I am not claiming to be a skillful forecaster, but I will give you my 2 cents.

I believe that any worthwhile forecasting should be based off of fundamentals, and while technical analysis is interesting, it is ultimately not a reliable method of prediction.

By technical analysis, I am especially point out that there are plenty of "chartists" who believe they can understand market forces by looking at patterns in charts. I don't mean to start a flame war, but I believe that the chances of understanding complex market forces simply by reading lines in a chart is akin to predicting someones future by reading the lines of a palm.

For me, the largest moves in BTC will correlate with global geopolitical events, namely the state of the global economy, and how governments react or preemptively act to influence the use of Bitcoin.

The reason why Bitcoin is falling is simply: More sellers than buyers.

Accept it and act accordingly. And stop your whining.

Bitcoin is dead and ASICS will give it the rest. ASICS are still profitable even if Bitcoin drops under $5.

Just a random observation from blockchained :



I can't help but to notice 2 things :
* we just touched and bounced off the dotted line - long-term trendline - which has provided good support since day 1.
* "mining factor" is almost at an all time low, and has been dropping like crazy lately.

Thoughts ?

I have lurked on bitcointalk for a while now and recently made an account to post a couple things in the Securities section related to some things I saw being mismanaged. I have been recently viewing the Speculation section of this forum and decided to start a thread due to some of the stuff I have been reading. A lot of threads have been bearish, thinking that bitcoin is going to fall drastically. I don't know why it seems that the Speculation section is so bearish, maybe people can't afford to buy bitcoin at its current price so they want it to drop, they are pessimistic people in general, they just want something to fail, they like negative press or they are actually correct in their bearish predictions. The psychological aspect of the Speculation forum is a whole different topic



Prediction is almost impossible

No one can predict where bitcoin is going to be more than a month from now. There are way too many external factors that affect bitcoin coupled with the fact that it is traded 24/7. Future event such as hacking, government interference, industry adoption are just some of the unpredictable effects on the value of bitcoin.

Since I believe it is impossible to predict what the price will be in the future, I will just deal with what I am seeing now, as of July 7th, 2013. I replied the same thing in another thread, but decided to make a new thread afterwards. The walls and price is based on Mt.Gox. Gox is the main price point for bitcoin and other exchanges trade based on Gox's price. Trades on other exchanges coincide with Gox's trading almost in perfect sync. Until another market has more volume than Gox, it will be the price point for a while.


The current price stunting

Are for the current price on July 7th, 2013: it is being stunted. Someone is keeping the price low and buying cheap coins through placing bids lower than their ask walls. They are hoarding cheap coins by getting people to sell into their bids and buying coins lower than their ask walls. They are pretty blatant about it, even placing the walls at $1 intervals. If they decide they have reached their desired amount of coins and then lift their ask walls, bitcoin will rise, which is what they want after buying lots of cheap bitcoins.

Whomever is doing this is pretty clever as they are also doing a couple of other things to stunt the price. If you think the price is going to drop, it will not. The ask walls are keeping the price low. This is actually the perfect time to do something like this. A lot of money has left Mt.Gox lately, so it isn't as difficult as it was a month ago to manipulate the price.



Hiatus effect

The vast majority of the recent bearish threads have completely ignored the MtGox withdrawal hiatus effect on bitcoin. Look at the price the day before the announcement, then look at the sharp downturn immediately after. The withdrawal hiatus without a doubt had an effect. I was actually surprised that bitcoin didn't drop much further than it has.

Surprisingly, and good for Bitcoin bulls, Gox was right on time with their 2 week hiatus. After 2 weeks the hiatus is gone and people can withdrawal money. The hiatus effect is interesting for a couple of reasons. Gox will never release the figures, but it would be interesting to know how much money was immediately withdrawn after the hiatus was lifted. Another very interesting figure to know would be how much money is going to come into the Gox now that the hiatus is gone and confidence in Gox is increased. The most interesting figure would be how much money is going to enter as well as leave MtGox after this holiday weekend. Gox lifted their hiatus on July 4th, a Thursday and holiday. Banks in the US were closed on Thursday, open on Friday, then closed over the weekend. Getting a wire in before this weekend may have been tough, and risky since the hiatus was just lifted the previous day.

So right now the amount of USD in Gox is most likely much lower than it was a month ago. This makes it easy for someone to keep the price low, but not too low.



Invested infrastructure in Bitcoin

For many who think Bitcoin can drop below $20, I encourage you to consider the actual amount of money that has been invested in companies surrounding  bitcoin. Millions have been invested in startups such as Bitpay, Coinbase and others. The amount of money that has taken an invested interest in Bitcoin would be very interested in not seeing it drop too low. $5 million was invested in Bitpay alone. There are much larger pockets backing Bitcoin than in 2011 and a price below $50 would certainly see some large buys.



My opinion

Once the dust settles on the hiatus and people feel confident enough to deposit USD into Gox, expect the price to rise. Deposits=buys. Gox isn't a bank, depositing money means you will at some point buy Bitcoin. People worried about not being able to withdrawal their USD may slowly regain confidence, redeposit and buy once again. I have purchased quite a few bitcoin myself this past weekend and I believe strongly in the price increasing.

Its the weekend, banks are closed in america. This week will be lower than 70.

Well, this is all speculation  But people are fearing that Gox doesn't have the liquidity to pay everybody.  One theory I could have is that Gox played people's money.

Normally, in an exchange, people send their money and play their own money.  BTC price may rise and fall, people individually gain and lose money, but in the end, no money is really gained or loss, it's only TRADED.  One person will make money on the back of another less fortunate lad, or lose money to another person's gain.

So, as long as each individual account is kept separate, then whatever people bring in or out of the exchange, be it fiat or BTC, then the exchange is still viable, and can have all the fiat/BTC liquidity required.

However, under the cover, the fiat sent to the exchange is just put in a big melting pot.  Some sort of money pool.  And how much each person still hold in fiat (or BTC) is just data bytes stored on a computer.  But this still works as good, and it's much simpler for the exchange operations.

So, as long as each individuals are treated independently, with their own assets isolated from other individuals, the game go on.  If the prices rise and fall, and someone gain or lose money in the end, then it's only their gain/loss.  The exchange is just providing exchange service, and the integrity stays on.

Now, let's speculate what would happen, if in a moment of great "illumination", Gox decided to invest in BTC, but didn't want to put it's own money in the pool.  Instead, it would just go to his main Gox pool account (after all, a lot of people keep fiat in their accounts for different, and legitimate, reasons).  Then, Gox actually play people's money.  It ends up as if Gox would withdraw from the money pool, and re-insert it under it's name, to buy BTC.  All this in hope that price will rise, and cash out (return what it took from the pool, and take out the profit).  But what happen is that the pool is now short.  What would happen if that the prices keep falling.  People more and more want to cash out.  The only problem is that the fiat pool is now drained.

The only options are:
- For Gox to insert fresh money in the poll (actually taking his loss at that time), but that most realistically won't happen (talking millions of $ here).
- Delay the cashout, in hope people reflow the fiat pool, so to pay out other investors wanting to cash out.  And hope that enough transactions occurs in the meantime so Gox has some revenue from transactions to help cover this up.  Well, seeing an increase in transaction fees would very highly back this theory up!

That scenario, although started faithfully, has now fully turned into a Ponzi-like scheme.

Note that this scenario is hypothetical and hopefully purely fiction.  But I think there's still reasons for concerns...

its not spam its reality bro

So whos selling? i will do as soon i eat my breakfast

Keep in mind the block reward halving.

Hello!

5 BTC .....2 million Value and only 10 Million Bitcoins to go, thats crazy, i want to short the Crap out of it, but how?

I had a revelation the other night - why don't we build a decentralized, open-source crypto-currency that is pegged (protocol-wise) to the US Dollar, which could anytime be bought with and sold for Bitcoin automatically (and perhaps exclusively), so to speak? It would be exactly like Bitcoin, with confirmations and all that, but with no mining and with an infinite supply.

Just imagine a separate downloadable client with a BTC address that would keep the received bitcoins in it's protocol (hell knows how, but it doesn't sound impossible) and provide you with a corresponding (at the then-current exchange rate) number of "coins", each of which you can always "cash out", again within the client, for $1 worth of Bitcoin. Whenever you cash out, you get paid automatically in Bitcoin at the current BTC/USD exchange rate, so you end up receiving the same exact money you brought in.

I could see this working flawlessly when the BTC appreciates, but when it depreciates there would be a deficit of BTC in the system. Here's an example:

John has 1 BTC (current price $100) and buys 100 Virtual USD coins with it. In the meantime, the BTC appreciates to $200 let's say, and when he (or anybody else, really) "cashes out" to Bitcoin, they receive 0.5 BTC, with half of the Bitcoin staying in the system.

And here's the counterexample, John has 1 BTC (current price $100) and buys 100 Virtual USD coins with it. In the meantime, the BTC depreciates to $50, and when he "cashes out" to Bitcoin, he must receive 2 BTC, when bringing in just 1 BTC. Is it possible that the first situation counterbalances the second one? In other words, can mass adoption solve this clusterfuck? I bet it can, if Bitcoin stays deflationary

Can a sustainable crypto-currency be built on the description above, and if yes, wouldn't this solve the volatility problem we have with Bitcoin, replacing it as a transaction currency and leaving it be a commodity, next to gold and silver?

Would be interesting to see what you guys think

I'm noticing a trend here, the lower the price goes the more Jaroslaw starts spamming the speculation forum with his retardedness. Too bad it's a lagging indicator.

When Max Keiser suggested it, it sounded ridiculous.

But maybe he wasn't talking to me.  Maybe he was talking to the whales or even the great manipulator(s).

Lies meinen ersten Satz nochmal, da steht was zum Geschlecht, danach weitere Erläuterungen. Der gesamte Post erklärt den Zusammenhang. Das ist schon so richtig wie ich es schrieb.

Bevor ich für immer schweige, melde ich Bedenken an.
Ich bin nach wie vor für das Wallet.
Gründe dafür wurden hier im Thread, zum Teil sehr fundiert, auch mehrere genannt.

Für mich erscheint der Beitrag recht sinnlos und off Topic.

Nicht nur in der Community eingedeutschte Wört sind oft "Unisex" und treten als Nomen auf. Hierbei wird die Wahl des Artikel weniger durch Singular und Plural beeinflußt. Diese eingedeutscheten Nomen werden im Plural einfach oft durch das "s" erweitert, hingegen im deutschen durch "n". Der Artikel wird bei Nomen durch den grammatikalischen Aufbau des gesammten Satzes, also durch deren Inhalt bestimmt. In Sätzen können Nomen Subjekte, Attribute und adverbiale Bestimmengen sein. Genau darin liegt die Antwort Deiner, Entschuldigung, schwachsinnigen Umfrage. 


6 setzen