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

[Davyd05]

I for one think that if they did reach an agreement, that BANKS WOULDN'T BE SHUTTING DOWN THEIR ACCOUNTS TODAY and they wouldn't be tweeting about banks shutting down their accounts.

Well, the boss must show that she is the boss. Otherwise, how will people respect her?

 Not to mention we've seen consistently with each Bank Channel premature closure by one or two banks and mainly due to self censorship rather then direct request, but I'd be in denial to believe that.

[TERA]

So basically the 5 major exchanges have all agreed to tax HFT (which I assume would be a HUGE disincentive), to agree with all banks account bans, and to cut off leveraged trading.

So, in effect, aside from losing their bank accounts, the exchanges are now going to take away most of the incentives Chinese have to trade bitcoin.

So, I would assume this means that any Chinese person who has money invested in bitcoin because they simply want to trade it will now have reasons to pack their fiat bags and go home or into another market, and those that simply want to hold will stay.

I think we're talking about 95% of the volume.

[windjc]

I for one think that if they did reach an agreement, that BANKS WOULDN'T BE SHUTTING DOWN THEIR ACCOUNTS TODAY and they wouldn't be tweeting about banks shutting down their accounts.

Well, the boss must show that she is the boss. Otherwise, how will people respect her?

 Not to mention we've seen consistently with each Bank Channel premature closure by one or two banks and mainly due to self censorship rather then direct request, but I'd be in denial to believe that.

Well I guess it depends on what your definition of "premature" is. If ignoring the December directive until April is premature, then yes, you are correct.

[windjc]

So basically the 5 major exchanges have all agreed to tax HFT (which I assume would be a HUGE disincentive), to agree with all banks account bans, and to cut off leveraged trading.

So, in effect, aside from losing their bank accounts, the exchanges are now going to take away most of the incentives Chinese have to trade bitcoin.

So, I would assume this means that any Chinese person who has money invested in bitcoin because they simply want to trade it will now have reasons to pack their fiat bags and go home or into another market, and those that simply want to hold will stay.

I think we're talking about 95% of the volume.

But am I understanding this right? Because, if so, there is no reason known to man why the exchange prices should be going up, unless it was nervous shorts covering.

[Davyd05]

So basically the 5 major exchanges have all agreed to tax HFT (which I assume would be a HUGE disincentive), to agree with all banks account bans, and to cut off leveraged trading.

So, in effect, aside from losing their bank accounts, the exchanges are now going to take away most of the incentives Chinese have to trade bitcoin.

So, I would assume this means that any Chinese person who has money invested in bitcoin because they simply want to trade it will now have reasons to pack their fiat bags and go home or into another market, and those that simply want to hold will stay.

I think we're talking about 95% of the volume.

So is this volume real or fake.. cause half the bears cry that the flood of coins are coming..

but the if the volumes fake then we we're just being sheep? which one is it?

cause then China's PBOC has clarified our greatest questions and soon we will see...Bullish if its fake.. Bearish if not ( and you believe 95% of Chinese bitcoiners we're traders)

[Davyd05]

I for one think that if they did reach an agreement, that BANKS WOULDN'T BE SHUTTING DOWN THEIR ACCOUNTS TODAY and they wouldn't be tweeting about banks shutting down their accounts.

Well, the boss must show that she is the boss. Otherwise, how will people respect her?

 Not to mention we've seen consistently with each Bank Channel premature closure by one or two banks and mainly due to self censorship rather then direct request, but I'd be in denial to believe that.

Well I guess it depends on what your definition of "premature" is. If ignoring the December directive until April is premature, then yes, you are correct.

So you going to show me a statement from the PBOC saying they've not followed said directives dated and with examples.. Or are you just going to show me a bank shutting and account down for.. something they claim came from higher up?

[TERA]

So basically the 5 major exchanges have all agreed to tax HFT (which I assume would be a HUGE disincentive), to agree with all banks account bans, and to cut off leveraged trading.

So, in effect, aside from losing their bank accounts, the exchanges are now going to take away most of the incentives Chinese have to trade bitcoin.

So, I would assume this means that any Chinese person who has money invested in bitcoin because they simply want to trade it will now have reasons to pack their fiat bags and go home or into another market, and those that simply want to hold will stay.

I think we're talking about 95% of the volume.

So is this volume real or fake.. cause half the bears cry that the flood of coins are coming..

but the if the volumes fake then we we're just being sheep? which one is it?

cause then China's PBOC has clarified our greatest questions and soon we will see...Bullish if its fake.. Bearish if not ( and you believe 95% of Chinese bitcoiners we're traders)

The Chinese hold millions of coins AND 95% of their current volume is fake.

[windjc]

I for one think that if they did reach an agreement, that BANKS WOULDN'T BE SHUTTING DOWN THEIR ACCOUNTS TODAY and they wouldn't be tweeting about banks shutting down their accounts.

Well, the boss must show that she is the boss. Otherwise, how will people respect her?

 Not to mention we've seen consistently with each Bank Channel premature closure by one or two banks and mainly due to self censorship rather then direct request, but I'd be in denial to believe that.

Well I guess it depends on what your definition of "premature" is. If ignoring the December directive until April is premature, then yes, you are correct.

So you going to show me a statement from the PBOC saying they've not followed said directives dated and with examples.. Or are you just going to show me a bank shutting and account down for.. something they claim came from higher up?

I'm honestly not sure what you are arguing here? Do you believe the PBOC is okay with banks being used for fiat deposits and withdrawals into exchanges?

[mooncake]

So basically the 5 major exchanges have all agreed to tax HFT (which I assume would be a HUGE disincentive), to agree with all banks account bans, and to cut off leveraged trading.

So, in effect, aside from losing their bank accounts, the exchanges are now going to take away most of the incentives Chinese have to trade bitcoin.

So, I would assume this means that any Chinese person who has money invested in bitcoin because they simply want to trade it will now have reasons to pack their fiat bags and go home or into another market, and those that simply want to hold will stay.

I think we're talking about 95% of the volume.

But am I understanding this right? Because, if so, there is no reason known to man why the exchange prices should be going up, unless it was nervous shorts covering.

Not HFT, but high volume trading. No mention about banks account bans. Yes, no leveraged trading.

You really need to understand the announcement before making presumptive postings.

[windjc]

So basically the 5 major exchanges have all agreed to tax HFT (which I assume would be a HUGE disincentive), to agree with all banks account bans, and to cut off leveraged trading.

So, in effect, aside from losing their bank accounts, the exchanges are now going to take away most of the incentives Chinese have to trade bitcoin.

So, I would assume this means that any Chinese person who has money invested in bitcoin because they simply want to trade it will now have reasons to pack their fiat bags and go home or into another market, and those that simply want to hold will stay.

I think we're talking about 95% of the volume.

But am I understanding this right? Because, if so, there is no reason known to man why the exchange prices should be going up, unless it was nervous shorts covering.

Not HFT, but high volume trading. No mention about banks account bans. Yes, no leveraged trading.

You really need to understand the announcement before making presumptive postings.

I meant HVT.

You are the one that is presumptious, with your wishful thinking.

This market is going to fucking crash.

[xulescu]

I am just going to view this bear phase as the accumulation phase...as that really seems to be underlying theme...

You accumulate better if you short from time to time

Yes, in theory shorting could be profitable.  However, NOT a good time to short now b/c BTC prices seem to be way below the BTC price trend line.

In this regard, it can be good to short when btc prices are above the trend line and to buy when btc prices are below the trendline.  

Certainly, we have a variety of views concerning where is the trendline, exactly.  

Personally, I am NOT very sophisticated in my trading, but I would put the current BTC trendline in the $650 to $850 arena.  I have seen others making claims that the btc trend line is much higher than what I am saying.  You could also assess the BTC trendline to be much lower; nonetheless, at $425-ish, in many accounts of the trendline, we are still much below the trendline..

IN sum, this particular moment does NOT appear to be a good time to short - absent some certain news that BTC prices are going to go down by 5-15%.  i have NOT seen any such news, even though I have seen considerable fear mongering in that direction to suggest that for sure BTC prices are going down.  I remain NOT very confident in such a prediction.

Do not try and bend the trendline. That's impossible. Instead only try to realize the truth.
What truth?
There is no trendline.

A trendline, to the extent to which it exists, becomes more apparent after the passage of time, and you could be correct that there is NO trendline.  I am putting my money on that there is a trendline and BTC prices are going to move up.

How about you?  Are you putting any money into BTC?  

So far, I am NOT putting more money into BTC than I am willing to lose, but I am putting in more than I had originally planned to put in.... The reason that I am putting more into BTC is b/c I am more informed about bitcoin today than I was 5 months ago.

Depending on the market, i expect to be fully 400% in BTC by mid june. I am still high-risk accumulating. I also have deep-out puts for hedging. It would take a lot of error from my prediction to change that default. But for now i am short.

[TERA]

I thought we had learned by now already to only listen to what Chinese authorities are saying and to completely ignore what the exchange owners are saying. They are bastards and everything they say is engineered for their own personal profit only.

[windjc]

And...we are back to where we started the day. LOL.

[mooncake]

@TERA and windjc - How much have you shorted?

[JulieFig]

The more and more fearful weeks are coming, non-stop, hahahahaha

Only 3 more weeks according to my best estimators.    For the next 6 months BTC should outperform.

Elaborate, if you will?

In my day job, I construct systems which build predictive graphical models.  The best model I have for predicting XBTUSD right now puts the next bottom somewhere between 15 May and 30 May.  My best performing (F1) model of the broad US market (roughly, the Russell 2000) has a sequence of high mass concentrations at progressively lower price ranges in mid-June, early-August, and early-October.  Since there is no lower mass concentration on longer time frames, when intregrating over price points, these models indicate that BTC will outperform the market until Winter, when their mass diffuses.

That's interesting - my analysis puts the bottom at around 17 May, which falls nicely within your range also. My projected predictions (late 2014 to mid 2015) will still hold true if we rise before this date though. It will be very interesting to see what happens in the coming weeks...

[JorgeStolfi]

it is highly possible there had been discussions with PBOC.

The exchanges are half a doen small businesses by Chinese standards, I doubt whether the PBoC would get down to discuss policies with them.  (The traded volumes look like a lot of money, but that is just internal accounting; what counts is their revenue from withdrawal fees, and possibly from self-trading or shady plays with customers' coins.)

Also, the squeeze doesn't seem to come from the PBoC anyway, only through it.  Illegal payments and protecting the small investor are the concern of other agencies.  (The PBoC may have objected to leveraged trade perhaps, as it would turn the exchanges into money lending businesses?)

[TERA]

@TERA and windjc - How much have you shorted?

I am not truly short. I only have paper trades to hedge against a portion of my cold storage. Technically, I'm long.

[xulescu]

@TERA and windjc - How much have you shorted?

I am not truly short. I only have paper trades to hedge against a portion of my cold storage. Technically, I'm long.

When did you start trading and, if you bought 1 BTC when you started trading, how much would you have now?

[windjc]

@TERA and windjc - How much have you shorted?

Around 1200 at this point.

[TERA]

@TERA and windjc - How much have you shorted?

I am not truly short. I only have paper trades to hedge against a portion of my cold storage. Technically, I'm long.

When did you start trading and, if you bought 1 BTC when you started trading, how much would you have now?

I started trading btc in march 2013. I'm confused by the rest of the question.