|
Here's what most people that are scared to be underwater with bitcoin don't understand. Go look at the historical data. Between the bubbles there's only about a 3-4 week window at most out of the whole 6-8 months that you can purchase bitcoin and be pretty much guaranteed to be in the black until the next bubble. For the rest of the time, the price will likely dip below your buy-in price at one point or another. Unfortunately, most bitcoiners have purchased bitcoin outside of this narrow window (because it's hard/impossible to predict the true bottom), and thus spend most of their time with their investment in the red until the next leg up. Well, unless you are a day trader that is, who panic sells every time the price gets even close to their buy-in or stop loss.
That's why the most sensible option is to hold, especially during the uptrend phase.
OP, you just so happened to buy when the timing was good. Don't lose your nerve now just because you haven't seen any upward movement in a while. Being able to buy back cheaper is not at all guaranteed. If you want to acquire more bitcoin, the safest thing to do is just hold and buy more on the dips.
|
|
|
|
Can we make your post a sticky in this sub forum? Or maybe we need a bumper sticker or something. Like you, every time I hear someone say that these buyers are going to immediately dump their coins on exchanges, I feel like I'm trapped in that movie "Idiocracy."
Which simply means you don't understand how arbitrage works. Which simply means you don't understand that HNW investors are not stupid troll day traders. Have you even seen the list of auction buyers? Point me to one on that list that would even care about arbitrage. Just one. Go on, I'll wait. Or is it just more convenient to disregard common sense? |
|
|
|
Noone is dumping on exchanges. In fact, its hard for me to comprehend the ignorance/stupidity of anyone who thinks someone is going to buy cheap from the government, transfer that money to an exchange and then try to sell for a profit. That's beyond imagination. These are serious buyers and players, not people/groups looking to go through the hassle to make maybe $5 a bitcoin profit on an illiquid exchange, where they couldn't sell that many coins anyway. Im getting stupidier just writing about this nonsense.
And the market will probably go up, simply because of a release of tension as to the outcome. Probably wont be sustained.
Although, I wouldn't be surprised if the markets has a semi-crash first.
Can we make your post a sticky in this sub forum? Or maybe we need a bumper sticker or something. Like you, every time I hear someone say that these buyers are going to immediately dump their coins on exchanges, I feel like I'm trapped in that movie "Idiocracy." If the price goes down after the auction, it won't have anything to do with the buyers. It will simply be troll whale traders just trying to use FUD to incite a panic in order to get cheaper coins. Most likely a huge bear trap before the start of a run up. Also, since the last 2 pages this thread has become a pointless bear circle-jerk. |
|
|
|
The candle has been lit.
What candle? Yeah, what do you mean, Tera?  Lol |
|
|
|
Thousands of coins are so difficult to come by in one go, and the list of auction buyers are pretty young and immature. Instead of self-made industry professionals with lots of common sense, they're all just teenagers that must have inherited their money or something and just want to make a fast buck. I'm 100% sure that the buyer(s) will dump all of them immediately on the exchange market, because that makes the most sense as they are not at all interested in bitcoin as a long term investment. Nope, not in the least bit. (/s  ) |
|
|
|
|
Like I said, Stamp refuses to follow Huobi in the up direction, but seems to have no problem following them down.
Fkn bullshit market. I'm sure Stamp will be right back to $599.999999 soon.
|
|
|
|
This is amazing, Stamp never veering from $599.99 for days. Nope, no manipulation involved at all. Nope, pure free market, makes perfect sense it should stay that price.  |
|
|
|
Giancarlo
Bitfinex Team
So essentially all you are saying is: Hurr, durr you can't prove it. Sure that makes it ok, right? What I'm just saying is that I'll be glad to prove him wrong, but I want him to pay for his completely idiotic allegations. What you are doing here is confusing absence of evidence with evidence of absence. I can prove the fairness of every single transaction on Bitfinex, but I just need to reward the 2 parties that will then come and witness the fact that the trade wasn't a fake trade. Nobody does anything for nothing and MatTheTwat has to learn his lesson. He has a concrete chance of making 100 BTC. If he's right ( and he's not). Spitting hot air out of your mouth is easy, a little bit more difficult is to place your bet and lose your coins in case you are proven wrong. Don't you agree with me? Giancarlo Actually, I respectfully disagree. Unfortunately in the current state of the Bitcoin world, and in light of the Mt. Gox implosion and other numerous incidents where exchanges either went under due to incompetence or their operators closed up and ran off with the coins, the onus of responsibility of proving an exchange "being on the level" resides with the exchange operators. It's called transparency, and it is required to earn the public's trust. You guys had no problem with having an independent audit done back in April to prove your solvency. You didn't first demand a bet to be made with someone before proving it. I don't see how this situation is any different. And why do you "need to reward the 2 parties that will then come and witness the fact that the trade wasn't a fake trade"? |
|
|
|
didn't it already $100 -> $1000 ?
Well he is talking about active bitcoin users, and not just the btc price. But as many people have pointed out, Facebook didn't have any competitors. Bitcoin has to compete with Fiat. I can spend BTC in places that might consist of 1% of my manual expenditures (SR and computer components), for the remaining 99% of my purchases, I can use Fiat and only Fiat and even if I could use Bitcoin, it would be much easier for me just to use Fiat. You're right, at first Facebook didn't really have any competitors (MySpace wasn't really that active any more). But then some competitors tried to come along. Diaspora and Google+ come to mind. But by that time, what Facebook had was early mover advantage. It's very hard to displace an early market mover once it has firmly established a large percentage of market share. People just didn't want to switch social networks, because all their friends were already on FB. But you have a point about Fiat being a competitor to Bitcoin. Right now I'd say fiat is it's only real competitor. Bitcoin still remains a "really inconvenient way to purchase a limited amount of things." In the future for Bitcoin to have a serious impact, acquiring Bitcoin and spending it anywhere and for nearly anything needs to be as easy stupid simple as acquiring and using fiat. Perhaps banks will eventually get onboard, who knows. I saw that Coinbase finally added a "buyback after purchase checkout" option. This is a good sign of things to come. http://blog.coinbase.com/post/89402160917/buyback-bitcoin-after-checkout |
|
|
|
This thread will be even funnier to necro in about 2 years from now. Also, you know what I find interesting? Many of the accounts that posted on this thread in 2011 are still active, many have logged on to bitcointalk even today. But they don't post in the Speculation sub any more. Many of them still log in, but haven't posted anything in a year or two. So what does that tell you? It tells me that either they are now rich from holding (unlikely), or have probably pissed away all their coins from back then and are now pretty bitter about it. |
|
|
|
|
This is a good discussion.
If you look at the growth pattern of other online social networks (e.g., MySpace, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc.) you'll see that it took all of them several years to get to the 1M user mark, and then after that the most explosive growth occurs in the next 2-4 years following that 1M user milestone. The first 1M users could be considered the "early adopters". This could also happen with Bitcoin as well.
Unfortunately with Bitcoin, there are two things that hinder being able to track this growth accurately:
1. Knowing the exact number of users to date - you can look at things like number of wallets on sites like Blockchain and Coinbase, but that just gives you the number of accounts. Number of wallets <> number of users. But you can do some level of extrapolation/guessing, like number of users = number of wallets / 5. Also, there are personal wallets on desktops and smartphones, wallets associated with all the exchanges, and other obscure/unknown sites that provide wallet services. Many wallets have been completely abandoned or have 0 bitcoin in them. So even trying to find all of the active wallets in existence would prove to be a futile effort.
2. Cost of entry - if you look at all the other online social networks that had explosive, viral growth, they all have one thing in common: provided you have access to a web browser on a desktop/laptop or smartphone, then signing up an account is free. Thus cost of entry and risk is near zero. People usually signed up on these social networks when first hearing about them and interested, because there was nothing to risk. With Bitcoin though, it's a little different because we're talking about money being in the equation. So even when people first learn about Bitcoin and are interested, they may be hesitant to get involved because of the perceived "cost of entry" and associated risk (real or imagined), etc.
|
|
|
|
We've just broken 600$ on huobi and getting soe volume also!
Yeah, watch how Huobi tries to go up but Stamp refuses to budge. My theories: 1. Huobi volume really is fake, and Stamp knows it. Thus refuses to follow such a small percentage of the market in the up direction. 2. Stamp is deliberately holding down the market, fake sell walls, etc. Probably on purpose until the SR coins are sold. My money is more on #2, because Stamp seems to have no problem following Huobi in the down direction. (Although I'm still not convinced Huobi's volume is 100% accurate) |
|
|
|
|
I like how Stamp refuses to follow Huobi when it's trying to push up, but will gladly follow Huobi when it's going down.
Fkn bullshit manipulated market.
|
|
|
|
What igorr, mah87 or fonzie does can be justifiably called trolling. Jorge is just being obstinate obnoxious.
FTFY |
|
|
|
why is it rising in china with volume, while Stamp is dumping with just a few coins??
is huobi volume fake??
If you're looking at Huobi on bitcoinwisdom, it's been stuck like that for a full 8 hours now. Something's broken. |
|
|
|
|
So let me see if I got this straight:
1) People think that if these coins sell for a discount to market price, then they'll immediately get dumped on the market.
2) But if these coins go for a premium over market price, then the buyer will hold them forever.
Completely binary outcome, eh?
(This short sighted thinking is why the majority of bitcoiners will never be wealthy)
|
|
|
|
Here is one possible way this could work and be simple to implement. The customer would see a simple bitcoin transaction. In detail:
1) The Starbuck's Point of Sale terminal would have a bitcoin payment icon which when clicked starts the process.
2) The dollar value of the order is immediately passed to Coinbase (or similar) which take the dollar value of the order, converts to Bitcoin at the current rate and adds a small transaction cost (to cover Coinbase costs).
3) The Starbuck POS terminals then displays a QR code with the Coinbase generated address and the Bitcoin transaction value provided by Coinbase.
4) The customer then scans the QR code with their own phone and taps to pay the Bitcoin value to Coinbase.
5) The original order value is then immediately credited by Coinbase to Starbucks in the local currency. The sale is complete.
All Starbucks has to do is to use an interface provided by Coinbase. The Starbucks internal systems only see the original local dollar value.
Coinbase (or similar) does the Bitcoin part of the transaction and bears any risk. Obviously no-one is going to wait around in a coffee shop for the normal Bitcoin confirmation.
The customer sees a pure Bitcoin transaction which happens immediately. The customer has no idea a third party is involved.
This is the system that Coinkite employs; a POS handheld system that settles immediately on their internal system afaik. Don't Coinbase and BitPay merchant services already do this? IIRC, they are already doing off-exchange transactions (that post immediately) if the client wallet and merchant service are the same. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I hate these douche bags that just backpedal instead of just admitting they were wrong. And boy, how wrong they are going to be.
I'm sure Paul Krugman, Peter Schiff, and Warren Buffett will just stubbornly hold out to the bitter end, never admitting that bitcoin has merit. Paul especially, since he has written so much as a naysayer.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
