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

[Sitarow]

[MAbtc]

Why so slow? Everything bitcoin related is blowing up at the moment.

Somebody hit me with some bear, please! Not enough bears around here -- this makes me worry.  

Ok a tiny bit of bear. Isn't all the good news priced in already?

No.

If you go out into the real world the vast majority of people still really haven't heard of bitcoin, let alone own any.  The more big news there is it'll push that many more people towards actually owning bitcoin and participating in the economy.  I don't think anyone here besides the trolliest of bears thinks that bitcoin has reached full market saturation.

That's not what he's saying --  nothing to do with market saturation. The market, by definition, has already been pricing in the news. Speculators aren't going to wait until the whole world knows about bitcoin to buy some.

[RationalSpeculator]

Why so slow? Everything bitcoin related is blowing up at the moment.

Somebody hit me with some bear, please! Not enough bears around here -- this makes me worry.  

Ok a tiny bit of bear. Isn't all the good news priced in already? That is why the price is at $210. Bitcoin has been in the world news so many times. If you are new to Bitcoin because of the current news and look back at the price, you are basically buying in at the top now, is that a good idea? I arrived late to the party in the beginning of may and waited, which was a good decision, bought in in july at around $63 on Bitstamp, a bit lucky though.

And this $27 to $855,000 story, I am sure will give a lot of people an arriving late to the party feeling, so they can't be bothered.

You are right. I may add that price is far above long term, already exponential, growth line (around $80), and returns this year are now equally high as 2011 year (1300%). I would think that percentage increases must go down over time as market cap goes up, so indeed: risky.

However, it is possible that adoption, and price, follow an S curve and that we are now in the first curve where adoption, and price, actually go up faster and faster. This means the uprise of 2013 would be considerably stronger percentage wise, not weaker as the similar 2011 rise.

In case of doubt choose for the side of safety. Question is, from which perspective: that bitcoin is money, or fiat is money?

[mccorvic]

Why so slow? Everything bitcoin related is blowing up at the moment.

Somebody hit me with some bear, please! Not enough bears around here -- this makes me worry.  

Ok a tiny bit of bear. Isn't all the good news priced in already?

No.

If you go out into the real world the vast majority of people still really haven't heard of bitcoin, let alone own any.  The more big news there is it'll push that many more people towards actually owning bitcoin and participating in the economy.  I don't think anyone here besides the trolliest of bears thinks that bitcoin has reached full market saturation.

That's not what he's saying --  nothing to do with market saturation. The market, by definition, has already been pricing in the news. Speculators aren't going to wait until the whole world knows about bitcoin to buy some.

That is what he's saying. He asked if the news has been priced in. It hasn't. Why? Because the people who will be buying/using bitcoin are just now reading it.

I mean, unless you think those people woke up yesterday and thought "Man, I'm going to read something tomorrow. Better buy today!"

[Tzupy]

Somebody hit me with some bear, please! Not enough bears around here -- this makes me worry.  

If the 233$ peak was wave 5, and we saw the 3 down sub-sub-waves, followed by 2 up sub-sub-waves, of which
the second is much larger than the first, then we should see another 3 down sub-sub-waves.
Those new 3 down don't have to look like the previous 3 down, but if they do, we are on a descending trend.
If they look different, then it's possible to resume an uptrend and reach an ATH.
Right now, we already are in the 4th sub-sub-sub-wave of the second sub-sub-wave, so I expect to go down.
But for now the Chinese keep buying and Gox and other exchanges struggle to follow.
Maybe the Chinese will write a new chapter to the EW theory, exceptions to the rules?

You sure about that?

That's my analysis, after looking at several scenarios. But with bitcoin I can't be truly sure about the future moves of the market.
Just wait a bit, maybe the Chinese will overturn the normal wave pattern. If enough fiat enters their exchanges, and more panic buy follows, it may be possible.

[MAbtc]

Why so slow? Everything bitcoin related is blowing up at the moment.

Somebody hit me with some bear, please! Not enough bears around here -- this makes me worry.  

Ok a tiny bit of bear. Isn't all the good news priced in already?

No.

If you go out into the real world the vast majority of people still really haven't heard of bitcoin, let alone own any.  The more big news there is it'll push that many more people towards actually owning bitcoin and participating in the economy.  I don't think anyone here besides the trolliest of bears thinks that bitcoin has reached full market saturation.

That's not what he's saying --  nothing to do with market saturation. The market, by definition, has already been pricing in the news. Speculators aren't going to wait until the whole world knows about bitcoin to buy some.

That is what he's saying. He asked if the news has been priced in. It hasn't. Why? Because the people who will be buying/using bitcoin are just now reading it.

I mean, unless you think those people woke up yesterday and thought "Man, I'm going to read something tomorrow. Better buy today!"

You're speaking as if "new blood" exists in a vacuum outside of the rest of the market, as if traders haven't been speculating on this news at all. That's ridiculous. Sure, new blood is entering the market. Much of it won't have gotten money to the exchanges, either, by the time we see a reversal. But, according to your theory, because of news they read last week or last month, they'll keep buying. Right?

[bassclef]

400+ bid wall up

[TERA]

Its still possible that the Chinese exchanges are just full of day traders and manipulators. Its not like any of us have been to China (or have you?) and actually  verified that Chinese are buying up and holding large amounts of coins. The charts don't lie though, and the bearish wedge is worrying me.

[mccorvic]

You're speaking as if "new blood" exists in a vacuum outside of the rest of the market, as if traders haven't been speculating on this news at all. That's ridiculous. Sure, new blood is entering the market. Much of it won't have gotten money to the exchanges, either, by the time we see a reversal. But, according to your theory, because of news they read last week or last month, they'll keep buyingbe more inclined to buy. Right?

You're actually supporting my point.  

#1 is the time delay you mentioned.  We really don't know what the incoming money will look like, be it flood or trickle.  Traders have been proven time and again to not have any ability to tell the future than anyone else so they cannot "price in" anything.

#2 people won't buy anything the first time they hear of bitcoin.  The odds of them starting up increases with sustained and interesting news articles.  No one here yesterday thought the bitcoin-buying-apartment story would be front page reddit material today.  Who knows what news will come out tomorrow.  Will the price go up $100 because this creates a ripple that will eventually catch the eye of some uber whale? I dunno. The "traders" don't either.  

EDIT: Though, if we really are talking about the news from a month ago, then I could accept that the price could be mostly set in.  I'm talking more about this general surge of news we're experiencing now.

[Sitarow]

7 Day Trading Volume

MtGox,
112,250BTC Sold
102,759BTC Bought
215,010BTC Total Volume
<- 4%

Bitstamp,
52,755BTC Sold
58,750BTC Bought
111,506BTC Total Volume
5% ->

BTC-China,
86,913BTC Sold
84,709BTC Bought
171,623BTC Total Volume
<- 1%

BTC-e,
43,509BTC Sold
44,318BTC Bought
87,827BTC Total Volume
1% ->

VirtEx,
2,348BTC Sold
3,302BTC Bought
5,651BTC Total Volume
17% ->

[ChartBuddy]

[MAbtc]

You're speaking as if "new blood" exists in a vacuum outside of the rest of the market, as if traders haven't been speculating on this news at all. That's ridiculous. Sure, new blood is entering the market. Much of it won't have gotten money to the exchanges, either, by the time we see a reversal. But, according to your theory, because of news they read last week or last month, they'll keep buyingbe more inclined to buy. Right?

You're actually supporting my point.  

#1 is the time delay you mentioned.  We really don't know what the incoming money will look like, be it flood or trickle.  Traders have been proven time and again to not have any ability to tell the future than anyone else so they cannot "price in" anything.

#2 people won't buy anything the first time they hear of bitcoin.  The odds of them starting up increases with sustained and interesting news articles.  No one here yesterday thought the bitcoin-buying-apartment story would be front page reddit material today.  Who knows what news will come out tomorrow.  Will the price go up $100 because this creates a ripple that will eventually catch the eye of some uber whale? I dunno. The "traders" don't either.  

Re #1, again, you're talking about something completely different. Sure, traders are usually wrong. But they have certainly been trading on recent news. So yes, by definition, the news has been priced in. You and I have no idea how much new money is/will be coming in, so you telling me that "old news will be priced in at X time" is ridiculous, on its face.

When speculators expect a rise in exposure/adoption/new blood, they buy. That's exactly what "pricing in the news" is. That doesn't mean that new investors won't enter, and it doesn't mean that the trend won't reverse.

Re #2, yeah, who knows what will happen tomorrow? Maybe following a momentum shift, there will be a slew of bad news that will propel the market downwards in tune with momentum. What does that have to do with anything? Are you telling me that in that case, we will have to wait weeks or months for the market to price in the news? Markets are dynamic -- they don't sit around waiting for people to twiddle their thumbs.

You're talking about this as if this is just a linear process: people read news, they learn about bitcoin, then they buy some. You take into account absolutely no market activity outside of that.

[mccorvic]

"old news will be priced in at X time" is ridiculous, on its face.

That's what I am arguing against and, from my perspective is what you are arguing FOR but just saying X=Right now

When speculators expect a rise in exposure/adoption/new blood, they buy. That's exactly what "pricing in the news" is. That doesn't mean that new investors won't enter, and it doesn't mean that the trend won't reverse.

The premise here is one I don't buy and that's speculators alone determine price.  I believe that speculators have 0 actual knowledge and just flail about and react more irrationally then they'd like you to believe.  I know this isn't a popular opinion here and wont' bother arguing it

Re #2, yeah, who knows what will happen tomorrow? Maybe following a momentum shift, there will be a slew of bad news that will propel the market downwards in tune with momentum. What does that have to do with anything? Are you telling me that in that case, we will have to wait weeks or months for the market to price in the news? Markets are dynamic -- they don't sit around waiting for people to twiddle their thumbs.

You're talking about this as if this is just a linear process: people read news, they learn about bitcoin, then they buy some. You take into account absolutely no market activity outside of that.

No, of course there are a lot more forces at play then JUST this linear process and I'm taking the idea of being "priced in" in a much longer term view than I think you are.  The ripples from any single news spread out and can have larger reactions than just the immediate future.  It seems to me that the idea of "priced in" that you are trying to define is by definition whatever the price is right now and that just doesn't seem useful to discuss.  

For example, prior to the reward halving when the price was still like 7ish there were people saying that the halving was already "priced in" and the minute the halving happened and the price didn't instantly double they said "told you so it was already priced in!" In my opinion, the slow price increase that followed the month or two after is a result of this halving and it just had a delayed effect.  

We are in real uncharted territory with bitcoin and we really don't know what events will have what impacts.  Even the most experienced trader (who can hardly handle real markets) has no prayer of accurately predicting pricing.  

[wobber]

$215 is being tested. Surpassing soon.

[SheHadMANHands]

It seems pretty obvious, at least to me, that new users coming in and purchasing BTC pushes the price up.  These new users just buy.  They don't ask "uhh but I guess I shouldn't buy, my future buy has already been priced in by others!"

This does induce bubbles (overbuying).

[windjc]

"old news will be priced in at X time" is ridiculous, on its face.

That's what I am arguing against and, from my perspective is what you are arguing FOR but just saying X=Right now

When speculators expect a rise in exposure/adoption/new blood, they buy. That's exactly what "pricing in the news" is. That doesn't mean that new investors won't enter, and it doesn't mean that the trend won't reverse.

The premise here is one I don't buy and that's speculators alone determine price.  I believe that speculators have 0 actual knowledge and just flail about and react more irrationally then they'd like you to believe.  I know this isn't a popular opinion here and wont' bother arguing it

Re #2, yeah, who knows what will happen tomorrow? Maybe following a momentum shift, there will be a slew of bad news that will propel the market downwards in tune with momentum. What does that have to do with anything? Are you telling me that in that case, we will have to wait weeks or months for the market to price in the news? Markets are dynamic -- they don't sit around waiting for people to twiddle their thumbs.

You're talking about this as if this is just a linear process: people read news, they learn about bitcoin, then they buy some. You take into account absolutely no market activity outside of that.

No, of course there are a lot more forces at play then JUST this linear process and I'm taking the idea of being "priced in" in a much longer term view than I think you are.  The ripples from any single news spread out and can have larger reactions than just the immediate future.  It seems to me that the idea of "priced in" that you are trying to define is by definition whatever the price is right now and that just doesn't seem useful to discuss.  

For example, prior to the reward halving when the price was still like 7ish there were people saying that the halving was already "priced in" and the minute the halving happened and the price didn't instantly double they said "told you so it was already priced in!" In my opinion, the slow price increase that followed the month or two after is a result of this halving and it just had a delayed effect.  

We are in real uncharted territory with bitcoin and we really don't know what events will have what impacts.  Even the most experienced trader (who can hardly handle real markets) has no prayer of accurately predicting pricing.  

I generally agree with you. You only have to spend a few days in the "speculation" forum to understand that Bitcoin day traders on the whole are not NEARLY as sophisticated as stock market or other large market day traders. So "pricing in" is not something that happens here much IF AT ALL.

Add to this the illiquidity of the markets and the delayed effect of "press" and subsequent new monies entering the exchanges is obvious.

This is such a SMALL and NEW marketplace. Even a relatively small amount (< $5 million) of new capital coming into the markets can have a huge effects over a couple of weeks.

Compare that to a normal exchange, where an investor can just call up his portfolio manager and ask for funds to be switched in <24 hours or where a construction worker can log onto his mobile etrade account and switch funds around, and the idea of "pricing in" or "buy the rumor, sell the news" in BTC markets is laughable - its just not there yet.

PLUS we have to add in the effect that different countries have different news. We don't really know what's going on in China and they don't really know what's going on in the West.

But, generally, this IS an unpopular view on this forum, for obvious reasons.

[samson]

Where are all the 'chumps' who buy at the ATH+ going to come from ?

[molecular]

"old news will be priced in at X time" is ridiculous, on its face.

That's what I am arguing against and, from my perspective is what you are arguing FOR but just saying X=Right now

[...]

I firmly believe in this "fresh blood" theory (called the January 2013 rally based on that back in November '12, just to pad myself on the back)

The money starts flowing 2 weeks after the news exposure. Just look at when we started to see above-average increase after the SilkRoad arrest news... 2 weeks after that. Of course 2 weeks is just the start, some people take longer (6 weeks) or need even more time to make up their minds.

The news is plentiful and positive. Has been for a while now. I think we'll see quite a massive inflow of new money going forward... a self-accellerating effect (all-time high will be broken),... the new hidden rocket.

Hold on to your coins!

[SheHadMANHands]

Where are all the 'chumps' who buy at the ATH+ going to come from ?

Good point.  Clearly no ATH should ever be surpassed, in any market..    

[MAbtc]

"old news will be priced in at X time" is ridiculous, on its face.

That's what I am arguing against and, from my perspective is what you are arguing FOR but just saying X=Right now

You're basically saying that news is never priced in. Where does that get us? I'm saying that the market -- quite obviously -- reacts to news. The fact that markets are dynamic and news ubiquitously available (i.e. traders don't live under a rock) suggests that it is constantly being priced in. This is by definition. What I'm saying is that recent news suggests increased exposure and thus increased future demand -- speculators are accounting for that.

You're saying that good news drives demand, and that we haven't seen that reflected in the market. That's fine. But speculators pricing in news ≠ demand.

When speculators expect a rise in exposure/adoption/new blood, they buy. That's exactly what "pricing in the news" is. That doesn't mean that new investors won't enter, and it doesn't mean that the trend won't reverse.

The premise here is one I don't buy and that's speculators alone determine price.  I believe that speculators have 0 actual knowledge and just flail about and react more irrationally then they'd like you to believe.  I know this isn't a popular opinion here and wont' bother arguing it

What determines price if not those who trade? The "price" you seem to allude to is not the "price" reflected on the market (by exchanges). Hence, our conversation.

Re #2, yeah, who knows what will happen tomorrow? Maybe following a momentum shift, there will be a slew of bad news that will propel the market downwards in tune with momentum. What does that have to do with anything? Are you telling me that in that case, we will have to wait weeks or months for the market to price in the news? Markets are dynamic -- they don't sit around waiting for people to twiddle their thumbs.

You're talking about this as if this is just a linear process: people read news, they learn about bitcoin, then they buy some. You take into account absolutely no market activity outside of that.

No, of course there are a lot more forces at play then JUST this linear process and I'm taking the idea of being "priced in" in a much longer term view than I think you are.  The ripples from any single news spread out and can have larger reactions than just the immediate future.  It seems to me that the idea of "priced in" that you are trying to define is by definition whatever the price is right now and that just doesn't seem useful to discuss.  

For example, prior to the reward halving when the price was still like 7ish there were people saying that the halving was already "priced in" and the minute the halving happened and the price didn't instantly double they said "told you so it was already priced in!" In my opinion, the slow price increase that followed the month or two after is a result of this halving and it just had a delayed effect.  

We are in real uncharted territory with bitcoin and we really don't know what events will have what impacts.  Even the most experienced trader (who can hardly handle real markets) has no prayer of accurately predicting pricing.  

This is the disconnect. The very meaning of the words "priced in" indicates "at the present time". If something "will be priced in in the future" then it is, obviously, not priced in currently. I think there is a clear difference between news -- upon which speculators react dynamically -- and future demand spurned by that news over time.