This is a cryptographically verifiable non counterfeitable digital token - much cooler ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) What BTC ETFs like COIN and other BTC investment funds need to do is to guarantee and show allocated coins, every client's holding is stored on their own individual publicly published and viewable address, rather than pooled in the total holdings account as happens on exchanges, this is like the best practice of PM funds like www.bullionvault.com except miles better as anyone can instantly see and prove that the funds are actually allocated to the clients rather than just take the business's and auditor's word for it. It is technically possible and would show that these magic internet money tokens are unique in more ways than one.
|
|
|
We reached a new BTC swaps ATH today:
12359 BTC
Former one in April was 12128BTC
Noone will care until there is a squeeeeze.
|
|
|
Past performance does not guarantee future return.
huh, you might be right about something after all ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fdp3nZiY.png&t=663&c=N33BMPCVlDExlg) Of course if you just lengthen the timeframe slightly it looks totally different. I see what you did there.
|
|
|
Yes, lawyers for multimillion dollar clients often divulge confidential information to redditors. But thanks for posting nonetheless. Guess you didn't read it, it was confirmed by the moderator: Hi /u/notisis[1] [+1], While I'd love this world to be a place where we can blindly believe what people say on the internet, sadly, we don't live in that world. Please submit me some shred of proof and I'll reapprove this post (and remove this comment). EDIT: I reached out to Kathleen Moriaty via email to confirm /u/notisis[2] [+1] claim. Below is the email she sent to me in its entirety: Dear Taylor, I did speak with a Bitcoin investor about 15 minutes ago, although I was unaware that he intended to quote me or otherwise discuss our conversation. Your message is a useful reminder that I shouldn’t hazard any guesses. The SEC has warned me not to provide people with possible speculative information about the complicated process of launching a new securities product for public sale, so I have been saying either (1)“it could take quite a while, like a year” or (2)“there is really no way to tell, since the regulatory process is very complicated, especially with respect to a new asset like bitcoin.” From now on, I’ll just use statement (2), so if you want to quote me, just use that one. Thanks so much, Kathleen Yes, sorry that isn't confirmation it is a reddit post. Oh dear. But like I added.. common sense? You think they will allow an ETF that follows shady exchanges? Really? If so please explain why on earth they would do that. Please explain why on earth would you know more about the SEC policies and likelyhood of COIN's acceptance than the top ETF lawyer on Wall Street? From the horses mouth : “If there weren’t any realistic uses, I wouldn’t be so happy about doing this” The concept of common sense eludes you. I know nothing about SEC policies like most here, but I do have a mind that can think and add two and two together. That is really all it takes. The ETF would have to follow numbers that are unregulated and in one instance anonymous(btc-e). I'm sure they will be just fine with that. Seems like the concept of common sense also eludes two millionaires, Kathleen Moriarty and law firm Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP. Indeed, in the face of such strong arguments I am not so sure as to why they judged it worthy of going forward with the ETF proposal ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) You should propose your "common sense" legal counsil to them. I'm certain they could use it ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) I give up, ETF will be approved and bitcoin will be going to $10k when it does. I'm sure it will happen before the end of the year and that this is all just a big hoax. Congratulations on being right. Now enjoy your future riches. Thanks for ignoring entirely the main point of discussion and derailing the thread.
|
|
|
Yes, lawyers for multimillion dollar clients often divulge confidential information to redditors. But thanks for posting nonetheless. Guess you didn't read it, it was confirmed by the moderator: Hi /u/notisis[1] [+1], While I'd love this world to be a place where we can blindly believe what people say on the internet, sadly, we don't live in that world. Please submit me some shred of proof and I'll reapprove this post (and remove this comment). EDIT: I reached out to Kathleen Moriaty via email to confirm /u/notisis[2] [+1] claim. Below is the email she sent to me in its entirety: Dear Taylor, I did speak with a Bitcoin investor about 15 minutes ago, although I was unaware that he intended to quote me or otherwise discuss our conversation. Your message is a useful reminder that I shouldn’t hazard any guesses. The SEC has warned me not to provide people with possible speculative information about the complicated process of launching a new securities product for public sale, so I have been saying either (1)“it could take quite a while, like a year” or (2)“there is really no way to tell, since the regulatory process is very complicated, especially with respect to a new asset like bitcoin.” From now on, I’ll just use statement (2), so if you want to quote me, just use that one. Thanks so much, Kathleen Yes, sorry that isn't confirmation it is a reddit post. Oh dear. But like I added.. common sense? You think they will allow an ETF that follows shady exchanges? Really? If so please explain why on earth they would do that. I don't work for the SEC. Nothing you have posted is verifiable or in any way confirmed.
|
|
|
Yes, lawyers for multimillion dollar clients often divulge confidential information to redditors. But thanks for posting nonetheless. Guess you didn't read it, it was confirmed by the moderator: Hi /u/notisis[1] [+1], While I'd love this world to be a place where we can blindly believe what people say on the internet, sadly, we don't live in that world. Please submit me some shred of proof and I'll reapprove this post (and remove this comment). EDIT: I reached out to Kathleen Moriaty via email to confirm /u/notisis[2] [+1] claim. Below is the email she sent to me in its entirety: Dear Taylor, I did speak with a Bitcoin investor about 15 minutes ago, although I was unaware that he intended to quote me or otherwise discuss our conversation. Your message is a useful reminder that I shouldn’t hazard any guesses. The SEC has warned me not to provide people with possible speculative information about the complicated process of launching a new securities product for public sale, so I have been saying either (1)“it could take quite a while, like a year” or (2)“there is really no way to tell, since the regulatory process is very complicated, especially with respect to a new asset like bitcoin.” From now on, I’ll just use statement (2), so if you want to quote me, just use that one. Thanks so much, Kathleen Yes, sorry that isn't confirmation it is a reddit post.
|
|
|
Do you realize your graph only goes until 7/03, right?
Not mine, nabbed from bitcoinmarkets. And it goes to october the 3rd.
|
|
|
Yes, lawyers for multimillion dollar clients often divulge confidential information to redditors. But thanks for posting nonetheless.
|
|
|
So this is chart is interesting: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FxXdKFiU.png&t=663&c=zT-s1DPTUVeNow) If this were really a mass exodus and the death of bitcoin then it would probably look very different. Moving the price with such a thin market is trivial. I wouldn't be surprised if something big is announced in the next few days or weeks. Something where we all go, aaaaaah, like the ETF. Or bitcoin could plummet into the center of the earth ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
Why on earth does the mining have to use more power than a medium size country as the price rises?
Because the miners get paid with block rewards in bitcoin. As the price of bitcoin rises so does the block reward. And as long the mining gear produces more rewards than the power to run it costs, it will stay online. And at, say $500K per coin and 12.5BTC/block that would be like $900M rewards/day or ~$330B/year. A large amount of that would be going into paying the electricity bills. You make an excellent point and in the long run perhaps the mining system may prove flawed. But I must have missed where in the near term the cost of a bitcoin is anyway related its mining cost? I'm sorry, but you are wrong. If bitcoin price is 10x higher than mining costs then a lot of new miners will emerge ... simply because they can make some profit. If the price of bitcoin rises 100x tomorrow the mining cost of a bitcoin in the near term does not. The mining cost will rise as demand for miners rises to capture profit from the block reward minus cost of production, but this is a delayed response, with a definite lag period. My point was simply that in for example november/december last year the price shot up 10x in very short order. Mining has since surged to capture that demand and the hash rate has gone ballistic. In this example with a bitcoin valued at 500,000 dollars, however unlikely it seems, such a price could arise in a bubble situation where the price rises many fold over a short period of time, far exceeding the pre bubble mining cost of securing the network. So although I doubt we will ever see such high prices they do not necessarily require the hundreds of billions of dollars in electricity costs that goat has inferred earlier. Sustaining such a price is a different matter entirely..
|
|
|
|