Buy back.

Stop reading news.

Stop caring about price.

*Have your friend call you if and only if Bitcoin experiences a sell signal (0.4 log units above trendline).

Live your life.

Wait for the call.

When it comes, check if selling max 50% of your bitcoins is enough to retire.

If yes, sell them. If no, take 20% out as profits and buy something nice.

Go to *.

windjc and others haven't probably considered the effect that Gox and other exchanges' fall has had on the market landscape:

- It has made people wary on sending fiat to exchange, yes (this is the visible effect).
- But it has also made them search for and use the alternatives (this is the invisible effect).

Lots of trade is happening in services like Bittiraha.fi, who make markets locally (and local = Europe in this case). Judging the volume from exchange data is hilarious. Equally hilarious is the day when the positive balance of the local market-making hits the exchanges. That demand is in the form of market orders.

I for one think that the exchanges are a drag on Bitcoin's longer-term health (and have been on this line since $50). Consequently, I think that the development that people don't trust the exchanges any more is good.

Why I try to exhort people buy now is that you deserve it (after so much pain and misinformation)! Reading this thread only and following the prevalent mood would have made you buy at $1000 and sell at $400, but the reverse is how you make money.

To this and similar thinking I would say: The large traders are not following these technical patterns, they are creating them.

This thread was started as Wall Observer - previously there were large single orders which formed "walls" in the depth chart. But they have always been erected by the market manipulators, because they are the only ones with that many coins (then BTC10-BTC20k, now even BTC2k is considered a wall).

From my experience I can tell that wall building can fake selling pressure, and force the price down by 15% followed by buyback. At least it did in May, 2013.

If I had 35,000 bitcoins, I could manipulate the market all I wanted, and make money doing so. Hint: it is only 0.3% of world's bitcoins and there are several people who have it, and who most probably operate in the markets.

Please do not consider that Bitcoin market is more free market than any market in the "free market" countries. They are all ruthlessly manipulated to achieve various aims, and the way for you to make a small annual gain in the number of your bitcoins (which actually increases your % of world's bitcoins, because of the low inflation) is to hold, sell high, and buy back low, and not fall on the trap that the "technicals" can forecast anything, because they are fabricated. And be content what you get, and not short.

And I am quite sure I know the reason for that. It is the extreme information asymmetry between Bitcoin owners and non-owners. (To simplify,) Bitcoin owners know that bitcoins are very valuable, and they buy and hold as much as they can. But as a result of their price going up, it forces people to sell, not because they don't trust Bitcoin, or expect the EV to be anything less than $100k or whatever in a few years, but because their entire net worth consists of bitcoins and it is rational to diversify (cf. Kelly betting). Even if the price goes down, these true believers cannot buy much more because the same optimal allocation strategy holds true.

The ones who don't own bitcoins, don't know it is good They are converting to bitcoiners at an exponential rate, though (see my previous post, and this thread for the ownership distribution). This increasing adoption gives the steam to the rise of price, in a self-sustaining virtuous cycle.

First only very few people knew about Bitcoin, and they were technologically astute and early adopter type. Many could start using Bitcoin immediately upon hearing. In the second phase more people heard, but they were, on average, slower. In the third phase or so, in which I belong, I heard and it took me 12 months to buy. In the next one, people who heard in 2011, propelled the boom in 2013 because their average decision making time was even longer. In the whole of 2013, especially the time around the peaks, 100s of millions of people heard about Bitcoin. On average, these people are even slower than previous ones, perhaps taking on average 24 months to enter (and also a smaller percentage of them enters). But they are so many! There is nothing you can really do to prevent the fraction of these people adopting Bitcoin, and by doing it, their action increases the price again by a decade, letting the rest of the planet to hear about it and putting hundreds of millions of people in the pipeline.

Bitcoiners know it, the rest don't. The price does not go to $1 million in an instant because only the ones who realize the above thing, can push the price up, but it will nevertheless go there eventually, because the above thing is a self-sustaining loop. Therefore buying bitcoins when you read and realize it, is the most lopsided bet you can ever make. You can actually pay $460 for something whose EV (expected value = average payback of all scenarios weighted by their probabilities) is in between $100k and $1M+. ONLY the fact that people realize this one at a time, slowly but exponentially, keeps the bitcoin price "at check", growing at an average of 1000% per year, for 5+ years now.

My wealth is dependent on the above being true. Nobody has explained to me, why it is not so. The stage is yours!

Kudos for the person who explained this to me in 2010, after which it took me 12 months to buy, after which it took an additional 18 months to realize it, which realization threatened my sanity, which was only saved by starting to smoke cigars. After 12 more months I tell it to you, please don't repeat my mistakes. Consider if it is valid, and invest accordingly. I am quite sure that next month you will not see this low prices any more, because the information is freely available.

And I am quite sure I know the reason for that. It is the extreme information asymmetry between Bitcoin owners and non-owners. (To simplify,) Bitcoin owners know that bitcoins are very valuable, and they buy and hold as much as they can. But as a result of their price going up, it forces people to sell, not because they don't trust Bitcoin, or expect the EV to be anything less than $100k or whatever in a few years, but because their entire net worth consists of bitcoins and it is rational to diversify (cf. Kelly betting). Even if the price goes down, these true believers cannot buy much more because the same optimal allocation strategy holds true.

The ones who don't own bitcoins, don't know it is good They are converting to bitcoiners at an exponential rate, though (see my previous post, and this thread for the ownership distribution). This increasing adoption gives the steam to the rise of price, in a self-sustaining virtuous cycle.

First only very few people knew about Bitcoin, and they were technologically astute and early adopter type. Many could start using Bitcoin immediately upon hearing. In the second phase more people heard, but they were, on average, slower. In the third phase or so, in which I belong, I heard and it took me 12 months to buy. In the next one, people who heard in 2011, propelled the boom in 2013 because their average decision making time was even longer. In the whole of 2013, especially the time around the peaks, 100s of millions of people heard about Bitcoin. On average, these people are even slower than previous ones, perhaps taking on average 24 months to enter (and also a smaller percentage of them enters). But they are so many! There is nothing you can really do to prevent the fraction of these people adopting Bitcoin, and by doing it, their action increases the price again by a decade, letting the rest of the planet to hear about it and putting hundreds of millions of people in the pipeline.

Bitcoiners know it, the rest don't. The price does not go to $1 million in an instant because only the ones who realize the above thing, can push the price up, but it will nevertheless go there eventually, because the above thing is a self-sustaining loop. Therefore buying bitcoins when you read and realize it, is the most lopsided bet you can ever make. You can actually pay $460 for something whose EV (expected value = average payback of all scenarios weighted by their probabilities) is in between $100k and $1M+. ONLY the fact that people realize this one at a time, slowly but exponentially, keeps the bitcoin price "at check", growing at an average of 1000% per year, for 5+ years now.

My wealth is dependent on the above being true. Nobody has explained to me, why it is not so. The stage is yours!

Why do you waste your time in the speculation forum then? There are other threads where the research is made:

This is the post, the chart, and the question that everyone who has heard about Bitcoin should be confronted with.

Btw. do you have a theory about which one is leading the other? It seems to my old eye that in >50% of the cases price has been leading the transaction growth, but judging from a laptopscreen is not the way to do research...

Yeah, the cost basis for my remaining bitcoins is more than $100 negative. It is an exaggeration to say that I am rich if bitcoin goes to zero, but I think I'll find something else to do, even for making money. It (making money) becomes easier when you are well-off and well-known, neither of which is solely dependent of my number of bitcoins, although I am grateful for the opportunity that I am living because of them.

I am sure you can make some very profitable bets with the fellow posters, who have given quite different odds!

I propose geometric mean, such that:
h) In 2014, price will visit above 1250 = 1%
h) In 2014, price will visit above 1250 = 70%
=> sqrt(0.01*0.7) = 8.4%.

You pay 1 / 8.4% = 11.952 units if you lose
He pays 1 / 91.6% = 1.092 units if you win.

Normalized, this is 10.948 : 1.

Both people in the wager have about 8 times better odds than they estimated as current, wonder why there is so little of this!  

In my own trading, I give almost zero weight on "news". There are some developments that change the probability whether Bitcoin hits big ($1M) or not. To them I give some weight. Mostly I give weight to whether the price is below or above its long-term trend. This kind of trading schedule lets me buy low and sell high, gives peace of mind, and is the almost only strategy that actually is implementable for someone of my size (too small to manipulate world market, too big to daytrade efficiently anywhere). If BTC fails, I am prepared to ride it to the bottom, because I have sold high.

Thanks, it looks nice. The tops are neatly aligned.

What I mentioned concerning "my" trendline, the signals can only be calibrated after the event, so yours as well as mine would have started to predict events only in 2013 - before that there was only noise. Moreover, your line anticipated going really low vs. the trend in the mid-2013 bottom, and the followers would not have bought at all, losing the runup to $1000, whereas mine gave a correct buy signal at $70, which was calibrated in 10/2011 bottom by taking its trendline value.

Both seem to indicate that this is a buy zone, or what do you think?

Since I am also interested in the model, care someone tell, if the model in his opinion has predictive value, and does it give buy/sell signals or zones or anything?

That's why I am buying and telling others to buy.

Bitcoin has a long and glorious history that its price has had nothing to do with long-term expected value. My estimate of scenario-probability-weighted discounted 2020 value of 1 bitcoin is about $500,000 and the fact that the majority of players in the market think differently, is my advantage.

Have you, or have you not, considered that crypto is better than fiat, and is therefore replacing fiat like Internet replaced so many things?

All your talk is nullified when you consider this matter for even a short while.

There is a limited number of bitcoins, and if you get them cheaper, it is good for you.

Of course if all your trades that you claim were real, that is good for you too. Sadly I don't believe it, because you only claim them afterwards, and when looking at your actual predictions, they are ambiguous and wrong. See my post a few pages ago.

Preferably like I just did, by including the text for readability.



The exercise would force you, for once, to make a post that can be mathematically analyzed.

If it could not be predicted, why is it that I constantly make money by predicting it? I am here to help you, so unless you get paid really well for distracting, how about start listening!

LET'S GIVE PROBABILITIES TO THE FOLLOWING EVENTS
a) In 2014, price will visit below 100 = 10%
b) In 2014, price will visit below 200 = 15%
c) In 2014, price will visit below 300 = 25%
d) In 2014, price will visit below 400 = 55%
e) In 2014, price will visit above 500 = 95%
f) In 2014, price will visit above 750 = 90%
g) In 2014, price will visit above 1000 = 85%
h) In 2014, price will visit above 1250 = 80%
i) In 2014, price will visit above 2000 = 70%
j) In 2014, price will visit above 3000 = 60%
k) In 2014, price will visit above 4000 = 50%
l) In 2014, price will visit above 5000 = 35%
m) In 2014, price will visit above 7000 = 25%
n) In 2014, price will visit above 10000 = 15%
/LET'S GIVE PROBABILITIES TO THE FOLLOWING EVENTS

("price" = exchange rate in Bitstamp, or a western exch with highest volume iff Bitstamp closes)

LET'S GIVE PROBABILITIES TO THE FOLLOWING EVENTS
a) In 2014, price will visit below 100
b) In 2014, price will visit below 200
c) In 2014, price will visit below 300
d) In 2014, price will visit below 400
e) In 2014, price will visit above 500
f) In 2014, price will visit above 750
g) In 2014, price will visit above 1000
h) In 2014, price will visit above 1250
i) In 2014, price will visit above 2000
j) In 2014, price will visit above 3000
k) In 2014, price will visit above 4000
l) In 2014, price will visit above 5000
m) In 2014, price will visit above 7000
n) In 2014, price will visit above 10000
/LET'S GIVE PROBABILITIES TO THE FOLLOWING EVENTS

I will add mine shortly in a separate post so you can quote this one if you like to join

$500 won't get you in sorry We are talking about people who realistically need this kind of services, and they have more than BTC57. I don't mean any offense here.

EDIT: That still sounds smug to the extreme - let me explain more. The intention of the training is to gather people whose bitcoins are worth $500k or more at present (BTC1,000) and the facility will expand when the bitcoin price goes up, so that the lower threshold in bitcoins decreases, but in dollars it keeps going up, unless many similar facilities spring up and offer better services more cheaply. As far as I know, this is the first one with this kind of idea, but definitely not the last. Perhaps not many feel they need the service, but that is my business risk. It will anyway be a general purpose luxury country hotel and my holiday home.

Whales want to increase their BTC position, because they are accumulating, and/or because they can derive a profit.

The important part is to sucker the other people to short in the first place. This is very risky, because they have to buy back the bitcoins later at a price that may be very high if nobody wants to sell the coins for cheap. At this first stage the whale buys the shorted coins.

When the squeeze comes, the price shoots up, the sucker-shorter must buy back, and the whale can be the one providing the coins or not. In the first case he makes fiat profit, and the second case he is happy to have increased the number of his stash for cheap.

In economic theory, shorting makes the market more efficient and reduces volatility. In practice, this is not so. Don't short.