Free market baby.
People who are going to hold anyway, benefit more (more risk too) by gaining a little interest on their holdings. They obviously believe the price will rise plenty again eventually, so it's a non-issue to them.
No , they don't benefit more. And it shouldn't be a non-issue. They ignorantly shoot themselves in the foot again and again. This is exactly my point. They *believe* price will rise again *eventually* , so it's wrongly thought to be a non-issue for them - while allowing their coin to be used to suppress the price in the mean time for peanuts , against their own self interest.
Free market baby.
It is true that there is more volume with margin than without, but this works in both directions. It's not only selling/shorting, but also lack of buying that leads to a lower price. These are normal market mechanisms and nothing you or anyone else can do will ever change that. No amount of shorting can overcome a strong enough buy surge and vice versa, so until buying goes bonkers, shorters gonna short and longs gonna hold.
Mostly I agree with your statement here , in that you didn't really state anything that's really incorrect. But , my point is that adding to the sell volume is counterproductive to anyone who wants the value of the coins they hold to go up. Not buying more single handedly is of course fundamentally different than deciding to not lend out the coins you already have bought to be shorted into the market. The decision to lend your coins you own would seem to not generally impact in a significant measure the decision of other people to buy - people will buy whether or not they're buying your coins directly from you or buying them from someone who borrowed them from you *but* if your intent is to hold anyway and , and this is key *want price to increase* , then you should neither sell nor lend your coins to be sold - both actions , selling or lending coins to be sold cause negative price pressure.
Free market baby.
People who are going to hold anyway, benefit more (more risk too) by gaining a little interest on their holdings. They obviously believe the price will rise plenty again eventually, so it's a non-issue to them.
It is true that there is more volume with margin than without, but this works in both directions. It's not only selling/shorting, but also lack of buying that leads to a lower price. These are normal market mechanisms and nothing you or anyone else can do will ever change that. No amount of shorting can overcome a strong enough buy surge and vice versa, so until buying goes bonkers, shorters gonna short and longs gonna hold.
Excellent point, on mentioning the volume aspect.
I'll add this:
"Hodl" / "Don't lend your precious coins." / "Let's all agree not to sell before X" are all variations of the same idea: *my* valuation of asset x is betterer and correcterer than *your* valuation (where "your" is essentially the market's aggregate valuation).
Only problem is, that's not how price discovery on markets work.
I disagree that additional lended sell volume is a neutral factor in price discovery , though yes it is correct that sell volume is increased as a result of lending out coins to be sold. That was a big factor of what I was arguing in the first place while connecting that to it contributing to a lower price - though you both seem to want to ignore that , to me , seemingly obvious and basic connection. Holding , not lending , and attempting to influence market price by convincing everyone to decide on a generally higher valuation are 3 completely different things. Holding can be done without lending. Selling can be done without lending. Lending is essentially an entirely different decision than selling or holding. And trying to convince others of a generally higher valuation really is a totally different concept.
is there any TL;DR for those walls of text of yours?!
*sigh* It makes me sad that people request a tiny sentence to be made out of a more complex godforbid long paragraph. The public education system and tv culture has failed us all. But here goes:
Lending bitcoins to be sold by others causes lower price , which is directly counterproductive to those very individuals who are lending their bitcoins out and want the price to ultimately go up.
i wouldn't care to lend out my btc to others for shorting. but i would seriously avoid the risk having my btc locked up on a shady chinese exchange platform that doesn't even label as a company (a brand, lol). if you give away your private keys that easy, don't complain if you get robbed.
Wow , was wondering if anyone else would agree that they also wouldn't have any desire to lend their bitcoin to shorters - thanks. Also , agree that of course leaving coins on shady chinese exchange platforms (aka all the ones that allow leveraging in the first place) is a bad and dangerous idea - to add to that , whether or not they are simply left in your account there , or left there as lended coin it is equally dangerous.
anyone who is NOT lending is missing on a stable income opportunity. i think i've collected a pretty stable income over the last months just by lending out at ridiculously high interest rates instead of holding to my stash. so take your whining ass some place else loser.
Cool to meet your acquaintance , rude dumbfuck. You'd be a lot happier if the price were 275 than 245 and you had 10 coins instead of 10.5 (hint , the first one is a bigger number , even if it's multiplied by fewer bitcoin). You'd also be a lot happier if you sold and rebought them lower yourself and kept all of your profits , instead of letting someone else do that for you in exchange for a significantly smaller gain. But hey , if you think allowing other people to use your coins to consistently jam the price down for you , and keep the lions share of short profits you could have had for yourself instead , in exchange for 1/2 of 1/10th of 1% and that's ridiculously high gain for you , then god help you , I can't and won't try further to do so.
I disagree with you that lending bitcoins to shorters in general is a stupid thing, but I think lending out coins to others at rates below 0.05% per day is stupid (only if people are borrowing your coins for long periods you could possibly make a good gain in terms of BTC and USD, but if someone manages to borrow your coins for a long time it means the exchange rate is going down, therefore I think rates 0.05% and above are possibly worth it)
Agree to disagree I guess , but really it comes down to how severely the price is suppressed and whether or not you lose greater than 0.05% per day as a result of your lending. You may be correct with that number , or you could be way off on daily interest gained vs actualized price loss. I am pretty sure that given daily whole percent 1 , 2 , 5 whatever full % swings occur , the rational lending rate to even expect to break even should be much much higher , given the expectation that your lended coins will be handed back to you devalued after they are used to dump into the market for sake of driving the price down.
