Yeah, VWAP would be nice but isn't that important. Median price would be awesome already!
Median price has been added. Looks very good. Your site is now officially my favorite live-charting site. Will make a second donation as soon as my wallet is refilled. |
|
|
|
Hey, I just learned first hand the annoyance that is legacy banking, even *within* the limits of how it is supposed to work: trying to wire money to bitfinex (Shanghai bank)... what a pain in the ass. Can't do it online, get to convince my bank guy to do the wire, all kind of (useless) information asked for. I sincerely hope that'll be a thing of the past soon  |
|
|
|
Eh, let's not jump to conclusions. As was pointed out by others, that's a letter by *one* bank, for *one* type of account, saying nothing about whether you can switch to another type of account that still allows intl wire transfer. In short: no. International transfers won't quietly stop working in the US. They won't make it *that* easy for us  |
|
|
|
EDIT: Wait. Why 55%? It's compounded interest, so: 1.00166^365 ~= 83% before comission
It's only compounded if everyone except you withdraws their profits. If everyone leaves their profits in, then it's effectively simple interest. Your share of the profits remains constant, and presumably so do the expected profits. True. Forgot about the other investors. Anyway, looks like most investors that post here are more or less happy with the expected returns, so I rest my case. |
|
|
|
Good point, I admit. In the long run I don't think a ratio of 60+k invested vs. below-10k gambled is sustainable, but I guess that's a self-correcting problem 10k / 60k = 0.166% per day expected return on investment, or 61% per year. 55% after commission. I'm not familiar with other places to invest Bitcoin. What is the usual rate of return? At what point would JD's expected rate of return become unacceptable? I don't know. In the "real world", +55% would be pretty fantastic. I just guess in the world of bitcoin, it's not that much, especially considering the (substantial) risk to the investment on j-d. But I can only speak for myself, others might think 55% is more than enough. EDIT: Wait. Why 55%? It's compounded interest, so: 1.00166^365 ~= 83% before comission |
|
|
|
Good point, I admit. In the long run I don't think a ratio of 60+k invested vs. below-10k gambled is sustainable, but I guess that's a self-correcting problem |
|
|
|
|
Look at it in the context of previous daily wagering amounts (even excluding the "whale days") and total amount invested, and it doesn't look that impressive anymore.
We had a nice momentum after nakowa (and maybe mechs), but it seems to have diminished over the last week(s).
|
|
|
|
|
... as always, btc market gets ahead of itself. We'll scratch 150, drop back to 120-something but quickly go back to 132. From there, we'll continue the rally :D
|
|
|
|
|
3 days in a row with sub-10k total wagered per day...
I'd really like to see a discussion about realistic ways to increase traffic/total wagered.
Anyone? Dooglus?
|
|
|
|
|
Remember what happened when proudhon turned bull? Now ElectricMucus thinks "the bubble" will be "reinflated"...
...
...
SELL! SELL! SELL!
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, got to give (master)luc(if) credit where credit is due: he is pretty cautious with what he posts here, so *if* he posts, it's always worth considering. And he's neither a bull nor a bear in any meaningful sense: he's just a pretty good trader, by the looks of it :D
|
|
|
|
|
The "consciously creating the appearance of volume" is a possibility, but not even what I really consider the main factor. Take the following example:
Scenario 1: "indecisive" market (say in a consolidation phase), but low trading cost (which, for example, seems to be the case on the Chinese exchanges). Quite high volume despite the indecision, because trading is cheap, and there's always someone trying to make a small profit by selling high/buying back low(er).
Scenario 2: A rally, with many new buyers entering the market. Overall volume could in fact be the same as in scenario 1 (since a number of established btc holders are probably tempted to sell if price is rising too fast, in anticipation of a sudden drop), but the total amount USD entering exchanges is different (assuming of course that the sellers don't leave the market entirely).
I guess I see where the idea that it doesn't really matter comes from: if, in the long run, the traders that trade "back and forth" stay out of btc entirely, then it really doesn't matter. But the crucial difference is that at least a portion of the "new" money stays in the market, and at least a portion of the money of those that sold to the new entrants will (probably) stay on the exchanges, waiting for an opportunity to rebuy.
Here's another view on the matter: think of it in terms of price discovery. In scenario 1, the participants already paid a price per btc close to the price of the trade now. For them, their contribution to the overall price discovery is rather minimal (say a trader bought at 100, and now sells at 101). A new market participant will however mark a much more substantial adjustment of what the market thinks is a fair price: he previously "valued" btc at 0, and now values them at 100 (as per the example before). Volume doesn't distinguish between those two cases, but for the long-term market dynamics it does matter, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess we disagree on this question, then. For the overall size of the market, and as a result, for overall buying pressure, it matters a lot whether new participants enter, or whether the same ones trade back and forth.
|
|
|
|
|
Here's the problem with volume analysis: there's now definitive way of knowing if some trade contributing to the volume is between two parties that both previously held btc (i.e. "trading back-and-forth"), or whether at least one party will buy btc for the first time (or in substantially higher quantities than before). The latter case is what we really want (and need), it's the "fresh money" that is necessary in the argument that says: price can only be sustained/go up if X amount of USD enter the market each month. Since from the outside there is no way of telling which of the cases applies, I'm extremely sceptical about arguments based on volume and price sustainability based on volume.
|
|
|
|
Yes, I know that problem all too well. Realistically, to get the same amount of options as there are on btccharts (and more in fact), you will probably need to use a dedicated trading & data platform like Sierra Chart. As far as websites go, clarkmoody's rtbtc has perhaps the most options, but as far as I know, doesn't include bistamp data so far, which is why I haven't signed up yet. Looks very good to me otherwise. |
|
|
|
1) People, stop quoting trolls. 2) @dooglus: Did you get a chance to look at the (quoted below) ideas to get more traffic/widen the player base? [...]
Volume is a bit uneven: on some days volume (even without a whale) is well above 20k, on other days it hovers around 10k. Since individual profits (on average) depend on the site volume and the total amount invested, I'd say that right now, at 50k invested vs. 10k to 20k daily volume, we're doing okay, but could do better perhaps.
Is this something you are considering, dooglus? How to increase wagering volume, by getting the site more exposure? Or implementing features to bind gamblers to the site?
I remember someone in here posted (a few pages ago) an idea about 'badges' and 'achievements' gamblers can unlock. What do you think about it? Personally, I like the idea, if it's done well and doesn't look tacky.
What else... I remember someone suggesting earlier that the Chinese market for gambling is huge. So gettin the site translated into Chinese, and advertising it, could give a boost to volume.
|
|
|
|
Blasting through 145!!!  Looks like it happened 6 times in history (on daily chart) ... :-) is the attempt #7 the last one ? Perhaps more impressive, Stamp is at like a 5 month high. I would take actual buying pressure on Stamp as more indicative than on Gox, as Stamp has been more historically viewed as a "seller's exchange" (suppressed by Gox). Of course, we'll see where the storm settles.. Where do you get the "5 month high" from? Price weighted by volume? In terms of pure price extrema, 31st August was still higher @135. |
|
|
|
Still a great website, still using it almost daily (and I donated a while ago). Now even better  |
|
|
|
adamstgBit, when you see any bearish comment, you look like this?  I'm quiting smoking, I dont wana talk about it. fuck you all. Awww, but we love you. Btw, how's that cloud computing thing working out so far? *runs* |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
