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

[Torque]

Now that I am starting to get used to your style, Torque, it is a bit hilarious how you seem to get so worked up and infuriated over numerology.  

See this is why you have no credibility here JJG, because you can't even use your own eyes. No one follows anything that you have to say. And the constant numerology bit is a) getting old and b) doesn't even apply here.

[1579477704]

1579477704

[1579477704]

1579477704

[1579477704]

1579477704

[1579477704]

1579477704

[deepcolderwallet]

Could we stay on topic gentlemen? ^^

Note that I don't mind discussing politics but there is a part on the forum dedicated for that. Especially as I don't see how Trump is linked to BTC price... He won't do anything to make the dollar stronger: I don't think he wants to, he doesn't care at all about his country or its economy, and even if he wanted to I'm not sure he could do anything.

And on topic: Did you see how the price is on the rise again? Do you think there is a link with the segwit2x increasing support?

Typical globalist/MSM brainwashed trying to ignore POTUS Donald Trump importance in taking back power to people comment.

[JayJuanGee]

Now that I am starting to get used to your style, Torque, it is a bit hilarious how you seem to get so worked up and infuriated over numerology.  

See this is why you have no credibility here JJG, because you can't even use your own eyes. No one follows anything that you have to say. And the constant numerology bit is a) getting old and b) doesn't even apply here.

Well, that escalated quickly... [insert gif, here].


O.k... let me get back to serious matters.   


The serious matter here is that in the past week or two, Bitstamp has been relatively a bit more bullish than most of the other major exchanges, and in that regard, if Bitstamp's price is a bit higher than others, then doesn't it make sense that dumping is going to take place when it's price is 1 or 2% higher than others, especially if there does not seem to be enough buying support to keep such price rises going?

Yeah, sure most BTC coin holders want BTC prices to rise, but sometimes it is a good thing to allow the buying support to build up and NOT to get too far ahead of ourselves in regards to our bullish BTC price wishes.

In other words, the whole situation looks good, no?  We have a pretty decent ongoing volume level, and overall prices seem to be continuing to trickle up and up and up.. and seems like it won't be too long and we will be testing $3k resistance, again.  So, in that regard, won't it be a bit better of a scenario if we go to test $3k resistance and we have support following along rather than prematurely rushing up to that level, again?

[deepcolderwallet]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

[leowonderful]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

It's probably why the exchange is higher than other exchanges. Not sure why people don't sell as much there though if prices are indeed higher.

[bitserve]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

?

Stamp has 2250BTC up to $3000, whilst bitfinex has around 3000BTC.

There's not that much difference...

[deepcolderwallet]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

?

Stamp has 2250BTC up to $3000, whilst bitfinex has around 3000BTC.

There's not that much difference...

At cryptowat.ch I'm grouping the orders in 10 BTC steps and last value shown is $2760.00 at Bitstamp summing around 500 BTC. While at Bitfinex grouping in 50 BTC the last relevant step is $3400.00 summing 5100+ BTC.

Am I doing something wrong?

[deepcolderwallet]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

It's probably why the exchange is higher than other exchanges. Not sure why people don't sell as much there though if prices are indeed higher.

A few months ago we were calling it Bearstamp because Bitfinex's prices were $100+ over Stamp.

[bitserve]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

?

Stamp has 2250BTC up to $3000, whilst bitfinex has around 3000BTC.

There's not that much difference...

At cryptowat.ch I'm grouping the orders in 10 BTC steps and last value shown is $2760.00 at Bitstamp summing around 500 BTC. While at Bitfinex grouping in 50 BTC the last relevant step is $3400.00 summing 5100+ BTC.

Am I doing something wrong?

I don't use cryptowatch. I use bitcoinwisdom. There's more than 2000BTC up to $3000 at Bitstamp.

P.S.: Oh, so you are comparing how many coins are in Bitstamp up to 2760 vs how many in Bitfinex up to $3400? Well, that explains the discrepancy.

[deepcolderwallet]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

?

Stamp has 2250BTC up to $3000, whilst bitfinex has around 3000BTC.

There's not that much difference...

At cryptowat.ch I'm grouping the orders in 10 BTC steps and last value shown is $2760.00 at Bitstamp summing around 500 BTC. While at Bitfinex grouping in 50 BTC the last relevant step is $3400.00 summing 5100+ BTC.

Am I doing something wrong?

I don't use cryptowatch. I use bitcoinwisdom. There's more than 2000BTC up to $3000 at Bitstamp.

P.S.: Oh, so you are comparing how many coins are in Bitstamp up to 2760 vs how many in Bitfinex up to $3400? Well, that explains the discrepancy.

No, you got it wrong. The last value shown for Bitstamp is $2760, which made me believe there weren't no more orders over it. But since you told me another tool (bitcoinwisdom) shows more orders over this value I believe cryptowat.ch is buggy. Try grouping orders in a scale of 10 BTC and tell me if it's different of what I'm seeing here.

[Elwar]

The key difference between Bitfinex and Bitstamp is leverage. Most of the people using leverage will be near the current price.

You're not going to borrow dollars so that you can put a buy order at $2500 (paying interest on that money daily).

[bitserve]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

?

Stamp has 2250BTC up to $3000, whilst bitfinex has around 3000BTC.

There's not that much difference...

At cryptowat.ch I'm grouping the orders in 10 BTC steps and last value shown is $2760.00 at Bitstamp summing around 500 BTC. While at Bitfinex grouping in 50 BTC the last relevant step is $3400.00 summing 5100+ BTC.

Am I doing something wrong?

I don't use cryptowatch. I use bitcoinwisdom. There's more than 2000BTC up to $3000 at Bitstamp.

P.S.: Oh, so you are comparing how many coins are in Bitstamp up to 2760 vs how many in Bitfinex up to $3400? Well, that explains the discrepancy.

No, you got it wrong. The last value shown for Bitstamp is $2760, which made me believe there weren't no more orders over it. But since you told me another tool (bitcoinwisdom) shows more orders over this value I believe cryptowat.ch is buggy. Try grouping orders in a scale of 10 BTC and tell me if it's different of what I'm seeing here.

I think you gave the solution in your own question. You are grouping sell orders for Bitstamp in $10 blocks while for Bitfinex you are using $50 blocks.... Maybe there is a limit in rows displayed? I am sure both exchanges have orders up to the very high thousands (ppl camping for a flash spike/crash). So there's much more than what you are seeing displayed.

[deepcolderwallet]

I just realised Stamp has around 500 coins in sell orders.
While Finex has 5700+. I never had a clue about the size discrepancy of these two exchanges.
 

?

Stamp has 2250BTC up to $3000, whilst bitfinex has around 3000BTC.

There's not that much difference...

At cryptowat.ch I'm grouping the orders in 10 BTC steps and last value shown is $2760.00 at Bitstamp summing around 500 BTC. While at Bitfinex grouping in 50 BTC the last relevant step is $3400.00 summing 5100+ BTC.

Am I doing something wrong?

I don't use cryptowatch. I use bitcoinwisdom. There's more than 2000BTC up to $3000 at Bitstamp.

P.S.: Oh, so you are comparing how many coins are in Bitstamp up to 2760 vs how many in Bitfinex up to $3400? Well, that explains the discrepancy.

No, you got it wrong. The last value shown for Bitstamp is $2760, which made me believe there weren't no more orders over it. But since you told me another tool (bitcoinwisdom) shows more orders over this value I believe cryptowat.ch is buggy. Try grouping orders in a scale of 10 BTC and tell me if it's different of what I'm seeing here.

I think you gave the solution in your own question. You are grouping sell orders for Bitstamp in $10 blocks while for Bitfinex you are using $50 blocks.... Maybe there is a limit in rows displayed? I am sure both exchanges have orders up to the very high thousands (ppl camping for a flash spike/crash). So there's much more than what you are seeing displayed.

I don't think it's due to a limit in rows displayed, if that was the case a larger number of coins would be shown at Bitstamp's book, but it does not show a relevant number of coins being sold over $2770 right now. Anyway, I believe maybe cryptowat.ch is bugged.

[kludzins]

Found UP-to date picture: 

So Amazon till Christmas? 

[deepcolderwallet]

Found UP-to date picture: 

So Amazon till Christmas? 

So it says that if someone with Bill Gates net worth (there's a bunch of guys dirty rich like him, isn't it?) or any government feels like investing in create an ASIC more powerful than the actual Antminer then secretly building some mining farms, the whole Bitcoinland could be easily taken over?

How much fragile is the pot where we're putting our money? Because I can think many reasons a government or some powerful banks would want to shut all this down.
Apologies if I'm sounding naïve, I'm not a scientist, I'm only a curious Average Joe.

[JayJuanGee]

Found UP-to date picture: 

So Amazon till Christmas? 

So it says that if someone with Bill Gates net worth (there's a bunch of guys dirty rich like him, isn't it?) or any government feels like investing in create an ASIC more powerful than the actual Antminer then secretly building some mining farms, the whole Bitcoinland could be easily taken over?

How much fragile is the pot where we're putting our money? Because I can think many reasons a government or some powerful banks would want to shut all this down.
Apologies if I'm sounding naïve, I'm not a scientist, I'm only a curious Average Joe.

It sounds as if you are engaging in purposeful misleading bullshit, while trying to act as if you are "average Joe" naive.   

The market cap of bitcoin is not the same as how much computing power that you need in order to attempt to take it over.  Good luck with that.

[2017Bubble]

hello it me,

seems like we are moving uppish

[bitserve]

Found UP-to date picture:  

So Amazon till Christmas?  

So it says that if someone with Bill Gates net worth (there's a bunch of guys dirty rich like him, isn't it?) or any government feels like investing in create an ASIC more powerful than the actual Antminer then secretly building some mining farms, the whole Bitcoinland could be easily taken over?

How much fragile is the pot where we're putting our money? Because I can think many reasons a government or some powerful banks would want to shut all this down.
Apologies if I'm sounding naïve, I'm not a scientist, I'm only a curious Average Joe.

Yes, you could probably take over Bitcoin with just around $1Billion. That would destroy Bitcoin AND your billion. Now.. why some individual like Bill Gates would feel like doing that? What would be the impact in PR for doing it? How much more would he lose?

Do you have any idea of how much damage could someone do with one spendable billion if his intention was just to wreck havoc in the "real world"? He could even start a fucking small war if he was smart (and evil).

Now let's see one goverment (USA?) does it. The economical cost is almost negligible but.... again... a government destroying something that is not ilegal, fucking millions of people all around the world for no reason and, probably, with no way to cover/hid the action?

Is the pot "fragile"? Maybe... now let's compare it with how fragile are other pots:

- FIAT (well, you know).
- PM's (See Executive Order 6102)
- Stocks (see the large liss of crashes over time)
- Real state (safe most of the time, but it can also be easily confiscated as its intrinsically not mobile)

So, nothing to lose dream at night, but as I always say, follow the Triple D: Diversify, Diversify, Diversify.

[deepcolderwallet]

Yes, you could probably take over Bitcoin with around $1Billion. That would destroy Bitcoin AND your billion. Now.. why some individual like Bill Gates would feel like doing that? What would be the impact in PR for doing it? How much more would he lose?

Bill Gates was just an example, but we can think about some Bankers willing to do that. Would it necessarily have to be in the clear? I mean, I can think about some ways to do this undercover, so no PR impact.

Now let's see one goverment (USA?) does it. The economical cost is almost negligible but.... again... a government destroying something that is not ilegal, fucking millions of people all around the world for no reason and, probably, with no way to cover/hid the action?

Why no way to cover/hid it? And I think it's STILL not illegal, Congressmen are taking their time to corner OTC trades and harden AML/KYC regulations.

Is the pot "fragile"? Maybe... now let's compare it with how fragile are other pots:

- FIAT (well, you know).
- PM's (See Executive Order 6102)
- Stocks (see the large liss of crashes over time)
- Real state (safe most of the time, but it can also be easily confiscated as its absolutely not mobile)

All you listed above are known to have huge Big Players participation (a few families, Banks and the government itself)

So, nothing to lose dream at night, but as I always say, follow the Triple D: Diversify, Diversify, Diversify.

I can agree with that.

[bitserve]

Yes, you could probably take over Bitcoin with around $1Billion. That would destroy Bitcoin AND your billion. Now.. why some individual like Bill Gates would feel like doing that? What would be the impact in PR for doing it? How much more would he lose?

Bill Gates was just an example, but we can think about some Bankers willing to do that. Would it necessarily have to be in the clear? I mean, I can think about some ways to do this undercover, so no PR impact.

Now let's see one goverment (USA?) does it. The economical cost is almost negligible but.... again... a government destroying something that is not ilegal, fucking millions of people all around the world for no reason and, probably, with no way to cover/hid the action?

Why no way to cover/hid it? And I think it's STILL not illegal, Congressmen are taking their time to corner OTC trades and harden AML/KYC regulations.

Is the pot "fragile"? Maybe... now let's compare it with how fragile are other pots:

- FIAT (well, you know).
- PM's (See Executive Order 6102)
- Stocks (see the large liss of crashes over time)
- Real state (safe most of the time, but it can also be easily confiscated as its absolutely not mobile)

All you listed above are known to have huge Big Players participation (a few families, Banks and the government itself)

So, nothing to lose dream at night, but as I always say, follow the Triple D: Diversify, Diversify, Diversify.

I can agree with that.

1- Ok, let's take another example, Mark Zuckerberg does it to rekt the Winklevoss once again. It's not that easy to move the amounts of money needed without noone knowing. Less so to hire the needed personal (ASIC designers, etc), less so to make a chinesse factory produce them, less easy to transport, install and put all that ASIC's on a giant plant requiring HUGE amounts of electrical energy..... No, really, you can't do that something of that scale in a covert way.

Maybe I am wrong, then tell me how you would do it and I will try to find the failure on your plan.


2- Oh yeah, the goverments could do it with legislation, of course, but I guess that's not what we were talking about.

3- Yet they all have demonstrated to be a "fragile" pot sometimes/somewhere along the history. Nothing is 100% safe.

4- That's my main point.