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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[oblox]

Someone bought 159 shares at $42

Wait a minute,

Are you telling me that if I held this financial instrument for at least one year, I would be able to sell the derivative for almost twice the price of the underlying asset?

This makes no sense

If you were an accredited investor and happen to have been one of the 600-700 shares worth that were traded thus far, yes. Granted, if you bought a year ago, you would still be under in terms of your entry, but you could sell your shares and purchase again at nav if you were content on holding another year. Else, cash out and send the money to one of the exchanges to buy BTC directly.

[shmadz]

Someone bought 159 shares at $42

Wait a minute,

Are you telling me that if I held this financial instrument for at least one year, I would be able to sell the derivative for almost twice the price of the underlying asset?

This makes no sense

If you were an accredited investor and happen to have been one of the 600-700 shares worth that were traded thus far, yes. Granted, if you bought a year ago, you would still be under in terms of your entry, but you could sell your shares and purchase again at nav if you were content on holding another year. Else, cash out and send the money to one of the exchanges to buy BTC directly.

So.... effectively almost $200 premium for a derivative version of bitcoin?

Interesting

[ensurance982]

And the $42s are cleared off the books with another 259 shares. $200 on the ask, lmfao.

If someone really bought at those prices, everyone buying into GBTC - no matter at which time - would have made a profit. I mean, it's clear some people will just want to grab the first shares traded on the ETF, but buying at those prices is insane. They're either trying to confuse people about the value of a single share (1/10 of a BTC) or try to make a quick buck in a crazy emerging market.

It is not insane... it is a speculation. What if those are actually the cheapest shares? Many bought btc at 800$+ 

Of course it's speculation Cheapest shares... well... Of course that could be, but considering the fact that the underlying asset is worth less on the open market (BTC exchanges) I still think it's more likely that those prices are overvalued - Big time.

I think it's likely the price of shares and coins will approach each other. But with $140 of ground to cover, that's a nice ride.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking, as well! I don't think the GBTC price will have to blindly approach the BTC spot price on Bitcoin exchanges. For all we know, Bitcoin ETFs could - in a few years - be the primary way of price discovery for Bitcoin! It remains to be seen how much "force" the ETF can exert on the regular BTC spot price on Finex, etc.

[Fatman3001]

And the $42s are cleared off the books with another 259 shares. $200 on the ask, lmfao.

If someone really bought at those prices, everyone buying into GBTC - no matter at which time - would have made a profit. I mean, it's clear some people will just want to grab the first shares traded on the ETF, but buying at those prices is insane. They're either trying to confuse people about the value of a single share (1/10 of a BTC) or try to make a quick buck in a crazy emerging market.

It is not insane... it is a speculation. What if those are actually the cheapest shares? Many bought btc at 800$+ 

Of course it's speculation Cheapest shares... well... Of course that could be, but considering the fact that the underlying asset is worth less on the open market (BTC exchanges) I still think it's more likely that those prices are overvalued - Big time.

I think it's likely the price of shares and coins will approach each other. But with $140 of ground to cover, that's a nice ride.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking, as well! I don't think the GBTC price will have to blindly approach the BTC spot price on Bitcoin exchanges. For all we know, Bitcoin ETFs could - in a few years - be the primary way of price discovery for Bitcoin! It remains to be seen how much "force" the ETF can exert on the regular BTC spot price on Finex, etc.

That sounds plausible. Especially if BTC finds real usage in clearance and settlements.

[ensurance982]

That sounds plausible. Especially if BTC finds real usage in clearance and settlements.

BTC being used in remittance is already a very interesting and promising fact. And even though it could make sense to use the protocol as a backbone for clearance within the regular banking system, I just don't see how it could be integrated at this point. I've got a feeling that the volatility (and of course low liquidity/market cap) makes it more than tricky at this point.

[inca]

Lets see what happens.

Either bitcoin is very underpriced or GBTC users are happy to pay a heavy premium.

Dumping into the opening on a Chinese exchange shows the degree of desperation from bears - yes you will have to cover your positions

[NewLiberty]

Your edit is pretty much what I was trying to say. There is nothing inherently wrong with Socialism. The Reich's (amazing) initial success in WW2 was, in large part, due to its socialist aspects: state taking control of the industry, subsidized scientific research, etc., etc. It's the "Nationalist" part that made nazis ...unlovable. The whole racial purity, eugenics, antisemitism, lebensraum at any cost etc. The "socialism" part worked like a charm

A great many people DO think that there is something inherently wrong with socialism.  It is an unnecessary and detrimental bundling of services into too-big-to-fail geographic monopolies.

Why does the insurance company need an army?

Personally, I am not well pleased by the unification of the entity that provides the survivor benefit (social security) also deciding how long I survive (health care).  It seems a very clear conflict of interest with an abhorrent enforced trust.

The fact that the governance of most geographies have fallen into this trap does not make it more welcome or justified, only less so.
The only opt-out is exit and there are increasingly fewer of those.

[Fatman3001]

That sounds plausible. Especially if BTC finds real usage in clearance and settlements.

BTC being used in remittance is already a very interesting and promising fact. And even though it could make sense to use the protocol as a backbone for clearance within the regular banking system, I just don't see how it could be integrated at this point. I've got a feeling that the volatility (and of course low liquidity/market cap) makes it more than tricky at this point.

At this point, yes. But we don't have to move far in terms of stability before the cost savings are such that it makes sense.

[ensurance982]

Lets see what happens.

Either bitcoin is very underpriced or GBTC users are happy to pay a heavy premium.

Dumping into the opening on a Chinese exchange shows the degree of desperation from bears - yes you will have to cover your positions

Well, to be fair, I think it was a valid attempt and could have turned out to be a wise strategy. Often it is "buy the rumour, sell the news" that works best in Bitcoin. With GBTC starting to trade, bears could have smelled a similar opportunity as with Coinbases exchange back in January! It was a run-up, and as soon as it went live - Boom, the bubble burst, back to $220. Could've worked this time, as well...

[inca]

Lets see what happens.

Either bitcoin is very underpriced or GBTC users are happy to pay a heavy premium.

Dumping into the opening on a Chinese exchange shows the degree of desperation from bears - yes you will have to cover your positions

Well, to be fair, I think it was a valid attempt and could have turned out to be a wise strategy. Often it is "buy the rumour, sell the news" that works best in Bitcoin. With GBTC starting to trade, bears could have smelled a similar opportunity as with Coinbases exchange back in January! It was a run-up, and as soon as it went live - Boom, the bubble burst, back to $220. Could've worked this time, as well...

It hasn't.

Surprised we havent seen some big market buys tbh.

[NewLiberty]

Lets see what happens.

Either bitcoin is very underpriced or GBTC users are happy to pay a heavy premium.

Dumping into the opening on a Chinese exchange shows the degree of desperation from bears - yes you will have to cover your positions

Both are true.  GBTC is the only option for some classes of funds (so heavy premium), and bitcoin is underpriced.  This is a decent arbitrage opportunity.

[xyzzy099]

I was not implying any kind of value judgement at all - just relating historical fact.

EDIT:  I realized I did not answer your point.  It is a fact that capitalists can practice a little socialism, socialists can practice a little capitalism, and either can be practiced to varying degrees by both good and evil men.  We do not live in a binary universe.

Your edit is pretty much what I was trying to say. There is nothing inherently wrong with Socialism. The Reich's (amazing) initial success in WW2 was, in large part, due to its socialist aspects: state taking control of the industry, subsidized scientific research, etc., etc. It's the "Nationalist" part that made nazis ...unlovable. The whole racial purity, eugenics, antisemitism, lebensraum at any cost etc. The "socialism" part worked like a charm

Yes, Socialism is a very effective way to gain the hearts and minds of the people, no doubt.

Your responses seem to suggest that you read my initial post as implying that socialism was evil because Nazis were socialists.  I certainly never said anything like that.  I just pointed out that they were, in fact, socialists, both by their own claim, and demonstrably by many of their social and economic policies.

[ensurance982]

Lets see what happens.

Either bitcoin is very underpriced or GBTC users are happy to pay a heavy premium.

Dumping into the opening on a Chinese exchange shows the degree of desperation from bears - yes you will have to cover your positions

Well, to be fair, I think it was a valid attempt and could have turned out to be a wise strategy. Often it is "buy the rumour, sell the news" that works best in Bitcoin. With GBTC starting to trade, bears could have smelled a similar opportunity as with Coinbases exchange back in January! It was a run-up, and as soon as it went live - Boom, the bubble burst, back to $220. Could've worked this time, as well...

It hasn't.

Surprised we havent seen some big market buys tbh.

Yeah, it hasn't, which is good. But one is always wiser in retrospect! I'm actually quite relieved and almost surprised that we haven't seen a dumpfest as soon as GBTC went live. But them trading at 50% over spot price seems to be good news for a change. What about that incredible wall on Stamp?

[inca]

Lets see what happens.

Either bitcoin is very underpriced or GBTC users are happy to pay a heavy premium.

Dumping into the opening on a Chinese exchange shows the degree of desperation from bears - yes you will have to cover your positions

Well, to be fair, I think it was a valid attempt and could have turned out to be a wise strategy. Often it is "buy the rumour, sell the news" that works best in Bitcoin. With GBTC starting to trade, bears could have smelled a similar opportunity as with Coinbases exchange back in January! It was a run-up, and as soon as it went live - Boom, the bubble burst, back to $220. Could've worked this time, as well...

It hasn't.

Surprised we havent seen some big market buys tbh.

Yeah, it hasn't, which is good. But one is always wiser in retrospect! I'm actually quite relieved and almost surprised that we haven't seen a dumpfest as soon as GBTC went live. But them trading at 50% over spot price seems to be good news for a change. What about that incredible wall on Stamp?

1500 coins? Stamp is on life support tbh.

[ensurance982]

Lets see what happens.

Either bitcoin is very underpriced or GBTC users are happy to pay a heavy premium.

Dumping into the opening on a Chinese exchange shows the degree of desperation from bears - yes you will have to cover your positions

Well, to be fair, I think it was a valid attempt and could have turned out to be a wise strategy. Often it is "buy the rumour, sell the news" that works best in Bitcoin. With GBTC starting to trade, bears could have smelled a similar opportunity as with Coinbases exchange back in January! It was a run-up, and as soon as it went live - Boom, the bubble burst, back to $220. Could've worked this time, as well...

It hasn't.

Surprised we havent seen some big market buys tbh.

Yeah, it hasn't, which is good. But one is always wiser in retrospect! I'm actually quite relieved and almost surprised that we haven't seen a dumpfest as soon as GBTC went live. But them trading at 50% over spot price seems to be good news for a change. What about that incredible wall on Stamp?

1500 coins? Stamp is on life support tbh.

I agree that stamp does look like it's struggling quite a bit, especially when it's giving away promo codes, and waiving trading fees for a longer period of time after the incident in January. But on the other side, these asks are real, and people can buy those coins for that price. It's not as if this is some fake offer or something.

[xyzzy099]

Yes, Socialism is a very effective way to gain the hearts and minds of the people, no doubt.

And a very effective way of running an economy which is what I was driving at.

Well, as you can probably tell by my signature, I would strongly disagree about that - but experience tells me that we will probably not resolve that argument here

[NewLiberty]

And a very effective way of running an economy which is what I was driving at.

Sure, but that is a horrible job for a government to be doing.  It works well until it doesn't.  When it fails it is catastrophic due to the massive bundling of services within the government institution.  It becomes the opposite of anti-fragile.

Building tanks out of glass is a very effective way of seeing the enemy from within the tank also.  It is just not the right job for it to be doing.

[Fatman3001]

I was not implying any kind of value judgement at all - just relating historical fact.

EDIT:  I realized I did not answer your point.  It is a fact that capitalists can practice a little socialism, socialists can practice a little capitalism, and either can be practiced to varying degrees by both good and evil men.  We do not live in a binary universe.

Your edit is pretty much what I was trying to say. There is nothing inherently wrong with Socialism. The Reich's (amazing) initial success in WW2 was, in large part, due to its socialist aspects: state taking control of the industry, subsidized scientific research, etc., etc. It's the "Nationalist" part that made nazis ...unlovable. The whole racial purity, eugenics, antisemitism, lebensraum at any cost etc. The "socialism" part worked like a charm

Yes, Socialism is a very effective way to gain the hearts and minds of the people, no doubt.

And a very effective way of running an economy which is what I was driving at.

Your responses seem to suggest that you read my initial post as implying that socialism was evil because Nazis were socialists.  I certainly never said anything like that.  I just pointed out that they were, in fact, socialists, both by their own claim, and demonstrably by many of their social and economic policies.

I corrected Fatman3001 by pointing out that, at least technically, nazis *were* socialist. So yeah, I'm with you there.

You two were getting on my tits a bit, but I see now that it's more a matter of confusion regarding terminology.

[derpinheimer]

Very low volume on GBTC, but its somewhat of a relief that they havent dumped down below the regular exchanges (yet?)