Bitcoin Forecast, Bitcoin Speculation & Bitcoin Technical Analysis. Up or DOWN?

[Vandroiy]

Just want to add a little of my chartism, with all the Elliott waviness in here.

Once adapted to the strange time-scales of Bitcoin and some liquidity problems, the past five months indeed turned out similar to the DJIA and NASDAQ bubbles, no? If the price stays stable now or some time soon, and then rises out of that plateau, we have a match almost as perfect as it gets. I'd be proud if the analogy holds. I started using in in June, a stabilisation now would complete the cycle neatly.

The theory is that a horde of people expect trends to continue, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy until stopped by market forces. They first cause a huge rally, then bear trap, then overconfidence battles an overly large supply in down-up spikes trending down, turning into a pure down-trend as people give up on the "infinite rally" theory and follow the down-trend instead. Finally, undervaluation occurs, and again market forces stop the trend with the greatly improved buying power per USD. Day-trading takes over, blocking motion until people agree the trend is over and things turn back to normal, likely reverting the undervaluation in an upward correction.

This isn't even all of the signs and predictions, there's also a first sell-off of sceptic traders before the main spike... and guess what, all of this happened, except for the plateau (or possibly slow decline) and the final correction, which would be the steps to come up next. However, the final upward correction may be the biggest stretch of the analogy. Bitcoin isn't quite the NASDAQ after all. Still, this is the best I got, so it's what I used.

The problem with this prediction method is that it only works in bubbles, between the first sell-off and final plateau. So if it works one more time, it's reached its time-out for quite a while.

[S3052]

 
New public update published
bitcoinbullbear.com/index.html
blog.bitcoinwatch.com

[kokjo]

 
New public update published
bitcoinbullbear.com/index.html
blog.bitcoinwatch.com

DOWN! SELL! SELL! SELL!

[mobodick]

 
New public update published
bitcoinbullbear.com/index.html
blog.bitcoinwatch.com

I don't get it.
Your message @ 5 Nov sais:
"We predicted very accurately the rise from 2.04 $ to 3.83 $ last week in the subscriber section of our service."

But last week the price never dropped below $3.
In fact, the 2.04 mark you talk of was hit on the 20th of October, which is more than 2 weeks ago.
Now the term 'prediction' dictates that it is made before the actual event.
So my question is, at what precise date did you make the prediction for this rise?

And in any case, why not open your past short term predictions to the public as they were sent to your user?
They should be worthless for future price and if you are any good it should show when compared to historical data.

[netrin]

Once adapted to the strange time-scales of Bitcoin and some liquidity problems, the past five months indeed turned out similar to the DJIA and NASDAQ bubbles, no? If the price stays stable now or some time soon, and then rises out of that plateau, we have a match almost as perfect as it gets. I'd be proud if the analogy holds. I started using in in June, a stabilisation now would complete the cycle neatly
....
The problem with this prediction method is that it only works in bubbles, between the first sell-off and final plateau. So if it works one more time, it's reached its time-out for quite a while.

I would very much appreciate seeing your correlation. Either with pictures or dates.

Mt. Gox Bitcoin May to today (late July 2011) vs.
Nasdaq Composite 1994 to 2008

[S3052]

I don't get it.
Your message @ 5 Nov sais:
"We predicted very accurately the rise from 2.04 $ to 3.83 $ last week in the subscriber section of our service."
But last week the price never dropped below $3.
In fact, the 2.04 mark you talk of was hit on the 20th of October, which is more than 2 weeks ago.

I should have written this more precisely. What I meant was that last week, prices reached the target with the high of 3.83 $.

Now the term 'prediction' dictates that it is made before the actual event.
So my question is, at what precise date did you make the prediction for this rise?

And in any case, why not open your past short term predictions to the public as they were sent to your user?
They should be worthless for future price and if you are any good it should show when compared to historical data.

Here is the short term alert that I gave to subscribers on Oct 21, 2011:
"As forecast, bitcoin prices broke out from the declining wedge and
gained 20% in short time.
Now, a sustained rise above 2.6 - 2.7 $ will open up much more upside
potential (see attached chart).

Stop loss remains just under 2.04-2$ $ (major support), while the 2.45
(62h moving average) and 2.3 $ also provide support now.

We will turn mid or long term bullish after a break above 4 $."

and the attached chart

[mobodick]

I don't get it.
Your message @ 5 Nov sais:
"We predicted very accurately the rise from 2.04 $ to 3.83 $ last week in the subscriber section of our service."
But last week the price never dropped below $3.
In fact, the 2.04 mark you talk of was hit on the 20th of October, which is more than 2 weeks ago.

I should have written this more precisely. What I meant was that last week, prices reached the target with the high of 3.83 $.

Now the term 'prediction' dictates that it is made before the actual event.
So my question is, at what precise date did you make the prediction for this rise?

And in any case, why not open your past short term predictions to the public as they were sent to your user?
They should be worthless for future price and if you are any good it should show when compared to historical data.

Here is the short term alert that I gave to subscribers on Oct 21, 2011:
"As forecast, bitcoin prices broke out from the declining wedge and
gained 20% in short time.
Now, a sustained rise above 2.6 - 2.7 $ will open up much more upside
potential (see attached chart).

Stop loss remains just under 2.04-2$ $ (major support), while the 2.45
(62h moving average) and 2.3 $ also provide support now.

We will turn mid or long term bullish after a break above 4 $."

and the attached chart
...

Impressive!

[netrin]

Wave a can't be counted in 5 waves and this is why the current c wave will also not be a 5 wave move. Wave II is not a simple a-b-c zigzag, but rather a more complex correction, i.e. a "double three".

I see your double and raise you a triple. How about another zig-zag or a triangle finale?

[Vandroiy]

I would very much appreciate seeing your correlation. Either with pictures or dates.

Mt. Gox Bitcoin May to today (late July 2011) vs.
Nasdaq Composite 1994 to 2008

Whoa, that's not what I meant. First of all, I compare nothing of NASDAQ after 2003, only the last big rally and the time where the market is not in "bubble destruction mode". Also, the comparison needs multiple corrections. I wouldn't expect Bitcoin to be as close as the NASDAQ and DJIA bubble were between one another, simply because the timings in the digital age are heavily distorted, Bitcoin is much smaller, and even with that said, everything happened at blazing speed in the first half of this year.

Timing issues I expect:

• Bitcoin is illiquid. Times in which the price appears very stuck, especially until a real bust started in August, should not be considered much in comparison with the much more liquid NASDAQ.
• Similarly, the MtGox hack is something one cannot just throw in there. It probably delayed the process, just cutting it in as natural is most likely not a valid approach.
• These saw-tooth like down-up spikes are distorted because of Bitcoin's extreme timing. What is important is that a similar pattern repeats a few times, and includes a characteristic drop, turnaround, and vain rally multiple times and on similar time-scales.
• I personally would not match the "bursting" phase of initial sell-offs with the same scale factor as that of the following "bust" phase, where price is repeatedly lowered in spiky price curves. They have different psychological components that might have changed separately: during the "bursting", the inflow of people and their reaction time to a changed scenario is important, which is much faster in an internet-driven community. But in the bust phase, panic thresholds and the time people take to change their minds is important, which has not changed as much. Thus, in Bitcoin, the bust phase appears longer compared to the initial bursting.

The point of this wasn't to become an exact price prophet, but rather to make qualitative forecasts on price. After the superexponential breakout, prices were very likely to drop, and after that had happened, the following rallies ended in that typical bust-pattern, each attempt to return driven down by the great bears until all denial was destroyed.

It's cheating to match the graphs in a non-trivial way in retrospect, so I won't. Also, it's quite extreme to intend predicting an exact price curve. This analogy was good enough to make predictions on expectation value, that is, produce money on average. In my case, it saved me from massive losses, and gained me a little in day-trading. I know it working once doesn't prove a thing, but once you "get" what the analogy is about, it is quite striking IMO. I wanted to test it again on silver -- I was quite frustrated my order on put options wasn't executed, just before the 40-30 drop.

Anyways, I'll shut up on this now, as it's a thing of the past now. Bitcoin "bubble mode" might have ended already. At least I can't use the analogy to predict when, or if, the trend stops now. All I want to say is: I think this was more than a coincidental similarity.

[netrin]

I created that superimposition, not to predict prices, but to show that if NASDAQ saw a bubble in 2000, then so did bitcoin experience a bubble in June. Time scales be damned!

Similarly, the MtGox hack is something one cannot just throw in there. It probably delayed the process, just cutting it in as natural is most likely not a valid approach.

I have mixed feelings about how the hack fits into analysis. I think the instantaneous price drop needs to be removed from the graph, however, its effect on price was very real and can not be ignored. The hack was a legitimate sell-off in so far as real bitcoin orders (buys) were triggered, however it does not represent the actions of the herd. If someone set off a bomb on the NYSE businesses would continue to function more or less as normal.

These saw-tooth like down-up spikes are distorted because of Bitcoin's extreme timing. What is important is that a similar pattern repeats a few times, and includes a characteristic drop, turnaround, and vain rally multiple times and on similar time-scales.

Call it what you like. Those patterns exist in all markets on all time scales. Volatility is predictably greater for newly spawned assets. If you correctly observe rate of change (logarithmic axes), then bitcoin price action displays nothing atypical.

Bitcoin "bubble mode" might have ended already.

It ended months ago. Bubbles are symmetrical at best or crash with greater slope than ascent at worst. Bitcoin has experienced a very typical correction the past five months.

[quartz92]

3.000 support wall is being tested

It will be for a while as well

[gewure]

asks vastly outnumber bids. 3$ bidwall was broken, is now a askwall.

..was a good decicion to go short on bitcoinica a week ago

[proudhon]

Shorting bitcoin has been a good way to go for the past 5 months.  5 months from now I'm confident we'll be even lower (< $1), so even shorting now will probably turn out profitable.

[gewure]

Shorting bitcoin has been a good way to go for the past 5 months.  5 months from now I'm confident we'll be even lower (< $1), so even shorting now will probably turn out profitable.

im into bitcoins for about one and a half month or so,..

i can't share your pessimistic point of view, i think it will once drop lower than 2, or maybe even then 1, but then we see a big trend reversal, as suggested by the elliot-wave stuff beeing around here in the forum.

serious: who of you would NOT be tempted to buy maaaany bitcoins when they hit $0,999? you proudhon?

[BadBear]

Shorting bitcoin has been a good way to go for the past 5 months.  5 months from now I'm confident we'll be even lower (< $1), so even shorting now will probably turn out profitable.

im into bitcoins for about one and a half month or so,..

i can't share your pessimistic point of view, i think it will once drop lower than 2, or maybe even then 1, but then we see a big trend reversal, as suggested by the elliot-wave stuff beeing around here in the forum.

serious: who of you would NOT be tempted to buy maaaany bitcoins when they hit $0,999? you proudhon?

Well gosh, I just don't know how to counter this intelligent discussion about "elliot-wave stuff".  You must be right.  BUY BUY BUY! 

[gewure]

Shorting bitcoin has been a good way to go for the past 5 months.  5 months from now I'm confident we'll be even lower (< $1), so even shorting now will probably turn out profitable.

im into bitcoins for about one and a half month or so,..

i can't share your pessimistic point of view, i think it will once drop lower than 2, or maybe even then 1, but then we see a big trend reversal, as suggested by the elliot-wave stuff beeing around here in the forum.

serious: who of you would NOT be tempted to buy maaaany bitcoins when they hit $0,999? you proudhon?

Well gosh, I just don't know how to counter this intelligent discussion about "elliot-wave stuff".  You must be right.  BUY BUY BUY! 

i wanted to suggest im not that much into trading theories i study them since about a year or so, out of interest and cause im a socioeconomy-student, but i rather call it "yo da elliot stuff, mate!1!1!!" than trolling around and posing as tradingspecialist^^

[S3052]

November 15, 2011: Interim Bitcoin Charts Update
http://www.bitcoinbullbear.com/index.html

[codymanix]

> "Bitcoin prices fell strongly, which was as expected"

Well, this wasn't natural, it was due to manipulation.
So how could you have expected this, unless *you* are the manipulator.

[molecular]

> "Bitcoin prices fell strongly, which was as expected"

Well, this wasn't natural, it was due to manipulation.

Since when is manipulation of markets not natural? Look at GLD

So how could you have expected this, unless *you* are the manipulator.

nice spin!

[ElectricMucus]

What a fuckin hypocrisy is that. I am usually attacked when I state that some early adopters are sitting on too many coins (In terms of the percentage of the supply not the total amount)

The same people now whine about 'manipulation' ... What are they supposed to do? Sit on them till they are old and gray so your coins have all the purchasing power?

damn, I am beginning to understand the reason of why to dump this shit down.