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

[El duderino_]

It should better start rising up soon, or I'll miss my "Breaking 24777$ prediction" tip  according to my prediction its supposed to get there by feb12th2019..
but im afraid the market volatility is too dead for it to move up even $500+ before year's end :/

you can get BEAR on me, BUT not that BEAR      to say +500 bucks is difficult in BTC, that's just harsh 

i would accept it with open arms for you to win that BTC-tip 

[1601554275]

1601554275

[jojo69]

It's not a prediction or anything, I don't know shit, but I'm feeling like a break up to 67 is really possible right now, maybe even 74.

[bitserve]

WAY better than nothing. Though "portfolio cash value" is not the same as USD Fiat on deposit. It could be all on Tesla stock for what we know or any sort of high risk high yield investments.

The portfolio may even be in the form of Tether!

P.S.: Also one single signature from some UNIDENTIFIED person and not even an official bank seal..... It's almost comical when you are certifying almost 2 Billion USD.

For reals, dude.

I don't think it is in the form of Tether. I don't even think it is in the form of any crypto (ie Bitcoin). Why? Because That's not part of the "portfolio" that bank manages and this is not an audit. So it must be in the form of whatever assets that bank is managing for them.... which could be many RISKY/iliquid assets/investments anyways.

[FractalUniverse]

It should better start rising up soon, or I'll miss my "Breaking 24777$ prediction" tip  according to my prediction its supposed to get there by feb12th2019..
but im afraid the market volatility is too dead for it to move up even $500+ before year's end :/

you can get BEAR on me, BUT not that BEAR      to say +500 bucks is difficult in BTC, that's just harsh 

i would accept it with open arms for you to win that BTC-tip 

yeah. 500 is a bit of exaggeration, but the fact is, that daily range has been declining since end of january

i just plot this 30 day ATR on my chart and it looks like it dropped below $200 today. on the other hand, there is much more room upside now :


it will take some serious volume to make it going up

[bitserve]

WAY better than nothing. Though "portfolio cash value" is not the same as USD Fiat on deposit. It could be all on Tesla stock for what we know or any sort of high risk high yield investments.

The portfolio may even be in the form of Tether!

P.S.: Also one single signature from some UNIDENTIFIED person and not even an official bank seal..... It's almost comical when you are certifying almost 2 Billion USD.

For reals, dude.

"USD Fiat on deposit" is nothing if you don't know their debts. i.e. money could've been borrowed for a day and deposited to the account short term just for the letter. Bottom line, it's most likely illegal and will always require trust in 3rd party. Those that don't know history are doomed to repeat it.

Yes. It doesn't say anything about liabilities. That being said I don't think it is that easy for a shady crypto exchange to obtain a (nowhere near) 1.8Billion short term lending at *ANY* cost. The risk of those founds being frozen "in transit" are HUGE. So it must probably be theirs OR the bank is in it OR everything is fake.

[Raja_MBZ]

1/1/2020: Bitcoin fails to break the psychological barrier of $0.1 million, plummeting back to its 2-month-low of $80,000.



The chart seems crazily bullish to me

[rolling]

^
PLeaseeeee no BULLRUN after a stationary "countdown clock" 

NO, the BIG GREEN DILDO after that event could be HUGE

$50,000 per coin a short time after the next halving.

It will have to be a nice size crash to get it down that low

[El duderino_]

It should better start rising up soon, or I'll miss my "Breaking 24777$ prediction" tip  according to my prediction its supposed to get there by feb12th2019..
but im afraid the market volatility is too dead for it to move up even $500+ before year's end :/

you can get BEAR on me, BUT not that BEAR      to say +500 bucks is difficult in BTC, that's just harsh 

i would accept it with open arms for you to win that BTC-tip 

it will take some serious volume to make it going up

Not in need for a HAT?   

Getting tired of the price, gotta crawl into my HODLcave and go for a DEEP sleep

[jojo69]

the fuck is ATR?

[Last of the V8s]

So there was a fake bitcoin by a man called Ver called 'bcash', which failed.
Nov 15th there will be a fake of that by a man called faketoshi called 'fake bcash', which will fail.
There's another fake fork of it to come by a fake snake called 'fake snake bcash', which will fail.
capiche?

[roycilik]

~snip~
MANY HAT's created THX

Kitty want to buy yours Bictoin



Avatar

[JayJuanGee]

Can someone make Arthur Hayes shut up ?

https://www.ccn.com/bitcoin-price-bitmex-ceo-doubles-down-on-bear-call-says-btc-could-fall-to-2000/

CCN reported earlier this week that Hayes, a former Citigroup trader, is now predicting that the bitcoin downtrend could last another 18 months, mirroring the “nuclear bear market” the crypto industry experienced in 2014 and 2015. Writing in Friday’s edition of the BitMEX Crypto Trader Digest, Hayes doubled down on that portentous outlook.

Sure... Lot's of things "could" happen regarding BTC's price performance between now and the end of year, including down to $2k... but so fucking what?  We should not be spending our time and efforts on more extreme probabilities rather than more likely scenarios, right?

I suppose the article is emphasizing the change of rhetoric of some "important" peeps, such as Hayes.. .assuming that he is NOT just talking out of his ass for that particular assertion?

If they suggest "$50k in 2018", and then later they say "could down to $2k", it still remains important to attempt to figure out context of these kinds of BTC predictions and the kinds of probabilities these supposedly "important" sorcerers are assigning to various events at certain times (and perhaps just a spike in price too)  - and then in the end, does it matter what the sorcerer says if such BTC price prediction are provided as conclusions and without much if any context?

At this point, it does seem a bit more plausible that down to $2k could be reached in 2018 rather than $50k, but the greater probability of down to $2k in 2018 does NOT mean that it is likely for either seemingly extreme event to happen... perhaps less than 10% either way, no?  

Getting more specific:  Maybe below 10% odds for down to $2k, and perhaps below 5% odds for $50k?  

Both price performances are possible and just because down to $2k has a bit higher odds does not make it a very reasonable to be asserting such statement as if its odds were higher than what it really is.

By the way, I am just SOMAing^(tm-d_eddie) a bit regarding my actual numbers.....just to assign some approximate probabilities that might be currently quasi-reasonable for btc price movements between now and the end of this calendar year.

[Last of the V8s]

http://stockcharts.com/school/doku.php?id=chart_school:technical_indicators:average_true_range_atr
jojo it's a measure of volatility

[xhomerx10]

~snip~
MANY HAT's created THX

Kitty want to buy yours Bictoin



Avatar

 I have been usurped.

 edit: Not too bad but you should use grain merge or multiply to get the kitty layer to appear as an embroidered patch.

[Realerre]

Can someone make Arthur Hayes shut up ?

https://www.ccn.com/bitcoin-price-bitmex-ceo-doubles-down-on-bear-call-says-btc-could-fall-to-2000/

CCN reported earlier this week that Hayes, a former Citigroup trader, is now predicting that the bitcoin downtrend could last another 18 months, mirroring the “nuclear bear market” the crypto industry experienced in 2014 and 2015. Writing in Friday’s edition of the BitMEX Crypto Trader Digest, Hayes doubled down on that portentous outlook.

Sure... Lot's of things "could" happen, including down to $2k.

I suppose the article is emphasizing the change of rhetoric of some "important" peeps.

If they suggest "$50k in 2018", and then later they say "could down to $2k", it still remains important to attempt to figure out context of these kinds of BTC predictions and the kinds of probabilities these supposedly "important" sorcerers are assigning to various events at certain times (and perhaps just a spike in price too)  - and then in the end, does it matter what the sorcerer says if such BTC price prediction are provided as conclusions and without much if any context?

At this point, it does seem a bit more plausible that down to $2k could be reached in 2018 rather than $50k, but the greater probability of down to $2k in 2018 does NOT mean that it is likely for either seemingly extreme event to happen... perhaps less than 10% either way, no?  

Getting more specific:  Maybe below 10% odds for down to $2k, and perhaps below 5% odds for $50k?  

Both price performances are possible and just because down to $2k has a bit higher odds does not make it a very reasonable to be asserting such statement as if its odds were higher than what it really is.

By the way, I am just SOMAing^(tm-d_eddie) a bit regarding my actual numbers.....just to assign some approximate probabilities that might be currently quasi-reasonable for btc price movements between now and the end of this calendar year.

Or maybe sideways, this could be the direction....

[jojo69]

http://stockcharts.com/school/doku.php?id=chart_school:technical_indicators:average_true_range_atr
jojo it's a measure of volatility

oh man, thanks, don't I feel silly?

here I thought it was some shitcoin I had never heard of


also  "grain merge"

[kurious]

I usually roll my eyes when I hear "Taxation is theft", but this?

Them wanting to tax the cash in my wallet sounds crazy to me...

Yet you guys are talking about it like it's most normal and reasonable thing.

Mind-boggling.

Yeah I think we all just see the writing on the wall, you're not getting away from the Government taking their share especially if it has value and we all agree Bitcoins going to long term go up. I mean you can buy things directly for btc but I think vendors include sales tax in most of it. (Newegg for example)

But the tax on just your holdings fuck that including cash, no thanks. Is that some socialism bullshit that's favored there?

Paying your taxes is not socialism, it's patriotism.

Anyway I much prefer the way the taxes work in NL, no taxes whatsoever on trading including 'cashing out' (should really be called cashing in btw), just a very reasonable taxation on holdings, excluding the first 25k and minus debts. Most of the world is much worse off having all these taxable events like trading. They must all be socialist countries then I guess.

Having cashed some out late last year and now suffering with having to pay 20% on it come January, I have actually researched the NL system of a sub 2% tax on value held, even looked at living there fro long enough to cash out.  It's way better than 20% on what you cash out!

FWIW:  US is similar to the UK; 20% on capital (non-earned) gains.  And having lived over the pond I can tell you, dealing with the IRS is (to say the least) 'not pleasant'.  By the time you factor in local taxes, healthcare insurance costs etc.  It's actually not really cheaper in the USA compared to (say) the UK.  Unless you're very rich, but that is the same anywhere - if you're rich enough, you can afford not to pay taxes.  Taxes are for the great unwashed, not the rich.  The truly rich have 'schemes'.

I did ask about offshore tax efficiency etc. at a posh accountants recently and was effectively told 'you can't afford it'.  Plus ça change!

[JayJuanGee]

Can someone make Arthur Hayes shut up ?

https://www.ccn.com/bitcoin-price-bitmex-ceo-doubles-down-on-bear-call-says-btc-could-fall-to-2000/

CCN reported earlier this week that Hayes, a former Citigroup trader, is now predicting that the bitcoin downtrend could last another 18 months, mirroring the “nuclear bear market” the crypto industry experienced in 2014 and 2015. Writing in Friday’s edition of the BitMEX Crypto Trader Digest, Hayes doubled down on that portentous outlook.

Sure... Lot's of things "could" happen, including down to $2k.

I suppose the article is emphasizing the change of rhetoric of some "important" peeps.

If they suggest "$50k in 2018", and then later they say "could down to $2k", it still remains important to attempt to figure out context of these kinds of BTC predictions and the kinds of probabilities these supposedly "important" sorcerers are assigning to various events at certain times (and perhaps just a spike in price too)  - and then in the end, does it matter what the sorcerer says if such BTC price prediction are provided as conclusions and without much if any context?

At this point, it does seem a bit more plausible that down to $2k could be reached in 2018 rather than $50k, but the greater probability of down to $2k in 2018 does NOT mean that it is likely for either seemingly extreme event to happen... perhaps less than 10% either way, no?  

Getting more specific:  Maybe below 10% odds for down to $2k, and perhaps below 5% odds for $50k?  

Both price performances are possible and just because down to $2k has a bit higher odds does not make it a very reasonable to be asserting such statement as if its odds were higher than what it really is.

By the way, I am just SOMAing^(tm-d_eddie) a bit regarding my actual numbers.....just to assign some approximate probabilities that might be currently quasi-reasonable for btc price movements between now and the end of this calendar year.

Or maybe sideways, this could be the direction....

Well, of course, sideways (especially within about a $1k to $2k price range) would be way more likely than asserting either down to $2k or up to $50k in this calendar year, and I suppose that is part of my irritation regarding the above cited article. 

When we are talking about future possible BTC price scenarios, there are all kinds of directions that could play out, and some of the scenarios are more likely than others, including the BTC price staying somewhat in the same territory that it is now, and the outcome of events only become 100% after they play out.. so I just become a bit irritated when BTC price predictions are described out of context and without really exploring the context of possibilities (which seems to be a common occurrence in BTClandia).   

By the way, I have heard Hayes interviewed before, and he is certainly no dummie, so therefore, I doubt that he only considers future BTC possibilities in one direction - even though it remains certainly reasonable for him to either bet on one direction (such as down) and to assign high probabilities to one direction, such as down (but those kinds of specifics seem to be quite absent from the ccn.com article).

[Last of the V8s]

also  "grain merge"

the fuck is that?
you mixing vodka and whisky?
or a sex act?
it's always a sex act with you people, isn't it?

edit: by which i meant 'the youth'
anyway til grain merge is a milliner's tool 

[JayJuanGee]

Can someone make Arthur Hayes shut up ?

https://www.ccn.com/bitcoin-price-bitmex-ceo-doubles-down-on-bear-call-says-btc-could-fall-to-2000/

CCN reported earlier this week that Hayes, a former Citigroup trader, is now predicting that the bitcoin downtrend could last another 18 months, mirroring the “nuclear bear market” the crypto industry experienced in 2014 and 2015. Writing in Friday’s edition of the BitMEX Crypto Trader Digest, Hayes doubled down on that portentous outlook.

How the does he know that?
Trace Mayer was saying that market would go to 28K, it went to 20K and stopped cold.
Now Trace is saying that 3.5K is possible, however, maybe it's already done it's bear cycle (mostly).

Nobody knows what the market would do, and if they do, ostensibly, they are not going to tell us.

Is 2k possible. maybe, but is it likely-f, NO.

From where are you getting the Trace Mayer assertion of $3.5k is possible?  Is that a recent statement, and what is the context of such statement? 

As you have already astutely asserted, I think that both of us have recognized that there is a decent difference in the picture that might be portrayed between purporting that some BTC price movement is "possible" and ascribing "likelihood" to that same BTC price movement.