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

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

IMHO, the absolutely FIRST thing to do is to know (and increase) your personal limits for such cashing out. Of course, you can drizzle it out, but in situations like Dec 2017, you can "lose" 40% of the gains (or at least would not be able to re-deploy after withdrawal) if you cannot withdraw what you want to withdraw.
High(er) limits are certainly very handy.

Regarding the ability to remove value from various exchanges, surely there has been problems with both withdrawal limits and even surprise KYC (sometimes referred to as shotgun KYC) in the past, and sometimes people do not even know that they have withdrawal issues (or limitations) or even that new limitations are being put into place until they take actual steps towards withdrawing (presumptively large amounts - or maybe larger amounts than they had previously withdrawn - or even amounts that had not been purchased at that particular exchange).

So, surely could be a problem to ONLY have one way of withdrawing value from an exchange - whether withdrawing the dollar value or even the BTC value if and when such a time to withdraw were to come.

Your post, Biodom, reminded me of another idea, too.

 I am not really opposed to the idea of a thought out plan that even increases the percentage of BTC that would be sold as the BTC price goes up (under the presumption that the BTC might be going up).

Surely, it becomes a bit more problematic to presume the next steps after selling the BTC as the price goes up - that the BTC price might go down - but of course, plan outlines can be made to figure out BTC price buyback points in the event that BTC prices were to go back down.. some people might be o.k. starting to buy back in small increments (such as 10% price drops), and other people might prefer larger price drops before buying back, such as waiting for 30% or more or even waiting for 50% or more before they would buy back.  Those kinds of buy back thresholds could be predetermined (even while maintaining a competing idea in mind that such buy back thresholds might not be reached which will cause any buy back, NOT to happen) and then the buy back thresholds could be later tweaked, too.

Part of my presumption for any amount of BTC that is sold is that the HODLer who sells should be ready, willing and able to consider that act of selling his/her BTC as a complete exit out of BTC for the amount that was sold - of course, if subsequent events happen that allow for a rebuying, then so be it, but the underlying presumption that I like to keep in mind when selling BTC is to NOT be selling any such BTC and expecting to buy back lower - because the lower part of such idea might not happen.. In other words, such seller needs to be committed to the sale and willing to live with NOT being able to buy back at lower prices.

[Arriemoller]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg52526333#msg52526333
Sep-22-2019


www.wohats.com
Sep-22-2020

Happy Birthday WOHats


Hello hat gang, I am happy to inform you that today is the 1th anniversary of www.WOHATS.com

1 year has passed and a lot has changed since its creation, I am happy because the most viewed blog post after a year is the list of posts: Hats History this was the purpose of the blog, let everyone know how the beautiful story began in the Wall Observer thread.

To date there are 137 users with hats
Own domain
The Blog has some interesting links for our dear friend BTC
Real-time price of BTC Bitstamp/TradingView
All releases of Bitcoin Core
Link to number of full nodes online, hash rate, and much more
In one year, the scoreboard has a result of > 8,000 views

I think it's fair to give it one more year to see how it evolves, we continue with him?

O, yes please, continue. That site is the best!

[nullius]

Wear your mask.

Thanks.  As a public service, I have improved your photo with an important message.  Safety first!

...to me - this is what WWIII looks like: people vs government(s) on a world scale.

Too bad that most of the people are on the side of “their” governments, or at best passively accepting thereof.  It is the usual state of affairs.  At least the tacit consent of the governed is required for a government to be stable—and they have it.

[Last of the V8s]

Never fear. New government is on its way.

[OutOfMemory]

Very annoyed OG HODLER.

That makes two annoyed OG HODLERs.

Getting mighty sick of the mandatory mask mandates, despite everything dropping and starting to get under control.

It's all political theatre.

*breathe in and out Bob. Don't get angry. Go hit another bowl of Gods' herb*

That's simply what god gave us the herbs for  

My rookie tip: If you ever sell, don't sell it all, keep at least 10% of your corn for hodling.

I am thinking about a formula that aim to NOT sell more than 10% for every range - such as every 100% (or maybe less selling and a greater range?)

But it would go something like this:

Let's say that you started buying BTC at or near the top of the last bubble, but you stuck with it and you kept dollar cost averaging in.  Accordingly, you have a average cost per BTC that is around $8k per BTC, and so you are a bit concerned about what to do.

You decide that you will sell no more than 10% of your stash for every time that the BTC price doubles (if it does)

Therefore, you have authorized yourself to sell 10% of your stash at any point of your own choosing at each point within the below prices ranges:


1) $10k to $20k (10% of total stash)

2) $20k to $40k (10% of total stash)

3) $40k to $80k (10% of total stash)

4) $80k to $160k (10% of total stash)

5) $160k to $320k (10% of total stash)

6) $320k to $640k (10% of total stash)

7) $640k to $1.2m (10% of total stash)

Etc. etc. etc

Yes, i am also  a fan of this ladder approach. My message was more for the kind of "i'll sell it all at now, because who knows if bitcoin will ever reach this high regions in the future again"...

Better version: If you intend to sell it all when moon, sell only 90%!

Fair enough... I suppose 90% is better than 100%.  I can see that angle - even though personally, I remain worried about the necessity of those kinds of plays, too...  

Accordingly, you will hardly see me compromising in that kind of seemingly timing of the market mindset direction - even though I do appreciate that there could be personal circumstances that might justify a bit of a different approach... even though that selling 90% approach continues to feel like a kind of gambling mindset, rather than an investing mindset.

By the way, I feel that I do compromise in regard to my suggestion that peeps need to determine how much to put into bitcoin, and I suggest starting out with a consideration of 1% to 10% of quasi-liquid assets, and suggesting that a minimum of 1% is a potentially prudent approach... even though 1% also seems a bit whimpy to me, but I have a kind of understanding that sometimes people may need to get accommodated to an investment such as BTC and also to get used to it.... so surely, I am not opposed to considering ways to individually tailor approaches while also even going outside of the suggested range based on personal circumstances....

At the same time, I am just considering mindsets of selling 90% as a road that is a bit too far - and I have difficulties with relating to those kinds of gambling mindsets - unless there is an actual excuse that is based on short life expectations or some exogenous demands, rather than attempts that seem to be merely timing the market... Might be just me, unless there would be some particular circumstances that might be pointed out that would allow me to appreciate that such an approach would not be a kind of gambling.

Sure, this definitely has gambling at its roots. Mind.... erm... you-know-who was also, put straightforward, just gambling. Cashing out 100% in a low, (pretending to be?) satisfied by a couple hundred % yield. WTF!
I'm no friend of this gambling stlye, too. But the ones that are, should only gamble-out 90% and leave 10% in for reasons hodlers know about.
I end this for lack of a better explanation here, because god was very generous today, when i got over his herbs. #nohomo

 

[Cryptotourist]

i dont know

Sure you do, there you are:



 


I feel so confident that we will not dip below $10k ever again, that I will buy a beer to the first one that observes it if we do. [redeemable in 60 Grin, sorry]
I know we're very close, and can easily happen, but my SOMA analysis completely disagrees.


Mask culture. My favorite:



Protip: If you don't like it, you can go fuck yourself with it.

[Last of the V8s]

https://digital-totality.hcpp.cz/

Great line-up of speakers at Paralelni Polis this year, including one of our own Wall Observers.

[Toxic2040]

Never fear. New government is on its way.

[JayJuanGee]

Fair enough... I suppose 90% is better than 100%.  I can see that angle - even though personally, I remain worried about the necessity of those kinds of plays, too...  
[edited out].. even though that selling 90% approach continues to feel like a kind of gambling mindset, rather than an investing mindset.
[edited out]

Sure, this definitely has gambling at its roots. Mind.... erm... you-know-who was also, put straightforward, just gambling. Cashing out 100% in a low, (pretending to be?) satisfied by a couple hundred % yield. WTF!
I'm no friend of this gambling stlye, too. But the ones that are, should only gamble-out 90% and leave 10% in for reasons hodlers know about.
I end this for lack of a better explanation here, because god was very generous today, when i got over his herbs. #nohom

I will concede that gambling by selling on the way up is better than gambling by selling on the way down.

I will grant you that much.

[strawbs]

@LFC:

Man, UK pubs were already closing far too early, compared to most other countries (last round @ 11:30pm IIRC)... Looks like COVID-19 sealed the deal! Now families can take their kids with them to the pub, and be back home in time for bed.

I miss the days when children weren't allowed in pubs. They were one of the few day-time places where a person could go to to be free from the annoyances of kids running around. Now, there hardly exists a place where children are excluded. I was sat trying to enjoy a beer in a sunny beer garden last week, only to have screaming kids running around, parents completely disinterested in what their darling offspring were up to.

If you want to have kids, look after them responsibly, which does not mean taking them to pubs, FFS.

And don't get me started on airplanes - why not have child-free areas of the plane and areas which are just for families with screaming kids - let them keep each other awake.

(Sorry for ranting - I'm generally fed up with with our incompetent govt's disastrous management of pretty much everything, the fuck-wits who keep on voting for them, and an impending second lockdown. Now where was that secluded island.....)

[Toxic2040]

the evening wall report

#dyor

1h


4h


D

#stronghands

[nullius]

I miss the days when children women (of the non-professional kind) weren't allowed in pubs. They were one of the few day-time places where a person man could go to to be free from the annoyances of women with their kids running around. Now, there hardly exists a place where children women are excluded. I was sat trying to enjoy a beer in a sunny beer garden last week, only to have screaming kids running around, parents women completely disinterested in what their darling offspring were up to.

This is not some kind of an anti-woman “eww, girls, go away” rant; I dislike those.  Rather, it is an observation that I again find myself in the wrong century.

For a nutshell historical illustration of what I mean, consider that the American Prohibition of alcohol was in large part an attack by women’s clubs on de facto men’s clubs.

Whereas if married women (and today we must consider, single mothers) are ordinarily present in pubs, then you cannot reasonably expect to disallow children.  Children come with the women.  It is a part of a package deal; anyone who doesn’t understand that, does not know the first thing about women.  Have cake—no eat, too.  And if non-professional single, childless women go to pubs, then you cannot reasonably expect for them to suddenly stop doing that when they get married and/or have kids.  Life doesn’t work that way.  Eat cake—no have, too.

It seems that what you really want is an exclusive men’s space.  Perhaps modulo the general licence customarily exercised by practitionresses of the oldest profession.


It is personally bizarre that I find myself being the one to point this out.  I am by nature too much of a lone wolf to have ever much sought the company of other men.  If I seek the social company of human creatures, more oft than not, it is with the female species.  For various reasons.  I am too pathologically individualistic to do clubs—note the lack of a hat.  And it has been over ten years since I even set foot in a pub—I’ve got beer at home, where I can drink it naked when so desired, with or without company as so desired.

Sight is sometimes granted by distance...  What?  It’s a social gathering-place for women?  Interesting.  How can you not expect for kids to be there, too?

Aside, I am indeed in the wrong century if #nohomo tags are needed on discussion of men’s sometimes desire to socialize exclusively with other men.

Mask culture. My favorite:

That doesn’t look efficacious to me.  Does it have adequately close and comprehensive coverage of the mouth?  This seems safer:



Seriously, I wear the biggest, meanest N95 mask that I can find.  It covers the whole lower portion of my face (and has a respirator port so that I can breathe).  With sunglasses and a hat, my face is protected from the global pandemic of ubiquitous “security” cameras, Amazon Ring, cameraphone snapshots...  Fork off, facial recognition robots!

[marcus_of_augustus]

Pandemic is only really in it's early days ... 6 months down and 18-24 to run.

... if getting chinese bio-weapon grafted into your genome isn't enough to send you around the twist, then your government's idiotic Orwellian over-reaction (and lack of spine to stand up to china commie scum) will definitely send you over the edge.

... good luck, masks help but most are pretty much just symbolic gestures. Eyewear protection is helpful too ... best is to go to ground on your private island and shoot anyone who looks sick, in a uniform, or the wrong colour.

... second wave is still coming I think, it hasn't mutated to trigger the ADE response in young people second infection yet, maybe they are waiting until enough young uns have been exposed or 'vaccinated' first?

[nullius]

... if getting chinese bio-weapon grafted into your genome isn't enough to send you around the twist, then your government's idiotic Orwellian over-reaction (and lack of spine to stand up to china commie scum) will definitely send you over the edge. [...]

I’m not buying that.  More panic-mongering.  It seems that, against an “idiotic Orwellian over-reaction”, you’re agitating to push for the opposite wrong reaction.

That is how the Marxist dialectic works:  Wrong thesis, wrong antithesis, synthesized to the desired wrong conclusion.  Panic thesis:  Lock down the world into a giant prison!  Panic antithesis:  —What, exactly?  Nuke China?  Just guessing...  Anyway, seeing as how you do not have any nukes, what practical objective are you seeking?

... good luck, masks help but most are pretty much just symbolic gestures. Eyewear protection is helpful too ... best is to go to ground on your private island and shoot anyone who looks sick, in a uniform, or the wrong colour.

Oh, I get it:  Go hide in a corner where you will be irrelevant.  If you can.  Regardless, be very afraid.  Everybody needs to panic—even the opponents of the primary panickers, the dumb masses who are demanding the “idiotic Orwellian over-reaction”.

Synthesis:  Everybody panics.  Global tyrants do whatever they want.  Even the few people who dislike that are too scared to think straight.

What we need is for people to stop panicking, as I have been saying for more than six months.

[marcus_of_augustus]

... if getting chinese bio-weapon grafted into your genome isn't enough to send you around the twist, then your government's idiotic Orwellian over-reaction (and lack of spine to stand up to china commie scum) will definitely send you over the edge. [...]

... wordy man being wordy ...

... good luck, masks help but most are pretty much just symbolic gestures. Eyewear protection is helpful too ... best is to go to ground on your private island and shoot anyone who looks sick, in a uniform, or the wrong colour.

Synthesis:  Everybody panics.

... I didn't mention panic once, you've repeated it multiple times. If you want to wet your pants in fear with the facts of the situation that's on you ... I'm just laying them out so rational adults can do what rational adults must do.

Chinese commies dumped a bio-weapon on the world ... what now punks?

Orwellian over-reaction, face masks ... scared spooks telling lies, crickets ...

[nullius]

... wordy man being wordy ...

Functional illiterate whining about words.

As I always say:  If you’re not reading it, it’s not for you.  And indeed, that was not written for you.  Don’t flatter yourself.  I found thereby a salutary moment to express to other readers a point that I’ve had on my mind for awhile now.

... I didn't mention panic once, you've repeated it multiple times.

That is quite deceptive on your part.  N.b. that none of the official government sources uses the word “panic”, either.  It is ironic how you implicitly suggest that somebody is only peddling panic if he says, “Everybody panic now!”

Whereas I will not waste words explaining point by point why your post is panic-mongering.  It is sufficiently obvious for others.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Whereas I will not waste words explaining point by point why your post is panic-mongering.  It is sufficiently obvious for others.

... ahhh, right. Verbal diarhea scattered around the WO everywhere not withstanding ... laying out the facts of the chinese commie bio-weapon drop is only "panic-mongering" for pants-wetters who's brains seize up with fear.

... someone from the West has to man up or they'll be sucking yellow dick for the next 200 years.

[bitebits]

Bermuda Stock Exchange to Have the World’s First Bitcoin ETF.

The world’s first Bitcoin (BTC) exchange-traded fund (ETF) is going to be launched on the Bermuda Stock Exchange (BSX). According to an official statement released by the BSX, the new Bitcoin ETF is going to be called Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index ETF and there will be released to the market 3 million Class E shares.

The new Bitcion ETF has been launched thanks to the Brazilian Fund Manager Hasdex that partnered with the Nasdaq in order to offer investors a safe and regulated Bitcoin ETF product. This would help firms and users get exposure to the crypto market through a traditional investment platform.

For all the fiat to disappear in the Bermuda Triangle.

[nullius]

... someone from the West has to man up or they'll be sucking yellow dick for the next 200 years.

What if I were Chinese?  I have never said what I am.  Though I let it slip somewhere that I’m not white.  I do have some very racist ideas about white people’s apparently genetic stupidity in wrecking their own cultures and countries.  I think that their brains are flawed.  Anyway, I have not said what I am.

It is difficult to tell.  For example, I am perhaps one of the only people in the world who has been accused of being both a Mossad agent and a neo-Nazi.  Simultaneously.  For the same writings.  People get confused.

For all you know, I’m a Chinese Nazi.  LOL.

Wang Jingwei (汪精衛) shares a toast with German diplomats, 1941

Thus having given you something to suck on, I am now done being amused by this little discussion.  No, I do not intend to subject other people (or myself) to endless flamewars with you.

[hv_]

Bermuda Stock Exchange to Have the World’s First Bitcoin ETF.

The world’s first Bitcoin (BTC) exchange-traded fund (ETF) is going to be launched on the Bermuda Stock Exchange (BSX). According to an official statement released by the BSX, the new Bitcoin ETF is going to be called Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index ETF and there will be released to the market 3 million Class E shares.

The new Bitcion ETF has been launched thanks to the Brazilian Fund Manager Hasdex that partnered with the Nasdaq in order to offer investors a safe and regulated Bitcoin ETF product. This would help firms and users get exposure to the crypto market through a traditional investment platform.

For all the fiat to disappear in the Bermuda Triangle.

shilling FOR banks (kraken), bank product (ETFs) and all with high fee transactions, higher than SWITF or any other costs - what was the original Bitcoin about ?  - meh