Bitcoin Forum
June 19, 2018, 10:19:12 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 ... 81 »
161  Economy / Speculation / 17 March Issue Sent Out on: March 17, 2014, 03:52:41 PM
This week's issue was just sent out to the following users:

oda.krell
docile
John999
kramerc
iron77
kwest
jlin
CoinBurner
Aquatic

---

i do want to take this time to share with the greater forum some feedback i received via pm regarding last week's report:

Quote
Thanks for last weeks newsletter, it is exactly what I was hoping would exist somewhere.  For me its a perfect balance of analysis and a description of the methods used to produce that analysis.  Your style of communicating has a strong educational flavor to it and its the best kind, the kind that comes completely naturally to a person.  I've been reading it this morning and I feel 100% more comfortable with my understanding of the current situation in the market than at any time over the last 4 months I've been involved in it.  What a relief! Smiley

thanks for the amazing feedback!

i am always accepting new subscriptions, so PM me if you are interested!

--arepo
162  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: March 16, 2014, 03:59:21 PM
What if resistance is logarithmic?



it looks to me like one or more of the points you built your resistance on was an outlier, skewing the slope.
163  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Redditís science forum banned climate deniers. on: March 16, 2014, 06:28:13 AM
the contents of this thread easily describe the reason why that particular subreddit chose this action, whether or not i personally agree.

also i'd just like to point out that spamming this thread with ridicule and general condescension such that the ratio of posts defending either side of this important debate are strongly skewed in one direction has the same destructive effect as direct censorship.

--arepo
164  Economy / Speculation / Re: Prepare for March 16 Dip on: March 15, 2014, 10:22:38 PM
with no more major bad news, I have a hard time seeing BTC go much below 600 in the near future.

News doesnt move the market, speculators do. if the news was the be all and end all, it would all make sense and you would be rich, but this is a game of strategy. there are players ahead of you, and you will see the price fall now even if there is good news.

+1

from my experience, news doesn't predict price, price predicts news.

and remember that it's just a game, so have fun Wink
165  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion on: March 15, 2014, 10:20:36 PM
Wow, this volume..

Im no TA guy but it looks like it wants to shoot down.

As always, hope I'm wrong.

low volume is not necessarily bearish, but we're sure as hell not going to be able to break above the mid-term resistance on this slow boat.
166  Economy / Speculation / Re: BTC price on: March 15, 2014, 07:00:39 PM
[snip]

IF THAT IS FOR YOU STABLE IM THE PRESIDENT OF USA

that is stable, and you're not the president. i would hope any president of the US would have a little bit better baseline understanding of the mechanisms underlying market pricing.. Undecided

here's a start: it goes up, and then it goes down, because price is stochastic.

--arepo
167  Economy / Speculation / Re: Check out this poll on Bitcoin - 95% would never buy!!! on: March 15, 2014, 06:42:09 PM
Context of the article skews the poll results.

That's like first showing Detroit to non-Americans and then asking what they think of the US.

+1

came here to say this. it's called poisoning the well.

--arepo
168  Economy / Speculation / Re: Low quality stir fry of price analysis. Get it while itís hot. on: March 14, 2014, 08:08:45 PM
EDIT: I just re-read my post. you're right, since I didn't mention it is the December downtrend, it was misleading. My mistake.

no worries. i realized shortly after that post that on the 1-week scale this figure does indeed look like its own triangle consolidation pattern, and mentioned the model in an update in the newsletter thread, as it does agree with the other data Wink

--arepo
169  Economy / Speculation / UPDATE -- confirmation on: March 14, 2014, 06:38:57 PM
---

6-hour scale


http://i.imgur.com/LPi4cYw.png

---

looking at the 6-hour scale, we see a reversal candle (first marked in blue), which we can identify by its long wicks and small body. in general you can also use volume to help confirm these candles, but since volume is relatively low right now that method is not applicable. this corresponds with a bounce off of the mid-term resistance (not drawn, see figure on page 10 of issue 10 March), confirming the model.

however, we see a second possible reversal candle, also marked in blue. this may be a micro-term reversal (meaning just a couple of periods long) where the price may attempt to retest the $645 resistance (marked in white). the model presented in the newsletter suggests that this retest, if it occurs, will fail, and we will continue to trend downwards.

---

1-week scale


http://i.imgur.com/ox43PcI.png

---

zooming out, there is a possible descending triangle forming on the 1-week scale with a moving resistance and a flat support (drawn in white) which also supports the model presented in the newsletter. this would suggest that the next price target for this trend down will be around $605, close to the known support at $600.

if we break under this support, which may happen depending on how many weak hands there are in the market right now, we may continue to trend downwards all the way to the mid-term support detailed in the newsletter (figure on page 10 of issue 10 March).

another way to understand what is going on right now is to assume that the large movement up to $710 caused the market to be extremely overbought in the short-term. a short period of consolidation followed, and then a movement down to the support at $605 (visible in the 6-hour figure above). the action since then was likely largely composed of weak hands naively reading the recent large buy as a very bullish sign. however, not many traders were convinced of a real reversal of the mid-term downtrend and so buying pressure, while steady, remained light. since trading volume is just generally low right now, there was not much selling pressure to counter it, causing us to gently trend up to the mid-term resistance around $650-$660. however, when the price failed to decisively break-out on such low volume as projected in my last post, some weak hands sold, causing the bounce. as such, depending on how much of the buying action since the $710 move was composed of similarly weak hands, we could trend all the way back to the last $605 low, or lower.

--arepo
170  Economy / Economics / Re: What percentage of Bitcoin would it take to manipulate prices? on: March 14, 2014, 05:43:06 PM
i recently made a post in the speculation subforum, drawing from the efficient market hypothesis and concepts from game theory, that argues that in most cases direct market manipulation would be costly, not profitable.

conclusion quoted below, but read the full post for the argument.

in closing: the market incentivizes all participants to enforce trends (by means of profits), and deters them from violating them (by means of costs),

and the corollary: any manipulative meta-strategy that can consistently extract profits can and will be exploited by other participants and thereby neutralized by the same principle.

--arepo
171  Economy / Speculation / Re: Bad News Speculation: Next Flash Crash??? on: March 14, 2014, 05:25:00 PM
BTC is sleeping only a total fool would start a large dump now.

what do you mean, "sleeping"?

Means the dragon will awake and rise to new all time highs

haha, well there's your answer then. there will be a dip now because too many speculators are expecting a rise in price and the market moves to minimize profits. it's called a long squeeze.

--arepo
172  Economy / Speculation / Re: Prepare for March 16 Dip on: March 14, 2014, 05:23:18 PM
Any apparently reason why the dip?

short answer: because the buyer to $710 pushed us into short-term overbought territory. long answer. longer answer, subscribe to my newsletter for in-depth weekly price analysis Wink

--arepo
173  Economy / Speculation / Re: Low quality stir fry of price analysis. Get it while itís hot. on: March 14, 2014, 05:20:13 PM
The plot thickens. Triangle closing, or maybe broken already to the downside. I don't think we're going to break through the December downtrend this weekend, but if whatever dip we might see over the weekend doesn't take us below ~600 I can see a continuation like shown below for the next week to 10 days, where we finally break through the LT downtrend and have a retest of 700. CMF, order book, even bitfinex stats all look pretty good, there's just not enough momentum, and we're a bit too overbought, to go through it *right* now.




by my figure, this isn't a proper triangle consolidation pattern because the drawn resistance doesn't have enough points of contact. this looks much more like a micro-bubble started by the large movement up to $710. i expect a relatively sharp movement down to mirror the movement up, retracing at least 61.8% of the way back down to the $530 support, which confirms your target at the $600 support.

we shall see...

--arepo
174  Economy / Speculation / Re: Bad News Speculation: Next Flash Crash??? on: March 14, 2014, 04:00:58 PM
BTC is sleeping only a total fool would start a large dump now.

what do you mean, "sleeping"?
175  Economy / Economics / Re: market price suspiciously stable on Bitstamp on: March 13, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
trading within a range occurs at the tail end of patterns that started with large movements. we're almost done tracing out the repercussions of the big drop from the ATH, and there isn't enough volume to push the price around much. as bid and ask depth fill in on either side, it locks the price into a smaller and smaller trading range until a large volume push can break us out into new price territory.

The upside down W-pattern is telling me that there is extended resistance coming up to the stork curve right after the inverted peak which is predicting heavy buying interest in the falling triangle wedge.

i can assure you that what i said makes a whole lot more sense than your humorous word-salad. i've bolded the key terms for you, so let me know which words you failed to comprehend Wink
176  Economy / Economics / Re: How and why Bitcoin will plummet in price on: March 13, 2014, 06:42:34 PM
I doubt he is right... I sure hope he isn't !

http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/how-why-bitcoin-will-fail/

unfortunately for the author, he seems to assume that the attractiveness of a cryptocurrency is tied in a major way to the value in traditional currencies of its base unit. the selling point for all cryptos is its utility, regardless of its market value...
177  Economy / Economics / Re: market price suspiciously stable on Bitstamp on: March 13, 2014, 06:35:40 PM
I don't understand how Bitstamps price can be so stable, trading within a narrow margin. Any explanation for this?

Also, I can't even get BTC-e to work, even with Javascript turned on, the site just flickers and does nothing. Do they want cookies too?

trading within a range occurs at the tail end of patterns that started with large movements. we're almost done tracing out the repercussions of the big drop from the ATH, and there isn't enough volume to push the price around much. as bid and ask depth fill in on either side, it locks the price into a smaller and smaller trading range until a large volume push can break us out into new price territory.

LOL a technical analyst. That's funny.

sorry, maybe you should ask a botanist for an explanation of price behavior next time? Tongue
178  Economy / Economics / Re: market price suspiciously stable on Bitstamp on: March 13, 2014, 06:18:59 PM
I don't understand how Bitstamps price can be so stable, trading within a narrow margin. Any explanation for this?

Also, I can't even get BTC-e to work, even with Javascript turned on, the site just flickers and does nothing. Do they want cookies too?

trading within a range occurs at the tail end of patterns that started with large movements. we're almost done tracing out the repercussions of the big drop from the ATH, and there isn't enough volume to push the price around much. as bid and ask depth fill in on either side, it locks the price into a smaller and smaller trading range until a large volume push can break us out into new price territory.
179  Economy / Speculation / Re: Challenge: if you really are a guru, post trades in real time on: March 13, 2014, 05:48:09 PM

The problem with your argument, as with so many game theoretic derivations, is that it assumes a "static" setup, and then derives conclusions that are correct for the simplified setup, but not necessarily for reality. In the case under discussion here, I could construct a "meta meta" game where, given enough time, effort and actual ingenuity you could create a flock of followers with an account that allows you to exploit their group behavior, while also keeping track of diminishing returns. Once you become convinced other are onto you, you continue the game with a new account, with a new set of "followers". The previous is not so much a practical suggestion (if you are good enough to gather followers that easy you probably don't need to manipulate to make consistent profits), but to point out that the conclusions drawn in many GT derivations based on a finite set of premises can rather easily be picked apart.

your argument is sound. there isn't much more to be said of the various metastrategies involving inducing other market participants to make a certain action other than the fact that they are unstable. you point out that if you are able to pull off such a dynamic strategy then it is at least feasible to profit from it, however you're doing far more than simple market manipulation at this point. i suppose the limits of my argument are to simply state that the idea that "market manipulation = profits" is not sound under basic game-theoretic formulations of the trading game.

edit: also deriveable from my original argument is that this metastrategy is more unstable the more efficient the market is. as such, there is a hard limit to the profitability of the dynamic metastrategy imposed by the cleverness of the other participants enforcing efficiency.

--arepo
180  Economy / Speculation / Re: Predictions through 2016 on: March 13, 2014, 03:58:02 PM
Unless you can explain your speculation with some formula, it's all bs.
My simple speculation of gut feeling is about $2000/BTC around Dec 2016.

does anyone else see the irony here? Grin
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 ... 81 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!