LOL, are you really suggesting that those who were weak sold at $160+
They can buy back right now at $132/$133
you didn't think this through. the only reason anyone can buy back so low is because they sold. if they didn't sell, then they were not weak hands. also, you're neglecting the sellers who sold between $132 and $121 --arepo threadjacking alert what rank are you arepo? 9k  you play? |
|
|
|
y'all better read the OP an' shit before just postin' whatever.... so much OT ITT. not a single person challenged my hypothesis, and only one person even mentioned it in two pages  oh well... --arepo |
|
|
|
yes
thanks....  |
|
|
|
tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average.
In the fully general case, this is likely correct. That is: Any fixed strategy to "control" or "manipulate" any market indefinitely will lose, on average, in the long term. However: If this is the case, why is price manipulation prohibited in mature markets? I think we can find very good reasons to assume that manipulation events*, (painting the tape, playing up volume, painting candles near hourly/daily close, decisively breaking resistances, and so on... ) can be very profitable, relative to risk, especially in an immature, unregulated market, especially one with no underlying asset, especially when trending sideways.
*(Tactical, time-bounded, in pursuit of some definite objective, with a pre-determined failure/stop-loss criterion.) +1 i thought this was an excellent post as well and started a new thread split from this one to expand on this topic, for anyone who wants to follow the conversation. -arepo |
|
|
|
I think we can find very good reasons to assume that manipulation events*,
(painting the tape, playing up volume, painting candles near hourly/daily close, decisively breaking resistances, and so on... )
can be very profitable, relative to risk, especially in an immature, unregulated market,
the funny thing about regulations is ideally we shouldn't need them, but in practice we often do. maturity is important. there are two categories of actions you listed: data manipulation, and psychological manipulation. for data manipulation, i think the sheer cost of such actions should be a sufficient deterrent, as the cost of the manipulation is directly proportional to its magnitude. as for psychological manipulation, i'm going to get game-theoretical again: observation: not counting this month, which saw an unprecedented involvement in wet-behind-the-ears traders, the market was visibly maturer than the 'early days' of 2011. in the case of 'flash crashes' and other sudden, large-volatility movements, the price usually corrects a large percentage of the movement very rapidly, which demonstrates a mature market that can recognize perturbative forces and neutralize them (one manifestation of the self-organizing properties of markets). in the related case of the breaking of a decisive resistance, they should not be able to reliably make excess profits off of this kind of move because direct manipulation is not possible, since there is no way to know for sure how the market will react to your actions, no matter how large. as such, i think my hypothesis"following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average" can account for the scenarios you described above. data manipulation decreases profits by incurring proportional costs, and psychological manipulation carries too much risk. thoughts? --arepo |
|
|
|
tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average.
In the fully general case, this is likely correct. That is: Any fixed strategy to "control" or "manipulate" any market indefinitely will lose, on average, in the long term. However: If this is the case, why is price manipulation prohibited in mature markets? I think we can find very good reasons to assume that manipulation events*, (painting the tape, playing up volume, painting candles near hourly/daily close, decisively breaking resistances, and so on... ) can be very profitable, relative to risk, especially in an immature, unregulated market, especially one with no underlying asset, especially when trending sideways.
*(Tactical, time-bounded, in pursuit of some definite objective, with a pre-determined failure/stop-loss criterion.) |
|
|
|
SPLIT FROM LUCIF's ANALYSIS THREAD: All this TA reminds me of voo doo and hocus pocus BS.
If you are here on the forum you ultimately are bullish on bitcoins unless you are working for the FED or other central bank.
I agree- true- the sentiments and psychology of people is the same as in any investment area BUT in this very small and not very wide spread market we can have a swing of 50% in one day due to a whim of a big investor ( or an early adopter ). So all the sophisticated TA is out the window. No one person can predict crazy. And I know some of those early coin holders are probably not all right in the head. this is a common misconception that has a game theory explanation. take one assumption: barring 'crazy' actors, TA can accurately account for underlying trends in price data. hypothesis: while some traders can be considered 'eccentric', direct manipulation is risky and can often incur loss, and a rational actor with a large sum will make 'TA-appropriate' moves (following from our assumption) to maximize gain. tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average. --arepo |
|
|
|
LOL, are you really suggesting that those who were weak sold at $160+
They can buy back right now at $132/$133
you didn't think this through. the only reason anyone can buy back so low is because they sold. if they didn't sell, then they were not weak hands. also, you're neglecting the sellers who sold between $132 and $121 --arepo |
|
|
|
|
not very rigorous -- i would suggest including some quantification of how often these events actually happen, as well as more definitive bounds than "mid-month" and "months-end".
--arepo
|
|
|
|
wonder what happened to this guy? also, i thought the title was ironic...  |
|
|
|
Someone please go coin dump 10-20k. This is fucking boring. I need to buy back in.  not gonna happen. look at that mini-bull! see his strong trendline! the train stopped briefly but is quickly departing again.. toot |
|
|
|
A lot of people sit on BTC waiting for it to rise. Some others don't buy it because they think it will fall.
I do neither.
I feel that I can't tell whether it will go up or down. I sit on the fence and any reserve I have is quite small on the basis that it's a useful emergency fund.
But I still use it to pay for things instead of hoarding because I sit on the fence. I feel if you are a bear you are wrong... and if you are a bull you are wrong. Both think they are right. Both think that they are more intelligent than 50% of the market. If you pause for a second and think... can you really out trade the market? Do you have time to monitor MtGox for lag? Do you have time to follow tech analysis and trade accordingly... or program something to trade for you that will work even when your exchange is down?
Probably the answer is no. It's a full time job and the crashes usually revolve around the weekend.
Bear/bull thinking seems to me as a binary thought trap.
Why not sit on the fence? If we do that then it's possible to use BTC for normal transactions. The problem with greed is that it takes all our focus. Instead of getting on with work we're thinking of the price. If we can sit on the fence and forget the price then we can get on with work. Those who are working with BTC are making the real profits. Sure there are fluctuations to mitigate for but in general having a skill is much more valuable than money in any form.
However... it's genuinely addictive. Kick that habit. Post back here the longest amount of time you've gone without checking the price!
+$132.00 |
|
|
|
All this TA reminds me of voo doo and hocus pocus BS.
If you are here on the forum you ultimately are bullish on bitcoins unless you are working for the FED or other central bank.
I agree- true- the sentiments and psychology of people is the same as in any investment area BUT in this very small and not very wide spread market we can have a swing of 50% in one day due to a whim of a big investor ( or an early adopter ). So all the sophisticated TA is out the window. No one person can predict crazy. And I know some of those early coin holders are probably not all right in the head. this is a common misconception that has a game theory explanation. take one assumption: barring 'crazy' actors, TA can accurately account for underlying trends in price data. hypothesis: while some traders can be considered 'eccentric', direct manipulation is risky and can often incur loss, and a rational actor with a large sum will make 'TA-appropriate' moves (following from our assumption) to maximize gain. tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average. --arepo |
|
|
|
So how to anticipate whether a price correction is coming or warranted? Following the data points below over time should warn you ahead of others if interest is waning. won't warn you ahead of anyone who doesn't also look at these charts, unfortunately. also all of these indicators are 'lagging' indicators. --arepo |
|
|
|
i am thoroughly enjoying this circus. please go on. |
|
|
|
Did they bring some friends, or did they immediately die on the battlefield?
it's still the weekend, so i'm not expecting any serious action, but that counter thrust was realllly important in breaking the downward momentum we were picking up, and it will contribute to a possible high-volume doji when the hourly candle closes. now for some accountability: 1. $120 will hold in the mid-term
2. we will breakout up
2. is clearly falsified. see this post for detailsmy adjusted expectations given today's price action are as follows: $120 should hold for the weekend, and while a sustained rally is probably out of the question for the short-term, i expect consolidation around this key price point for at least that long.
--arepo |
|
|
|
Great, thanks for the constant updates. Although i'm no expert at chart reading, i'm just beginning to learn and it always helps reading your charts.
i always appreciate the appreciation we bounced where are the buyers?  --arepo |
|
|
|
Keep up the good work arepo very helpful and interesting mate
cheers  -===- short-term oscillators still say 'oversold'. amazing how much buying pressure is holding the price up, with all of this selling volume -- more evidence of a bottom. *10-day hourly scale*  -===- $120 should hold for the weekend, and while a sustained rally is probably out of the question for the short-term, i expect consolidation around this key price point for at least that long. --arepo |
|
|
|
can you link "your thread"? Looked through your recent posts but couldn't locate it.
sorry, didn't mean to make you search this guy, more specificially, i've been discussing signs that this is a market bottom in pages 6-8. |
|
|
|
Look at the timescales involved. We barely tanked to the point of where hyperbolic growth started. And press interest & Google trends hasn't followed the price this time.
i stand by the determination that this pattern isn't just a bubble. we were riding an incredibly strong rally, if everyone can just put their despair aside for a second. look at the timescales involved in the June '11 pattern -- we're way off track. this is something completely different. not saying that it immediately follows that we should go up, but all this bubble talk is getting old as we've long broken that pattern. and it's not just "it's different this time", it's more "it doesn't even look like a bubble anymore". we retraced 80% in about three days -- wtf was that? more like a massive market correction. i think the market is becoming more efficient. from what i gather, most of the weak hands were shook out already or else we wouldn't have made it to $160 in the first place. --arepo |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
