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

[JayJuanGee]

Wow.  This battle is epic and made me glad i dumped into that strange 514 wall? wtf was that guy thinking?

what a market.

breakout action ... do you go all in or wait for one more pullback? ... we're right on trend right now, might never see this low again is the psychological battleground.

I try to buy on the way down and sell on the way up... so as you may be able to tell, I am a little exhausted from buying for about 5 months.. .but I am NOT going to sell anytime soon.. maybe after we get into a more comfortable uptrend.... I may sell a little.

However, I agree that you are correct that we may never see this price again.. I just get a little worried to buy while the price is going up.. especially when I had bought so many BTC all the way down the downtrend.. especially starting below $610.

[Mervyn_Pumpkinhead]

First, that was nixon that condemned the dollar with deconnecting it from gold. He couldn t do otherwise because they had printed so many dollars that they couldn t reimbourse country that wanted to have gold for dollar.

Second, Greenspan was doing what bankers ask from him. that s why they put him here. Bernanke wasn t a greenspan v2! He is one of the people who had the best studied the 1929 crises and the united states have already decided to give a try to free money. Again he did what bankers asked him to do.

Third, ultra liberal doesn t mean to give all power to bankers. It s all about what people choose as a whole. We have to let the invisible hand of the market adjust absurd situations. (4 times more dollar since 2008 is just grotesk)

First, where the hell did this myth come from that it is a good thing when a currency is tied to gold. Gold is an  precious metal with strongly manipulated speculative value, that doesn't have much practical application. It was a good thing when the dollar tied itself more to oil then to gold, because a lot more depends on oil then it depends on gold.

If Greenspan gave the power to the private sector, then it's logical that those who are at the top of the private sector have the the most important vote on things. And every free person could also get to the top if they're smart enough and they work hard enough. This is capitalism, that decides power by fair competition and is about the survival of the fittest.
Most of the weak whiners don't exactly like free competition, because they aren't exactly competative, because they aren't smart enough and they don't want to work hard enough. They just wish that they would get rich by hodling bitcoins, without actually having to do any work and without being smart.
It's very hard to understand on what you meant on Bernanke wanting to try free money.

Ultra-liberal in this context meant less regulations from the public sector and more freedom to the private sector. Would you have wished that the freedom didn't go to those who are educated and run the finance at the private sector, but to every citizen in the country? That every financial decision will be decided by public referendums by people who aren't even capable of electing competent public leaders?!?
Most of the people don't exactly know what they want. They just want more money and power, while not wanting to do any work for it. They demand that they could decide on things while they themselves are not ready to do any work to make decisions of better quality.

[billyjoeallen]

You can't have winners without losers...

Only true in a zero-sum game.  More generally, you can't have competition without relative losers.

Correct. My money is still sitting in my trading account, so I am only a relative loser. Considering my initial buy-in price I am still doing rather well. Trading is not a zero sum game. Both parties feel they are better off or the trade would not take place.

I agree with you here.   However, you said the exact opposite a few times when you were being the cocky rendition of yourself.... I personally prefer the more reasonable version... but I am just one person... 

It only appears I said the exact opposite. The confusion is understandable. Currency speculating is a zero sum game. One trader thinks the price will go up, one thinks the price will go down, and the person who wins gains the exact amount the other trader loses (minus trading fee). Trading in general is positive sum because we traders have different end goals. I specifically said I was hedging and that due to my cold storage coins I am in a net long position even though I sold my trading stash to lock in profits. The benefit for me is that I can endure the swings of the market for far longer now without relying on day trading profits. The benefit for the other trader is obvious, unless the market goes lower than his buy-in price and he sells then.

[JayJuanGee]

The volume of this pump is very similar to March 3. The difference is that it is spread over two days instead of one. I won't trust this as a true recovery unless there is a successful retest of $340 support on higher volume. Every dollar spent on the exchange is a dollar not used to put a floor on the price in the event of another stampede for the exits.

You kids run and play. I guess it falls to me to be the responsible adult in the room. A roll I am unused to. Hopefully I will not be needed.

fine words, sir.

I disagree. The pump of March 3 was one single player with a few millions. This one is a lot of tiny little buys on Chinese markets that keep on pressing from the bottom up, inspiring confidence in the western markets and causing the leveraged shorts to explode in a fireworks show.

Is this concerted? I don't think so. I think we simply have a new massive herd of Chinese gamblers who are entering the speculation game by buying bitcoins and altcoins.

You said yourself we are all China's bitch. Here's something that just popped into my head:

Whacky conspiracy theory:

Price is being manipulated by the PBoC to accumulate a large position for the purpose of adding it to it's gold and foreign currency reserves. The ultimate goal is to make the renminbi a major world currency, possibly the world's reserve currency.

evidence for said whacky theory:

1. stochastics are funny.

2. Public airing of pro-bitcoin feature on public television followed by outright hostile words and policy, followed by...uncertainty"

evidence against said whacky theory:

1. That's the beauty of conspiracy theories. The lack of evidence merely shows you how deep it goes!

discuss.

I generally agree with that particular conspiracy theory as a chinese aspiration.. does NOT mean that they will achieve it, but are taking measures to solidify  holdings in various assets, including PMs and BTC... b/c they view the dollar as a bad investment.

[Mervyn_Pumpkinhead]

You said yourself we are all China's bitch. Here's something that just popped into my head:

Whacky conspiracy theory:

Price is being manipulated by the PBoC to accumulate a large position for the purpose of adding it to it's gold and foreign currency reserves. The ultimate goal is to make the renminbi a major world currency, possibly the world's reserve currency.

evidence for said whacky theory:

1. stochastics are funny.

2. Public airing of pro-bitcoin feature on public television followed by outright hostile words and policy, followed by...uncertainty"

evidence against said whacky theory:

1. That's the beauty of conspiracy theories. The lack of evidence merely shows you how deep it goes!

discuss.

This thing started by couple of half-witted Chinese officials f**king up and getting pulled into the BTC hype, that included the idea that BTC is competative against the dollar. In communist regimes it's not unusual to have officials in high position that didn't get there by their competence, but by loyalty.
It just took some time for smarter officials to join in and explain to everyone in power, that by letting the Chinese people pump BTC, will only make money flow out of China and into the pockets of westerners who own most of the coins in existance.

That is the reason why China and Russia wants nothing to do with bitcoin but the western powers don't mind.

[JayJuanGee]

You can't have winners without losers...

Only true in a zero-sum game.  More generally, you can't have competition without relative losers.

Correct. My money is still sitting in my trading account, so I am only a relative loser. Considering my initial buy-in price I am still doing rather well. Trading is not a zero sum game. Both parties feel they are better off or the trade would not take place.

I agree with you here.   However, you said the exact opposite a few times when you were being the cocky rendition of yourself.... I personally prefer the more reasonable version... but I am just one person... 

It only appears I said the exact opposite. The confusion is understandable. Currency speculating is a zero sum game. One trader thinks the price will go up, one thinks the price will go down, and the person who wins gains the exact amount the other trader loses (minus trading fee). Trading in general is positive sum because we traders have different end goals. I specifically said I was hedging and that due to my cold storage coins I am in a net long position even though I sold my trading stash to lock in profits. The benefit for me is that I can endure the swings of the market for far longer now without relying on day trading profits. The benefit for the other trader is obvious, unless the market goes lower than his buy-in price and he sells then.

I stick with my earlier post...

Nonetheless, I agree with you about trading bringing value to both parties - even though some traders will lock in losses when they buy high and sell low..   However, when the market is going up, then most people should profit...   It is more difficult to lose money when the market is going up.. as long as the investor has patience.

[pjviitas]

You said yourself we are all China's bitch. Here's something that just popped into my head:

Whacky conspiracy theory:

Price is being manipulated by the PBoC to accumulate a large position for the purpose of adding it to it's gold and foreign currency reserves. The ultimate goal is to make the renminbi a major world currency, possibly the world's reserve currency.

evidence for said whacky theory:

1. stochastics are funny.

2. Public airing of pro-bitcoin feature on public television followed by outright hostile words and policy, followed by...uncertainty"

evidence against said whacky theory:

1. That's the beauty of conspiracy theories. The lack of evidence merely shows you how deep it goes!

discuss.

This thing started by couple of half-witted Chinese officials f**king up and getting pulled into the BTC hype, that included the idea that BTC is competative against the dollar. In communist regimes it's not unusual to have officials in high position that didn't get there by their competence, but by loyalty.
It just took some time for smarter officials to join in and explain to everyone in power, that by letting the Chinese people pump BTC, will only make money flow out of China and into the pockets of westerners who own most of the coins in existance.

That is the reason why China and Russia wants nothing to do with bitcoin but the western powers don't mind.

There is only one flaw with this reasoning...with only a 5 Billion dollars is peanuts for these countries...if China or Russia or the USA for that matter wanted all the Bitcoin there wouldn't be much we could do about it.

There are no counties that seriously give a shit about Bitcoin because if they did none of us would have any right now.

[KFR]

I'm wondering what effect the next halving of the block reward will have and how the market will react and adapt.  Bitcoin's a lot bigger now than at its last halving in late 2012.  It's humbling to think that just over ten years from now there will only be 450 new coins mined each day rather than today's rich yield of 3,600. 

[billyjoeallen]

First, where the hell did this myth come from that it is a good thing when a currency is tied to gold.

From numerous members of the Austrian School of economics (Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, etc). Alan Greenspan was also a "goldbug" back when he was an acolyte of Ayn Rand.

The central premise is that Central Bankers cannot know how much liquidity the market needs because they don't have the ability to collect and process the information that millions of local buyers and sellers have. The natural scarcity of gold prevents them from injecting too much liquidity, which causes an unsustainable boom, which causes a bust.

Busts in fact are corrections, times where capital is transferred from incompetent managers to competent managers in order for that capital to be used in more productive ways.

In short: Central Bankers with good intentions screw things up. Central Bankers with bad intentions screw things up. The free market also screws things up, but not as badly as Central Bankers do.

I am even more liberal (in the economic sense) than the goldbugs. I think there should be no legal tender and that the free market should determine what the most liquid commodity is, and we should call that commodity "money".

[romneymoney]

There is only one flaw with this reasoning...with only a 5 Billion dollars is peanuts for these countries...if China or Russia or the USA for that matter wanted all the Bitcoin there wouldn't be much we could do about it.

There are no counties that seriously give a shit about Bitcoin because if they did none of us would have any right now.

That's the market price.  If someone wanted ALL of it
the price would rise to near infinity
I know if demand is that high, I will hodl for the moon

[Mervyn_Pumpkinhead]

There is only one flaw with this reasoning...with only a 5 Billion dollars is peanuts for these countries...if China or Russia or the USA for that matter wanted all the Bitcoin there wouldn't be much we could do about it.

There are no counties that seriously give a shit about Bitcoin because if they did none of us would have any right now.

I agree with you there that no country is taking BTC serious because it isn't a serious competition as an currency.
I'm not telling here that China govt wanted bitcoin, I'm just telling that couple of half-witted Chinese officials thought that it would actually help them fight against the dollar as the dominant reserve currency. Later smarter people explained to them that it isn't so, so any government support was pulled.
China was pro-bitcoin for a short period because of the stupidity of the few.

[pjviitas]

There is only one flaw with this reasoning...with only a 5 Billion dollars is peanuts for these countries...if China or Russia or the USA for that matter wanted all the Bitcoin there wouldn't be much we could do about it.

There are no counties that seriously give a shit about Bitcoin because if they did none of us would have any right now.

I agree with you there that no country is taking BTC serious because it isn't a serious competition as an currency.
I'm not telling here that China govt wanted bitcoin, I'm just telling that couple of half-witted Chinese officials thought that it would actually help them fight against the dollar as the dominant reserve currency. Later smarter people explained to them that it isn't so, so any government support was pulled.
China was pro-bitcoin for a short period because of the stupidity of the few.

Probably the reason governments don't really care about Bitcoin is because when all mining is centralized by the end of the 2015 they can simply expropriate the facilities in the name of national security.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[bitcoinsrus]

Explanation

Chart buddy invalid pic 

[Mervyn_Pumpkinhead]

First, where the hell did this myth come from that it is a good thing when a currency is tied to gold.

From numerous members of the Austrian School of economics (Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, etc). Alan Greenspan was also a "goldbug" back when he was an acolyte of Ayn Rand.

The central premise is that Central Bankers cannot know how much liquidity the market needs because they don't have the ability to collect and process the information that millions of local buyers and sellers have. The natural scarcity of gold prevents them from injecting too much liquidity, which causes an unsustainable boom, which causes a bust.

Busts in fact are corrections, times where capital is transferred from incompetent managers to competent managers in order for that capital to be used in more productive ways.

In short: Central Bankers with good intentions screw things up. Central Bankers with bad intentions screw things up. The free market also screws things up, but not as badly as Central Bankers do.

I am even more liberal (in the economic sense) than the goldbugs. I think there should be no legal tender and that the free market should determine what the most liquid commodity is, and we should call that commodity "money".

I have to say that you just wrote one of the smartest replies, that I have received on this forum and I agree with what you're saying.

[Adrian-x]

Bitcoin will fail due to its natural scarce nature.
It WILL not work:
-as mean of transaction
-store of value

If the technology is so unique and outstanding, the scarce nature
Will ultimately destroy it.

The value will be zero.

Wake up!!!!!!!

re-quoting for posterity - his cracks me up every time "The world was running low on scarcity, so we had to create some"

Bitcoin burns greed.  Greed is the fuel for its engine.  All that greed will be consumed and transmuted into a new thing: scarcity.

Bitcoin is commodified scarcity.  The world was running low on scarcity, so we had to create some.  Previously we faced peak scarcity.  Thanks to bitcoin, we now have enough scarcity for everyone.

Bring on the greed.  Come at me bro.  Bitcoin will use crypto fu and redirect that negative energy into pure positive scarcity.

[Mervyn_Pumpkinhead]

There is only one flaw with this reasoning...with only a 5 Billion dollars is peanuts for these countries...if China or Russia or the USA for that matter wanted all the Bitcoin there wouldn't be much we could do about it.

There are no counties that seriously give a shit about Bitcoin because if they did none of us would have any right now.

I agree with you there that no country is taking BTC serious because it isn't a serious competition as an currency.
I'm not telling here that China govt wanted bitcoin, I'm just telling that couple of half-witted Chinese officials thought that it would actually help them fight against the dollar as the dominant reserve currency. Later smarter people explained to them that it isn't so, so any government support was pulled.
China was pro-bitcoin for a short period because of the stupidity of the few.

Probably the reason governments don't really care about Bitcoin is because when all mining is centralized by the end of the 2015 they can simply expropriate the facilities in the name of national security.

BTC would actually pose a threat as a currency when it wouldn't need services like bitpay to enable doing business by the support of fiat. BTC is useless without fiat, so it can't really pose a threat.

[solex]

It seems so recent that all the talk was about BTC gravitating repeatedly towards $666...we need to get back to there  

I agree... and that $666  pricepoint felt low at the time...  

The geometric mean of the cycle high/low is now $628 which is where it is most likely to stabilize for a while.

[KFR]

re-quoting for posterity - his cracks me up every time "The world was running low on scarcity, so we had to create some"

Bitcoin burns greed.  Greed is the fuel for its engine.  All that greed will be consumed and transmuted into a new thing: scarcity.

Bitcoin is commodified scarcity.  The world was running low on scarcity, so we had to create some.  Previously we faced peak scarcity.  Thanks to bitcoin, we now have enough scarcity for everyone.

Bring on the greed.  Come at me bro.  Bitcoin will use crypto fu and redirect that negative energy into pure positive scarcity.

Agreed.  Screw T-shirts; I want a flag with this on it.

[Nightowlace]

New ATH by June 1, 2014

Just because.