Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[hv_]

1.  BTC980,000*. Satoshi Nakamoto
...
LETS PUMP THIS SHIT

Since we're throwing out baseless numbers you can add:

2. BTC500,000 Elwar

LETS PUMP THIS BTC SHIT WITH FIAT

Gooo!

Please add

JPY1,000,000 hv_

 

[1714608693]

1714608693

[1714608693]

1714608693

[soullyG]

[Elwar]

 

[Torque]

Have you guys considered that maybe there won't be this huge pump, but that we just simply keep grinding upward steadily all next year and into the future?  And let me outline below why this would be a GREAT thing:

Like Tera suggested, where we are today is very different than 2013.  We have many more legit exchanges now, and with the exception of Bitfinex, they've likely all gotten their sh-- together and much more resistant to hacks and outages.

I have this theory, that all of Bitcoin's past major rallies were predicated on the pumpers having a "fall" in their backpocket, something that would guarantee a REASON for a crash (so that they could time their big short, of course). In the early years it was spreading FUD about the Bitcoin protocol itself, and hacking/crashing the early shitty exchanges. In Mt. Gox's case, it was easy to just DDOS, hack, or crash that exchange whenever the pumpers/hackers needed to, because it was so shitty and full of holes.  And of course they had siphoned off pretty much all the bitcoin and made Mt. Gox insolvent, so the FBI shutting them down was real bad news they could use to their benefit.

Then in late 2013, we got to see the effects of a major fake FUD announcement (i.e., the whole "China bans Bitcoin" or "Russia bans Bitcoin" or "51% attack imminent!" garbage).  It was effective then, but I think today that fake FUD news would no longer work like it did then because bitcoiners have become resistant to such drivel.

So if the pumpers no longer have exchange hacks to rely on, or fake FUD to use, then they would have no guaranteed "fall" in their backpocket. And if they had no guaranteed reason for a crash, then would they be even bother to pump the market to the moon anymore? It would take a LOT of $$$ and margin leverage to pump the Bitcoin market to the moon now.

I'm starting to wonder if the pumpers/hackers have simply moved on to the smaller altcoins now, as it's easy to see how these same tactics were used in both the ETH (eg. DAO hack) and Monero (eg. fake hack news) markets just recently with the exact same results.  Plus it takes less money to pump the altcoin markets.

TL; DR - If Bitcoin ever starts pumping to the moon out of the blue, be very, very worried... because bad news is right around the corner. (btw, I'm still concerned about those ~110K stolen Bitfinex coins   )

[Elwar]

Have you guys considered that maybe there won't be this huge pump, but that we just simply keep grinding upward steadily all next year and into the future?  And let me outline why this would be a GREAT thing:

Sure, a long slow steady climb would be nice. And that is best for Bitcoin being accepted as a currency alternative. But...


it's just so damned exciting when the price is flying up by 10% a day for weeks on end...

The cup and handle charts do show a huge skyrocket though.  I feel like we are near the price we should be at (I predicted the price would be $766 on 1/1/2017 back on 1/1/2016 when the price was around $300).

[rtrtcrypto]

I'd be curious to have people's opinions on how violent a SPIKE UP could be...
What would need to happen to move the price 10x from here? 100x?

Seems like bubbles in the near future will need to be propped up by ALOT more people than in the past bubbles.

Have you guys considered that maybe there won't be this huge pump, but that we just simply keep grinding upward steadily all next year and into the future?  And let me outline why this would be a GREAT thing:

Sure, a long slow steady climb would be nice. And that is best for Bitcoin being accepted as a currency alternative. But...


it's just so damned exciting when the price is flying up by 10% a day for weeks on end...

The cup and handle charts do show a huge skyrocket though.  I feel like we are near the price we should be at (I predicted the price would be $766 on 1/1/2017 back on 1/1/2016 when the price was around $300).

[DieJohnny]

Have you guys considered that maybe there won't be this huge pump, but that we just simply keep grinding upward steadily all next year and into the future?  And let me outline below why this would be a GREAT thing:

Like Tera suggested, where we are today is very different than 2013.  We have many more legit exchanges now, and with the exception of Bitfinex, they've likely all gotten their sh-- together and much more resistant to hacks and outages.

I have this theory, that all of Bitcoin's past major rallies were predicated on the pumpers having a "fall" in their backpocket, something that would guarantee a REASON for a crash (so that they could time their big short, of course). In the early years it was spreading FUD about the Bitcoin protocol itself, and hacking/crashing the early shitty exchanges. In Mt. Gox's case, it was easy to just DDOS, hack, or crash that exchange whenever the pumpers/hackers needed to, because it was so shitty and full of holes.  And of course they had siphoned off pretty much all the bitcoin and made Mt. Gox insolvent, so the FBI shutting them down was real bad news they could use to their benefit.

Then in late 2013, we got to see the effects of a major fake FUD announcement (i.e., the whole "China bans Bitcoin" or "Russia bans Bitcoin" or "51% attack imminent!" garbage).  It was effective then, but I think today that fake FUD news would no longer work like it did then because bitcoiners have become resistant to such drivel.

So if the pumpers no longer have exchange hacks to rely on, or fake FUD to use, then they would have no guaranteed "fall" in their backpocket. And if they had no guaranteed reason for a crash, then would they be even bother to pump the market to the moon anymore? It would take a LOT of $$$ and margin leverage to pump the Bitcoin market to the moon now.



I'm starting to wonder if the pumpers/hackers have simply moved on to the smaller altcoins now, as it's easy to see how these same tactics were used in both the ETH (eg. DAO hack) and Monero (eg. fake hack news) markets just recently with the exact same results.  Plus it takes less money to pump the altcoin markets.

TL; DR - If Bitcoin ever starts pumping to the moon out of the blue, be very, very worried... because bad news is right around the corner. (btw, I'm still concerned about those ~110K stolen Bitfinex coins   )

Sorry, but you are pretending like human greed is just not going to apply "this time." You cannot prevent another moon shot, like you cannot prevent the tide from rising every day. It will happen as sure as the sun sets. Humans and greed know no bounds. When an opportunity to double your money over night presents itself, then people will poor their money into bitcoin and there will not be enough coins to go around. Bitcoin's next stop will be a trillion market cap, i am just upset i didn't get more coins while I could....

[Scofield]

Anyone else thinking about selling? I'm moving 25% in order to pick up some cheaper BTC, it seems like the cup and handle pattern formed completely, after topping at 5150 Yuan. I hope to rebuy around 4500-4600.

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

I predicted the price would be $766 on 1/1/2017 back on 1/1/2016 when the price was around $300.

link or nada.

[bitcoinsforall]

BTC is the king of all ALT Coins and the price will always remain above 500$

for the next few days..my prediction  is 800$

next year 1000$

[Elwar]

I predicted the price would be $766 on 1/1/2017 back on 1/1/2016 when the price was around $300.

link or nada.

I guess it was $750.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1309383.0

[Dafar]

I predicted the price would be $766 on 1/1/2017 back on 1/1/2016 when the price was around $300.

link or nada.

I guess it was $750.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1309383.0

Congrats on being lucky. But since your'e an oracle... what's the price on Dec 30, 2016?

[Elwar]

I predicted the price would be $766 on 1/1/2017 back on 1/1/2016 when the price was around $300.

link or nada.

I guess it was $750.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1309383.0

Congrats on being lucky. But since your'e an oracle... what's the price on Dec 30, 2016?

You mean 2 days before my prediction of $750? I'd say about $750....?

[European Central Bank]

I have this theory, that all of Bitcoin's past major rallies were predicated on the pumpers having a "fall" in their backpocket, something that would guarantee a REASON for a crash (so that they could time their big short, of course).

where could you short in late 2013 and before? i didn't think many places offered that option back in the day. or do you just mean selling high and buying back low?

[criptix]

Am i really the only one who thinks that the fomo is already going strong?

Less then 30 days for a near 150$ increase.

Shorting one more time? :3

[criptix]

I have this theory, that all of Bitcoin's past major rallies were predicated on the pumpers having a "fall" in their backpocket, something that would guarantee a REASON for a crash (so that they could time their big short, of course).

where could you short in late 2013 and before? i didn't think many places offered that option back in the day.

You are probaly talking about leverage.
But in 2013 there existed leverage too.

[Tzupy]

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-broken-resistance/

^^^^^
LOL

[Torque]

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-broken-resistance/

^^^^^
LOL

Looks like a typical MatTheCat chart. 

[JayJuanGee]

Ok, taking my seat again for the next round incoming.

Hey tok _ n

I was thinking about our recent interaction, and I am really thinking that if you were to consider a kind of weighted average to the trade volumes of exchanges, then that could be more satisfactory overall...

I've thought about this in the past too. I tried to model it as a supply/demand system.

I failed miserably, but the journey was enlightening

I understand that there has been various discussion about this point of weighted trade volume, and I understand that it could be quite a bit of work to attempt to establish any kind of exact system, and therefore, probably good in concept, even though in practice we may want to merely attempt a kind of ballparking of such weighted trade volume considerations.

TL;DR zero fee volumes can't be used sensibly unless you model those fake and external influences. Different fee volumes probably can't be modelled the way I described but maybe the basic idea is usable.

I personally think that it would be easier not to get caught up too much with any particulars of the exchange, just down grade them a bit from 100% if they have questionable practices.  For example a place like Okcoin or Huobi have extraordinary trade volume, so maybe just count them as 10% or 20%, and maybe even less, if you come to the conclusion that the trade volume does not really represent anything meaningful...

You may well be correct if you're saying there's no better way than to suck your finger and hold it in the wind. I certainly didn't come up with anything better.
Nevertheless, you won't get any agreement amongst the people you're talking to with such a subjective guess. Everyone will have their own guess - the details matter here.

I hoped to supply some real analysis.

PS: have you checked your pm's lately?

You seem to misunderstand me or to misread me, if you are suggesting that I am saying put your finger into the wind.

I followed the thread and understood your position.

I'm saying you want to guess the weighting to apply, and I'm saying you won't get general agreement with your guess.

The only way to get some agreement would be to add at least a modicum of math.

Probably our disagreement is not very considerable here.    Whenever either combining consideration of exchanges or giving less than 100% credit to any exchange is going to cause folks to come to differing conclusions about methodology.  But in the end, some folks are more technical and mathematic, and other folks just try to get senses of trends based on larger dynamics, without getting caught up in the mathematical particulars. 

I would characterize myself as less of the mathematical type, but I do tend to be pretty mathematical nerdy sometimes in regards to various tracking methods that I employ for myself.  So, yeah, overall it is much more difficult to get others to agree with my particular approach, unless I show proof of the methodology that is acceptable to others.

[spooderman]

lol china bans bitcoin again.

y u always do this china