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

[oda.krell]

another false breakout eminent?

Not sure if "false" breakout is the best way to describe it, but yes, I expect price to go up somewhat shortly, oscillators say we're pretty oversold.

[phoenix1]

In a bubble collapse, there are often bag holders who are wary to sell at a big loss so hang on for a while and those who attempt to double-down. I got involved in one once (on the advice of someone else. I should have known better) and watched as it took about four months for my shares to drop from 40c to 1c or so after the bust.

I don't think that's what's happening with Bitcoin at all but it's simply not necessarily the case that the deflation after a bubble burst is all that quick.

I think you are pointing out the difference between 'panic' and 'hold and hope' ... quick vs slow deflation being the differing outcomes. No idea how this applies to Bitcoin right now, but I agree with the point you are making

I don't think it really does. This was a no-hope company with not really much going for it. I knew the mechanics of a pump & dump but thought my friend knew what he was talking about. I held because I was mentally incapable of locking-in my losses. Now it's not even worth my time to sell what I have. Bitcoin is pretty solid under the hood (in my opinion) and I'm holding less for the chance to "cash out" in the future but more because I believe it will be expensive to "cash in" once the full potential starts unfolding.

If/when CryptoCurrency becomes, stable, reliable and a way of life, all that would have been missed would be an opportunity to make money on the way there if Bitcoin is the winner.
Ultimately it's about utility, not profit, and if/when it gets there, there would be nothing lost ... it would be a way of life.

[Piper67]

The idea that people are "slowly" fleeing the market and "slowly" panic selling and that it's just an extended collapse is turning into a bad punchline. The only people left saying that are people trying to get back in at a discount.

I agree with about the oxymoronic use of 'slow' panic   ... that don't make much sense ...
However, I dont agree that anyone who wants to buy in at a lower level than this is trying to get in at a discount. There are a lot of assumptions in that. I know that is not exactly what you said, but similar things have been said by many people, so I am just pointing it out that it ain't necessarily so. I am sure there are people running round trying to scare people so they can buy cheaper something they believe to be worth more (I see them!). Some others amongst us just don't want to buy at these prices and see too much risk here and now.

In a bubble collapse, there are often bag holders who are wary to sell at a big loss so hang on for a while and those who attempt to double-down. I got involved in one once (on the advice of someone else. I should have known better) and watched as it took about four months for my shares to drop from 40c to 1c or so after the bust.

I don't think that's what's happening with Bitcoin at all but it's simply not necessarily the case that the deflation after a bubble burst is all that quick.

In the bubble burst from $32 to $2.50 I did not sell a single coin. Instead I've been buying increasingly more thinking: "you idiots, it's just bad press, the fundamentals are sound" and so on. A bit green behind the ears I was back then.

Of course in hindsight it would've been better to sell all and buy back in at $2.50.

On the other hand I recently talked to a guy I got to know in early 2011. He had been mining and sold everything in late 2011 only to discover bitcoin had gone to 3 digits. He now says: I won't buy, it's too expensive.

Just holding on to your coins is not the best thing to do, but not the worst thing either.

Yeah, but hindsight is also 20/20. I'm pretty sure (haven't done the hard maths, and probably won't cause it's the weekend) that if you start from the premise that you'll trade successfully only 50% of the time, buy and hold is a much better approach in the long run than trying to play the market swings.

[michaelGedi]

just thought I'd mention that I'm confused by this talk of a "deflating" bubble, and the fact that bitcoin is essentially "deflationary".


Can someone please explain?

[Rampion]

The idea that people are "slowly" fleeing the market and "slowly" panic selling and that it's just an extended collapse is turning into a bad punchline. The only people left saying that are people trying to get back in at a discount.

I agree with about the oxymoronic use of 'slow' panic   ... that don't make much sense ...
However, I dont agree that anyone who wants to buy in at a lower level than this is trying to get in at a discount. There are a lot of assumptions in that. I know that is not exactly what you said, but similar things have been said by many people, so I am just pointing it out that it ain't necessarily so. I am sure there are people running round trying to scare people so they can buy cheaper something they believe to be worth more (I see them!). Some others amongst us just don't want to buy at these prices and see too much risk here and now.

In a bubble collapse, there are often bag holders who are wary to sell at a big loss so hang on for a while and those who attempt to double-down. I got involved in one once (on the advice of someone else. I should have known better) and watched as it took about four months for my shares to drop from 40c to 1c or so after the bust.

I don't think that's what's happening with Bitcoin at all but it's simply not necessarily the case that the deflation after a bubble burst is all that quick.

In the bubble burst from $32 to $2.50 I did not sell a single coin. Instead I've been buying increasingly more thinking: "you idiots, it's just bad press, the fundamentals are sound" and so on. A bit green behind the ears I was back then.

Of course in hindsight it would've been better to sell all and buy back in at $2.50.

On the other hand I recently talked to a guy I got to know in early 2011. He had been mining and sold everything in late 2011 only to discover bitcoin had gone to 3 digits. He now says: I won't buy, it's too expensive.

Just holding on to your coins is not the best thing to do, but not the worst thing either.

I also follow your strategy. Of course is better to sell at the peak and buy back at the bottom, but it's kind of gambling, and losing Bitcoin is always a big mistake - both fundamentals and past history show you that.

Fundamentals will tell you that Bitcoin has a huge potential and that it's stronger than ever, but they cannot help you to predict peaks or bottoms.

Thus, I tend to buy as much Btc as I can with the limited fiat I have, and I almost never sell . My strategy is to increase as much my BTC stash risking the fewer Btc I can. I already took my gamble, I gambled on Bitcoin. Won't gamble my Btc looking for a bottom.

[Frozenlock]

Yeah, but hindsight is also 20/20. I'm pretty sure (haven't done the hard maths, and probably won't cause it's the weekend) that if you start from the premise that you'll trade successfully only 50% of the time, buy and hold is a much better approach in the long run than trying to play the market swings.

That's also what I thought for a long time... until I read both Goomboo's journal and this (from Technical Analysis of Stock Trends - 9th Edition):

As may be seen in the following table, replacing the table from Chapter 5,
the Dow Theory continued to provide its user an advantage over the
unaware Buy-and-Hold Investor. From its original investment of $100 in
1897 the Theory investment would have grown to $345,781.94 by December
31, 2005, with the long trade still open. The table below shows the details,
including the post-2000 bust drawdown. To my mind this table is a powerful
demonstration of the power of methodical technical investing.
By contrast, the investment of $100, if bought at the low, 29.64, and sold at
the historic high, 11762.71, in January 2000 would have grown to $39,685.03.

[Odalv]

The idea that people are "slowly" fleeing the market and "slowly" panic selling and that it's just an extended collapse is turning into a bad punchline. The only people left saying that are people trying to get back in at a discount.

I agree with about the oxymoronic use of 'slow' panic   ... that don't make much sense ...
However, I dont agree that anyone who wants to buy in at a lower level than this is trying to get in at a discount. There are a lot of assumptions in that. I know that is not exactly what you said, but similar things have been said by many people, so I am just pointing it out that it ain't necessarily so. I am sure there are people running round trying to scare people so they can buy cheaper something they believe to be worth more (I see them!). Some others amongst us just don't want to buy at these prices and see too much risk here and now.

In a bubble collapse, there are often bag holders who are wary to sell at a big loss so hang on for a while and those who attempt to double-down. I got involved in one once (on the advice of someone else. I should have known better) and watched as it took about four months for my shares to drop from 40c to 1c or so after the bust.

I don't think that's what's happening with Bitcoin at all but it's simply not necessarily the case that the deflation after a bubble burst is all that quick.

In the bubble burst from $32 to $2.50 I did not sell a single coin. Instead I've been buying increasingly more thinking: "you idiots, it's just bad press, the fundamentals are sound" and so on. A bit green behind the ears I was back then.

Of course in hindsight it would've been better to sell all and buy back in at $2.50.

On the other hand I recently talked to a guy I got to know in early 2011. He had been mining and sold everything in late 2011 only to discover bitcoin had gone to 3 digits. He now says: I won't buy, it's too expensive.

Just holding on to your coins is not the best thing to do, but not the worst thing either.

Yeah, but hindsight is also 20/20. I'm pretty sure (haven't done the hard maths, and probably won't cause it's the weekend) that if you start from the premise that you'll trade successfully only 50% of the time, buy and hold is a much better approach in the long run than trying to play the market swings.

bitcoin in paper wallet  vs  coins at exchange (under attack of government and hackers)

[Jaques]

another false breakout eminent?

Not sure if "false" breakout is the best way to describe it, but yes, I expect price to go up somewhat shortly, oscillators say we're pretty oversold.

who said up? altough mid-term bullish (long term i hope people wont need no more money) originally I expected a false breakout downwards before going up ...

now, as price did not establish above 120 due to low volume there is even more chance of a down swing ...

we shall see and act accordingly ...

[StarenseN]

I've seen all the $500, $1000 and even $300k coin statements.  I truly hope that happens for people but if that's the case, who are these people paying $500-$300k per coin?  Because I know who it's not going to be.   

As far as I understood this, your problem is the psychological barrier of "one unit for over 100 dollar", right? But does it really matter? I don't care if I get 1 BTC for 100 $ or only 1 for 1000 $, all that matters for me is the relative value and it's change: 20 % value gain is 20 % value gain, even if I pay 300k $ for "one unit", isn't it?

But I feel with you. I support that mBTC "movement".

Sweet Jesus it brings a tear to my eye to see weak bears leave.

That's like saying, “I used to invest $5,000 in BTC when it got me 65 coins, but now it only buys me 40 coins, that sucks!”. If you’re investing in BTC, that’s a good thing. It means they’re worth more. Lets say you take $10,000 to invest on NASDAQ. Hmm, Google, $880? Fuck that. Groupon, $6? Much better.  But wait, you could buy penny stocks and own 50,000 shares! Holy shit ballz!

BTC has been over $100 most of the last 2 months. People didn’t have a problem when we had plenty of volatility. People don’t like it now, because woops, the volatility didn’t bail you out. So you’re faced with buying back at a higher price point and having fewer coins. Then you’d have to deal with the realization you shouldn’t have sold. Instead of facing that fact, you’d rather go trade another Cryptocoin. I could use $5000 to buy 44 BTC, or I could buy 1,500 Litecoins! FUCK YAH IMMA MAKE IT RAIN LITECOINS!

If that 44 vs 1,500 makes it look like a better deal, heading to litecoins is probably a good idea. However I’d suggest instead of $5,000, drop your investment pool down to like $5. Emotionally that’s a much easier number to deal with when trading.

This is how I imagine weak bears moving to other markets to trade because triple digit BTC rocks their world.

Haha. This. Definitely.

It don't get it also when people are emotionally influenced by the price of a whole 10^8 satoshi bulk. So weak mind indeed

[phoenix1]

another false breakout eminent?

Not sure if "false" breakout is the best way to describe it, but yes, I expect price to go up somewhat shortly, oscillators say we're pretty oversold.

who said up? altough mid-term bullish (long term i hope people wont need no more money) originally I expected a false breakout downwards before going up ...

now, as price did not establish above 120 due to low volume there is even more chance of a down swing ...

we shall see and act accordingly ...

^^ this ... perhaps 

[dexX7]

It don't get it also when people are emotionally influenced by the price of a whole 10^8 satoshi bulk. So weak mind indeed

You can overcome this instinct by will power, but that's how our mind works. Maybe it's easier to associate Bitcoin with gold or something more valuable, but even that conflicts with Bitcoin as handy object to buy things. Especially if you remember the time, when 1 BTC was worth almost nothing.

[Richy_T]

Yeah, but hindsight is also 20/20. I'm pretty sure (haven't done the hard maths, and probably won't cause it's the weekend) that if you start from the premise that you'll trade successfully only 50% of the time, buy and hold is a much better approach in the long run than trying to play the market swings.

That's also what I thought for a long time... until I read both Goomboo's journal and this (from Technical Analysis of Stock Trends - 9th Edition):

As may be seen in the following table, replacing the table from Chapter 5,
the Dow Theory continued to provide its user an advantage over the
unaware Buy-and-Hold Investor. From its original investment of $100 in
1897 the Theory investment would have grown to $345,781.94 by December
31, 2005, with the long trade still open. The table below shows the details,
including the post-2000 bust drawdown. To my mind this table is a powerful
demonstration of the power of methodical technical investing.
By contrast, the investment of $100, if bought at the low, 29.64, and sold at
the historic high, 11762.71, in January 2000 would have grown to $39,685.03.

There's a big danger in comparing a model to historical data and assuming it will predict future performance.

The stock market is also a very different thing than it was in the 19th and most of the 20th century. Several orders of magnitude different.

[ChartBuddy]

[michaelGedi]

Yeah, but hindsight is also 20/20. I'm pretty sure (haven't done the hard maths, and probably won't cause it's the weekend) that if you start from the premise that you'll trade successfully only 50% of the time, buy and hold is a much better approach in the long run than trying to play the market swings.

That's also what I thought for a long time... until I read both Goomboo's journal and this (from Technical Analysis of Stock Trends - 9th Edition):

As may be seen in the following table, replacing the table from Chapter 5,
the Dow Theory continued to provide its user an advantage over the
unaware Buy-and-Hold Investor. From its original investment of $100 in
1897 the Theory investment would have grown to $345,781.94 by December
31, 2005, with the long trade still open. The table below shows the details,
including the post-2000 bust drawdown. To my mind this table is a powerful
demonstration of the power of methodical technical investing.
By contrast, the investment of $100, if bought at the low, 29.64, and sold at
the historic high, 11762.71, in January 2000 would have grown to $39,685.03.

There's a big danger in comparing a model to historical data and assuming it will predict future performance.

The stock market is also a very different thing than it was in the 19th and most of the 20th century. Several orders of magnitude different.

there is also one enourmous "if"

If I'd been friends with Satoshi and mined loads of coins on my sisters laptop, then sold at the £266 high... that holding strategy would have worked pretty well

[Coinseeker]

Reading many of these comments just reminds me of the blind, ideological and delusional thinking of the Napster cults.  Faith is necessary I get that but some of this stuff is just craziness.  The more I read these forums, the shorter Bitcoins lifespan becomes to me.  I''m currently at 2 years tops.  That's not because Bitcoin is not awesome, it's simply that too many people behind it are irrational and lack common sense and logic.  

I plan to make as much as I can off of it while I can, but my sights are already set on the "iTunes" of crypto.

[michaelGedi]

Reading many of these comments just reminds me of the blind, ideological and delusional thinking of the Napster cults.  Faith is necessary I get that but some of this stuff is just craziness.  The more I read these forums, the shorter Bitcoins lifespan becomes to me.  I''m currently at 2 years tops.  That's not because Bitcoin is not awesome, it's simply that too many people behind it are irrational and lack common sense and logic.  

I plan to make as much as I can off of it while I can, but my sights are already set on the "iTunes" of crypto.

what I'd like to know is as infrastructure does develop, who of the early adopters holding larger amounts of coins will actively invest their own profits, fiat or bitcoin into developing it further, and how many will just wait and see, while hoping to grow "richer". How many will just simply wait to "make as much of it as (they) can"...

I don't know much about ideological Napster cults, but I do know that they were onto something.


What bitcoin seems to be teaching the world is not "craziness", but yes, if it's not developed, and early adopters and those hoarding lots of coins do not actively participate in engaging with developing it's utility and infrastructure I can see it not lasting.

I know next to nothing about programming but I sense that it all needs a fair bit of work but this is not impossible. 


What would be interesting to see is that if it does only last "2 years", how the bitcoin will exchange, transfer or find new uses around that -end of lifespan- ... it's not like it can just drop dead.

[Jaques]

Reading many of these comments just reminds me of the blind, ideological and delusional thinking of the Napster cults.  Faith is necessary I get that but some of this stuff is just craziness.  The more I read these forums, the shorter Bitcoins lifespan becomes to me.  I''m currently at 2 years tops.  That's not because Bitcoin is not awesome, it's simply that too many people behind it are irrational and lack common sense and logic.  

I plan to make as much as I can off of it while I can, but my sights are already set on the "iTunes" of crypto.

lol

so what is the iTunes of crypto please?

[Hawker]

Reading many of these comments just reminds me of the blind, ideological and delusional thinking of the Napster cults.  Faith is necessary I get that but some of this stuff is just craziness.  The more I read these forums, the shorter Bitcoins lifespan becomes to me.  I''m currently at 2 years tops.  That's not because Bitcoin is not awesome, it's simply that too many people behind it are irrational and lack common sense and logic.  

I plan to make as much as I can off of it while I can, but my sights are already set on the "iTunes" of crypto.

All new ideas attract some people who think the end of the world is nigh.  That doesn't change the fact that some new ideas are good ideas.  Bitcoin is a good idea in my opinion as it provides an effective alternative to fiat currency.  As such, it only takes a few dictators or billionaires to use it to avoid confiscation and the value will shoot to well over $10,000 per coin.  

Concrete example: Hosni Mubarak had $70 billion confiscated when he lost power.  If he had been able to get even a quarter of that into Bitcoin, it would still be his and Bitcoin would be worth over $20,000 each.

So hang in there - this idea has more potential for massive gains than any other investment opportunity around today.

[molecular]

just thought I'd mention that I'm confused by this talk of a "deflating" bubble, and the fact that bitcoin is essentially "deflationary".


Can someone please explain?

you're being played.

"deflation" of a bubble has nothing to do with "deflation" of the money supply or prices.

[Jaques]

on topic;

t/a wise things are getting worse by the hour IMO

some buying or al least manipulation ( ) needed to get over the weekend without a dip to 105/110