The OP has previous.

Remember when there was yet another incident in an ongoing conflict and BTC hit $1000 in a week? No? Me neither.

Uh, how... what...?

If a trader buys BTC with $1000, at $250 for 1 BTC, and the price goes up 10% over 1 year - they can sell their 4 BTC for $1100.

If a trader buys BTC with $1000, at $1000 for 1 BTC, and the price goes up 10% over 1 year - they can sell their 1 BTC for $1100.

What am I missing?

And you're right - we did see $20 again. I hope the OP bought back in sometime between their July 2011 post and February 2013, when we saw 20 again.

January 2011 (first time) and February 2013 (the "again" that the title suggested would never occur). This is a very old thread.

No. You know there's this new thing the kids are doing, called "fact checking"? Finex closed just above 320 on 31 December, ditto for Stamp.

I don't know why you're so certain dumb blind luck is involved. I put the same amount of thought into options trades as I would any other trade - only difference is I tend towards options when volatility is low. I trade mostly in BTC so exchanging the BTC I set aside for trading for fiat would be a cost, and playing poker probably much more so.

I would say I've had more luck trading options, particularly during the past year when we were ranging between ~200 and ~300, than straight trading - except I don't believe luck had much to do with it. I sold puts when prices started falling back from 300, and I sold calls when prices started lifting from ~200. Had the range been narrower and volatility even lower I'd have considered selling straddles or strangles, but I'm happy enough with my profits.

I'm not sure I'd regard alts as derivatives - to me that's like saying JPY is a derivative of GBP. I was meaning more conventional derivatives, like options.

Profit is useful to me, and isn't this discussion about trading when there isn't any momentum (i.e. following the current momentum isn't an option)? "Keeping it simple" has to be about more than sitting on your hands and complaining about the lack of volatility. I take your point about transparency and regulation, but they're considerations whether I'm trading straight BTC or derivatives.

I keep seeing this "stable prices not good for trading" line. Have BTC traders developed a very limited definition of trading that ignores derivatives?

I know hindsight's 20-20, but honestly - replying to Kwukduck really doesn't require hindsight.

So, Bitstamp dropped to a lowly USD 310, 'finex to an even humbler 309.46. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that the low points on the 20th were during your 12 hours.

Are you ever right? Were you ever right?

WHAT, AGAIN? I'm still reeling from the shock of your completely 100% accurate prediction a couple of weeks ago:


Oh, wait - prices fell for two days after your last pump-alert. I guess you're just talking out of your rear end.

Agreed. The past data is all over the place - it leads me to believe that a belief that "prices fall in December" isn't a valid one. (Prices might fall - but it won't be due to any imagined "December effect").

Historically there's not been a great deal of downward pressure on price during Decembers. December 2011 saw a rise; December 2012 was flat, preceding a rise in January 2013 (to the >$10 then-ATH); December 2013 did see a fall (following the November 2013 >$1000 ATH); and December 2014 was mostly flat (but did precede a substantial drop in January 2015).

They're too late - it happened in August.

Edit: do you think they got CNY 20.67 confused with 2067 - or that they confused LTC with BTC? On Huobi right now there's near parity between LTC and BTC... (Either way - ouch!)

@Wangxinxi, Izanagi (and possibly Devthedev?)

I'm leaving this campaign at or after midnight UTC - partly to ensure I've completed another full week, partly to give you a few more hours to sort this out. I'll keep the signature in place until then.

My transaction history and emails from Coinut show that my two most recent deposits (from Coinut) were for the periods 3-9 October 2015 and 10-16 October 2015.

Obviously the issues surrounding the signature campaign raise doubts about Coinut as a whole. I do not know if - or for how long - I will continue to trade on Coinut. I'd therefore prefer it if any payments were made to my Bitcoin address:
I encourage Coinut to be as open and transparent as it can be about what's going on. When all we hear is silence we have to assume the worst.

I hope for the best, and wish you the same for the future.

(In before "evidence your post count": Izanagi has done the post-count for 4 weeks for which I've not received payment, and I don't have any reason - or method - to dispute the Coinut spreadsheet. All a documented post-count would achieve for me is getting the correct payment for the final period - 14-20 November 2015. And, frankly, I'd sacrifice that entirely if it meant (a) I got paid for the previous 4 weeks, and/or (b) people relying on the income from this campaign got paid instead of me).


(Edit: changed Bitcoin address)

(Second edit to add... I requested a withdrawal ~1 BTC) a few hours ago - it was processed nearly immediately, and it's now on 3 confirmations. Thanks, Coinut!)

Current projection is towards the end of July. The Chartbuddy bot is currently providing a block countdown ("BTH" - blocks to halving) over on the Wall Observer thread, though it's in blocks (obviously!), which I still can't translate into days/weeks/months!

Aw, you wee lamb! That's mint, thank you!

Huh. I'm no pro trader but I managed to buy BTC and sell puts at a few low points, and sell calls at a couple of high points over the past year. I'd love to claim that I am a pro-trader, but I was far from alone in noticing that BTC was swinging between ~200 and ~300. I didn't try and call tops or bottoms, I just took advantage of the size of the swings and traded when the trend was fairly clear.

You should give up on the dogma. Hard evidence is the solution, not blindly following dogma. Even if you're simply mindlessly channeling a troll.

Edit: no, you're right. I should devote time and energy to persuading the government and regulatory authorities of the PRC that they should regulate against speculation in a nationally tiny market in order to protect some anonymous guy on the internet who's told me via the medium of sarcasm that they're really keen on regulating this nationally tiny market. I just bet the PRC will jump right to it.

Hmmm. Part of the reason I don't tend to buy P&Ds-ruin-our-lives arguments is because they usually seem to come back to regulate-all-the-things arguments. Not saying they don't occur, just that evidence tends to play second fiddle to solutions (of a regulatory nature). Anyway, if the latest rise was indeed a P&D it was an exceptional one, and kudos to the players behind it.