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

[notme]

the plunge is coming, everyone must make the pledge!

its now or never lemmings.

They need some encouragement to actually make the leap:

A Canadian Broadcasting Corporation documentary, Cruel Camera, found the lemmings used for White Wilderness were flown from Hudson Bay to Calgary, Alberta, Canada, where they did not jump off the cliff, but were in fact launched off the cliff using a turntable.

[1714328883]

1714328883

[1714328883]

1714328883

[JorgeStolfi]

I don't understand this game! Realy, pure madness  

It is actually quite simple: the current market price is a kind of mean of the guesses of all traders about what will be the market price in the future.

Yes, mathematically that would be called a recursive definition with no basis (i.e. without a non-recursive "bottom case").

In the stock market, analysis of a company's business and market provides an estimate of its future profits, and those in turn provide a base value that can be considered the "bottom case" of that recursion.

In the commodity market, predictions of the "destructive" demand for the commodity (by industry and consumers, as opposed to traders) play the same role.

Of course the base value predictions may be quite wrong, and (as in the case of gold and tulips) the speculative value may swamp the base value.

Cryptocurrencies pay no dividends and have no "destructive" demand. So they have no base price to anchor the speculation, even remotely.

That is why their prices are so volatile and unpredictable.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[MAbtc]

Morning.

Was getting nervous going to sleep last night with Gox pushing new local high....

Gox, BTCE:

[Ashitank]

Morning.

Was getting nervous going to sleep last night with Gox pushing new local high....

What are your next targets MAbtc , up or down & what price points @ stamp.

[MAbtc]

Morning.

Was getting nervous going to sleep last night with Gox pushing new local high....

What are your next targets MAbtc , up or down & what price points @ stamp.

I don't know, I'm trying to figure things out, Huobi confuses the shit out of me.... My only target that got hit was BTC-E $824-->$854. Most of my targets are not super short-term and I am hesitant to share them yet. 

My mid-term bearish outlook hasn't changed.

[pdawg]

[Erdogan]

A more libertarian analysis of the phenomenon from three years ago here

http://www.samizdata.net/2010/06/money-supply-th/

I'll just add that that article is a large part of why I jumped on Bitcoin as soon as I found out about it and understood its fundamentals.

Curious, what does the article say why this is bad? I can't make out any argument, just a prolonged statement that it is.

Oh and the analogies suck. (The fear mongering too)

The article says that at the same time credit is expanded in the housing and sovereign bond market, credit is sucked out of the private space. This is done through the banks, they have deposited their money with the fed. A dollar deposited with the fed, is multiple dollars removed from the private sector due to the fractional reserve banking money multiplier. The banks have done this because the fed started to pay interest on the voluntary excess reserves. The sum withdrawn from the private sector matches the expansion in government debt. This is bad, because it adds to the planned economy and reduces the free economy.

You are presenting a Circular argument.
In case you haven't noticed: Excess reserves aren't supposed to be in the public hand in the first place or part of any economy. And that they aren't suggests that the FED is doing something right.

No. Normal reserves are mandated by the fed, and is (was) used to regulate the money supply. Too much money in circulation, mandate higher reserves and vice versa. If the banks had more money, they would lend them in the market. It would not be rational to deposit them at the fed, because the fed did not pay interest, so not lending to the market would be a loss. The fed changed it policy, not by increasing the reserve requirement as usual, but by paying good interest of the deposits. They are called excess reserves because they are not mandatory.

[Nightowlace]

Totally off topic but seeing as how that happens often here I have a charity fundraiser going on here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=412327.0

If anyone can help out it would be greatly appreciated. Also if you guys want to drive the price up to $10k a coin that would be great as well considering we already have 1B donated and two Casascius coins pledged to be auctioned off to help fund it.

[aminorex]

Cryptocurrencies pay no dividends and have no "destructive" demand. So they have no base price to anchor the speculation, even remotely.

They have a fundamental value which is described by PQ=MV.
Destructive demand in this case means savings.  Dividends in this case means deflation.

[MikeH]

I've been thinking about the threat from banks - perhaps there isn't really one, I mean if you think of the banksters as individuals - if they were true beneficiaries of the current system of being able to print money out of thin air, they'd already be set for life..  most probably also work like politicians in only thinking short term and don't really care what happens down the track.

China's stance may just be a temporary as they wouldn't want any risk to the potential of becoming the or part of the next world reserve currency.

I dunno, maybe some at the top would like to see bitcoin squished but considering those at the top now would be inheritors rather than creators of this fraudulent system, perhaps they may be relieved to see the end of it - especially with all the attention its received in recent years.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Erdogan]

A more libertarian analysis of the phenomenon from three years ago here

http://www.samizdata.net/2010/06/money-supply-th/

I'll just add that that article is a large part of why I jumped on Bitcoin as soon as I found out about it and understood its fundamentals.

Curious, what does the article say why this is bad? I can't make out any argument, just a prolonged statement that it is.

Oh and the analogies suck. (The fear mongering too)

The article says that at the same time credit is expanded in the housing and sovereign bond market, credit is sucked out of the private space. This is done through the banks, they have deposited their money with the fed. A dollar deposited with the fed, is multiple dollars removed from the private sector due to the fractional reserve banking money multiplier. The banks have done this because the fed started to pay interest on the voluntary excess reserves. The sum withdrawn from the private sector matches the expansion in government debt. This is bad, because it adds to the planned economy and reduces the free economy.

You are presenting a Circular argument.
In case you haven't noticed: Excess reserves aren't supposed to be in the public hand in the first place or part of any economy. And that they aren't suggests that the FED is doing something right.

No. Normal reserves are mandated by the fed, and is (was) used to regulate the money supply. Too much money in circulation, mandate higher reserves and vice versa. If the banks had more money, they would lend them in the market. It would not be rational to deposit them at the fed, because the fed did not pay interest, so not lending to the market would be a loss. The fed changed it policy, not by increasing the reserve requirement as usual, but by paying good interest of the deposits. They are called excess reserves because they are not mandatory.

Related to this - why it is bad - I noted a passage from chairman Bernanke in his farewell speech:

Of special concern is the reduction of productivity. Businesses hire more people now, to do the same thing as they did before with fewer people.


Free from memory. The reason for this development could very well be the distortions that the central planners introduce into the market with the low interest rate and public money going to privileged businesses.

[JorgeStolfi]

Now it is about 2:00 AM in China; all the Chinese traders (and their robots) must be sleeping, since Huobi's volume is (relatively) almost zero.

We should be able to see now what the price trend would be without China. 

[Nightowlace]

Now it is about 2:00 AM in China; all the Chinese traders (and their robots) must be sleeping, since Huobi's volume is (relatively) almost zero.

We should be able to see now what the price trend would be without China. 

If and when Bitcoin reaches tens of thousands of dollars each how disappointed will you be that you didn't invest?
I think you need to look at the long term potential of bitcoin being adopted as a method of transfer in money and a store of value.
Gold eft is a store of value based on nothing. If everyone were to want physical gold for their paper gold it would be impossible. So why not bitcoin?
Look at the ease of use, limited interference, and speed in which you can transfer funds. If I wanted to send my friend in London $1,000 USD it would cost me about $275 USD a trip to the local Western Union and more paperwork, identification and declarations than if I were going in to the hospital for a heart transplant.

With Bitcoin I can sit at home, in my boxers, log in too my wallet and transfer funds for less than 1%, no paperwork, and no more time than waiting for my Keurig to pour a nice hot cup of coffee.

Win win. HODL. Buy now before it's too late.

[JorgeStolfi]

If and when Bitcoin reaches tens of thousands of dollars each how disappointed will you be that you didn't invest?

I will be very disappointed, indeed.

As I will be if and when gold reaches 1,000,000 USD/ounce, or Apple stock rises to 1,000,000 USD/share.

I understand that many people like gambling; fine, but I don't. 

I understand that many people are optimistic about the future of Bitcoin; fine, but I am not.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[alexeft]

I understand that many people are optimistic about the future of Bitcoin; fine, but I am not.

Why is that?

[Nightowlace]

If and when Bitcoin reaches tens of thousands of dollars each how disappointed will you be that you didn't invest?

I will be very disappointed, indeed.

As I will be if and when gold reaches 1,000,000 USD/ounce, or Apple stock rises to 1,000,000 USD/share.

I understand that many people like gambling; fine, but I don't. 

I understand that many people are optimistic about the future of Bitcoin; fine, but I am not.

People who take risks are the ones typically rewarded. Even if you were to buy two bitcoins. If they double in price sell one and you've earned a free one. If they halve in price sell both and you lost half of your investment. It's a calculated risk with great reward potential.

[T.Stuart]

I understand that many people are optimistic about the future of Bitcoin; fine, but I am not.

For someone who isn't optimistic about the future of Bitcoin, you sure are around a lot. What are you doing? Research?