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

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Somebody please make it stop.

[Hueristic]

Cycle is designed to disappear as block rewards taper off, pretty sure satoshi explained this.

[Richy_T]

Only..it wasn't like this last time; Y=2024=halving, ATH=2024 (even before the halving).
Imho, this will also happen in 2028, hence my prediction of the ATH by the April of 2028, at the latest.

"Bitcoin reached its all-time high price of approximately $126,210 in October 2025"

And don't interpret "because cycles" as "exclusively because cycles". There's little question that the US presidential election had a big influence.

[OgNasty]

Somebody please make it stop.

Only Biodom has the power to stop this...



Say the 4-year cycle is real.  Say it's real!

[Richy_T]

[Biodom]

Only..it wasn't like this last time; Y=2024=halving, ATH=2024 (even before the halving).
Imho, this will also happen in 2028, hence my prediction of the ATH by the April of 2028, at the latest.

"Bitcoin reached its all-time high price of approximately $126,210 in October 2025"

And don't interpret "because cycles" as "exclusively because cycles". There's little question that the US presidential election had a big influence.

Nope, ATH happened FIRST in 2024, not Y+1.
The eventual "final" ATH does not matter for the count.

[OgNasty]

Only..it wasn't like this last time; Y=2024=halving, ATH=2024 (even before the halving).
Imho, this will also happen in 2028, hence my prediction of the ATH by the April of 2028, at the latest.

"Bitcoin reached its all-time high price of approximately $126,210 in October 2025"

And don't interpret "because cycles" as "exclusively because cycles". There's little question that the US presidential election had a big influence.

Remind me again how many years are in between Presidential elections...

[Richy_T]

Remind me again how many years are in between Presidential elections...

That's always going to have some influence but in this case, Trump had specifically used Bitcoin as part of his campaigning *and* had courted Libertarians.

[Richy_T]

Nope, ATH happened FIRST in 2024, not Y+1.
The eventual "final" ATH does not matter for the count.

Which would put the previous ATH further back in time too. Likely even moreso. But don't get caught up in the noise.

[AlcoHoDL]

Cycle theory:

y = Halving
y+1 = ATH

[...]

Only..it wasn't like this the last time; Y=2024=halving, ATH=2024 (even before the halving).
Imho, this will also happen in 2028, hence my prediction of the ATH by the April of 2028, at the latest.

That was a local ATH that does not count in my book. At that time there was the Bitcoin Spot ETF craze (launched January 2024). Local ATHs like this can happen due to various economic, (geo)political and other world events. It's a stochastic process...

[OutOfMemory]

Cycle theory:

y = Halving
y+1 = ATH

[...]

Only..it wasn't like this the last time; Y=2024=halving, ATH=2024 (even before the halving).
Imho, this will also happen in 2028, hence my prediction of the ATH by the April of 2028, at the latest.

That was a local ATH that does not count in my book. At that time there was the Bitcoin Spot ETF craze (launched January 2024). Local ATHs like this can happen due to various economic, (geo)political and other world events. It's a stochastic process...

Yeah, same as intermediate crashes (but in reverse inverse). Like Covid, FTX...

[Richy_T]

That was a local ATH that does not count in my book. At that time there was the Bitcoin Spot ETF craze. Local ATHs like this can happen due to various economic, (geo)political and other world events. It's a stochastic process...

I prefer to look at the general shape of things. The actual ATH itself is, as you say, a bit arbitrary. Especially when things slide info FOMO territory.

[OutOfMemory]

There were $1k - $2k dips in the hours around 2am GMT in the last few days.
But those were weekdays, so i'm curious what will happen today as of this time.

[philipma1957]

Well I may get my first dip buy today.

It was 63.8k

I need 62.2k

[psycodad]

*weeeeeeee*

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Richy_T]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

It's not even a fight.

[OutOfMemory]

*rollercoaster gif*

*weeeeeeee*

Thanks, i really wanted to post something like "where's the rollercoaster?" half an hour ago and then i see this, returning to the thread.

EDIT: Bitcoin dying again? When obituary? 

[somac.]

https://x.com/CorySwan

Let's see what @grok
 had to say about the theory:

"Binance (and CZ-linked market makers) could be a primary driver of the post-hack slide, with the move then amplified by copy-trading.

On October 29, 2026, Binance suffered the largest crypto heist on record (~$6.3–6.4B across chains, including ~18,270 BTC). It halted withdrawals, saw order-book depth on BTC drop roughly 30% in the first day (per Talos data), and later boosted fee rebates for smaller market makers to rebuild liquidity. It has publicly stated it covered the losses from its own resources (partial SAFU draw, futures insurance fund, and treasury), buying replacement tokens on the open market and OTC, and claims to have replenished the vast majority. Immediate price impact was real but limited (BTC briefly toward the mid-$70ks). The deeper slide toward the mid-$60ks has continued into mid-November amid documented ETF outflows, stronger dollar, hotter CPI/rate-hike pricing, post-midterm regulatory worries, and liquidation cascades.

That is the mainstream account.

Here is the alternative you and others have floated.

Incentives and capabilities
Binance is the dominant spot and derivatives venue. Its price prints and order-book behavior heavily influence the “reference” price that other exchanges, ETFs, and systematic traders follow. Thin post-hack books lower the capital required to move price meaningfully.

CZ has a long documented history of owning or controlling market-making entities (Merit Peak and Sigma Chain) that were major liquidity providers on Binance platforms. The 2023 SEC complaint alleged these entities engaged in substantial wash trading, were intimately involved in providing the liquidity the platforms needed, and created conflicts where Zhao’s interests sat on both sides of customer trades. Critics have repeatedly pointed to suspicious order-flow patterns, liquidation cascades that appear to benefit certain counterparties, and the difficulty of distinguishing ordinary MM inventory management from more directional activity. Even after formal separation claims, related-party or “friendly” MM relationships are opaque; the books are not public in real time.

After a multi-billion-dollar hole, the economic incentive is not purely “buy the dip to make customers whole.” Covering at high prices is expensive. Walking the market down first (or leaning into existing weakness) lets residual buying or inventory replenishment occur at better levels.

Aggressive or one-sided quoting by related or incentivized MMs can also push price into clusters of leveraged longs, generating liquidations. Those liquidations produce fees for the exchange, force selling that can be absorbed more cheaply, and reset positioning. Reports in mid-November already noted traders mapping repeated flushes into long clusters since the hack, with Binance accounts still heavily long heading into several of them.

The mechanism and the cascade
A relatively modest, coordinated or opportunistic push does not need to explain the entire move by itself. In thin liquidity, selective selling or the temporary withdrawal of bids by key MMs can break technical levels, produce visible negative flows, and print lower highs. Once those signals appear on charts, in ETF/flow data, and in funding/open-interest metrics, professional traders, momentum systems, CTAs, and discretionary desks copy-trade the breakdown. That is the standard reflexive process in crypto: the initial impulse (whatever its origin) becomes self-reinforcing as stops are hit, leverage is flushed, and new shorts are added. Weekend and low-volume periods make this especially efficient.

Post-hack conditions made the environment more favorable for such influence: reduced depth, elevated uncertainty, ongoing phased withdrawal reopening, and a general reduction in risk appetite that already had some natural sellers. The claimed open-market buying for coverage can coexist with other related-party selling or inventory management that nets the price lower in the short term. Proof-of-reserves snapshots and coverage announcements are self-reported and do not fully reveal the timing or offsetting flows of affiliated trading entities.

Why this is hard to dismiss even without a smoking gun
Crypto markets have repeatedly shown that a small number of large, coordinated or highly incentivized participants can move price in the short-to-medium term when liquidity is impaired. Historical patterns around Binance liquidations, volume spikes, and CZ-linked entities give the hypothesis a track record of similar claims that were never fully disproven in real time. The copy-trading dynamic you described is not speculative; it is how modern crypto price discovery works once a directional signal is confirmed on the charts and in visible flows. Macro factors (ETF outflows, rates, dollar) are real and concurrent, but they do not preclude a powerful venue-level actor from leaning on the market at the margin, especially when its own books and related MMs give it both the motive and the means.

In short: the public narrative emphasizes coverage buying and external macro forces. The steelman version notes the dominant venue, thin post-hack liquidity, long-standing related-party MM history and allegations, clear economic incentives around price levels and liquidations, and the reflexive amplification by pro traders once the technical and flow signals appear. Direct evidence of an intentional “walk the price down and rebuy cheaper” program is absent from public data, which is why the claim remains unproven. But the structural conditions that would make it possible and profitable are documented and were present."

[OutOfMemory]

Well I may get my first dip buy today.

It was 63.8k

I need 62.2k

Ok, i have set one at 64.5k (filled) and another one at 62.4k, yet.

EDIT: The lower one i speculated on that 2am dip...