Just to make sure, I understand the concept:
Buy.
When 1st doubling happens, sell 10% of what I have.
When 2nd doubling happens, sell 10% of what I have.
When 3rd doubling happens, sell 10% of what I have.
...
right?
And it should apply to anything that seems to keep on growing in price.
The rationale is that Bitcoin seems to have much more upside (100,000s of %) than downside (max 100%), but we do not know the probabilities. It has gone up so far, but if it fails, we only know from the hindsight. Therefore a risk-balancing way is to buy in now with whatever amount you want to risk, wait for price to go up, and sell gradually after price has increased. This way both the cash and bitcoin balance keep going up as long as bitcoin price goes up. In my opinion you should apply this method only to things that can go really high. Most things cannot  |
|
|
|
I have been a miner since Nov 2011, and I work in a very geek orientated environment, there are over 100 working in my team. They are all tech geeks and out of these people only maybe 3 or 4 have mined bitcoin.
I dont believe you about having 100 miners on your team Luckily he did not claim so |
|
|
|
But be honest, you have so many coins i'm guessing you could probably crash the market if you wanted. You have a vested interest in not doing this, but you must be very concerned.
Perhaps I could, but it would not remain crashed for very long. Trying to buy the amount of coins that I have, in exchange or outside, is so very difficult that I prefer to keep mine, thank you (I am still interested in buying minimum BTC100 at a time.) |
|
|
|
some people are worried of being a 450 bag holder.
Okay, let's give it 100 days! (Anyone who bought at 450 is not worried of anything. Some who entered at 1000 and doubled down at 600-800 may be, but they have already shed a lot of coins so after 100 days we should be at about 4000) Haha, bulls feel the need to refute such accusations. When they don't refute, just ridicule, it's time to sell  |
|
|
|
$5000 per BTC could still happen this year. On days like today it does seem really hard to believe though. At the same time Bitcoin has breached the support level at $400, and is sliding rapidly towards $300. Now what $200... $100? Anything seems possible. I am holding out still.  Currently on a pace to be above $400 by tomorrow. Will it really happen? Holding pretty strong above $400 today What is more shocking than the price dropping quickly is how fast it can rise! I am actually really comfortable with the price being around $400. That is a great base to begin another "bubble." I have a feeling the next rise will be very impressive. Good point! In the 7 days leading to 19. November 2013 (not exactly THAT long ago ), the bitcoin price DOUBLED, measured by the DAILY AVERAGE! Would you be confident if this time next week we'd be at $850? |
|
|
|
As you can see in 2010-2011 the then most accurate trendline (red line) seems quite robust but then, over a year, shifts to another exponent, the current one, which has been valid for a further year and a half starting in mid-2012.
Ln base (instead of log) makes it difficult to read. But the more dangerous design decision is to start the graph from Mt.Gox inception, which is really a totally arbitrary choice of a startdate. There has been Bitcoin trading before Mt.Gox, the fact that finding the data is hard does not give us the right to ignore it! I have estimated it to be a flat $0.005/1 BTC based on multiple isolated trades, and the ballpark is certainly correct because there has not been any trades below $0.001 or above $0.010 before the opening of Gox, which instantly lifted the price to a new level of about $0.05-$0.08. (Again, many have criticized this, but never given any recommendation about what might be better, NOR helped me to find more data on the trading in 2009-10.) What kind of trading signals has that one given? Like I told in its thread, mine has excelled in buyback zones - the previous 2 signals at $2.28 in October-2011 and $71 last summer were spot on, and this time the signal came at $460 some days ago. |
|
|
|
Also every day there are 3,600 new freshly mined bitcoins, and part of them are sold to pay electricity bills, try to recover money invested on the miner, investing on more mining power or present/future panickers.
That means it is needed up to $1.5 million daily deposits to maintain the price stable. (Actually less because some will hold no matter what, so you can guess something like 25%-50% of $1.5 million)
I would put it this way: Only about $0.5 million of the daily bitcoins generation enters the market. Of that, the following are interested: 20 G20 countries 50 midsize countries 70 small countries 70 very small countries 500 billionaires 10,000 100-millionaires 1 million 10-millionaires 30 million millionaires 500 large corporations 500,000 midsize corporations 500 million Europeans with <1M net worth 300 million N. Americans -..- 300 million S. Americans -..- 200 million ex-Soviet -..- 1,700 million in Indian peninsula 1,600 million in China 1 billion in other parts of Asia 500 million more in Asia 1 million existing bitcoin investors thinking it is cheap It is mathematically certain that everybody cannot get many bitcoins. The list above included so many entities that it is certain that some of them realize that acting before others is an advantage, like any one reading this has realized. Then they start to want the bitcoins, and as the daily interest exceeds $0.5 million, the price starts to rise. |
|
|
|
every single other poster in this forum I've seen who uploads his variant of a log linear regression chart (including well known Finnish investors clowns) post their pretty picture with a straight line, saying proudly "look, how close price is at all times to that line!", only showing how pathetic their understanding of TA is. The point, as exemplified by your second graph, is that you need to look at the *running* calculation of a regression, based on the data *available at the time*. And then it becomes clear that, at least in 2011, price stayed for a long time deep below the trendline predicted by regression.
Your rant is based on a wrong understanding of my model. It has always featured a monthly recalculation of the trend (which for practical purposes does not differ from a running calculation). Also as you can see from the same link, my model which has the price data from 1/2009 (unlike all the models that arbitrarily ignore the data prior to Mt.Gox, including the one in OP) does very well with the 2011 slump, giving a buy signal at $2.28 (similar signal was given at $71 last summer and at $460 in 2014-3-31). And, as opposed to the aforementioned Finnish clown, whether that happens (bull or bear market in the meantime) is *not* answered by regression.
Either I have subconsciously changed my mind and started to support you, or you have been misunderstanding my stance all along. |
|
|
|
I don't know if anyone has noticed but the long term charts do not look good...even in log scale.
Everybody is entitled to an opinion. Mine is that long-term charts have never looked this good if you are looking for a low-risk entry point. November-2011 comes close. |
|
|
|
The trendline is an imaginary observation of the past based on guesstimations of a lagging slope and an arbitrary formula for an exponential growth of the userbase in which the exponent could easily be wrong causing a massive error.
thats shark jumping. the exponent error point is the good point in your post. i should like to take fits over time to observe the variance. stupid tax deadline has me stretched tho. I don't know where I saw a couple of days ago the graph with the curve representing where the exponential would be taking in count only data up to that time. It has been remarkably close to current trendline for over a year. I think rpietila already said this when introducing his model and since then has talked of how little the slope changes month-to month but has not repeated it enough, apparently, given that it is a very strong point to which oda.krell raised an objection too.  Starting at 2009-01-03, X-axis resolution daily. Y-axis log(USD/BTC) (red line); log(price)/log(trend_price) (blue line) <- trendline recalculated monthly; this graph uses 36 individual trendlines 2011 I bought at this point of the trendline (-0.35). 12/2013 decided that it will possibly go to about -0.35 but to be on the safe side I calculated 410 to be the buy zone in 2-3/2014 (-0.3 in 2014-3-31). Now it strongly points out that we are oversold, since never before in Bitcoin's history has the price gone down from a condition this much below the trend. The price/trendline-differential has gone deeper but it has been accompanied with a rising price (11/2011-12/2012). To underline the novel method used here: the trendline (not shown, only the price (red) and the difference of price and trendline (blue) are shown) is recalculated every month so that its parameters constantly change. As far as I know, there is much critique against the trendline but none of it stems from understanding. The valid attack vectors are: - Is the dataset reliable in describing the phenomenon? (yes; the very beginning is uncertain because there were not many trades, but leaving it out, leads to greater arbitrariness than using as representative the data as we can generate) - Can it reasonably be modelled using the given trendline model? (yes; this is about technology adoption, which can follow logistic function) - Is the trendline best fit to the data? (yes, its R^2 is the highest) |
|
|
|
So, since you have popped in, how long til we get a head of steam up again and this all calms down (to enable a base for a decent rise)?
I note and agree with your points about exchange confidence keeping money off the exchanges in any depth, but greed will surely conquer wariness at some point.
I would welcome your thoughts on timescale back to a decent bull market - a month, three... longer?
In my baseline scenario, we close April at above 500, and 1000 will be breached in July. Then there is the slower scenario but I am quite hopeful that 2014 will be a year of a new ATH nevertheless. As everyone (including me) expect a 2-3 month plateau, perhaps that is not what will happen |
|
|
|
the exponent error point is the good point in your post
I did not get how there can be exponent error if all you do is observe some set of data and draw a least-squares trendline, explain? |
|
|
|
Quick TA update: - 6H candle color/volume: BREAKING - huge green candle beats the previous reds AND action afterwards is promising, conclusion: probability of recent reversal increased - Bid/ask strengh at market: slippage to sell 5k: $45, slippage to buy: $65, conclusion: buying side solidifies - Trendline comparison: we are now at -0.372 log units. The trendline is at $1,000 and rising $7 per day, conclusion: rock bottom - Sentiment: changing; I personally expect panic buys starting soon - Prognosis: getting better; probability for dips gets smaller by the day, long-term buy zone How extravagant. This bounce was actually weaker than the last mtgox bounce. 10KBTC of bids are in front of the bottom (vs 20KBTC) It went from 340 to 440 [+30%] ( vs 400 to 610 [+52%] ) There was 64K volume on stamp (vs 120K) There is a whopping 9.5M USD. I follow the indicators I selected, and keep them constant. I want to add something to the discussion, not monkey yours or anyone else's methods. The trendline is an imaginary observation of the past based on guesstimations of a lagging slope and an arbitrary formula for an exponential growth of the userbase in which the exponent could easily be wrong causing a massive error.
"The trendline" is a best-fitting (highest R^2) trendline among the ones in active use, over the dataset of typical/average monthly Bitcoin prices over all of Bitcoin's existence. Your plurality of negatives when describing it, makes me wonder if you actually realize there is nothing at all arbitrary in it. All arbitrariness starts when you consider, whether the best-fitting and longest historical trend so far has predictive ability, or not. |
|
|
|
Quick TA update: - 6H candle color/volume: BREAKING - huge green candle beats the previous reds AND action afterwards is promising, conclusion: probability of recent reversal increased - Bid/ask strengh at market: slippage to sell 5k: $45, slippage to buy: $65, conclusion: buying side solidifies - Trendline comparison: we are now at -0.372 log units. The trendline is at $1,000 and rising $7 per day, conclusion: rock bottom - Sentiment: changing; I personally expect panic buys starting soon - Prognosis: getting better; probability for dips gets smaller by the day, long-term buy zone |
|
|
|
AFAIK the reversal from ~Dec/19 to ~Jan/6 has an obvious explantion: Huobi concluded that they could still operate via bank accounts instead of the big 3rd party processor (Alibaba?), and their clients gradually migrated to that medium. In fact their volume increased after Dec/16, perhaps because OKCoin and BTC-China clients moved in.
Shit, just bought 900 LTC on market by mistake  BTW newbie question: what does consolidation mean in this context?
I realized I have probably never said it - I love you all! This is such community and thread, much wow!!1 <3 |
|
|
|
Love this thread.. Bookmarked and following..
I am drinking Beer? That ok???
Since the price is 420, aok! |
|
|
|
We can't read that without registering, and we can't register without a reference. Can I get a reference from you? I think my post history here should show I'm sufficiently knowledgable.
Send me PM, please. Both of you |
|
|
|
b) The price drops to the level where mostly only those hold up the price, who are ready to go down with the ship. For this to happen there will be a 1w volume record and the price will rest there for weeks or more with a very low volume. A good indicator for that would be some of the most enthusiastic and loudest bulls in this forum, who will start to rant and blame everyone for selling their coins and ruining heaven for everyone. As long as there is hope for fools, without any real reason for hope, then this isn't the bottom yet.
I bought my coins today, perhaps you should also..? |
|
|
|
There is this thing called "escrow" where bitcoins are typically sent first to a "trusted 3rd party", and once fiat is moved, the bitcoins are released. That is a hassle, I am working hard to replace it with a guarantee system, which would make cheating unprofitable.
Interesting concept, would like to hear more, as I am having this kind of issues on receiving USD (via cashiers checks) for property located elsewhere, would be fantastic if a system like this existed in BTC. |
|
|
|
I am proud to be a bagholder ever since $3... Not that I felt any obligation to disclose, but I am happy to say that I finally managed to source BTC200 @400 off-exchange! Question: How do you do such an exchange in practise, i.e. how do you guarantee that one party will not take the other's money and run? By becoming such a trustable person myself that the other one always sends first. There is this thing called "escrow" where bitcoins are typically sent first to a "trusted 3rd party", and once fiat is moved, the bitcoins are released. That is a hassle, I am working hard to replace it with a guarantee system, which would make cheating unprofitable. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
