Can we have two bubbles in one year?

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

It's obvious that big crashes shake out weak hands, leaving strong hands, almost by definition.

[MAbtc]

This is not a bubble. Adoption in China is going on.

What is your definition of adoption? Is it just entry of speculators? Or something else? Because I haven't heard of anything else going on. If the former, not sure I agree.

It's obvious that big crashes shake out weak hands, leaving strong hands, almost by definition.

Like, something tangible / observable?

So, no go on that? Price goes back up -- we assume that strong hands are now holding?

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

What's your question exactly? If by "speculators" you mean weak hands, no it's also new strong hands. It's always a mix.

[MAbtc]

What's your question exactly?

Are there any indicators that suggest the weak hands/strong hands theory, or is it just anecdotal? Like, something we can observe over time?

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

What's your question exactly?

Are there any indicators that suggest the weak/hands strong hand theory, or is it just anecdotal?

What theory?

[MAbtc]

What's your question exactly?

Are there any indicators that suggest the weak/hands strong hand theory, or is it just anecdotal?

What theory?

That when price rebounds following a crash, the new holders are less likely to sell at any given price point. Isn't that the gist of the "strong hands are now holding" statement that is constantly repeated?

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

The new *group of* holders, yes, as - since the last crash was particularly recent - a particularly large proportion of those holders have shown they are strong hands because they just weathered a crash. The x-factor is how many of the newly added holders are strong hands. Note that the requirement includes that they continue holding for a significant amount of time, like a few months. Put another way, what looked like pie-in-the-sky prices in January 2013 now have built a foundation from which to grow.

[MAbtc]

The new *group of* holders, yes, as - since the last crash was particularly recent - a particularly large proportion of those holders have shown they are strong hands because they just weathered a crash.

So it is purely anecdotal, then? We don't really know who sold or bought, or when, nor their psychology or targets. Trying to bottom feed doesn't mean you won't dump.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

It's just basic reasoning: people who didn't budge during a major crash are prima facie more likely to hold steady than those that freaked out. Strong hands generally are strong hands because they are deep-down confidet in Bitcoin's future, and weak hands are not.

[MAbtc]

It's just basic reasoning: people who didn't budge during a major crash are prima facie more likely to hold steady than those that freaked out.

If you agree with this, the next step is easy: Those that didn't budge, by hypothesis, are left holding and those that freaked out are left with no or fewer coins (except the good traders, which are a rare species).

Sure, those who held during the first crash are likely to hold in a second. That's not what I'm talking about. That's irrelevant as no coins are changing hands.

I'm talking about the buyers that buy up the recovery. The bottom feeders. The "weak hands" are being shaken out -- but are "strong hands" buying up the coins?

There just seems to be a circular logic here, where "buying" (period) makes one a "strong hand."

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Oh, no - not necessarily. Though people get stronger handwise as they learn more about Bitcoin, and former weak hands that panicked and lost their ticket probably often get stronger and wait for a buying op.

I don't know how it feels to slam dunk your bitcoins into the trash at $2 in late 2011, or $50 in April, or $70 on the day of the SR shutdown. But it must feel pretty bad and cause some soul-searching (about Bitcoin) in many cases.

[Peter Lambert]

It's just basic reasoning: people who didn't budge during a major crash are prima facie more likely to hold steady than those that freaked out.

If you agree with this, the next step is easy: Those that didn't budge, by hypothesis, are left holding and those that freaked out are left with no or fewer coins (except the good traders, which are a rare species).

Sure, those who held during the first crash are likely to hold in a second. That's not what I'm talking about. That's irrelevant as no coins are changing hands.

I'm talking about the buyers that buy up the recovery. The bottom feeders. The "weak hands" are being shaken out -- but are "strong hands" buying up the coins?

There just seems to be a circular logic here, where "buying" (period) makes one a "strong hand."

Presumably the people holding coins through the first crash were also buying more coins since, so their strong hand would have become larger. I don't know of any way to actually measure something like that, this is all based on suppositions and guessing.

If I didn't sell when the price was 250 because I think the price is going to 1000, when the price hits 50 I buy some because I believe it is at a discount.

[mootinator]

Strong hands also = people like me who bought in at $25, sold half at $50. The only incentive I have to sell is when having X dollars today becomes more interesting to me than holding and seeing how far this goes. Crashes are irrelevant.

[Xer0]

you can even have 3.
or 0.
or 2 in a month... that's Bitcoin 

[klee]

Will somebody mention the difficulty jump from 7,673,000 in April to 267,731,249 today and above 350,000,000 in 3 days tops?
if the price was above 200$ with ~8mil difficulty where should it be today?

P.S. I'm Greek by the way

Geia sou patrida

[MaTachi]

Plus all of the weak hands have been scared off the exchanges after the bubble burst in Apr. Now there are a lot of people holding their coins no matter what.

Is there any sort of a basis for the strong hands / weak hands theory? Like, something tangible / observable? So many people state this "fact", but it just seems like a wild assumption to me.

He/she is only trying to justify for himself/herself why it possibly can't crash this time and that it's completely different now. Dangerous.

[1Pakis]

Geia sou patrida

Geia sou kai se esena
To site stin ypografi sou einai diko sou h einai diafimisi?

[600watt]

shit man, if it continues like this, we will be asking us "can we have two bubbles in one day?"   

[User705]

Two other possible things to consider.  Bitcoin currently is still inflationary since a rather large % of coins keep getting created every day.  A large amount of ASIC manufacturers need to convert BTC to fiat and a large number of ASIC buyers need to cash out their losing bets on most recent ASIC buys.

[1Pakis]

This doesn't change fact that you need much more that 200$ to mine 1BTC or 200000$ to mine 1000BTC.