All done at 225? Hobble along here for a while, I think.
In the last few months, I have been having some difficulties understanding the recent BTC price performance, especially being stuck int he $200s price range... and I really do NOT understand the current price drop... Can anyone (like a NON-troll) give some reasonable explanation for this situation? I'm thinking that a decent price stability point would be well above $700... .. but I seem to be off by at least a factor of three (and even more)... Wowza... I'm pretty sure it's just the same thing as for the last few months, a heavy bear market. Whether due to retailers accepting bitcoin and converting it into fiat, manipulation, miners, hacked bitcoin sells, or a combination of all the above, not enough has yet changed to reverse the trend. It's changing for sure, but fairly gradually. |
|
|
|
|
When compared to previous big dumps, this is more of a slowish grind than a mass panic dump. Big players waiting for next week's wall street action?
|
|
|
|
What is now shit happened so BTC dropped.
No new shit has happened, other than gradual growing Bitcoin infrastructure and useful apps to facilitate mass adoption. None of it has been quite enough though to reverse the bear market yet. |
|
|
|
|
is it just me or has someone big been creating support at around 240-245 ever since the 25th of March? Manipulation or a great buying opportunity for a metawhale to buy against the final wave of a determined bear market?
|
|
|
|
Wall street big money, this have been mentioned for thousands times, but seems they never come with their big money and big pump to market. Anyway I'm glad we back to $260 today.
I feel like sophisticated finance is not the type to accumulate like every day people. I imagine some sort of crazy math refined by stress testing rakes up all the money from normal speculators, no matter which direction they want to go. We know they're definitely in Bitcoin. Why would you rather pump up the price making everyone rich when you could keep more of the fiat influx to yourself setting up trading ranges you can more or less control i.e. profit in both directions? But maybe I'm too paranoid. I wouldn't be surprised. The thing is, if they do have some sort of clever profit system, it's likely to increase overall liquidity and stability |
|
|
|
I am interested as well in what your thoughts are about price movements. From the charts it looks like it could go either way but somehow I just don't believe it will drop given the imminent release to the public of the Bitcoin ETF next week.
It doesn't really change anything imo because people who knew about bitcoin had the chance to buy bitcoin way before the ETF, and people who don't know about bitcoin won't know about bitcoin because there is an ETF in their brokerage account out of the millions of other funds. I mean, someone eager to buy bitcoin isn't counting down to the day the ETF will launch so he can buy BTC's. He would have bought already via circle, coinbase, lbc, stamp, etc a lot earlier. The big money could buy at anytime via 2nd trust or I believe there is another fund that has huge minimums. And for us speculators, well we already knew about the ETF a long time ago. I concur with most of what you wrote however I think there is a very large class of potential investors who would not consider buying anything unless they can do so through their brokerage accounts. Those same people have been hearing about Bitcoin for a long time now but had no channel to invest, a channel which is acceptable to them. meh this no analysis. more like gossip. I'd agree with wpalczynski. There is a significant group of people who have known about bitcoin for ages but wouldn't be comfortable putting their money through the class of exchanges we have at the moment. |
|
|
|
I'm basically trying to figure out how to delineate my stakes profit from my share of the house edge profit. When I click on the 'commission' button in the 'History' tab, does this show my investment increase due to house edge, and the commission taken from that for just-dice, or is there a different way to view what I've gained from my share of the house edge?
I don't think the site makes it very clear where your profits came from. Let's look at a random user for an example. This guy hasn't touched his investment for the last couple of months, so things aren't complicated by invest/divest events. .... <snip> Thanks Doog, I'd been wondering the same thing - I didn't think the average offsite investment was so high, so I didn't realise how diluted my investment would be. Yeah, thanks Doog for the thorough explanation! Your examples really helped to expound the principles I hadn't gotten my head around. |
|
|
|
Edit: I just re-read your post, and found a bigger problem: During that time, my investment profit, which includes staked Clams, has gone up by nearly 10%.
That seems wrong. Your investment profit started at zero, and is now presumably positive. That's not a 10% increase, that's an infinite percentage increase. "The site profit doubled so my investment profit doubled" isn't good logic. The only similar statement that is close to being true is: "the site's bankroll (onsite + offsite) went up by X%, so my total investment (onsite + offsite) should also have gone up by X% (until 10% commission is taken at the end of the week, at which point it will have gone up by 0.90*X%, and more because of staking rewards" I meant that the total of my investment profit has gone from zero to nearly 10% of my investment. That doensn't matter now though. I'm a little confused about how the investing works.
Since I invested, the site profit has gone up from 50k to 65k, a 23% cumulative increase.
[...]I should have a cumulative profit of 20.7% (90% of 23%)
Think of it this way. The total amount invested is 1000. In the first month the site makes a profit of 10 (1%). Then you invest. In the 2nd month the site makes another profit of 10 (another ~1%). Total profit is now 20. You say "hey, profit went from 10 to 20. It doubled! When did I only make 1%?" Do you see the error in your thinking? The fact that the profit doubled is of no importance. You invested into a bankroll which grew from 1010 to 1020. That's about a 1% growth, and so you got about 1% growth on your investment. I had already read the FAQs about onsite and offsite etc, but still couldn't figure it out. I see now how I mistook the increase of profit percentage for the increase of the total invested percentage. Thanks I'm basically trying to figure out how to delineate my stakes profit from my share of the house edge profit. When I click on the 'commission' button in the 'History' tab, does this show my investment increase due to house edge, and the commission taken from that for just-dice, or is there a different way to view what I've gained from my share of the house edge? |
|
|
|
|
I'm a little confused about how the investing works.
Since I invested, the site profit has gone up from 50k to 65k, a 23% cumulative increase. I know that this does not include staked Clams. During that time, my investment profit, which includes staked Clams, has gone up by nearly 10%. When looking at my commission history, the total profit there since I invested is about 0.08% of my investment.
I'm confused. If investors get 90%, and house gets 10% of the 1% edge, then I would have thought that I should have a cumulative profit of 20.7% (90% of 23%) not including staked Clams.
|
|
|
|
Wall street is buying bitcoin at 315! buy Buy BUY! Where does it say that? What I see on that link is "31.50 / No Inside (1 x 1 )" and lots of N/A. 31.5 is the bid for 1/10th of 1 BTC, they reset the bids every 24h b/c the trading hasn't yet begun. Its usually around 29-30 per share, 31.5 is the highest I've seen yet. I see. Thanks |
|
|
|
Wall street is buying bitcoin at 315! buy Buy BUY! Where does it say that? What I see on that link is "31.50 / No Inside (1 x 1 )" and lots of N/A. |
|
|
|
You should move your coins to other clients (Bitcoin core/qt if you want full node, electrun/multibit if you don't want fullnode), as you now know it is not secure.  I do like blockchain wallet, but probably not a bad suggestion to get offline. |
|
|
|
and there we have 300
at exactly 3:00pm GMT |
|
|
|
This is not common, re-add 2FA as soon as possible and contact Blockchain.info. I would probably move any bitcoins out of that address too, run a virus scan, check your sent emails in case the request is still there, change your email password, essentially do everything to stop them from getting into your account.
Yeah, thanks, I did the password changes, re-enabled 2-factor authentication etc as soon as I got the email. They hadn't gained access to my wallet, or hadn't taken anything from it at least. It's an old wallet I hadn't used for nearly a year, with not much coin in it. It might be a phishing email to get you to click and log in. Have you checked? Post the email details here including the actual email address it was sent from.
Yeah, I wondered about that too. I did my ususal logging in to blockchain.info with my linux USB boot drive, and typed in the wallet identifier. 2-factor authentication was in deed disabled. from: Blockchain < no-reply@blockchain.info> to: my email subject: Two Factor Authentication Disabled mailed-by: mail.blockchain.info Signed by: mail.blockchain.info |
|
|
|
|
Hey, I got emailed this the other day:
"Two Factor Authentication Disabled
A request to remove two factor authentication from blockchain.info wallet identifier [....................] was approved. Two factor authentication is now disabled."
I certainly didn't make the request. I'm confused about how someone managed to turn off my two factor authentication. They didn't get access to my wallet. Is this common?
|
|
|
|
I'm really curious whether these threads are really launched in order to try to influence the price. And even more interested whether there's any cause-effect relation between people posting there threads and people selling their coins...
I'm pretty sure you'd see a graph with an exponentially decreasing causation of thread posts to price fluctuation. I remember when every 'big'ish news story would cause significant price change responses, even some which were FUD or fraud too. Nowadays the news/forums factor has much less effect on price volatility. |
|
|
|
|
just-dice 1% edge can't compete with moneypot's 0.11%, but it's pretty much guaranteed to not scam you. When gambling starts to get the better of my emotions, it helps to have the peace of mind knowing that it's an honest site with guaranteed fairness
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that's a simple case of serendipity coincidence. People are gradually cottoning on to it. I for example, only just found out that JD was back, so was buying CLAM also |
|
|
|
hopium in deed! tl;dr the author might have bought some coin at what he hopes is the bottom, and so tries to tell us that stability is coming. Assuming bitcoin survives (I think so), volatility will surely decrease as liquidity increases, but I reckon the kind of stability needed for big business to hold bitcoin is not yet on the horizon. Yes, for sure. What he is saying though is that he sees evidence that traders and speculators are increasingly getting us to that point. yup, and the 'smaller' traders and speculators specifically. Although an effective buffer for whale movements, and maybe even increasingly effective, I'm not so sure that the small traders effect is really going to be the major force to bring stability. I guess that the increasing involvement of bigger business would have the more significant and necessary greater stabilising force to attract bigger business... chicken-egg! |
|
|
|
hopium in deed! tl;dr the author might have bought some coin at what he hopes is the bottom, and so tries to tell us that stability is coming. Assuming bitcoin survives (I think so), volatility will surely decrease as liquidity increases, but I reckon the kind of stability needed for big business to hold bitcoin is not yet on the horizon. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
