Resistance expected near the previous peaks at $125 and $147.
The case for a continued bubble collapse strengthens if these previous peaks are not surpassed.
Time frame? Day? Week? Don't pressure the poor Bitcoin, let him do his thing  Three months to inflate the bubble, should collapse in three also. Time frame is months to confirm the bubble collapse, but refutation can happen immediately, e.g. a spike to a new all time high. |
|
|
|
|
Does anyone else see even more weird bot behavior?
Alternating purchases and sales under 1 BTC. An arb?
|
|
|
|
Resistance expected near the previous peaks at $125 and $147. The case for a continued bubble collapse strengthens if these previous peaks are not surpassed. Conversely it weakens if they are.  |
|
|
|
Here is the breakout to the upside.  |
|
|
|
I'm really enjoying the price stability the past few days. If it continues I do think it will be quite good for bitcoin adoption. As the market is typically extremely volitile it does make me think that there are people who are creating the stability intentionally. If so, keep up the good work. Do others think this as well?
To me, the enthusiastic crowds of new bitcoin buyers are missing. Bargain-hunting buyers are more cautious about buying above these levels. Caution facilitates patience. But should prices slowly slump, or perhaps simply not rise, then I believe there will be another leg down testing $80. In a collapsing bubble, price trend bias is downwards. |
|
|
|
I am truly intrigued by the movement the last three days... and I was actually quite productive with my work I think if there are new people to the market they might enjoy this price "stability" and consider buying in if they were waiting for an entry point. Bitcoin was especially scary the days before. Did anyone read from Loaded? I have a feeling he might show up the next days... Indeed his absence here is telling in itself. |
|
|
|
I believe that the ascending bullish lows represent the notion that the underlying long term trend is consistent with the January-March trend, e.g. doubling every 30 days. This notion is unsustainable.
I believe that the descending bearish highs represent the bubble collapse. Bubble theory says that typical bubbles give back all their speculative gains.
Perhaps one month from the April 10 peak at $266 is long enough for the predominant trader sentiment to shift to the fact that the waves of new buyers are diminishing, causing demand to likewise diminish, causing prices to likewise diminish.
Sorry to dig up a slightly older post (posted earlier today, already 4 pages in o_O), but this is a pet peeve of mine: No, the "January-March trend [...] doubling every 30 days" is not per se, as you say, "unsustainable". What you're doing there is repeating the worn-out mantra "exponential growth is not sustainable". Unless of course when it is, either in finance, or in nature[1]. What you probably should have said would have been something like: "a given exponential growth function, causally connected (however losely) to something of finite quantity, will eventually reach a point at which it drastically outgrows said finite quantity". This is not just some empty semantic nitpicking. The difference in wording here amounts to the difference between lazy repetition of half-understood claims about the world, and a meaningful statement about the sustainability of growth. Please note: I am not making any claims about the correctness of the January trendline. I just refuse to let a lazy statement like that slide by, that at face value claims that exponential growth is somehow an oddity, and its usage as a way to model reality ought to be rejected. If you think that a particular exponential trend is not accurate, present your arguments (for fairness sake, in other threads you have been doing that. Sort of.). But the statement as it stands, in its unconditional form, is not fundamentally different from a perma-bull's battle cry "We'll inevitably reach 300k USD/btc next week". Both claims are devoid of information. * * * [1] A common rebuttal to the Apple case is "But now the price comes crashing down! So exponential growth is unsustainable after all". The fallacy here is of course that just because at a certain point exponential growth of a given magnitude must end, does not imply that up to that point the growth was not accurately described by a particular exponential function. Respectfully, it is surprising to me that with your attention to semantics you missed the distinguishing point that I made. Of course I take for granted that doubling of bitcoin price every 30 days is not something that can go on forever, The market has already demonstrated that the January to March trendline was not sustainable - the crash from $266 fell right through it. One must have numerical blinders on not to recognize bitcoin prices cannot double every thirty days indefinitely. Exponential bitcoin growth is happening now at perhaps 4-5x annually when measured according to the prominent lows of bitcoin prices at Mt.Gox 2011 to present. What I actually said was that the notion is unsustainable. If bitcoin stops going up, then obviously the notion, i.e. belief that it will keep doublling upwards every 30 days, becomes less prevalent - right? |
|
|
|
My guess is that there is a lot of people that got burned with the last bubble and now set up their bids and ask orders at very low and high values respectively. If only it would be a simple as that. But maybe it is just as simple as that if you want just one or two very profitable trades from this bubble. |
|
|
|
Im going short here fully leveraged. This reminds me of the recent 140 high with no volume. Looking for 105ish to make me a nice 25% gain.
Are you by chance all in? |
|
|
|
Does anyone get the feeling that the market is slowing down as we near the apex of the biggest triangle ever seen?
Isn't that what is expected?  Volume: As the symmetrical triangle extends and the trading range contracts, volume should start to diminish. This refers to the quiet before the storm, or the tightening consolidation before the breakout. Yes, it is expected but it something to actually feel it. I now believe that the highest volume weeks of 2013 are behind us. |
|
|
|
|
Does anyone get the feeling that the market is slowing down as we near the apex of the biggest triangle ever seen?
|
|
|
|
29 days after the April 10 peakA bubble collapse should be characterized by successively lower volume until the collapse is complete. Here is the June 8, 2011 bubble volume chart ...  And for comparison, here is the correspond April 10, 2013 bubble chart ...  Although the recent bubble's volume is 10x higher, it diminishes from its peak in a manner very similar to that of bubble 1.
|
|
|
|
If I may, I would like to add some of my own analysis. And thank you! |
|
|
|
How cool is it that the bearish highs and bullish lows have converged on the one month anniversary of the big crash from 266? Mere coincidence or divine forces at work?  I believe that the ascending bullish lows represent the notion that the underlying long term trend is consistent with the January-March trend, e.g. doubling every 30 days. This notion is unsustainable. I believe that the descending bearish highs represent the bubble collapse. Bubble theory says that typical bubbles give back all their speculative gains. Perhaps one month from the April 10 peak at $266 is long enough for the predominant trader sentiment to shift to the fact that the waves of new buyers are diminishing, causing demand to likewise diminish, causing prices to likewise diminish. |
|
|
|
|
Bubble 1 peaked June 8, 2011. Bubble 2 peaked April 10, 2013. 1 year, 10 months, 2 days separate these first two bitcoin bubbles.
Therefore I extrapolate from that evidence to predict that bitcoin bubble 3 will arrive in 672 days ...
Wednesday, February 11, 2015.
|
|
|
|
The 2011 bubble broke the long-term trend on the way down. I remember how S3052 was so sure that it would not - but it did and all hell broke lose. Great point to remember. The April 2011 low was used to establish the support trendline before we reached the actual bottom - leading to great debate here at bitcointalk, but it turned out that April 2011 was part of that bubble. |
|
|
|
|
Was looking like a definite change in trend at the time we lost data.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you Mr. Smoothie.
Folks reading this should know that I index my part of the thread from the first page. Recently I added a properly scaled comparison between the 2011 bubble and this one.
|
|
|
|
 Looks like a definite change of trend. Give a few more hours to confirm direction. More volume on the downside would also be expected if this is a major move. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
