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

[bobabouey2]

you would think its obvious that second market is going to buy up the lot if possible..

SecondMarket did not bid for themselves on the previous auctions.  In both cases, they only formed syndicates (assaciations) of small bidders who would not bid for a whole 2000 or 3000 BTC lot, and merged their bids into full-lot bids.  On the first auction they did not get a satoshi, Tim Draper took all the ~30'000 BTC.  On the second auction they got 48'000 of the 50'000 BTC, and Tim took the other 2000.  SecondMarket promptly distributed the 48'000 BTC to the small bidders, after taking a 1% service fee from them.

Their BIT fund only buys BTC when investos buy BIT shares.  BIT now has ~135'000 BTC in their possession, but it has not grown since May/2014, except for a 10 M USD  "freak" investment in November.   Only a few investors had the opportunity to withdraw; redemptions have been disbled since October, and it is not clear whether they will ever be re-enabled.

BIT investors have been barred from selling their shares to other people since the beginning.  The listing on OTCQX and the possibility OTC trading of the shares (only those older than 12 months) does not directly cause buying or selling of BTC by the fund.  However, if the BIT shares get traded at significantly more than their nominal value (the market price of 0.1 BTC), BIT may buy more BTC and issue more shares to sell to the brokers.  Conversely, if the BIT shares get traded at significantly less than their nominal value, BIT may buy back those shares from the brokers and sell the corresponding BTC.

The last paragraph is incorrect.  You are right that BIT is taking advantage of an exemption that allows unregistered shares to be sold without restriction (i.e. to the "public") after they have been held for a year.  But this means that the arbitrage method you mention by BIT cannot work.  If they buy more bitcoin and issue shares, whether to brokers or otherwise, those shares will not qualify for the 12 month exception, and cannot be sold to the "public."  (They could potentially be sold to other accredited investors if permitted by the fund.)

The BIT fund will be more comparable to a closed end fund, than a mutual fund or ETF.  Mutual funds and ETFs have mechanisms to expand or contract their assets based on supply and demand of shares, meaning the NAV and the public price are usually quite tight.  Closed end funds do not, shares are issued in one or more transactions, and then resold in the public market.  They can therefore trade at material discounts or premiums to their NAVs.

[Fatman3001]

Where the trolls at?

I fill in as a temp.

Oh you foolish bitcoiners... your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!!!

[bassclef]

I think a reasonable top is $350 and most likely to happen in the next 3 days

If we hit that target, I'm going on vacation. I've been trying to warn the shorts since capitulation that floating supply was drying up, nothing to sell, and we would get a markup soon.

edit: probably shouldn't post my trades here.

Longs are getting expensive--my cost of carrying this trade has essentially doubled since a few days ago. It will probably triple and more before I unload.

[ThatDGuy]

Where the trolls at?

I fill in as a temp.

Oh you foolish bitcoiners... your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!!!

...this is actually better troll content than we're used to.  Careful, you might end up with a permanent position with that kind of output.

[KryptoFoo]

target for a pullback 277-280.

I may be sleeping through that one though.

[JorgeStolfi]

enabled.
BIT investors have been barred from selling their shares to other people since the beginning.  The listing on OTCQX and the possibility OTC trading of the shares (only those older than 12 months) does not directly cause buying or selling of BTC by the fund.  However, if the BIT shares get traded at significantly more than their nominal value (the market price of 0.1 BTC), BIT may buy more BTC and issue more shares to sell to the brokers.  Conversely, if the BIT shares get traded at significantly less than their nominal value, BIT may buy back those shares from the brokers and sell the corresponding BTC.

The last paragraph is incorrect.  You are right that BIT is taking advantage of an exemption that allows unregistered shares to be sold without restriction (i.e. to the "public") after they have been held for a year.  But this means that the arbitrage method you mention by BIT cannot work.  If they buy more bitcoin and issue shares, whether to brokers or otherwise, those shares will not qualify for the 12 month exception, and cannot be sold to the "public."  (They could potentially be sold to other accredited investors if permitted by the fund.)

The BIT fund will be more comparable to a closed end fund, than a mutual fund or ETF.  Mutual funds and ETFs have mechanisms to expand or contract their assets based on supply and demand of shares, meaning the NAV and the public price are usually quite tight.  Closed end funds do not, shares are issued in one or more transactions, and then resold in the public market.  They can therefore trade at material discounts or premiums to their NAVs.

Oops, thanks for the correction.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Norway]

I have been buying constantly with every paycheck the last 10 months, and made a big buy two weeks ago.

And now, I just discovered: I'm almost break even!!!!  

[Kupsi]

I have been buying constantly with every paycheck the last 10 months, and made a big buy two weeks ago.

And now, I just discovered: I'm almost break even!!!!  

Nå begynner moroa 

[Dump3er]

Where the trolls at?

You have them all on ignore since you can't put up with them.

Will you start another round of crying when this suckers rally has finished and the new lows are coming?

[Norway]

I have been buying constantly with every paycheck the last 10 months, and made a big buy two weeks ago.

And now, I just discovered: I'm almost break even!!!!  

Nå begynner moroa 

Jepsi Kupsi! 

[bassclef]

Meanwhile LTC creeps back toward $2. Seems that it will rally along with BTC this time.

[Fatman3001]

Can a person that calls state a "stationary bandit" be dreaming of a state?

I'll start with the brief version: the sentiment communicated in the sentence I have marked with bold is illogical. It either means that you are an anarchist (left or right, one is dumber, both are illogical), or a liberal (don't start with faux inventive american term: libertarian) who can't grasp that the state plays a vital role in protecting those liberal rights, or you are someone who is anti-politics with strong political opinions.

Do you need more? Have I misunderstood something?

This one would do, thanks. However, I cannot see problem with logic. Person that calls the state "stationary bandit" obviously doesn't like the state. Right? While "dreaming of a ... state" means that the person likes some form of state. Right? So the bolded sentence can be translated to: "if I say that I don't like state, why you are making conclusion that I like state?". IMO, this is logical and reasonable question. While your conclusion is not logical. Your move

My claim was that based on my experience with you I cannot assume that there is a logical consistency behind what you are saying. What I was trying to show in the last post was why. Either you got lost trying to figure out what logic is, or you don't want to share with me which one of the three types of illogical political leanings you have. Or maybe there is a fourth that I haven't thought of. No moves, just curious.

[Richy_T]

CCMF   

Nice.

[rolling]

Meanwhile LTC creeps back toward $2. Seems that it will rally along with BTC this time.

LTC is losing value compared to BTC. The dollar value of LTC is irrelevant because you could hold BTC instead of LTC.

[EatonABooger]

Where the trolls at?

Sweaty, Sidney Greenstreet-type offshore banker: "I'm sorry, I can't divulge any information about that client's secret, illegal account" (hangs up) Oh crap! I shouldn't have said he was a customer. Oh crap! I shouldn't have said it was a secret! Oh crap! I certainly shouldnt' have said it was illegal. Ah, it's too hot today."

aaaahhhh the simpsons...   easing the pain....

I have often thought of this simpsons scene when thinking of how/when the feds will be trying to chase down the BTC trails and transactions.  makes me laugh every time.

[stereotype]

Where the trolls at?

I fill in as a temp.

Oh you foolish bitcoiners... your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!!!

Why does that actually sound so much funnier than NLC.  

Oh, and your nan eats lavender bulbs, while teaching a pink elephant to belly dance. Yeah.

[Fatman3001]

Where the trolls at?

I fill in as a temp.

Oh you foolish bitcoiners... your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!!!

...this is actually better troll content than we're used to.  Careful, you might end up with a permanent position with that kind of output.

I heard they get payed as much as 50 cents a day!!! Woohoooo!! A new world opens up to me!

[Fatman3001]

Where the trolls at?

I fill in as a temp.

Oh you foolish bitcoiners... your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!!!

Why does that actually sound so much funnier than NLC.  

Oh, and your nan eats lavender bulbs, while teaching a pink elephant to belly dance. Yeah.

Admittedly it was written by gods:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAy4zULKFDU

[oda.krell]

[...]

Hey, have a small favor to ask: I don't have you on ignore because I strictly try to limit the number of people who are on that list, but I do have to say, your posts are kind of worthless, so... could you maybe just stop posting? Yeah, that'd be just fantastic. k, thanks