GBTC Bitcoin Investment Trust Observer

[gog1]

another 6300+ bought.
All the three big buys since two weeks ago have some in common.
Every buy is about $2.5 M
all happen at Tuesday

Where do you see 6300+ bought today?

Could be weekly OTC deal with large mining farm.

I'm not sure how they operate, but wouldn't they be required to be 'fully invested'?  If so, the $2+ million buy would represent a $2+ million in flow.  Who they buy the coin from isn't really a big concern.

[jl2012]

6348XBT was bought with $2.42M

[RoadTrain]

I wonder how liquid the OTC market is. These buys are not that large, one could buy that much (say, 1k a day for 7k a week) on the exchanges without significantly moving prices.

[derpinheimer]

IDK, it seems pretty significant to me. Imagine how much of the volume is daytrading garbage... 6k of real buys is probably the net change of 60k+ volume... or 600k+ on Chinese exchanges.

[RoadTrain]

IDK, it seems pretty significant to me. Imagine how much of the volume is daytrading garbage... 6k of real buys is probably the net change of 60k+ volume... or 600k+ on Chinese exchanges.

If you constantly remove 1k BTC a day from markets, it will cause upward pressure, of course, but it will take time for it to build. I don't think these 20k are significant, unless buying continues at the same pace for a couple of months.

[Wary]

04 Nov    + 7,629 BTC   
11 Nov    + 6,847 BTC
18 Nov   another 7K ?

It was mean to be a joke  

[Wexlike]

04 Nov    + 7,629 BTC   
11 Nov    + 6,847 BTC
18 Nov   another 7K ?

It was mean to be a joke  

 

Wary, i think you have a special gift..

[oda.krell]

IDK, it seems pretty significant to me. Imagine how much of the volume is daytrading garbage... 6k of real buys is probably the net change of 60k+ volume... or 600k+ on Chinese exchanges.

If you constantly remove 1k BTC a day from markets, it will cause upward pressure, of course, but it will take time for it to build. I don't think these 20k are significant, unless buying continues at the same pace for a couple of months.

There are two aspects of large, public buys or sells: the net effect on overall buying/selling, and the psychological effect. Your point re: net effect is correct of course, but the same could then be said (more or less) about the SR auctions (which are also just a week or two of mining subsidies). What it ignores is the substantial effect such orders have on the market in addition to it. Similarly to how Bitstamp's "bearwhale" created panic at first, then, when it turned out there is actually the demand to absorb the offer, created a (minor) rally, I believe that there's a (hard to quantify maybe) market impact of learning that large, presumably private, investors are buying at these prices, more than they did in the months before.

[JorgeStolfi]

04 Nov    + 7,629 BTC   
11 Nov    + 6,847 BTC
18 Nov   another 7K ?

It was mean to be a joke  

It has been noted before that they seemed to buy at 1 week intervals (or do their accounting once a week).  But it was on Thursdays, IIRC...

I am still wondering about that puzzling SEC order. 

[gotmilk_]

They (alone) are taking off the market almost 1/3 of the weekly coin supply. For the third week in a row 
 

[N12]

6348XBT was bought with $2.42M

The third time now!

[MoreFun]

This trust is one of the biggest bagholders and their buying really does not mean a lot - at least till now it didn't (no reference to buying and future price rises).

These kind of trusts will mostly be bubble pumpers and bagholders of every next bubble.

[RoadTrain]

IDK, it seems pretty significant to me. Imagine how much of the volume is daytrading garbage... 6k of real buys is probably the net change of 60k+ volume... or 600k+ on Chinese exchanges.

If you constantly remove 1k BTC a day from markets, it will cause upward pressure, of course, but it will take time for it to build. I don't think these 20k are significant, unless buying continues at the same pace for a couple of months.

There are two aspects of large, public buys or sells: the net effect on overall buying/selling, and the psychological effect. Your point re: net effect is correct of course, but the same could then be said (more or less) about the SR auctions (which are also just a week or two of mining subsidies). What it ignores is the substantial effect such orders have on the market in addition to it. Similarly to how Bitstamp's "bearwhale" created panic at first, then, when it turned out there is actually the demand to absorb the offer, created a (minor) rally, I believe that there's a (hard to quantify maybe) market impact of learning that large, presumably private, investors are buying at these prices, more than they did in the months before.

Don't you think that it's not that difficult to mask your buys? Because if you mask them properly, I believe you can avoid the psychological effect.

[oda.krell]

IDK, it seems pretty significant to me. Imagine how much of the volume is daytrading garbage... 6k of real buys is probably the net change of 60k+ volume... or 600k+ on Chinese exchanges.

If you constantly remove 1k BTC a day from markets, it will cause upward pressure, of course, but it will take time for it to build. I don't think these 20k are significant, unless buying continues at the same pace for a couple of months.

There are two aspects of large, public buys or sells: the net effect on overall buying/selling, and the psychological effect. Your point re: net effect is correct of course, but the same could then be said (more or less) about the SR auctions (which are also just a week or two of mining subsidies). What it ignores is the substantial effect such orders have on the market in addition to it. Similarly to how Bitstamp's "bearwhale" created panic at first, then, when it turned out there is actually the demand to absorb the offer, created a (minor) rally, I believe that there's a (hard to quantify maybe) market impact of learning that large, presumably private, investors are buying at these prices, more than they did in the months before.

Don't you think that it's not that difficult to mask your buys? Because if you mask them properly, I believe you can avoid the psychological effect.

In principle, yes. That's why I've said for a while now, in opposition to some of the uberbulls, that if truly big capital wants to enter, they will probably do so off-exchange, by contractually binding large mining operations' outputs to themselves. That might still leave traces in the overall supply situation and have some effect on on-exchange prices, but probably be less of an impact than if they'd outright buy the same amounts on-exchange.

Anyway, the above is conjecture: it's only to point out why it is possible that big capital is entering a substantial position without us noticing directly that this is happening.

SecondMarket buys are publicly visible (or at least: the outcome is visible publicly, we don't know where and how they're getting their orders filled), that much is clear. So the psychological effect (if it exists) does apply.

But maybe I misunderstood the question?

[600watt]

In principle, yes. That's why I've said for a while now, in opposition to some of the uberbulls, that if truly big capital wants to enter, they will probably do so off-exchange, by contractually binding large mining operations' outputs to themselves. That might still leave traces in the overall supply situation and have some effect on on-exchange prices, but probably be less of an impact than if they'd outright buy the same amounts on-exchange.

Anyway, the above is conjecture: it's only to point out why it is possible that big capital is entering a substantial position without us noticing directly that this is happening.

SecondMarket buys are publicly visible (or at least: the outcome is visible publicly, we don't know where and how they're getting their orders filled), that much is clear. So the psychological effect (if it exists) does apply.

But maybe I misunderstood the question?

*insulting garbage*

dont mess with oda. he is smarter than you by several orders of magnitude.

[Biodom]

IDK, it seems pretty significant to me. Imagine how much of the volume is daytrading garbage... 6k of real buys is probably the net change of 60k+ volume... or 600k+ on Chinese exchanges.

If you constantly remove 1k BTC a day from markets, it will cause upward pressure, of course, but it will take time for it to build. I don't think these 20k are significant, unless buying continues at the same pace for a couple of months.

There are two aspects of large, public buys or sells: the net effect on overall buying/selling, and the psychological effect. Your point re: net effect is correct of course, but the same could then be said (more or less) about the SR auctions (which are also just a week or two of mining subsidies). What it ignores is the substantial effect such orders have on the market in addition to it. Similarly to how Bitstamp's "bearwhale" created panic at first, then, when it turned out there is actually the demand to absorb the offer, created a (minor) rally, I believe that there's a (hard to quantify maybe) market impact of learning that large, presumably private, investors are buying at these prices, more than they did in the months before.

Don't you think that it's not that difficult to mask your buys? Because if you mask them properly, I believe you can avoid the psychological effect.

In principle, yes. That's why I've said for a while now, in opposition to some of the uberbulls, that if truly big capital wants to enter, they will probably do so off-exchange, by contractually binding large mining operations' outputs to themselves. That might still leave traces in the overall supply situation and have some effect on on-exchange prices, but probably be less of an impact than if they'd outright buy the same amounts on-exchange.

Anyway, the above is conjecture: it's only to point out why it is possible that big capital is entering a substantial position without us noticing directly that this is happening.

SecondMarket buys are publicly visible (or at least: the outcome is visible publicly, we don't know where and how they're getting their orders filled), that much is clear. So the psychological effect (if it exists) does apply.

But maybe I misunderstood the question?

Well, 21 thou in 2-3 weeks (depending if you count the week preceding the first buy) is 1-1.5thou BTC/day.
Considering that current production is "just" 3.6 thou BTC/day, it is a substantial number and it is just one fund.
I don't think that this means higher prices, but it WOULD mean higher prices if this continues unabated or increases in volume and frequency.
I am of the opinion that if you see one fund doing this, then there are more doing the same and, of course, some doing the opposite.

[RoadTrain]

In principle, yes. That's why I've said for a while now, in opposition to some of the uberbulls, that if truly big capital wants to enter, they will probably do so off-exchange, by contractually binding large mining operations' outputs to themselves. That might still leave traces in the overall supply situation and have some effect on on-exchange prices, but probably be less of an impact than if they'd outright buy the same amounts on-exchange.

Anyway, the above is conjecture: it's only to point out why it is possible that big capital is entering a substantial position without us noticing directly that this is happening.

SecondMarket buys are publicly visible (or at least: the outcome is visible publicly, we don't know where and how they're getting their orders filled), that much is clear. So the psychological effect (if it exists) does apply.

But maybe I misunderstood the question?

I totally agree with you here, so let's sit and watch if this (public) buying continues. After all, the total amount of bitcoins is known and predictable, so this can't go on largely unnoticed forever.

[wachtwoord]

I don't think that this means higher prices, but it WOULD mean higher prices if this continues unabated or increases in volume and frequency.

Exactly right.

[cr1776]

I don't think that this means higher prices, but it WOULD mean higher prices if this continues unabated or increases in volume and frequency.

Exactly right.

Particularly if they could keep this up (the # of BTC purchased per period) through and after the next halving.   

[gog1]

I think this week will be interesting, given the auction is coming up, if they will still buy bitcoin from their sources or saving the ammo for the auction.