|
Hi guys. It's been a while since I've posted here. As usual, I'm checking in for anyone interested in subscribing.
I've finally decided to add one of my newsletters and premium-only updates from mid-2013 to provide an example of what subscribers can expect. The link to these newsletters can be found in the original post on this thread.
Even though these newsletters are old, they still provide an enormous amount of useful information for anyone interested in trading and charting. So, even if you either can't afford an extremely cheap subscription fee or don't envision subscribing, I would still recommend clicking on these links. After all, they might change your mind. Obviously, the technical picture for many of these charts have changed over the past couple of months and you will need to become a subscriber to receive updated newsletters.
As usual, I'm always open to discussing technical and fundamental opinions/ideas on this thread in regards to bitcoin and/or larger markets.
|
|
|
|
|
For my longer term subscribers, a fairly important premium update was just released. Enjoy!
Also, was that last question directed towards me, chessnut? I wasn't quite sure.
|
|
|
|
We've seen this call from you many times before. What makes this time more likely?
(Serious question, not sarcasm. I am fan of EW analysis but have been burned on this call before many times)
I would simply play it by ear. If the price doesn't bottom at SPX ~1550 (previous 2000 & 2007 highs), then this EW count has merit. If it bottoms at ~1550 then you pretty much have to assume that it'll revisit the highs. Furthermore, keep in mind that there are some other running corrective EW alternatives that allow for one or two more highs before a major top so a total collapse now is far from certain (i.e. I definitely wouldn't bet the farm on it...just yet). |
|
|
|
Because of popular demand, I've added a section about litecoin in my newsletter. So, for all you litecoin enthusiasts, you finally have a reason to subscribe  Although I currently use litecoin to complement my bitcoin analysis, I may expand upon it in the future if it can survive competition with bitcoin. Disclaimer: You should know that don't envision a future with multiple cryptocurrencies because its completely unnecessary from my perspective. But, in the end, I have and will always chart from a purely technical (TA) standpoint. I'll gladly leave fundamental analysis to economists (i.e. non-traders). |
|
|
|
Merry Christmas, speculators! I wish you all the best of luck...yes, even to you perma-bulls out there. If you guys haven't already exited out of bitcoin charts to spend time with family and friends, now is probably a good time to shut down the ole' computer for a day. If not, you might have a serious addiction  |
|
|
|
For any lost TA sheep out there , my subscription service is always available. Also, a quick premium update was just released. As always, happy trading all! |
|
|
|
Thing is, Luc didn't call for a multi-month-to-a-year bear market.
He said that Bitcoin was in a bear market for 3-4 years. THREE TO FOUR YEARS. I will say this now. If Bitcoin is in a bear market for 3-4 consecutive years bitcoin will fizzle out and probably be dead. So, in my mind, Luc called for the death of Bitcoin. And I personally think that this is utter nonsense in that it is NOT a technical call. That's a personal or fundamentals call. And Luc masked it as technical. That was my only issue with what he said.
Guy said no such thing. Quote: "Next entering point for me is in 2016-2017 year." That's all. Ummm. That's 3-4 years away. Ok maybe 2 1/2 - 3 1/2 years. He also implied that bitcoin would suffer until then. Why do you believe that a 3-4 year bear market will kill bitcoin? Isn't it just as easy to argue that a bear market will force innovation within the bitcoin ecosystem which would make way for a much larger bull market later down the line? IMO, there is no reason why you cannot be bullish on the future of bitcoin yet bearish on the price for a period of time. Well what are we considering a bear market? When I think of a bear market, or an untradable market (if you don't do shorts) I think of a market trending downward. So if bitcoin trends downward for 3 years, then I have to imagine a world where nothing significantly signals it to go higher. As it is an emerging technology, this implies to me that Bitcoin is failing at integration as a payment processor, currency and/or commodity investment vehicle. For instance, if Bitcoin takes a prolonged route of the 2011 crash that resolved itself in about a year a half, this means that over the next 3 years bitcoin bleeds from $700 to roughly $40-$60 (as in 2011 it started at $5 and ended at $2 or 60% lower than where the rise began. So this rally started at $125 it would end at $40-$60). So for this to happen, what has happened to bitcoin as a currency? Well bitpay and other future competitors surely arent successful at their goals in this scenario. No big business has started accepting bitcoin. I assume no large adoption of bitcoin as payments has been done. No killer app(s). As a commodity? At $40-$60, it has now lost 93% of its value. So it has failed there. As a payment processor? I assume no real adaption at this level commercially? So, in this scenario, Bitcoin is less than what it is today AND it is no longer an "emerging" technology. I contend that if Bitcoin is going to prosper we need at least another 12-18 months of mass adoption and acceptance. We are not close to the levels we need for sustainability. If Bitcoin follows the route I've outlined, based on what some are suggesting in this thread, then for all intents and purposes it will die, and at the very least probably be replaced with some other digital currency. Okay...but, IMO, you're making a giant assumption here. Why does bitcoin need another 12-18 months of mass adoption and acceptance to prosper longer term? That seems very arbitrary. Even so, why must it be completely accepted and/or reach sustainability now (within 12-18 months) instead of after a couple of years if not decades. Are we really in that much of a hurry? If bitcoin is truly as revolutionary as we'd like to assume, it's not going anywhere. Patience. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither was the internet. Also, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of alternative digital currencies trade with bitcoin, so maybe a great bear market is needed to seperate the wheat from the chaff. 2011 was a great example of how bitcoin not only survived a prolonged crash but came out even stronger. Whose to say that the same thing can't happen again? |
|
|
|
Thing is, Luc didn't call for a multi-month-to-a-year bear market.
He said that Bitcoin was in a bear market for 3-4 years. THREE TO FOUR YEARS. I will say this now. If Bitcoin is in a bear market for 3-4 consecutive years bitcoin will fizzle out and probably be dead. So, in my mind, Luc called for the death of Bitcoin. And I personally think that this is utter nonsense in that it is NOT a technical call. That's a personal or fundamentals call. And Luc masked it as technical. That was my only issue with what he said.
Guy said no such thing. Quote: "Next entering point for me is in 2016-2017 year." That's all. Ummm. That's 3-4 years away. Ok maybe 2 1/2 - 3 1/2 years. He also implied that bitcoin would suffer until then. Why do you believe that a 3-4 year bear market will kill bitcoin? Isn't it just as easy to argue that a bear market will force innovation within the bitcoin ecosystem which would make way for a much larger bull market later down the line? IMO, there is no reason why you cannot be bullish on the future of bitcoin yet bearish on the price for a period of time. |
|
|
|
Unless you have lots of capital and balls of steel, I strongly recommend against shorting bitcoin.
I would have to agree unless you have very tight stops in place...and even then a stop doesn't protect you if the price gaps up. There is an old adage about never attempting to catch a falling knife (buying during a collapse); the same can be said about trying to stop a rocket (shorting during a bubble). (...) Does it mean that you always buy/sell at market? When it comes to limiting risk, I always sell at market if a key technical area (~stop-loss point) is breached which goes against my trade. The risk of the market not pulling back is just too great in most circumstances. Plus, this helps take emotion out of the equation. But, when it comes to buying or selling into or out of a position, I usually stick with limit trades spread throughout a key technical area. Again, this helps take emotional trading out of the equation. Basically, I do everything possible to suppress my emotions |
|
|
|
edit: and what is it with all the defensiveness in this thread? how many times must someone complement the OP until they can avoid the condescension of EW theory traders? Jess. I bought low and sold high too guys. I basically made the important buys and trades that most here did without staring at charts 24/7. It wasn't rocket science.
As long as you stay away from trying to discredit TA, EW, or its practitioners, I'm pretty sure this whole fiasco will go down as a giant misunderstanding. Just try to keep an open mind, listen, and be respectful, especially when you are posting on someone else's thread. |
|
|
|
I'm curious about your opinion on the following. In catching up with the hundreds of posts in this thread, you make a strong case for why bitcoin is not like gold or silver as a hedge.
Makes perfect sense actually from that perspective.
But you also say that bitcoin tracks the stock market. As people are more willing to invest in anything, they are more willing to invest in bitcoin. Perhaps, you might argue, I don't know, that they need to be even MORE willing to invest in general before investing in bitcoin.
Sort of. I'm basically saying that the wealth effect from an increasing stock market makes people more willing and able to invest in risky ventures/investments. In other words, when you feel wealthy, you are probably more willing to buy something compared to if you are less wealthy. What doesn't make sense to me in this argument, however, is the fact that bitcoin has risen exponentially compared to the stock market. One might say, well bitcoin is like a penny stock that way - it was cheaper and so could rise faster.
Yes, I see bitcoin as more of a early startup (possibly a low cap tech stock) which fluctuates with but far more violently than the overall stock market because its fate is ultimately determined by how strong the economy is or is perceived. In other words, it has a high beta. But is seems that bitcoin - if not like gold and silver - is also not like the stock market. As it is a technology. A worldwide technology.
So far the primary mining and cultivation of btc has been in the US, and now spread a great deal into China. However, one might argue that btc investment is much more a worldwide opportunity than the US stock market. Also bitcoin seems to be a "personal" technology, meaning that unlike a stock, it has the ability to have a loyal following.
If institutional investors were highly leveraged in btc, then I could see an argument for why it might track the stock market. But, for the most part, institutional investors haven't entered in bitcoin markets.
It seems that it is very plausible that bitcoin rising while the stock market rises is simply coincidence. In fact, corrections in the stock market and bitcoin have not tracked. Of course, the correlation between the two is meant to be over the long term. But still, it seems that there is little emperical evidence to suggest that they are tied to each other, as we have not had a stock market crash since bitcoins invention.
In fact, it seems that there are many reasons to suggest that they are not. With the one caveat being, that if the world economy goes into throes, then all markets may suffer for a time.
Until bitcoin actually becomes a stable commodity and/or currency, its success, as of right now, is based on whether or not people will accept/buy it -- a concept which is not so different than what determines how successful a company/stock is. Now, as I stated above, this willingness to accept/buy a new idea/concept is largely determined by how well off investors feel. During bad times, investors go for the safe investment. During good times, investors go for the risky one. Absolutely though...this correlation to the stock market could be coincidental, especially because of how young bitcoin is. But, until it actually diverges, one has to assume that they will continue trending together. I hope that I helped clarify some things. If not, I'm always open to further questions and/or a constructive debate. |
|
|
|
waveaddict, thanks for observations. Actually main trading decisions were on patterns you pointed to.
No problem. I'll always defend a fellow talented TA & EWer It's truly amazing how often I have to explain basic market concepts and recall basic information in the speculation forum. Trying to educate people of the practicality of EW is the hardest because so many people misunderstand and misuse it. It's one of those ideas/theories that takes weeks to somewhat understand but years to fully appreciate and profit from. Most just quickly learn about it, without fully understanding it, and then fail at it and subsequently blame the idea instead of their own shortcomings. Anything that is worth doing/learning isn't easy! Moreover, it's insulting to have some of these same people argue with and insult you on something they haven't taken the time to understand, especially when you are trying to help them out. |
|
|
|
EW works very good for every market? false. People make false EW readings ALL THE TIME. Even the founder of EW theory says it does not work all the time.
And if you think Gold prices go up when there is confidence in the economy and stock market and go down during times of fear, then YOU need to read history a little bit more.
Making false EW readings does not mean that EW failed. If EW was straight forward and precise, it wouldn't be a theory. I'm not even going to respond to your second statement because you clearly have not looked at a commodity chart in a long time. People flee commodities and stocks and flock towards cash and bonds during market downturns. The only exception would be during a highly inflationary period which we are not in. ORLY? So gold did not go up during the last stock downturn and financial banking crisis? No, gold fell from ~1000 to ~650 during the 2008 banking crisis. Oil went from $150 to $40 Copper went from 4.2 to 1.2 etc... "But that aside, I ask only this --> if we hit new ATHs for bitcoin within the next year, what does that say about Luc's wave theory?" Nothing. EW helps traders gauge risk. All Luc is saying is that a very large motive count could be considered complete and that it would be foolish to not take, at least, some profit from a longer term viewpoint. Profiting from EW is all about expanding gains and limiting loses from likely and unlikely scenarios. EW is not about figuring out an absolute EW count and sticking with it no matter what. If a wave movement that contradicted lucs scenario occurred, luc would obviously change his analysis. |
|
|
|
EW works very good for every market? false. People make false EW readings ALL THE TIME. Even the founder of EW theory says it does not work all the time.
And if you think Gold prices go up when there is confidence in the economy and stock market and go down during times of fear, then YOU need to read history a little bit more.
Making false EW readings does not mean that EW failed. If EW was straight forward and precise, it wouldn't be a theory. Your second statement isn't even worth a response because you clearly have not looked at a commodity chart in a long time. People flee commodities and stocks and flock towards cash and bonds during market downturns. The only exception would be during a highly inflationary period which we are not in. |
|
|
|
Because the institutions that I consider big money - like Goldman Sachs - dont even own bitcoin. Yet. I have different information about GS and Bitcoin. Ok. So where are we going from here? Did you call $400 as the bottom of this down cycle? Or are you really holding fiat to 2016? dude just stop, understand there people will have money and they need to lose a large portion of that money so the market can move on Ok, I fear i am coming across of some sort of random antagonist in this thread. So let me clarify... I have read back on all of masterluc's analysis and for the most part its highly impressive, cohesive and has tracked my sentiments much more time than not. So mad respect there. However, his latest prediction that we are entering a multi-year bear market is based on the EW theory that he is extrapolating on a logarithmic chart since the beginning of BTC on the markets. Luc's short term predictions are awesome. But here is what I believe is happening with this long term prediction. First, we have to suppose that the EW theory is the correct theory to judge BTC long term growth chart. It very well may not be. In fact, there is a really good chance that its not. There is a strong argument that the EW theory for BTC and the S-curve adoption graph are incompatible with each other. So, I think what is happening with masterluc, is that he is stuck to a EW theory. Now that theory says we are going down for a long time. This flies in the face of the adoption curve and what we are seeing in the REAL world with adoption, eco-system, etc. So Luc has to justify a possible scenario that would make this seemingly ridiculous theory seem plausible. So he answers to this that the stock market is a bubble and when that pops it will spiral effect BTC to the downside. Although this statement flies in the face of what we have seen from investment commodities during stock market down turns. Now, I guess if the entire US system failed then BTC could be down for several years. But suggesting that the US economy and/or the stock market will create the EW theory scenario is, in my opinion, simply a concoction of masterlucs imagination. EW theory is a speculative theory which works for every market. The S-curve is not even even in the same category, so there really isn't a strong argument that they are incompatible. Commodities almost always fall during stock market declines so your second point doesn't really make sense. I suggest that you take the time to understand market dynamics and EW before you claim that materlucs is imagining a relationship which isn't there. |
|
|
|
|
Thought I'd bump this thread again because of the latest crash.
In short, the recent run up since $266 and crash were nearly textbook technical analysis (TA) if you knew what you were doing. So, profiting from the bubble and getting out before the crash was relatively easy.
If anyone is interested in learning how to chart & trade bitcoin, while obtaining a greater understanding of larger markets, I'm always taking on new subscribers.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin doesn't go down in price over longterm, this is a fact. With this fact I can deduce that it will never go longterm below $1000 anymore. It's simple really.
So, you are making a sweeping assumption from three years of data? Have you ever heard of market cycles? Bitcoin is, by far, one of the riskiest investment that you can make right now. The mere thought of taking out a loan to buy it is on par, if not worse, than the mindset of those who bought stocks on heavy margin during the 1920s. What could go wrong? This type of logic boggles my mind. I hear it all the time from ads claiming PMs are a good investment because they have been going up for 10 years. It's simple really. Funny how these ads came out right before silver took a 60%+ haircut. What would you do if bitcoin collapsed to 100, 50, or, dare I say, sub-50 before possibly continuing higher again? To believe that a haircut of this magnitude isn't possible, if not probable, is truly irrational. Wait, sub 50? Can you actually owe money if you invest on bitcoins? That's ridiculous. It's a exchange market, you buy from a person, that person sold you the BTCs at market price on that time, if it ever goes to 0, then you lose all, but how in hell is it going to go sub 0? who would you owe that money to in any case In this context, sub-50 means below 50 ... not -50 |
|
|
|
I don't think that some conspiracy is required to crash the price. Just demand and supply, at a certain price level we'll see a lot more supply.
And this is not a 5-5-5 EW, we are way beyond that. We already had 148$, 233$, 378$ (rebound to 395$), 900$ and now we probably are
close to the top of a humongous wave B, due to about 12M$ (on Gox) more than at the top 900$ crash.
The EW theory turned out to be just a particular case, it needs to be rewritten.
Try putting it in the context of a motive extension and things will make sense again. Also you might want to readjust where the impulse begins at. Good Luck! http://www.elliottwave.net/educational/basictenets/basics2.htm |
|
|
|
Bitcoin doesn't go down in price over longterm, this is a fact. With this fact I can deduce that it will never go longterm below $1000 anymore. It's simple really.
So, you are making a sweeping assumption from three years of data? Have you ever heard of market cycles? Bitcoin is, by far, one of the riskiest investment that you can make right now. The mere thought of taking out a loan to buy it is on par, if not worse, than the mindset of those who bought stocks on heavy margin during the 1920s. What could go wrong? This type of logic boggles my mind. I hear it all the time from ads claiming PMs are a good investment because they have been going up for 10 years. It's simple really. Funny how these ads came out right before silver took a 60%+ haircut. What would you do if bitcoin collapsed to 100, 50, or, dare I say, sub-50 before possibly continuing higher again? To believe that a haircut of this magnitude isn't possible, if not probable, is truly irrational. |
|
|
|
Here's hoping that this high beta speculative test turns us all into millionaires !!! But it does have enough similarities to gold to be able to use it similarly in theory at least to protect from inflation and such.
In theory...yes. But, as on now, there is just no evidence that it is an inflation hedge. A big reason why gold and silver have fallen for the past two years is because the US dollar has risen in value. The fact that bitcoin has continued rallying doesn't exactly help its inflation-hedge case. Regardless, bitcoin has enormous potential, and I'm in no way bashing it. It could after all change the world and make a lot of people very rich in the process. On the other hand, it is by no means a sure thing. It is probably just as likely or more so that a lot of people will lose a lot of money in bitcoin. Time will tell. I would just stress that no one should ever invest what they cannot afford to lose in bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
