bitcoin-trader.biz

[Illutian]

It's not much of a change, but it is a noticeably predictable cycle. I emphasis cycle because the change is so small, that I usually see it go back up above the point I had initially looked at in the morning on CoinWarz.

Unless you can prove it with numbers you are probably just seeing what you want to see. The mind is great at seeing patterns that aren't really there. This is just the kind of speculation that Pirateat40 encouraged among his followers. No need to explain what you're doing if they already think they know.

True, but the charted activity per week does substantiate the 'noticed pattern'.

10 days: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg10zigDailyztgSzm1g10zm2g25

I'd have to keep a record to even hope to show the pattern. But this is the first time looking at it

1 mo: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg30zigDailyztgSzm1g10zm2g25

August has actually been a pretty good month to show this pattern. There hasn't been any "oh shit" news other than BitLicense.

It's still a game of Russian Roulette. But this pattern metaphorically adds 2 extra rounds in addition to the one round

EDIT: And no. I am not offering a "get rich-er" thing. Use your brains people. Check the news pertaining to BTC. You could still lose out and the price continue to drop the following week.

[1715070884]

1715070884

[1715070884]

1715070884

[Grinder]

I'd have to keep a record to even hope to show the pattern. But this is the first time looking at it

You can get the numbers from Bitcoin Charts by using load raw data on the charts page.

[Illutian]

I'd have to keep a record to even hope to show the pattern. But this is the first time looking at it

You can get the numbers from Bitcoin Charts by using load raw data on the charts page.

Meant I'd have to keep a record, in this case per month, of the 'Time Period: Daily' filter. But that's a bit too much work some a casual like myself.

[sunny1]

If you notice the BTC price drops on the weekends. This may be why they don't use bots, and only trade on weekdays; excluding holidays. They use the weekend to drop the price of BTC. So they can pump it up throughout the following week.


...On average, the price drops about $20 USD during the weekend; only to begin rising around Tuesday-ish.

I like the idea of a noticeable pattern, and I'm sure that everyone trading coin would love to take advantage of cyclical events, but looking at the last 3 months of bitstamp prices, I don't see what you see as far as a pattern goes. Please correct me if I am wrong.
NB: I modified, in Kolour, a chart I copied from bitcoincharts.com, to highlight the weekends vs weekdays.
[snipping photo so the Post Wall of Doom doesn't manifest!]

I was just going by what I notice using CoinWarz, defaults to Coinbase's price. Which I believe is Bitstamp's price. Because Coinbase is more like a PayPal with BTC service than an actual trading exchange.

But with your chart. You can see that at the start of the Weekend there's typically a sell off (red candle) and a rally starting around Tuesday into Wednesday (green candle). This is, of course, not true if there was a selloff during the Friday-ish day on this planet, meaning it can start as early as Thursday for 'negative' GMT countries (I'm 6hrs behind, myself).

It's not much of a change, but it is a noticeably predictable cycle. I emphasis cycle because the change is so small, that I usually see it go back up above the point I had initially looked at in the morning on CoinWarz.

Meaning: I get up, check. That becomes the 'high'. Refresh a few hours later and the new 'high' is ~15 - 25 USD below the previous. By the time I go to bed the 'high' is now above the high I remembered seeing when I first checked. However, this change doesn't seem to happen much during the Weekday, unless something panics the crowd (damn you China; stahp eet!); again with the same casual glances.


NOTE: I do not chart watch. But I do casually refresh every few hours to check the prices on alt coins and just curiosity of what's going on in BTC Land (ie: Large drop, "oh shit, what happened; let's check the news tab of Google for 'Bitcoin'").

So far I've done...6 cashouts; 4 of those were not reinvestment payments. However, all were requested on Saturday (on purpose). And I believe all by one resulted in my BTC deposit being worth more than when it had been requested. Believe the one happened on the coat-tail of the New York BitLicense thing being announced.

FYI: I'm in no way suggesting BT has the ability to do this (and not be in the middle of a collapse; a la MtGox style). But they may have seen the pattern that people tend to sell off their earnings on the weekends. So it's hard to justify running any trades when the overall trend of BTC Pricing is downwards....instead you'd want to be buying and waiting till about mid-week to sell off.

This might also explain why the rates are so consistent. What's the difference between being paid 1% per day and 7% per week? ...just the psychological mind game that you think you're being paid more.

So, you do the massive trading (per week) during the cyclical cycle of 'up' and 'down' per week and minor trading. Then, per day, use the massive trading (per week) to smooth over the per day trading results.

** It's an interesting theory. That could work. Really, ~1% per day isn't that hard to achieve if you're watching what you do and do get greedy. It's even easier if you have a buffer created at the start of each week, when you bought up a bunch of cheap BTC from the weekend. It also would sort of explain the reluctance to be audited as that would likely show the weekly in/out of money (in this case money being BTC).

--Remember, Google doesn't want to disclose how much power their Search Engine farms use because it would give insight into how their 'secret sauce' code indexes searches.**

Very interesting theory Illutian, thumbs up!

[Keyser Soze]

Why not, if "random people on the internet" investments help them to earn even more ? I don't see anything wrong in it.

Their method of raising capital is illogical and does not increase their profit. See below quote from another thread.

I don't have any investment in bitcoin-trader.biz.  Still I'm amazed at how little creativity detractors show.   For example, it is easy to have revolving lines of credit for fiat.   There are also multiple ways of moving fait and you can even move by using other cryto currencies.   There are fees and spreads that cut into the profit, but that isn't as much an issue if you can trade a multiple of your funds in a day.   It is also possible for prices between exchanges to narrow or reverse in a day.    

On creativity: What about the myriad ways a hypothetical arbitrageur could leverage his or her trading?

*Reinvesting some of their steady, fabulous profit until arbitrage opportunity has diminishing returns (no cost!)
*Bank loan, home loan refinance, etc. (~5%)
*Equity investors/partners (could be quite low and risk-free to arbitrageur)
*Credit card cash advance (~20%)
*Loan shark (~40%)
*Payday loan (~200%)
*Paying dozens of people 0.5-3% everyday and updating their balances appropriately (~620-3000%)

Not only is the last option the most expensive, it's the most labor-intensive. Literally the only reason someone would do that is if they want the ability to take the money and run.

Indeed. And also: If you walk up to any venture capitalist or other investment firm and can prove to them that you have a way to make 0.5-3% per day risk-free (which is what BT claims), they'll be falling over eachother to give you their money. You wouldn't need to bother with making a website with account-management, keep an entire support team on payroll and bother with questions and complaints from people with $50 investments. Furthermore, you could definitely negotiate better terms when it comes to your own cut of the profits and the lock-in time of the investment.

If BTs activities are real, then their way of collecting money is incredibly inefficient and simply wasting a ton of potential profit for them.

*Bolded for emphasis.

[TraderThom]

To play Devil's advocate - there may be a possibility not yet considered. It is conceivable that they may not be trying to raise capital, as per their statement on the BTbiz site mentions:
"Bitcoin Trader was created by a group of Bitcoin geeks, with the vision to offer ordinary people the opportunity to earn a substantial and sustainable passive income."
It may be possible, and I hope it is, that they are simply sharing profit and not trying to raise funds for something else. They could simply be nice guys, who found a way to make some money, and are happy to share the wealth to whomever puts a little faith in their plan.
Again, just playing Devil's advocate - not being naive. I have money invested with them and stand to lose if it's a scam.

That sounds so nice it must be to good to be true? Free software available everywhere,popular bands giving their new albums away on the net,capitalism's biggest nightmare is coming true. Ever think what the effect would be if Crypto Currency ever took complete hold of the world economy? If you know any Crypto Anarchists,ask them what the best way would be to get everyone into Bitcoin or any other Crypto. The peer to peer civilization is at hand(This is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect the company or any of it's employees,etc etc etc,so,my thoughts on this one,not BT Official)

[Illutian]

Why not, if "random people on the internet" investments help them to earn even more ? I don't see anything wrong in it.

Their method of raising capital is illogical and does not increase their profit. See below quote from another thread.

I don't have any investment in bitcoin-trader.biz.  Still I'm amazed at how little creativity detractors show.   For example, it is easy to have revolving lines of credit for fiat.   There are also multiple ways of moving fait and you can even move by using other cryto currencies.   There are fees and spreads that cut into the profit, but that isn't as much an issue if you can trade a multiple of your funds in a day.   It is also possible for prices between exchanges to narrow or reverse in a day.    

On creativity: What about the myriad ways a hypothetical arbitrageur could leverage his or her trading?

*Reinvesting some of their steady, fabulous profit until arbitrage opportunity has diminishing returns (no cost!)
*Bank loan, home loan refinance, etc. (~5%)
*Equity investors/partners (could be quite low and risk-free to arbitrageur)
*Credit card cash advance (~20%)
*Loan shark (~40%)
*Payday loan (~200%)
*Paying dozens of people 0.5-3% everyday and updating their balances appropriately (~620-3000%)

Not only is the last option the most expensive, it's the most labor-intensive. Literally the only reason someone would do that is if they want the ability to take the money and run.

Indeed. And also: If you walk up to any venture capitalist or other investment firm and can prove to them that you have a way to make 0.5-3% per day risk-free (which is what BT claims), they'll be falling over eachother to give you their money. You wouldn't need to bother with making a website with account-management, keep an entire support team on payroll and bother with questions and complaints from people with $50 investments. Furthermore, you could definitely negotiate better terms when it comes to your own cut of the profits and the lock-in time of the investment.

If BTs activities are real, then their way of collecting money is incredibly inefficient and simply wasting a ton of potential profit for them.

*Bolded for emphasis.

Technically speaking then. Any stock that pays out Dividends is doing the same operation as BT.

Just to note: I treat BTC as stock. Because stock's value changes and is used as monetary compensation; aka Stock Options (during hiring or during company mergers).

In this case BT's business is to buy and sell BTC, hopefully at a profit at the end of the day (literally). Just as a company's business is to sell its services and at the end of the day (yearly/quarterly) make a profit.

From those profits a percentage is designated to be paid out to investors; Dividends.

[juanbond]

Why not, if "random people on the internet" investments help them to earn even more ? I don't see anything wrong in it.

Their method of raising capital is illogical and does not increase their profit. See below quote from another thread.

I don't have any investment in bitcoin-trader.biz.  Still I'm amazed at how little creativity detractors show.   For example, it is easy to have revolving lines of credit for fiat.   There are also multiple ways of moving fait and you can even move by using other cryto currencies.   There are fees and spreads that cut into the profit, but that isn't as much an issue if you can trade a multiple of your funds in a day.   It is also possible for prices between exchanges to narrow or reverse in a day.    

On creativity: What about the myriad ways a hypothetical arbitrageur could leverage his or her trading?

*Reinvesting some of their steady, fabulous profit until arbitrage opportunity has diminishing returns (no cost!)
*Bank loan, home loan refinance, etc. (~5%)
*Equity investors/partners (could be quite low and risk-free to arbitrageur)
*Credit card cash advance (~20%)
*Loan shark (~40%)
*Payday loan (~200%)
*Paying dozens of people 0.5-3% everyday and updating their balances appropriately (~620-3000%)

Not only is the last option the most expensive, it's the most labor-intensive. Literally the only reason someone would do that is if they want the ability to take the money and run.

Indeed. And also: If you walk up to any venture capitalist or other investment firm and can prove to them that you have a way to make 0.5-3% per day risk-free (which is what BT claims), they'll be falling over eachother to give you their money. You wouldn't need to bother with making a website with account-management, keep an entire support team on payroll and bother with questions and complaints from people with $50 investments. Furthermore, you could definitely negotiate better terms when it comes to your own cut of the profits and the lock-in time of the investment.

If BTs activities are real, then their way of collecting money is incredibly inefficient and simply wasting a ton of potential profit for them.

*Bolded for emphasis.

Technically speaking then. Any stock that pays out Dividends is doing the same operation as BT.

Just to note: I treat BTC as stock. Because stock's value changes and is used as monetary compensation; aka Stock Options (during hiring or during company mergers).

In this case BT's business is to buy and sell BTC, hopefully at a profit at the end of the day (literally). Just as a company's business is to sell its services and at the end of the day (yearly/quarterly) make a profit.

From those profits a percentage is designated to be paid out to investors; Dividends.

Typical blue chip dividend stocks yield up to about 6% per year, with most being more like 2% per year.  BT's yield since November 1st 2013 (less than 10 months) has been over 220%.  This isn't a dividend in the normal sense.  This kind of yield can only be classified as a HYIP.

[Keyser Soze]

Technically speaking then. Any stock that pays out Dividends is doing the same operation as BT.

Just to note: I treat BTC as stock. Because stock's value changes and is used as monetary compensation; aka Stock Options (during hiring or during company mergers).

In this case BT's business is to buy and sell BTC, hopefully at a profit at the end of the day (literally). Just as a company's business is to sell its services and at the end of the day (yearly/quarterly) make a profit.

From those profits a percentage is designated to be paid out to investors; Dividends.

I suppose, technically, you could look at it that way. Similarly, MMM, Bitcoin Savings and Trust and countless other ponzis paid out money to "investors", until they didn't. Also, as juanbond stated above, a traditional public company's dividends are no where near what BT has been paying.

Another problem with I have with your comparison is that BT (and most every other ponzi) is more like a "black box". You have to trust them completely, there is no way to verify any of the information they are providing you. Unlike public companies that trade on traditional exchanges, there are no audits, no financial records, no proof or evidence of anything they tell you. Trusting them is, for me, very hard to do because they are not financing their operations in a logical manner. As described previously, if legitimate, they are funding their business in the most expensive and labor intensive way possible.

They appear to be operating their business exactly like a ponzi, why should I trust them and think they are different?

As a side note, BT claims to be use arbitrage, which is hardly "buy and sell, hopefully at a profit". Generally arbitrage is "risk free", except for trade execution errors or exchange theft (applicable in the bitcoin world).

[Illutian]

Oh, I know that BT's payout is...above average

...does seem odd that a scheme wouldn't mimic 'realistic' outputs. I think if the payout was roughly 1% per week the demand for 'Proof of Legitimacy' would have been delayed for several years.

[sunny1]

Oh, I know that BT's payout is...above average

...does seem odd that a scheme wouldn't mimic 'realistic' outputs. I think if the payout was roughly 1% per week the demand for 'Proof of Legitimacy' would have been delayed for several years.

They do actually pay (or mimic) realistic outputs. There is a very comprhensive analysis on the other thread and the author came to the conculusio that the results are reflecting the daily spreads on the exchanges.

[BombaUcigasa]

Oh, I know that BT's payout is...above average

...does seem odd that a scheme wouldn't mimic 'realistic' outputs. I think if the payout was roughly 1% per week the demand for 'Proof of Legitimacy' would have been delayed for several years.

They do actually pay (or mimic) realistic outputs. There is a very comprhensive analysis on the other thread and the author came to the conculusio that the results are reflecting the daily spreads on the exchanges.

Where?

[sunny1]

Oh, I know that BT's payout is...above average

...does seem odd that a scheme wouldn't mimic 'realistic' outputs. I think if the payout was roughly 1% per week the demand for 'Proof of Legitimacy' would have been delayed for several years.

They do actually pay (or mimic) realistic outputs. There is a very comprhensive analysis on the other thread and the author came to the conculusio that the results are reflecting the daily spreads on the exchanges.

Where?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=527395

[BombaUcigasa]

Oh, I know that BT's payout is...above average

...does seem odd that a scheme wouldn't mimic 'realistic' outputs. I think if the payout was roughly 1% per week the demand for 'Proof of Legitimacy' would have been delayed for several years.

They do actually pay (or mimic) realistic outputs. There is a very comprhensive analysis on the other thread and the author came to the conculusio that the results are reflecting the daily spreads on the exchanges.

Where?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=527395

I re-read the linked thead. There is nothing about any kind of analysis in any of the posts, so I don't know where you got the idea that there is one...

[sunny1]

Oh, I know that BT's payout is...above average

...does seem odd that a scheme wouldn't mimic 'realistic' outputs. I think if the payout was roughly 1% per week the demand for 'Proof of Legitimacy' would have been delayed for several years.

They do actually pay (or mimic) realistic outputs. There is a very comprhensive analysis on the other thread and the author came to the conculusio that the results are reflecting the daily spreads on the exchanges.

Where?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=527395

I re-read the linked thead. There is nothing about any kind of analysis in any of the posts, so I don't know where you got the idea that there is one...

Sorry it was actually in this thread written by yourself

...there is no statistical indication that the numbers are cooked, but I was also unable to identify the method they use for profit-taking. It looks like they bet on price changes with open short or long positions (like forex) and they sometimes close on a profit or loss when the price moves rapidly.

Anyway, my position stands as before, I can't tell if the operation is honest or if it's a ponzi. It matches real trading more, and it would require greater difficulty to operate it as a ponzi.

[BombaUcigasa]

Sorry it was actually in this thread written by yourself

It's ok, look for the blue robot next time

They have some results that match positively and negatively with huge market movements. I would expect this to be caused by betting on a price movement and execute a double trade on different exchanges and move funds, but which exchanges, direction, and pair preference, that I can't figure out.

I'm looking for clues on how the results can be matched to specific activities and decisions, then I can re-run the analysis based on that. At the moment, the results are what I would provide if I either employed a very stupid trading bot, had real people make trend decisions or throw up random results with amplitude modulation.

Or maybe they audit that was promised can provide sufficient information.

[vach]

If I were running such a service, i'd provide stabile percent instead of real one, client would see an average but not the real income jumps and falls. So I'd rather not lookin for any matches with the market data...

[BombaUcigasa]

If I were running such a service, i'd provide stabile percent instead of real one, client would see an average but not the real income jumps and falls. So I'd rather not lookin for any matches with the market data...

You mean like they already did a few months back?

[vach]

If I were running such a service, i'd provide stabile percent instead of real one, client would see an average but not the real income jumps and falls. So I'd rather not lookin for any matches with the market data...

You mean like they already did a few months back?

What chart is that?

I dont know what they did, I mean if user/customer sees 2% then -0.5% then 1% he is paniking, and he rather preferes averaged stabile income per day then risky investment where he cant do anything... Its just a psycological aspect.. They feel it more reliable and safe when result is not changing too much.

[Grinder]

b-t.biz cant be a ponzi or they put their own money inside, because of the payouts and expired shares.

There's a third option: You don't know how a ponzi works. In your case reading the first sentence in the Wikipedia article should be enough to clear up your confusion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme