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

[Morecoin Freeman]

Happy new year my friends from bitcointalk, 2017 will be wonderful.

[1715647963]

1715647963

[1715647963]

1715647963

[1715647963]

1715647963

[1715647963]

1715647963

[1715647963]

1715647963

[1715647963]

1715647963

[Torque]

Only a complete fool is going to try and claim Bitcoin is more "anti-fragile" than metals that took two neutron stars to create.

Ok, WRT precious metals (like Gold), please think of this:

1)  PM derivatives market has driven up speculative price of Gold many orders of magnitude above any sensible speculative value based on Average Joe supply/demand, and far beyond any intrinsic value

2)  Any new large Gold deposits discoveries over the last 50+ years (which could be massive!) would *never* be disclosed to the public

3) No transparency in Gold holdings (i.e., vaults, federal reserves, bank reserves, personal holdings, etc.) so no feasible way to definitively audit.  Much of the Gold supposedly backing federal and bank reserves could be completely a myth, or at least a tiny fraction of what is reported to be held.

4) Gold easily faked with Tungsten

And you want to say PMs like Gold are anti-fragile???

[JimboToronto]

It's now 2017 UTC. Happy New Year everyone.

We closed off 2016 at $968USD at Bitcoinaverage, up from $434. Not a bad year.

That's $1301CAD, up exactly $700 from a year ago.

We've had better gains most other years percentage-wise, but considering we're heading into 2017 in a steady rise with lots of corrections and a feeling that the rally is just beginning, I'm more than happy.

Cheers all.



Here in the Big Smoke we've still got almost 5 hours until we sing Auld Lang Syne but it's never to early to start partying.

Cheers again.

[Ted E. Bare]

Happy New Year bitcoin holders

[wlefever]

Happy New Year! Looking forward to the next leg up in 2017! BTC

[nanobtc]

<snippage>

Microsoft has been accepting Bitcoin for literally years.
https://commerce.microsoft.com/PaymentHub/Help/Right?helppagename=CSV_BitcoinHowTo.htm

I stand corrected. Bullish!

[rjclarke2000]

It's now 2017 UTC. Happy New Year everyone.

We closed off 2016 at $968USD at Bitcoinaverage, up from $434. Not a bad year.

That's $1301CAD, up exactly $700 from a year ago.

We've had better gains most other years percentage-wise, but considering we're heading into 2017 in a steady rise with lots of corrections and a feeling that the rally is just beginning, I'm more than happy.

Cheers all.



Here in the Big Smoke we've still got almost 5 hours until we sing Auld Lang Syne but it's never to early to start partying.

Cheers again.


Interesting threesome right there!!! Jeremy, Queenie and Putin!

[Meuh6879]

In 1 month, guys ... in 1 month ONLY.

[shmadz]

Happy New year everyone!

Even Mike Maloney is on board!  https://youtu.be/RLnZnmLJWjA?t=22m59s
<you really need to watch this!  He actually seems to understand that bitcoin= good  blockchain= bad

Ah forget it, Fuck you guys, happy New year to you big brother

[sirazimuth]

It's now 2017 UTC. Happy New Year everyone.

We closed off 2016 at $968USD at Bitcoinaverage, up from $434. Not a bad year.

That's $1301CAD, up exactly $700 from a year ago.

We've had better gains most other years percentage-wise, but considering we're heading into 2017 in a steady rise with lots of corrections and a feeling that the rally is just beginning, I'm more than happy.

Cheers all.



Here in the Big Smoke we've still got almost 5 hours until we sing Auld Lang Syne but it's never to early to start partying.

Cheers again.

Interesting threesome right there!!! Jeremy, Queenie and Putin!

fify

[r0ach]

Only a complete fool is going to try and claim Bitcoin is more "anti-fragile" than metals that took two neutron stars to create.

Ok, WRT precious metals (like Gold), please think of this:

1)  PM derivatives market has driven up speculative price of Gold many orders of magnitude above any sensible speculative value based on Average Joe supply/demand, and far beyond any intrinsic value

2)  Any new large Gold deposits discoveries over the last 50+ years (which could be massive!) would *never* be disclosed to the public

3) No transparency in Gold holdings (i.e., vaults, federal reserves, bank reserves, personal holdings, etc.) so no feasible way to definitively audit.  Much of the Gold supposedly backing federal and bank reserves could be completely a myth, or at least a tiny fraction of what is reported to be held.

4) Gold easily faked with Tungsten

And you want to say PMs like Gold are anti-fragile???

#1 - The Crimex only has to account for physical delivery of around 1-2% of it's order books per month, which along with the ETFs is how they manage to fractional reserve metals.  Meaning everything in the paper markets is used to depress the price, NOT increase it.  Unallocated gold has no value.  It's like storing your Bitcoin on MtGox and having Mark Karpeles sell it while you're not looking.

#2 - The earth is for all intents and purposes a closed ecosystem.  We already know in general how much is out there.

#3 - Which is why the statement exists "If you don't hold it you don't own it" and is the same for Bitcoin.

#4 - There's plenty of easy methods to detect fakes, especially for coins where the dimensions have to match as well as weight and maker's marks

Anyway, let's not even get into the fact that through all of history paper currency has been a derivative of metals, NOT paper competing with metals.  Paper represents nothing.  Bitcoin is competing against metals, not the USD.  As for upside, silver has far higher upside potential than gold.

[Tzupy]

I am expecting, in a couple of hours, the last pump of this rally, taking us to about 1100$, spending a couple of days there before crashing 40%.
To be sure of catching it, I had to wake up early on the 1st January, grrr...

[JayJuanGee]

I am expecting, in a couple of hours, the last pump of this rally, taking us to about 1100$, spending a couple of days there before crashing 40%.
To be sure of catching it, I had to wake up early on the 1st January, grrr...

1)  There is not going to be a 1 or 2% dump before the pump?  You could be correct, we have had a few dump attempts, already.

2) I was thinking a kind of similar pump range of about $1,060 to $1,180, ish.. so you and I are in a similar ballpark in that respect... though I think that there is a chance that price could break upwards through such resistance and the resistance at that level is not inevitably going to cause a price reversal..

3) After reaching $1,100-ish, I can see a dump of 15% to 25%, but 40% seems quite a bit too high and too optimistic (given the current circumstances) - unless some facts change.. but then again, that is why you have a bear as your avatar and I have a fairy dancer... hahahaha.

[savetherainforest]

I am expecting, in a couple of hours, the last pump of this rally, taking us to about 1100$, spending a couple of days there before crashing 40%.
To be sure of catching it, I had to wake up early on the 1st January, grrr...

Easy there cowboy... 150$ today or tomorrow... Well, that's NOT going to happen!


Expect $30-50$ rising in the next week!

And from now on it will be just a steady sideways with 5$ rise per 1-2 days on average.  

But feel free to dream and good luck with u'r dreams!


*edit: And Happy New Year!     ... My "New Year's" resolution is to give less to the internet, I feel that each year I need to block more invasive software! Cheers!

[Tzupy]

I am expecting, in a couple of hours, the last pump of this rally, taking us to about 1100$, spending a couple of days there before crashing 40%.
To be sure of catching it, I had to wake up early on the 1st January, grrr...

1)  There is not going to be a 1 or 2% dump before the pump?  You could be correct, we have had a few dump attempts, already.

2) I was thinking a kind of similar pump range of about $1,060 to $1,180, ish.. so you and I are in a similar ballpark in that respect... though I think that there is a chance that price could break upwards through such resistance and the resistance at that level is not inevitably going to cause a price reversal..

3) After reaching $1,100-ish, I can see a dump of 15% to 25%, but 40% seems quite a bit too high and too optimistic (given the current circumstances) - unless some facts change.. but then again, that is why you have a bear as your avatar and I have a fairy dancer... hahahaha.

Pump started, 6h PSAR flipped to bullish on Chinese exchanges. Not let's see if it can break resistance at 7007 CNY. On the other hand, I could have slept a couple more hours...

[hulla]

OK - looks like someone somewhere is having a final push for the line and wants BTC to end the year on a high note.
I'm in the UK - 6 hours to midnight. How far can the price go in 6 hours ?

What will be the price this time tommorrow ?

My guess - in the range $975 - $985 on Stamp

Happy New Year to all bitcoin evangelists everywhere - we are the early adopters still.

It's 02:11 on Sunday, 1 January 2017 in China. That's too late for them to see $1000 Bitcoins in 2016. There's still a slim chance other countries might see $1000 Bitcoins in 2016, but a greater chance of sideways prices.

Ahhh but Hu boy did see $1000 BTC in 2016...they reached 6990 CNY.

I was unaware of the Chinese prices. I just checked BTCC and that reached 6966 ($1003), and OKcoin beat Hu boy by reaching 7007, so the top three China exchanges all reached $1000+ in 2016.

This is wonderful result and it good for the Chinese the price of bitcoin reach $1000+ before the end of the year. Despite the fact that they sort of close down for the year holiday.

[ErisDiscordia]

The push for 1000$ has started at stamp...let's see what the new year brings!

[JimboToronto]

Up late. New years eve. Gotta go to sleep but it's nice to see some upward movement. Stamp ask wall at $975 being eaten.

Let's see what 2017 brings.

'Night all. See you at noon.

[harrymmmm]

Continuing the discussion about what 'weight' to apply to chinese exchange volumes for comparison to fee'd exchanges, I found this interesting: https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/815298304233738240
Mostly I'm surprised Armstrong has anything interesting to say, and I'd be even more surprised if he's right but this sounds good.
He's saying the individual trader's volume is used to determine his withdrawal fees, so they are incentivized to trade with themselves to get lower withdrawal fees.

So when determining a model for these volumes, we have an extra independent variable in the function - the withdrawal fee. The vol depends on supply/demand for transactions, external factors (like trader's bot speed, bandwidth etc.), trader's withdrawal fee tier. If that last one is the most important one, it may be possible to get to a sensible 'weight' after all.

[koryu]