JimboToronto
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 4200
Merit: 4899
You're never too old to think young.
|
 |
October 07, 2014, 04:19:29 AM |
|
Cool. It's things like this that make me a long-term bull. |
|
|
|
|
|
vuduchyld
|
|
October 07, 2014, 04:20:50 AM |
|
The only fully rational motivation I can see is if he was trying to achieve a low but stable price for a period of hours during which to secure an OTC deal in the other direction This. I think you'll find the $300 ask was posted almost exactly at 01.00 UTC. It's possible it was the target for a much larger deal that was going through or futures contract settlement time, perhaps even being targetted since July to have price at $300 on that day and time. Looked a lot like options expiry time manipulation often seen in the commodities markets. Another great point |
|
|
|
|
nanobrain
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
Dumb broad
|
|
October 07, 2014, 04:26:06 AM |
|
The only fully rational motivation I can see is if he was trying to achieve a low but stable price for a period of hours during which to secure an OTC deal in the other direction This. I think you'll find the $300 ask was posted almost exactly at 01.00 UTC. It's possible it was the target for a much larger deal that was going through or futures contract settlement time, perhaps even being targetted since July to have price at $300 on that day and time. Looked a lot like options expiry time manipulation often seen in the commodities markets. Another great point  |
|
|
|
|
|
vuduchyld
|
|
October 07, 2014, 04:35:15 AM |
|
I'm not sure it is somehow simpler to assume that an irrational actor cost themselves millions of dollars, but OK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
October 07, 2014, 04:46:42 AM |
|
Didn't he first put the wall up at $280, take it down for an hour or two, then put it back at $320? And it was getting nibbled at $320 too. Then it disappeared and came back at $300, where it was obviously got eaten until gone. I really don't understand why he moved it from $320 to $300 given that it was getting action at $320...*iff* he was (even poorly) rationally trying to price-maximize.
Obviously tossing up a single 30k wall doesn't make too much sense for someone who's primary objective was rationally selling that stash. But I can maybe buy the theory of an irrational/undisciplined/freaked-out holder *except* for the move from $320 to $300, since there was indeed stable action at $320.
The only fully rational motivation I can see is if he was trying to achieve a low but stable price for a period of hours during which to secure an OTC deal in the other direction. He tried $280, but it was unstably crashing the price, so he tried $320. He got good interest there with a stable price, so he decided to see if he could do better and keep things stable at $300. Price pegged right up against the wall without crashing, so he stuck with it, and priced a bigger buy deal on OTC based on a stable price of $300. ...
Who knows... Not all players are rational, so it could be anything. Whatever; even the big trades are insignificant noise in the long run.
What about this: he was afraid that the price would just keep falling if he waited too long, and decided he had to sell in a few hours at most. He asked 280, saw that there was enough demand, tried at 320, saw that it was going to take a long while, so moved to 300, and it worked well enough for his purposes. |
|
|
|
|
|
igl00
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:00:04 AM |
|
BTC will get back to 500 for sure
|
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
 Online
Activity: 2366
Merit: 1820
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
 |
October 07, 2014, 05:01:06 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Melbustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1004
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:03:18 AM |
|
Didn't he first put the wall up at $280, take it down for an hour or two, then put it back at $320? And it was getting nibbled at $320 too. Then it disappeared and came back at $300, where it was obviously got eaten until gone. I really don't understand why he moved it from $320 to $300 given that it was getting action at $320...*iff* he was (even poorly) rationally trying to price-maximize.
Obviously tossing up a single 30k wall doesn't make too much sense for someone who's primary objective was rationally selling that stash. But I can maybe buy the theory of an irrational/undisciplined/freaked-out holder *except* for the move from $320 to $300, since there was indeed stable action at $320.
The only fully rational motivation I can see is if he was trying to achieve a low but stable price for a period of hours during which to secure an OTC deal in the other direction. He tried $280, but it was unstably crashing the price, so he tried $320. He got good interest there with a stable price, so he decided to see if he could do better and keep things stable at $300. Price pegged right up against the wall without crashing, so he stuck with it, and priced a bigger buy deal on OTC based on a stable price of $300. ...
Who knows... Not all players are rational, so it could be anything. Whatever; even the big trades are insignificant noise in the long run.
What about this: he was afraid that the price would just keep falling if he waited too long, and decided he had to sell in a few hours at most. He asked 280, saw that there was enough demand, tried at 320, saw that it was going to take a long while, so moved to 300, and it worked well enough for his purposes. He didn't have it at $320 for very long, IIRC (less than an hour?), and it was getting action the whole time. The action during the first hour at $300 seemed similar; it took a few hours to really get going. Though maybe my memory is off; I was doing other stuff while glancing at the book/wall periodically. |
|
|
|
|
|
catena5260
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:04:13 AM |
|
Cool. It's things like this that make me a long-term bull. long term we all will be dead. What happens in meanwhile is so or more important |
|
|
|
|
|
FNG
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:08:26 AM |
|
Strong feeling that we're about to repeat the Oct / Nov rally.
Sentiment has changed. VC money flowing again. Press on the crash has been pretty good. Rally on
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Online
Activity: 3906
Merit: 11182
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:22:00 AM |
|
Anybody know where to buy that shirt? I need that shirt so bad. he really has zero introspective abilities doesn't he... he doesn't realise that no matter how passionate he is and how strong he feels about certain issues and ideas, legitimacy is important if you want to make impact and to have people listen to you. If you are going to purposely disregard the fact that people have programmed opinions and prejudices and not give a shit about how you come across because of that, you're just an idiot and you're shooting yourself in the foot and fucking with your big principles for the sake of very minor principles.... and everyone you work alongside and speak on behalf of. as I type this he hasn't stopped... sounds like a high dude at a squat party  Watched until 17 min and he seemed level headed . Perhaps reference the time he becomes unruly for others That guy is manic. Diagnosed by Doctor Lyth  Seems like a normal and smart guy who is excited to talk about his various ideas and how technology is evolving (with his help) to offer some potential solutions to societal centralization and control issues. Amir, is anything but normal, young, smart, passionate, has no respect for the status quo, wild ideas, he is a crazy one, and he's alright in my book. i'd break my "not smoking any more pot rule" if i was given the chance to blaze with this nut bag  Well, maybe I do NOT know him as well as you? I had only been introduced to him through that one video clip - maybe less than 15 minutes worth of him talking? He does seem to have quite a bit to say... though....Maybe I would have troubles hanging out with him, or having a beer, who knows? But he seems like someone with whom we could shoot the shit for several hours, no problem, so long as he does NOT get into too much conversating about the overly technical matters related to crypto or 1s and 0s, b/c then I might get lost.... but he seems to have a decent perspective regarding the paradigm shifting nature of BTC and the threats imposed to the status quo financial institutions... .and the various political movements that BTC could assist. |
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Online
Activity: 3906
Merit: 11182
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:27:45 AM |
|
http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/06/what-is-happening-to-bitcoin-right-now/Note the quote. Exactly what i was thinking. It makes the most sense of all theories i've heard yet it's the hardest to believe for most here for some reason. "Seems pretty clear to me. An early adopter decided $300 is their breaking point. They want to cash out their $9m before they miss their chance. They’re not experienced with handling this amount of money because they’ve never been rich before; they just got lucky. They don’t have the connections to sell off-market so they decided to sell the way they know and the way that’s guaranteed to work: a Bitstamp sell order below market. They could maybe get more money with a more sophisticated trading strategy but who cares? They’ll take their $9m and retire on a beach somewhere for the rest of their lives. That’s what I’d do if I had 30,000 BTC right now and I bet you would too." The guy was looking at the price going down every hour and basically panic sold. Below 300 was just too much for him. He was losing 10.000's per day. He moved the coins to Stamp, right away did a 5k dump to secure a good amount of money (his aim was a million) and when he saw there were buyers he put the rest up at 300. Perfectly reasonable explanation. He wasn't the bearwhale. He also isn't buying back. Just a guy who wanted out. Yes, that happens. Pure speculation without any real basis in reality to conclude that was what was going on with that 30k btc selling. I agree, and even an immature early adopter wouldn't have been so stupid not to sell much earlier in the downturn. He had 10 solid months to do so. do we know enough information to even conclude that he had these 30k btc through the bubble. We are really grasping at straws when we attempt to construct a whole story line around the selling, when we do NOT know much or anything about the coins... except that they had seemed to flash a few times before the 24k btc wall went up and stayed. I have nothing against speculating or even describing various scenarios that seem more plausible than others... the sell 30k b/c you are fed up scenario seems to be amongst the less convincing scenarios, but it is described in the article (and propagated by Shroomie) as if it is the ONLY or the most plausible scenario... .. which just seems to be a selective vision of attempting to see what one wants to see or something like that. |
|
|
|
|
nanobrain
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
Dumb broad
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:48:48 AM |
|
I'm not sure it is somehow simpler to assume that an irrational actor cost themselves millions of dollars, but OK.
We don't know that all these orders were even by the same person or group but assuming they were, let us remember that this was all kicked off by a market sell of around 8K. That doesn't seem to be the work of someone who is also manipulating the futures market 6 months in advance. I really don't know and hope this inspires some investigative journalism to find out the 'truth'. It's great reading all the theories but I do think we should be careful not to ascribe too much complexity. |
|
|
|
|
nanobrain
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
Dumb broad
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:50:34 AM |
|
The volume on counterparty is crazy -- double Monero which usually leads all the alts on Polo -- and up 140%. |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2366
Merit: 1820
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
October 07, 2014, 06:01:07 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
heartastack
|
|
October 07, 2014, 06:28:26 AM |
|
WhatsApp deal closed for 21 billion dollars. Billion with a B!Bitcoin total market cap 4.5 billion, after more than 5 years...  Still believe it's the next Internet, combustible engine, bigger than discovery of fire?? Time to wake up from dream! So what your saying is whatsapp the simple chat app is severely overvalued or BTC is severely relatively undervalued? Both would make sense, more the latter |
|
|
|
|
|
samsonn25
|
|
October 07, 2014, 06:29:26 AM |
|
WhatsApp has over 600 million users, at $30 person value thats 18 Billion market cap.
If Bitcoin had even 60 million users at $30 person value is only 1.8 Billion, so it seems over valued now? Granted there are more coins to mine and be circulated.
|
|
|
|
|
nanobrain
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000
Dumb broad
|
|
October 07, 2014, 06:30:18 AM |
|
Uhhooo...a bit of volume and back into the 320s.
All those waiting to buy back...say aye!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Davyd05
|
|
October 07, 2014, 06:32:17 AM |
|
WhatsApp has over 600 million users, at $30 person value thats 18 Billion market cap.
If Bitcoin had even 60 million users at $30 person value is only 1.8 Billion, so it seems over valued now?
are you being silly... 60 million people using bitcoin atm would mean almost no1 having a single coin... depending on distribution but really a terrible comparison |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
