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

[BTCETFInvestor]

► https://www.binance.com/en-AE/square/post/32108031319722

403 on Tor browser. That's why you shouldn't just use a link dump, but post what it's about.

Maybe you should use a more common browser rather than a Tor Browser...

[OgNasty]

At least we know the catalyst now and why the market is dumping. Here is a nice summary for those of you who are interested. Here’s the text instead of just a link dump…

Link: https://x.com/cryptomanran/status/1991823369453351261

1. DAT's like MSTR, BMNR and others have been one of 2 big buyers that powered this cycle.

2.  The DAT game is simple, you need to be the biggest so that you get into the big indices and when you do, passive index trackers are forced to buy large amounts of your stock. As they do you get bigger and get added to more indices, and so the cycle perpetuates.

3. On EXACTLY 10th October, MSCI , the world's 2nd biggest Index company published the below. They are questioning whether companies that hold crypto assets as their core business, should be considered as "companies" or "funds".

4. If they are "funds" they are not included in passive indexing. why, because this creates a circular loop. The fund buys assets , gets bigger and then is included in more indices and buys more assets.

5. The expected ruling will be announced on 15 January 2026 and if this does pass, the companies like MSTR will be automatically removed from all indices.

6. If this happens it would mean that all the pension funds, normal funds and all other passive index holders would dump their MSTR automatically.

7. It would also mean that going forward they would never be included and as such , one of the big reasons why they actually exist would disappear.

8 . Since DATs have been powering this cycle and have been most the buying pressure, the smart money saw this immediately after the 10TH of October announcement and positioned accordingly.

9. The 10TH of October wasn't a coincidence after all - It was smart money seeing a big risk to crypto and the current market structure.

10. The market will probably continue to dum until around the end of December and if the announcement is negative, we will get a huge dump in preparation for the removal from the indices.

11. On the other hand , if it is positive , the bull market is back!!


Here is Saylor’s response…

Link: https://x.com/saylor/status/1991875241107222701

Response to MSCI Index Matter

Strategy is not a fund, not a trust, and not a holding company. We’re a publicly traded operating company with a $500 million software business and a unique treasury strategy that uses Bitcoin as productive capital.

This year alone, we’ve completed five public offerings of digital credit securities— $STRK, $STRF, $STRD, $STRC, and $STRE —representing over $7.7 billion in notional value. We also launched Stretch ($STRC), a revolutionary Bitcoin-backed treasury credit instrument that provides variable monthly USD yield to institutional and retail investors.

Funds and trusts passively hold assets. Holding companies sit on investments. We create, structure, issue, and operate. Our team is building a new kind of enterprise—a Bitcoin-backed structured finance company with the ability to innovate in both capital markets and software.

No passive vehicle or holding company could do what we’re doing.

Index classification doesn't define us. Our strategy is long-term, our conviction in Bitcoin is unwavering, and our mission remains unchanged: to build the world’s first digital monetary institution on a foundation of sound money and financial innovation.

[BTCETFInvestor]

If this Owen Gunden thing is real

Who?
Google tells me it's someone who sold 11k BTC since October, and finished the last part of his sale today. That raises 2 questions: 1. why doesn't an early Bitcoin investor care about his privacy, and 2. why is this relevant now, when a 80k BTC sale a while back only caused a small dip in price?

It is not relevant in my opinion. People are just trying to find a narrative that explains the market, and when they are desperate anything will do. Just a while back on X it was because quantum computers will break Bitcoin in a few years or some other nonsense that was being spread.  

@BitHodlers - Did you read the info in the link I provided about Owen Gunden's selling activity? It is indeed relevant...  

He sold 11,000 BTC since October 21, 2025, worth about $1.3 billion. His final transfer of 2,499 BTC (~$228 million) to Kraken marked the complete exit.

[AlcoHoDL]

Reminder: We are making fun of mindrust, because he claimed to be cool as ice for the whole bear market, claiming he would hold his corn with diamond hands and not ever thinking about selling.
The he sold overnight, at the bottom of the final bear capitulation candle, shortly before the accumulation phase prior to the next bull market started (was it at $4k, IIRC? ...or maybe $9k-ish?).

Mindrust sold around 4k. I'll never forget that day.

Me too, i only forgot the bottom price  

EDIT: At least, he became some kind of a legend, too.

Just look at how dark that dot is... The darkest of all day price changes since 2016.

He really sold the DIP!

[DaRude]

If this Owen Gunden thing is real

Who?
Google tells me it's someone who sold 11k BTC since October, and finished the last part of his sale today. That raises 2 questions: 1. why doesn't an early Bitcoin investor care about his privacy, and 2. why is this relevant now, when a 80k BTC sale a while back only caused a small dip in price?

It is not relevant in my opinion. People are just trying to find a narrative that explains the market, and when they are desperate anything will do. Just a while back on X it was because quantum computers will break Bitcoin in a few years or some other nonsense that was being spread.  

After that BTC30k bearwhale i came to conclusion that technical genius is inversely related to financial knowledge.

[wachtwoord]

If this Owen Gunden thing is real

Who?
Google tells me it's someone who sold 11k BTC since October, and finished the last part of his sale today. That raises 2 questions: 1. why doesn't an early Bitcoin investor care about his privacy, and 2. why is this relevant now, when a 80k BTC sale a while back only caused a small dip in price?

He's even mentioned in a 2013 msm newsarticle ffs 

[wachtwoord]

► https://www.binance.com/en-AE/square/post/32108031319722

403 on Tor browser. That's why you shouldn't just use a link dump, but post what it's about.

Maybe you should use a more common browser rather than a Tor Browser...

I think you are on the wrong forum trying to shame someone for dilligence ...

[wachtwoord]

If this Owen Gunden thing is real, I would hope to see a little recovery soon but we appear to be continuing to slide.

All the damn msm are posting about this faggot. Dont take it seriously lol

[wachtwoord]

Any idea how they identified him? I know I was surprised when one of the blockchain watching sites (was it blockchain.info?) linked wallets to addresses scraped from bitcointalk way back when but it seems like this would have required some kind of breach of privacy. (I did check to see if he was a bitcointalker but turned up nothing).

Because he is the source.

[cAPSLOCK]

Financial experts worldwide agree that ETFs are powerful tools for investing in underlying assets

Argumentum ad verecundiam.  Experts... Lol.  Pfft.  Trust the science, trust the government, trust black rock, trust the oligarchs, trust the leaders, trust the authorities.

This thinking actually runs entirely counter to the reason Bitcoin is important in the first place.

offering diversification, liquidity, and cost efficiency as effective vehicles for gaining exposure to underlying assets.

A tasty word salad.

Bitcoin doesn't need any of that.  It's whole point was to separate you from the need for that.

Bitcoin is an asset that you don't strictly need someone to custody for you.

And I would argue that the phrase "underlying assets" is nothing more than magic words.  And instead we should use what really are the words that describe the Bitcoin ETF.

Gigantic Throbbing Counter-Party Risk.

But it's risk with benefits, for sure. It's just that the benefits... the REAL benefits are for the companies that create the ETFs, not the customers.

One of the biggest selling points for ETFs is that they are regulated, that they meet the requirements for inclusion into other financial instruments that are regulated and created by a collusion between the companies that create them and the government.

Those two entities, the companies that create things like ETFs and the government, are also actually the exact same people.

It is kabuki. It is shadows cast upon a cave wall.

ETFs have become a cornerstone of modern portfolios. In 2024, about 16.9 million U.S. households owned ETFs, reflecting their mainstream adoption.[/b][/size]

Argumentum ad populum.

All the cool kids are doing it. All the sheeple are lining up for it. You're a fool if you don't!

I pride myself on nuanced thinking. Perhaps you could replace the word nuanced with the word erratic, but I prefer nuanced.  And I think the ETFs have been a giant boon for Bitcoin in many ways, and they are a way for people who do not understand Bitcoin to actually take part in it, sort of.  And some of their regulatory benefits are compelling. Being able to hold shares of a Bitcoin ETF in your retirement account, for example.

ETFs are an interesting and useful financial derivative invention.  They are particularly handy when the underlying asset is something that's extremely difficult to custody oneself.  Natural gas, for example.

But in my opinion, ETFs also have a built-in dark side. It centralizes ownership of important assets like gold and Bitcoin.  And it creates an ad hoc fiat system on top of these "underlying assets" and sells you pieces of paper... digits in a computer.

People have a hard time digesting that you can change a couple very simple rules in a game and the game becomes something completely different with a completely different strategy.

I am a bad poker player, but I do enjoy the game. There are two versions of Holdem that are commonly played, Texas and Omaha.  There are two extremely simple differences between these two forms of poker. In Omaha holdem, each player is dealt four cards. In Texas holdem each player is dealt two cards.  In Omaha, you must use exactly two and only two of your cards to make a hand. In the Texas variety you can use one both or neither of your cards to make a hand.

These two tiny little differences, amongst all the other rules for the game that are identical, change the gameplay significantly. The strategies, the edges, everything is completely different because of those two tiny things.

People who think they are buying Bitcoin when they buy a Bitcoin ETF are playing a game that they do not understand the rules of at all.  And the difference between Bitcoin held in one's own custody and shares of a Bitcoin ETF is enormous.  The biggest difference is that you are neutering Bitcoin completely via the ETF and reintroducing not only simple trust but complex trust in a third party.

I'm not saying that Bitcoin ETFs are not useful or that there are not arguments for owning them.

What I am saying, hopefully somewhat clearly, is: THEY. ARE. NOT. BITCOIN.

And their presence is a magic trick that our broken financial system can use to lull people into allowing the banks and the corporations to have control over all things that can be considered property, while the consumer simply holds a promise from proven liars.

I have made many arguments for the institutional middleman with Bitcoin. I believe banks are necessary.  I do not believe that every human being has the ability to custody their own Bitcoin without greater risk than using "experts" to do it.  And the risks scale differently for each individual.

But, if one is capable of owning their own property and taking responsibility for their own assets and chooses not to, then they are actually opting out of the part of the game that is crucial to its eventual success.  Without self-sovereign people, organizations, countries, etc., holding Bitcoin themselves the asset just turns into yet another paper printing machine.

[d5000]

Btc broke the 93k region few days ago and it's heading straight to the 85k support. Which simply means more dip. You can decide to bag now or still wait a little longer to bag more. The market looks boring and most people lose interest that's where the market is at right now.

My logic here is that: if you bought gold (or silver) before 2025 you've made at least 30% profit, and another possible valuable asset (BTC) has lost >30%. It could drop further, for sure, but you have a bit of margin to gamble. And when you're lucky you get a good price.

Savvy investors are obsessed with Bitcoin because of its volatility.

Problem is that with that volatility it will stay an asset for the "savvy" investors, and not for the general public who want a more reliable store of value.

But it is improving slowly, even if these days it doesn't look like that

[Gachapin]

Reminder: We are making fun of mindrust, because he claimed to be cool as ice for the whole bear market, claiming he would hold his corn with diamond hands and not ever thinking about selling.
The he sold overnight, at the bottom of the final bear capitulation candle, shortly before the accumulation phase prior to the next bull market started (was it at $4k, IIRC? ...or maybe $9k-ish?).

Mindrust sold around 4k. I'll never forget that day.

Me too, i only forgot the bottom price  

EDIT: At least, he became some kind of a legend, too.

and his 10 coins are now 840,000 not 1,260,000

so his loss is reduced to 800,000 not 1,220,000

He will certainly appreciate that

[Gachapin]

Almost $1 billion longs liquidated.  

Week and monthly RSI could be more streched down with a capitulation red candle.

They are speed running the bear market for a total reset, short and heavy wrapped as the biggest bear trap ever.

This does feel a bit like when we hit 69 top…. Came down a bit 50k ish
Then the fast capitulation to 30k ish

Only there we had a bear market…

Here we just need to avoid a long stretch of down movement and just start going up again.
A rebound would feel like victory.

That's the thing,

I don't mind the drops anymore.. it's the boring long sideways over several years that's exhausting

[philipma1957]

Reminder: We are making fun of mindrust, because he claimed to be cool as ice for the whole bear market, claiming he would hold his corn with diamond hands and not ever thinking about selling.
The he sold overnight, at the bottom of the final bear capitulation candle, shortly before the accumulation phase prior to the next bull market started (was it at $4k, IIRC? ...or maybe $9k-ish?).

Mindrust sold around 4k. I'll never forget that day.

Me too, i only forgot the bottom price  

EDIT: At least, he became some kind of a legend, too.

Just look at how dark that dot is... The darkest of all day price changes since 2016.

He really sold the DIP!

That was the covid flash crash.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[cAPSLOCK]

Reminder: We are making fun of mindrust, because he claimed to be cool as ice for the whole bear market, claiming he would hold his corn with diamond hands and not ever thinking about selling.
The he sold overnight, at the bottom of the final bear capitulation candle, shortly before the accumulation phase prior to the next bull market started (was it at $4k, IIRC? ...or maybe $9k-ish?).

Mindrust sold around 4k. I'll never forget that day.

Me too, i only forgot the bottom price  

EDIT: At least, he became some kind of a legend, too.

Just look at how dark that dot is... The darkest of all day price changes since 2016.

He really sold the DIP!

That was the covid flash crash.

Yes, I actually made my most sizeable recentish purchase of Bitcoin on that same day. I wonder if I got some of his. 😁

[vapourminer]

Reminder: We are making fun of mindrust, because he claimed to be cool as ice for the whole bear market, claiming he would hold his corn with diamond hands and not ever thinking about selling.
The he sold overnight, at the bottom of the final bear capitulation candle, shortly before the accumulation phase prior to the next bull market started (was it at $4k, IIRC? ...or maybe $9k-ish?).

Mindrust sold around 4k. I'll never forget that day.

Me too, i only forgot the bottom price 

EDIT: At least, he became some kind of a legend, too.

and his 10 coins are now 840,000 not 1,260,000

so his loss is reduced to 800,000 not 1,220,000

He will certainly appreciate that

its kinda funny but i am sometimes more curious as to how much someone has lost (on paper) than their current net worth.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[BTCETFInvestor]

Financial experts worldwide agree that ETFs are powerful tools for investing in underlying assets

Argumentum ad verecundiam.  Experts... Lol.  Pfft.  Trust the science, trust the government, trust black rock, trust the oligarchs, trust the leaders, trust the authorities.

This thinking actually runs entirely counter to the reason Bitcoin is important in the first place.

offering diversification, liquidity, and cost efficiency as effective vehicles for gaining exposure to underlying assets.

A tasty word salad.

Bitcoin doesn't need any of that.  It's whole point was to separate you from the need for that.

Bitcoin is an asset that you don't strictly need someone to custody for you.

And I would argue that the phrase "underlying assets" is nothing more than magic words.  And instead we should use what really are the words that describe the Bitcoin ETF.

Gigantic Throbbing Counter-Party Risk.

But it's risk with benefits, for sure. It's just that the benefits... the REAL benefits are for the companies that create the ETFs, not the customers.

One of the biggest selling points for ETFs is that they are regulated, that they meet the requirements for inclusion into other financial instruments that are regulated and created by a collusion between the companies that create them and the government.

Those two entities, the companies that create things like ETFs and the government, are also actually the exact same people.

It is kabuki. It is shadows cast upon a cave wall.

ETFs have become a cornerstone of modern portfolios. In 2024, about 16.9 million U.S. households owned ETFs, reflecting their mainstream adoption.[/b][/size]

Argumentum ad populum.

All the cool kids are doing it. All the sheeple are lining up for it. You're a fool if you don't!

I pride myself on nuanced thinking. Perhaps you could replace the word nuanced with the word erratic, but I prefer nuanced.  And I think the ETFs have been a giant boon for Bitcoin in many ways, and they are a way for people who do not understand Bitcoin to actually take part in it, sort of.  And some of their regulatory benefits are compelling. Being able to hold shares of a Bitcoin ETF in your retirement account, for example.

ETFs are an interesting and useful financial derivative invention.  They are particularly handy when the underlying asset is something that's extremely difficult to custody oneself.  Natural gas, for example.

But in my opinion, ETFs also have a built-in dark side. It centralizes ownership of important assets like gold and Bitcoin.  And it creates an ad hoc fiat system on top of these "underlying assets" and sells you pieces of paper... digits in a computer.

People have a hard time digesting that you can change a couple very simple rules in a game and the game becomes something completely different with a completely different strategy.

I am a bad poker player, but I do enjoy the game. There are two versions of Holdem that are commonly played, Texas and Omaha.  There are two extremely simple differences between these two forms of poker. In Omaha holdem, each player is dealt four cards. In Texas holdem each player is dealt two cards.  In Omaha, you must use exactly two and only two of your cards to make a hand. In the Texas variety you can use one both or neither of your cards to make a hand.

These two tiny little differences, amongst all the other rules for the game that are identical, change the gameplay significantly. The strategies, the edges, everything is completely different because of those two tiny things.

People who think they are buying Bitcoin when they buy a Bitcoin ETF are playing a game that they do not understand the rules of at all.  And the difference between Bitcoin held in one's own custody and shares of a Bitcoin ETF is enormous.  The biggest difference is that you are neutering Bitcoin completely via the ETF and reintroducing not only simple trust but complex trust in a third party.

I'm not saying that Bitcoin ETFs are not useful or that there are not arguments for owning them.

What I am saying, hopefully somewhat clearly, is: THEY. ARE. NOT. BITCOIN.

And their presence is a magic trick that our broken financial system can use to lull people into allowing the banks and the corporations to have control over all things that can be considered property, while the consumer simply holds a promise from proven liars.

I have made many arguments for the institutional middleman with Bitcoin. I believe banks are necessary.  I do not believe that every human being has the ability to custody their own Bitcoin without greater risk than using "experts" to do it.  And the risks scale differently for each individual.

But, if one is capable of owning their own property and taking responsibility for their own assets and chooses not to, then they are actually opting out of the part of the game that is crucial to its eventual success.  Without self-sovereign people, organizations, countries, etc., holding Bitcoin themselves the asset just turns into yet another paper printing machine.

Poor fellow! Have you been taking wordy lessons from JJG?

[philipma1957]

Financial experts worldwide agree that ETFs are powerful tools for investing in underlying assets

Argumentum ad verecundiam.  Experts... Lol.  Pfft.  Trust the science, trust the government, trust black rock, trust the oligarchs, trust the leaders, trust the authorities.

This thinking actually runs entirely counter to the reason Bitcoin is important in the first place.

offering diversification, liquidity, and cost efficiency as effective vehicles for gaining exposure to underlying assets.

A tasty word salad.

Bitcoin doesn't need any of that.  It's whole point was to separate you from the need for that.

Bitcoin is an asset that you don't strictly need someone to custody for you.

And I would argue that the phrase "underlying assets" is nothing more than magic words.  And instead we should use what really are the words that describe the Bitcoin ETF.

Gigantic Throbbing Counter-Party Risk.

But it's risk with benefits, for sure. It's just that the benefits... the REAL benefits are for the companies that create the ETFs, not the customers.

One of the biggest selling points for ETFs is that they are regulated, that they meet the requirements for inclusion into other financial instruments that are regulated and created by a collusion between the companies that create them and the government.

Those two entities, the companies that create things like ETFs and the government, are also actually the exact same people.

It is kabuki. It is shadows cast upon a cave wall.

ETFs have become a cornerstone of modern portfolios. In 2024, about 16.9 million U.S. households owned ETFs, reflecting their mainstream adoption.[/b][/size]

Argumentum ad populum.

All the cool kids are doing it. All the sheeple are lining up for it. You're a fool if you don't!

I pride myself on nuanced thinking. Perhaps you could replace the word nuanced with the word erratic, but I prefer nuanced.  And I think the ETFs have been a giant boon for Bitcoin in many ways, and they are a way for people who do not understand Bitcoin to actually take part in it, sort of.  And some of their regulatory benefits are compelling. Being able to hold shares of a Bitcoin ETF in your retirement account, for example.

ETFs are an interesting and useful financial derivative invention.  They are particularly handy when the underlying asset is something that's extremely difficult to custody oneself.  Natural gas, for example.

But in my opinion, ETFs also have a built-in dark side. It centralizes ownership of important assets like gold and Bitcoin.  And it creates an ad hoc fiat system on top of these "underlying assets" and sells you pieces of paper... digits in a computer.

People have a hard time digesting that you can change a couple very simple rules in a game and the game becomes something completely different with a completely different strategy.

I am a bad poker player, but I do enjoy the game. There are two versions of Holdem that are commonly played, Texas and Omaha.  There are two extremely simple differences between these two forms of poker. In Omaha holdem, each player is dealt four cards. In Texas holdem each player is dealt two cards.  In Omaha, you must use exactly two and only two of your cards to make a hand. In the Texas variety you can use one both or neither of your cards to make a hand.

These two tiny little differences, amongst all the other rules for the game that are identical, change the gameplay significantly. The strategies, the edges, everything is completely different because of those two tiny things.

People who think they are buying Bitcoin when they buy a Bitcoin ETF are playing a game that they do not understand the rules of at all.  And the difference between Bitcoin held in one's own custody and shares of a Bitcoin ETF is enormous.  The biggest difference is that you are neutering Bitcoin completely via the ETF and reintroducing not only simple trust but complex trust in a third party.

I'm not saying that Bitcoin ETFs are not useful or that there are not arguments for owning them.

What I am saying, hopefully somewhat clearly, is: THEY. ARE. NOT. BITCOIN.

And their presence is a magic trick that our broken financial system can use to lull people into allowing the banks and the corporations to have control over all things that can be considered property, while the consumer simply holds a promise from proven liars.

I have made many arguments for the institutional middleman with Bitcoin. I believe banks are necessary.  I do not believe that every human being has the ability to custody their own Bitcoin without greater risk than using "experts" to do it.  And the risks scale differently for each individual.

But, if one is capable of owning their own property and taking responsibility for their own assets and chooses not to, then they are actually opting out of the part of the game that is crucial to its eventual success.  Without self-sovereign people, organizations, countries, etc., holding Bitcoin themselves the asset just turns into yet another paper printing machine.

Poor fellow! Have you been taking wordy lessons from JJG?

This is funny.