Thank you for this background on your experiences, sgbett.  What you went through echoes my own since November.  I bought on the way up (thank the gods not all at the top!), and I am now buying a bit here and there on the way back down.  I have some fiat waiting for a final capitulation, but realize that it may or may not materialize.  As a n00b I made some rookie mistakes, but I can forgive myself since I basically discovered bitcoin right at the beginning of the China rally, and thus had no time to really analyze the market or fully understand what the heck was going on with Bitcoin.  It was all brand new to me, so I sort of just went all in.  (Also Coinbase made things difficult to get a sizable position going early on and I actually lost money with their slow onboarding process, but that's another story....)

Now I feel like I know this market a little better than I did then.  But overall, I'm not a day trader.  I'm in it for the long haul because I believe in Bitcoin.  Right now, I'm just trying to amass as many BTC as I can before the next leg up.  After that, my appetite for buying more will greatly decrease.  I plan to hold for at least 1.5 to 2 years before taking any profits.

My advice to anyone is, "Buy some and then buy some more. Keep buying until you are satisfied that you have enough."  

So Huobi and OKCoin can have bank accounts for deposit/withdrawal, but BTC China can't? Hmmm?  Interesting...

I'm starting to get a sense that there are forces at work in China, who do not like Bobby Lee and wish to run him and his business out of town.  Perhaps because he is seen as an outsider, and in the beginning acted as if his company had "cornered the bitcoin market" in China.  IDK.  He seems to have to play by a different set of rules than that of either Huobi or OKCoin just to stay viable.

Just watching it feels like something is going to blow on their servers.  Like it's stuck in an infinite loop or something.   

Yeah, but look at the 1m chart.  Price is not actually trending down, is it?

My theories:
1.  Fake volume created by bots using large trades (to avoid fees) to show higher level of activity.
2.  Some type of test of the trading system.
3  An attack on BTC China to somehow discredit them.  That much CNY going into into a corporate bank account is going to raise some red flags.
4.  Some large whale on BTC China just wants out.

Maybe so that Renminbi withdrawals have been suspended is a hoax, it's possible. But as the OP alluded to, the real underlying problem is this:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-16/chinese-stocks-tumble-contagion-concerns-first-shadow-banking-default

As I've said in other threads on China in this forum, I truly believe that their Shadow banking system and the $1T in toxic investment packages that they have created are one giant Ponzi Scheme house-o-cards, just waiting to fall.  The Chinese Government may be able to step in "through the back door" and bail out some of them, but they most likely won't be able to bail them all out.  And the contagion could spread very quickly in 2014 once it starts in earnest.

^^^
Best. Video. Evar. 

Here's the real reason why China is suspending bank withdrawals from Jan. 31st - Feb. 7th :

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/01/29/shadow-banking-chinas-wobbly-house-of-cards/

"Among the many issues raised by this episode, two deserve special attention. The first is the hitherto undisclosed risks in China's shadow banking sector, which is estimated to have $6 trillion in outstanding loans. The second is the increased likelihood of a major default in the very near future."

The PBOC is saying they are suspending bank and ATM operations due to "system maintenance."  Yeah, riiiight.  Just like in June 2013, and Dec. 2013.  

So they are having a liquidity crisis.  Yes, it will affect Chinese wanting to buy bitcoin during that time.  No, it really has nothing to do with bitcoin per se. When you have a chinese Shadow banking system that is basically one big Ponzi Scheme, bad things are going to start happening.   January 31st marks the start of when banks have to start "paying the piper", i.e. the Chinese investors.  And the Chinese government has known about this upcoming crisis since last year.

I can confirm that the video captured him saying this.  So confirmed.

At least she's back to talking about bitcoins instead of ripples  

Oh crap, Susan Athey mentioned Ripple about 3-4 times in the first 5 minutes of her opening remarks.  Heresy!

It's funny, so many bitcoiners focused on the date of Jan. 31st, but little do they know it's for all the wrong reasons.  Can't see the Chinese forest for the trees.

Do people with no eye on what's happening in the emerging markets really think that the Chinese government would put an arbitrary date of Jan. 31st, 2014, the announcement almost 2 months ahead of schedule, because they were focused on suspending bank withdrawals for.... just bitcoin?  Really?  Really??

China will be suspending bank withdrawals from Jan 31st to about Feb 7th, and it has little do with the bitcoin market.  It's just coincidental that it would effect bitcoin purchasing as well. Just do the research online and you'll find out why.  

Panel 2 is kicking ass today!  Kudos to Fred, Jeremy, and that Overstock guy (didn't catch his name)

My answer is no.  I think $5K is a little short sighted, a speed bump on the way up to something much higher.  Plus I just want to own, use, and spend bitcoin.  It's a revolution of sorts but still in its infancy.

Also as far as altcoins go, some folks need to realize that their ultimate success (as something other than pure speculation) will depend heavily on how far bitcoin goes in terms of adoption/use.

I agree with the Wells Fargo scenario.  One of the regulators on the panel even hinted as much, with his comment of "have you guys thought about becoming or funding/supporting a bitcoin bank?"  The implication being that US banks already have to comply with US state money transmitter and KYC laws/regulations, and so thus a US bank would have a much easier time becoming a US-based bitcoin exchange.  

But the question becomes, what exactly does a US bank have for incentive to becoming a bitcoin exchange?  Perhaps fiat conversion fees?  Trading fees?  Or maybe they wave the fees... I could see them only supporting their own bank accounts for ACH transfers.  Not exactly decentralized and unbiased, if you ask me.  But the average US-based Joe bitcoiner might see this as a "lesser of two evils" as opposed to relying on Coinbase and the foreign bitcoin exchanges for everything bitcoin-related.

If a US bank jumped in, I could see others follow in short order...

Good lord, the media spin already... sheesh that was fast   

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/28/in-praise-of-bitcoin-with-little-regard-for-banks/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=1&

I don't disagree with you that bitcoin has complexity to it under the hood.  But on the surface, it has a sort of simplicity once you understand the 5-6 core attributes.  From a regulation standpoint, however, the first panel was very concerned about the speed at which regulators can publish useful guidelines and proper compliance regulations, and how easy (or difficult) and cost effective it will be to adhere to those regulations.  Too much cumbersome or expensive US regulation, and you stifle (or complete stop) the ability for small bitcoin developers and businesses to be able to adopt and move forward.

I think we need to simplify it for the regulators, not make it more complicated (with discussion around colored coins).  Or else these regulations will take forever to draft/approve/publish and be overly complicated to follow and comply with.

Also I'm not sure that Panel 2 has the right mix of folks to be commenting on how bitcoins should be classified (commodity, currency, etc.), nor taxed/treated at the State level.

For anyone interested, it's Coeptis that the lawyer was talking about.  I had to Google it to find some info on it.
http://www.coeptis.com
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f7488616-561a-11e3-96f5-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2riztTRxv

It's interesting, as I remember the whole e-Gold fiasco and how the US Government eventually shut it down.  Not sure if Douglas Jackson still has enough clout to resurrect something like this.  Why would we trust something like this again?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-gold

I agree with the overall sentiment of your post, but just wanted to point out this one discrepancy.  It won't be until roughly the year 2140 before all 21M bitcoins have been mined.  See reference here:

"By 2140 there will be approximately 21 million bitcoins in existence and transaction processing will be solely incentivized by transaction fees."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin