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

[ivomm]

[1714832907]

1714832907

[1714832907]

1714832907

[1714832907]

1714832907

[1714832907]

1714832907

[LUCKMCFLY]

It's interesting, I hadn't seen it like that ..

#BTC #BITCOIN
This will blow your mind! 🤯

I Tried to visualise it

You see those gains? every cycle the gains get divided by 3 BUT the time-span get multiplied by 3!!

If we break ATH expect 2000% / 3 = 666% 😈

New ATH = 130K

Amazing huh?!

Please RT share this shit!!!!!!

Referring to:

$BTC needed:
👉625 days to break 2011 ATH
👉1245 days to break 2013 ATH
👉It's been only 680 days since ATH of 2017

Think about it for a sec...
Remember Fibonacci?

625 + 625 = 1250!
1250 + 1250 = 2500 - 680 = 1820 day left.

🎯  October 2024

@BTC_JackSparrow think level. 🧠

Source: https://twitter.com/888Velvet/status/1189029370381426690

[fillippone]

because we already know that Litecoin moved earlier than in previous cycles when it had its halving.

Stock to flow is irrelevant for LTC.
Whatever made LTC moving north around the halving time, it wasn't the SF, or halving itself.

Per request and despite the fact that I think that alts theoretically don't have 'unforgeable costliness' .. I decided to make a #Litecoin #LTC stock-to-flow model (data from Sep 2013). R2 is low .. 25%. Current S2F value is $27 (after 2019 halving $65). Can somebody pls verify?!

https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/1137352369321234432?s=20

Two posts, two PlanB tweet. I like that!

[Bitcoinaire]

It's interesting, I hadn't seen it like that ..

#BTC #BITCOIN
This will blow your mind! 🤯

I Tried to visualise it

You see those gains? every cycle the gains get divided by 3 BUT the time-span get multiplied by 3!!

If we break ATH expect 2000% / 3 = 666% 😈

New ATH = 130K

Amazing huh?!

Please RT share this shit!!!!!!

Referring to:

$BTC needed:
👉625 days to break 2011 ATH
👉1245 days to break 2013 ATH
👉It's been only 680 days since ATH of 2017

Think about it for a sec...
Remember Fibonacci?

625 + 625 = 1250!
1250 + 1250 = 2500 - 680 = 1820 day left.

🎯  October 2024

@BTC_JackSparrow think level. 🧠

Source: https://twitter.com/888Velvet/status/1189029370381426690

Cycles are not getting longer. We just had a 40% gain in 1 day, last 2 times that occurred was when bitcoin was $5 and the other time was when it was $.040.

[realr0ach]

Stock to flow is irrelevant for LTC.

You people are the most dishonest, retarded, fucking scammers I've ever seen in my entire life.  It's not possible for this 'stock to flow' nonsense to be completely invalid for Litecoin and every other coin and work ONLY for Bitcoin. They're all the same 'asset' class - I use the term "asset" extremely loosely because imaginary timestamps are not an asset - so it either has to work for all of them or none of them.  It obviously works for none of them because a stock to flow model only works on physical commodity resources humans actually need with some type of inelastic demand.

[Lauda]

Cycles are not getting longer. We just had a 40% gain in 1 day, last 2 times that occurred was when bitcoin was $5 and the other time was when it was $.040.

Humans are flawed imbeciles. If you look for a specific pattern long enough, you will find it given your bias. It is the exact opposite of what you should be doing, i.e. trying to explain the data objectively and not look for your most-beloved pattern. Most of the TA and 'history repeats itself' or 'history doesn't repeat itself' is nonsense both ways.

[Alexander_Z]

It's interesting, I hadn't seen it like that ..

#BTC #BITCOIN
This will blow your mind! 🤯

I Tried to visualise it

You see those gains? every cycle the gains get divided by 3 BUT the time-span get multiplied by 3!!

If we break ATH expect 2000% / 3 = 666% 😈

New ATH = 130K

Amazing huh?!

Please RT share this shit!!!!!!

Referring to:

$BTC needed:
👉625 days to break 2011 ATH
👉1245 days to break 2013 ATH
👉It's been only 680 days since ATH of 2017

Think about it for a sec...
Remember Fibonacci?

625 + 625 = 1250!
1250 + 1250 = 2500 - 680 = 1820 day left.

🎯  October 2024

@BTC_JackSparrow think level. 🧠

Source: https://twitter.com/888Velvet/status/1189029370381426690

Sadly, this may be correct: the price will fluctuate in the region from upper 4 digits to lower 5 digits for years.

[Lauda]

Sadly, this may be correct: the price will fluctuate in the region from upper 4 digits to lower 5 digits for years.

Complete shitpost.

Cycles are not getting longer. We just had a 40% gain in 1 day, last 2 times that occurred was when bitcoin was $5 and the other time was when it was $.040.

Humans are flawed imbeciles. If you look for a specific pattern long enough, you will find it given your bias. It is the exact opposite of what you should be doing, i.e. trying to explain the data objectively and not look for your most-beloved pattern. Most of the TA and 'history repeats itself' or 'history doesn't repeat itself' is nonsense both ways.

Addition: https://threesixty360.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/one-two-three-four-six-again-and-then-again/

[realr0ach]

Lauda, while you're here, since you provide the invaluable resource of angry, cat lady demographic, could you give us your viewpoint on the following subject?  A civilization is incapable of functioning with divorce rates at what they are, and women initiate 70% of them, while - here's the kicker - COLLEGE educated women initiate 90% of divorces.  Isn't this proof that educating women is completely pointless and causes nothing but instability? 

One might attempt to correlate this number with the hypergamous nature of women, and that giving them a way to accumulate wealth and power leaves them with no viable way to practice hypergamy since they have no viable hypergamous mate to marry up to, thus giving women no reason to exist.

[fillippone]

Stock to flow is irrelevant for LTC.

You people are the most dishonest, retarded, fucking scammers I've ever seen in my entire life.  

<...>

Forced to reply as you are calling me in a way I don't like.

If only you would use some of your time to actually read about the model (plenty of places to do that, one of those being here), instead of repeating the same old story, you would understand why this model is not applicable to Litecoin.

[goldkingcoiner]

Lauda, while you're here, since you provide the invaluable resource of angry, cat lady demographic, could you give us your viewpoint on the following subject?  A civilization is incapable of functioning with divorce rates at what they are, and women initiate 70% of them, while - here's the kicker - COLLEGE educated women initiate 90% of divorces.  Isn't this proof that educating women is completely pointless and causes nothing but instability?  

One might attempt to correlate this number with the hypergamous nature of women, and that giving them a way to accumulate wealth and power leaves them with no viable way to practice hypergamy since they have no viable hypergamous mate to marry up to, thus giving women no reason to exist.

Do you know about the mouse utopia experiment of John B. Calhoun? What happens to mice in a closed space with all the food they could want? As population grows, birthrate starts falling to almost 0. Same thing can be applied to humans, with Earth as our closed off space.

Evolutionary traits are kicking in to stop overpopulation. All natural. Might drive us to extinction, might not.

[realr0ach]

Stock to flow is irrelevant for LTC.

You people are the most dishonest, retarded, fucking scammers I've ever seen in my entire life.  It's not possible for this 'stock to flow' nonsense to be completely invalid for Litecoin and every other coin and work ONLY for Bitcoin. They're all the same 'asset' class - I use the term "asset" extremely loosely because imaginary timestamps are not an asset - so it either has to work for all of them or none of them.  It obviously works for none of them because a stock to flow model only works on physical commodity resources humans actually need with some type of inelastic demand.

Forced to reply as you are calling me in a way I don't like.

If only you would use some of your time to actually read about the model (plenty of places to do that, one of those being here), instead of repeating the same old story, you would understand why this model is not applicable to Litecoin.

No, you're parroting a talking point that you did not create yourself and have no idea how this talking point is even supposed to work because you think pushing this propaganda will be beneficial to your bottom line when there's no rationale whatsoever behind it.  You, Micgoossens, and several other cavemen in the thread do this, constantly parroting bogus shit from Twitter pump and dump scammers.

What is your rationale for why 'stock to flow' would work on Bitcoin when it doesn't work on ANY other digital crapcoin?  You don't have one.  You're either required to be a dishonest scammer or negro-level IQ to not be able to realize scarcity in vacuum for scarcity's sake is meaningless.  The idea of stock to flow requires pairing scarcity with inelastic demand.  To have inelastic demand requires being an actual physical resource humans need, not an IMAGINARY timestamp.  TIMESTAMPS are not in short supply ANYWHERE.

Stock to flow doesn't work on things like Garbage Pail Kid trading cards or digital shitcoins because as the price rises, there is no inelastic demand forcing the item to still be bought; demand has an inverse correlation to price in the case of these instruments.  Digital shitcoins are not the unit of account of anything, nor are they resources.

[Lauda]

-snip-

The conclusion from that is: The existence of men is pointless and will soon not be necessary. Our future AI overlords will realize this, and shall start exterminating males as soon as the tables turn. Don't try creating arguments mr. r0ach when your IQ is even challenged by early monkey specimen.

[realr0ach]

Lauda, while you're here, since you provide the invaluable resource of angry, cat lady demographic, could you give us your viewpoint on the following subject?  A civilization is incapable of functioning with divorce rates at what they are, and women initiate 70% of them, while - here's the kicker - COLLEGE educated women initiate 90% of divorces.  Isn't this proof that educating women is completely pointless and causes nothing but instability?

One might attempt to correlate this number with the hypergamous nature of women, and that giving them a way to accumulate wealth and power leaves them with no viable way to practice hypergamy since they have no viable hypergamous mate to marry up to, thus giving women no reason to exist.

The conclusion from that is: The existence of men is pointless and will soon not be necessary. Our future AI overlords will realize this, and shall start exterminating males as soon as the tables turn. Don't try creating arguments mr. r0ach when your IQ is even challenged by early monkey specimen.

Your statement overlooks the inconvenient fact that traditionally the main reason women seek out men and marriage in general is entirely an insurance policy/safety net.  The man was replaced by big government as that safety net, hence women's now instant flight to divorce at the first sign of minor inconvenience or non-asymmetrical benefit in their favor.  

For this paradigm to remain true, big government (which women always selfishly vote for in their own interest) would need to not only continue in current form, but get even larger due to women as a whole being a net negative contributor to a nation over the course of their lives.  In other words, if the man is not footing the bill, the woman's net negative economic contribution to the nation would attempt to be extracted from an ever-expanding state.  But this ignores the fact no matter what taxes are set to, the state only ever manages to pull out 20% from it's serfs.  So you're already at 'peak-state' and 'peak-women'.

[_javi_]

It has been accepted that 2017 bullrun was cancelled by CME and co, with their shorting tools.

Then, all the parabolas using that 2017 peak should be invalidated.
It could have been way higher..
And "they" could cancel next bullrun.. or not.

Funny interpolations.. trying to predict such an emotional market.


To be honest, nobody knows what the honey badger is doing next, neither when nor how high it could climb ...

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Looks like we might dip below $9,000. I don’t have any spare fiat left so not going to buy the dip if we go below. Planning to buy 0.25BTC next week, let’s see where the price goes  

[realr0ach]

It has been accepted that 2017 bullrun was cancelled by CME and co, with their shorting tools.

Then, all the parabolas using that 2017 peak should be invalidated.

You base your premise on numerous false assumptions and pretend the same people weren't working both sides of the trade.  Goldman Sachs and other traditional scam entities were deep into the digital shitcoin market around six months to a year before the Ethereum pump and dump scam launch, which Goldman Sachs bought most of the premine for.  So the Jewish scam financiers were one of the reasons the price went up in the first place.  They were pumping the garbage they owned trying to dump it on people at higher prices.  

After dumping all their garbage they might have taken some shorts out, I have no idea.  But unless those shorts were taken out on an exchange that actually settles in Bitcoin instead of dollars, it would have no actual effect on real Bitcoin prices without also attempting to manipulate the underlying market.  So, no, "Donald Trump" is not the cause of Bitcoin imploding.  But entities like Goldman Sachs were the cause of the rise and fall.

[_javi_]

Looks like we might dip below $9,000. I don’t have any spare fiat left so not going to buy the dip if we go below. Planning to buy 0.25BTC next week, let’s see where the price goes 

So far we are bouncing nicely on 9k.. until some beartard unloads big.

Aaaanything could happen!

go BTC go!!

[ssmc2]

Let's get this CME gap coverage over with then get back in bull mode.

[realr0ach]

Bitcoin is looking to overthrow women as the biggest form of malinvestment.  Trollgoossens and LFC_Bitcoin have decided to all-in on both to make sure they don't miss out on whoever the winner is.