BITSTAMP eXchange wall Observer. second biggest and best exchange

[dserrano5]

That wasn't the specific distinction he was trying to make. He was trying to illustrate that two parties with a vested interest in pumping the volume on the exchange, could trade back and forth for minimal fees, to create the appearance of a robust market.

FWIW that's how I interpreted it too.

[1714183694]

1714183694

[1714183694]

1714183694

[manfred]

That wasn't the specific distinction he was trying to make. He was trying to illustrate that two parties with a vested interest in pumping the volume on the exchange, could trade back and forth for minimal fees, to create the appearance of a robust market.

FWIW that's how I interpreted it too.

Thats why chinas volume is so high because most exchanges have no fee's and the same coins are moved back and forth.

[oda.krell]

The "consciously creating the appearance of volume" is a possibility, but not even what I really consider the main factor. Take the following example:

Scenario 1: "indecisive" market (say in a consolidation phase), but low trading cost (which, for example, seems to be the case on the Chinese exchanges). Quite high volume despite the indecision, because trading is cheap, and there's always someone trying to make a small profit by selling high/buying back low(er).

Scenario 2: A rally, with many new buyers entering the market. Overall volume could in fact be the same as in scenario 1 (since a number of established btc holders are probably tempted to sell if price is rising too fast, in anticipation of a sudden drop), but the total amount USD entering exchanges is different (assuming of course that the sellers don't leave the market entirely).

I guess I see where the idea that it doesn't really matter comes from: if, in the long run, the traders that trade "back and forth" stay out of btc entirely, then it really doesn't matter. But the crucial difference is that at least a portion of the "new" money stays in the market, and at least a portion of the money of those that sold to the new entrants will (probably) stay on the exchanges, waiting for an opportunity to rebuy.

Here's another view on the matter: think of it in terms of price discovery. In scenario 1, the participants already paid a price per btc close to the price of the trade now. For them, their contribution to the overall price discovery is rather minimal (say a trader bought at 100, and now sells at 101). A new market participant will however mark a much more substantial adjustment of what the market thinks is a fair price: he previously "valued" btc at 0, and now values them at 100 (as per the example before). Volume doesn't distinguish between those two cases, but for the long-term market dynamics it does matter, in my opinion.

[derpinheimer]

In order for the price move to be substantiated, there needs to be volume and this requires asks filling in.  19k (now 17k) is actually still low for stamp. It was 24k for a while.

Yes, but that doesnt mean asks filling in is bullish...  [its still bearish]

Back to 19k.

And back to 17k.. lol

I think these "small" movements have to be ignored.

[TERA]

In order for the price move to be substantiated, there needs to be volume and this requires asks filling in.  19k (now 17k) is actually still low for stamp. It was 24k for a while.

Yes, but that doesnt mean asks filling in is bullish...  [its still bearish]

Back to 19k.

And back to 17k.. lol

I think these "small" movements have to be ignored.

Without asks filling in, you'd have a full-on bubble with lots of volatility detracting investors and followed inevitably by an equally brutal crash that might break the trend. Slow and steady with a decent volume and liquidity is the way to go. Let's hold off bubbling till we break 260.

[molecular]

In order for the price move to be substantiated, there needs to be volume and this requires asks filling in.  19k (now 17k) is actually still low for stamp. It was 24k for a while.

Yes, but that doesnt mean asks filling in is bullish...  [its still bearish]

Back to 19k.

And back to 17k.. lol

I think these "small" movements have to be ignored.

Without asks filling in, you'd have a full-on bubble with lots of volatility detracting investors and followed inevitably by an equally brutal crash that might break the trend. Slow and steady with a decent volume and liquidity is the way to go. Let's hold off bubbling till we break 260.

ok, boss

[notme]

In order for the price move to be substantiated, there needs to be volume and this requires asks filling in.  19k (now 17k) is actually still low for stamp. It was 24k for a while.

Yes, but that doesnt mean asks filling in is bullish...  [its still bearish]

Back to 19k.

And back to 17k.. lol

I think these "small" movements have to be ignored.

Without asks filling in, you'd have a full-on bubble with lots of volatility detracting investors and followed inevitably by an equally brutal crash that might break the trend. Slow and steady with a decent volume and liquidity is the way to go. Let's hold off bubbling till we break 260.

And how do you get volume?  Oh yeah, traders, who are attracted to volatility.

[Shermo]

Looks like some big bites into that $136 wall at the mo

[Shermo]

And the wall is now at $140 with price slowly rising through the $136 range...

[Ivanhoe]

138 now, the rally is ignited again. Curious if Mt.Gox will follow.

[Shermo]

Wonder if we can break in to the 140's today?

[vokain]

legggggo

[zby]

Head and shoulder:



target is above 200

Only volume is a bit low.

[uhoh]

Wonder if we can break in to the 140's today?

[oda.krell]

nom nom (dat 140 wall)

[Ivanhoe]

Wonder if we can break in to the 150's today?

[oda.krell]

... as always, btc market gets ahead of itself. We'll scratch 150, drop back to 120-something but quickly go back to 132. From there, we'll continue the rally :D

[gunzeon]

Does anybody know of another exchange, apart from MtGox, where a trader can freely bounce between currencies ?

To me this is why tha banks sabotage their activities; they are a defacto money changer, usurping the busines from the banking cartel.

You got $US, $C, $A, Yen, Roubles, you name it, and no bank forex spread, just a minimal bitcoin trade commission.

Difficult for banks to play along with MtGox given that, me thinks.

People shifting money around freely and sharing none of it with them. Plain jealousy.

[rpietila]

Money changing is the original activity of the banks, and even Jesus condemned it.

[zby]

Does anybody know of another exchange, apart from MtGox, where a trader can freely bounce between currencies ?

To me this is why tha banks sabotage their activities; they are a defacto money changer, usurping the busines from the banking cartel.

You got $US, $C, $A, Yen, Roubles, you name it, and no bank forex spread, just a minimal bitcoin trade commission.

Difficult for banks to play along with MtGox given that, me thinks.

People shifting money around freely and sharing none of it with them. Plain jealousy.

There used to be 2% commission by MtGox for this.