rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;)

[BitChick]

Quality TA thread?  Does that mean that there will be no pictures of female's derrieres to weed through and millions of CHOO CHOOs and rocket ships?  

So what do you think the trendline is now?  Do most of you think that we are still over the "trendline?"  I have seen a "new and improved" super exponential one that seems closer to how things are moving right now with the price hitting $10,000 in May and $100,000 in August.



 

[HeliKopterBen]

If we happen to be on wave B 3 outomes are possible:

We remain below ATH (better below 960 stamp price) and then we correct below previous low.

We match ATH then we correct to previous low.

We surpass ATH then we correct to or below previous low.

So if someone believes we are on wave B, cheaper prices will happen. But you have to be sure we are on wave B.

The problem I see with this being a wave b in a downward correction is that the decline from 1242 to 455 looks like a textbook a-b-c down, indicating a wave 2 in a larger rally leg higher.

That is correct however, that abc can make an A of a larger ABC flat 3-3-5.
Some arguments against the correction ending at $455 is that the time it took was too short for the rally preceding it, there was no divergence in the underlying indicators on larger time frames at the bottom, and this rise since has no impulsive properties (There is too much overlap in the waves so looks to be corrective in itself).

Yes it looks like a good time to do nothing.

[gentlemand]

At this still very early stage in the game I think technical analysis has merit but it's nothing more than a sideline. This is a happening which is still finding its way.

You could be noodling away at your graphs just as it's revealed that Mr Nakamoto is Zeus or the US issues death certificates for everyone on this forum. Did it fall because it was about to hit wave C or whatever or because of some crappy news from China?

The valuation is what it is purely because of collective belief and acceptance. I've no idea whether it's justified. There should be a quality sentiment and news thread. That's what's going to count until we have a clear view of where things are going.

[Equus]

Posting so I can lurk and learn.

I would appreciate a link to the trendline model since so many of the early posts in this topic refer to it.

[traderCJ]

The valuation is what it is purely because of collective belief and acceptance. I've no idea whether it's justified. There should be a quality sentiment and news thread. That's what's going to count until we have a clear view of where things are going.

+1

[Voodah]

Ok, time for the TA:

Bubble velocity, engage !




Ichimoku cloud says we're fine for now... There's still some upside... Question is how much?

[molecular]

What is harder, is what to tell to the customers and business associates of various kinds. Is this the buy price or not, and for what kind of people/in what conditions it is?

Just tell them: whatever decision you make, it's always the correct one for you at the time. No regrets.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

At what point does the general concensus become bitcoin will not fail, bitcoin will not go to zero?

When each of the specific reasons why Bitcoin could fail, such as catastrophic corruption of the blockchain or the advent of a massively superior altcoin, are shown to be non-issues in a way that convinces most people, or at least most of the experts people listen to. Also, although government bans don't actually matter much as far "going to zero" scenarios, government acceptance will go far in alleviating this fear among populist investors.

Moreover, irrespective of whether such threats are conclusively proven to be non-issues, each passing year with no major incidents will automatically cause such concerns to fade.

[Siegfried]

According to the bitcoin wealth distribution thread, there are more than 11,000 individuals with more than 100 BTC. If the BTC price reaches 1 million dollars in 2016 as RP predicts, the number of 100 millionaires in the world will have increased by 38 percent (29,000 currently + 11,000 = 40,000). That would be the most rapid and dramatic wealth redistribution in history. It is difficult to imagine - my prediction is only 100,000 dollars per BTC - but I would be happy to be proven wrong.

[bclcjunkie]

i enjoy Risto's posts and glad he's got his own TA thread worth reading..

Risto what do you think about this? i find it pretty bullish in terms bitcoin finding its niche in financial world...


http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-01-05/future-money-here-zero-trust-digital-currency-contracts

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

According to the bitcoin wealth distribution thread, there are more than 11,000 individuals with more than 100 BTC. If the BTC price reaches 1 million dollars in 2016 as RP predicts, the number of 100 millionaires in the world will have increased by 38 percent (29,000 currently + 11,000 = 40,000). That would be the most rapid and dramatic wealth redistribution in history. It is difficult to imagine - my prediction is only 100,000 dollars per BTC - but I would be happy to be proven wrong.

The number of 100-millionaires wouldn't increase by nearly that many, because of dishoarding. If you have 100 BTC now and you sell 17% at each doubling (average historical dishoarding rate, according to RP(?)), you won't end up a 100 millionaire if bitcoin goes to a million, but more like a 16 millionaire in BTC with a few more million in fiat, if I got the math right. It seems you'd have to hold several hundred BTC (today) to make the cut, or else rake less than 17%.

[User705]

@siegfried Your scenario assumes that the 11,000 individuals holding over 100XBT won't sell a single one all the while prices are going to 1 million each.  An extremely unlikely scenario.  For example look at the super perma bulls on this forum and see the kind of things they all bought when XBT hit over $1000 recently.  Spending a lot of XBT in the process even while supposedly believing that XBT is going to the moon.  There will be dilution along the way while perhaps new players will be accumulating.  
@bclcjunkie  The article seems to omit the key detail of how his boombust contracts are zero trust?  Is there more info somewhere else?

[rpietila]

BTC648 to $990 (BS). That was the high before the latest crash.

If we fail to make it, the downtrend scenario raises its ugly head.

However I am not betting on a flashcrash that would instantly take it to the new lows. Quite many seem to have prepared for that. There is bid mass in the <$500 area. Otoh, above 500 the bids have not increased literally at all during the last days' rise.

I don't know what to make of this historically low volume  Last time BS had such low weekly volume was right at $130 before going UP.

[Siegfried]

According to the bitcoin wealth distribution thread, there are more than 11,000 individuals with more than 100 BTC. If the BTC price reaches 1 million dollars in 2016 as RP predicts, the number of 100 millionaires in the world will have increased by 38 percent (29,000 currently + 11,000 = 40,000). That would be the most rapid and dramatic wealth redistribution in history. It is difficult to imagine - my prediction is only 100,000 dollars per BTC - but I would be happy to be proven wrong.

The number of 100-millionaires wouldn't increase by nearly that many, because of dishoarding. If you have 100 BTC now and you sell 17% at each doubling (average historical dishoarding rate, according to RP(?)), you won't end up a 100 millionaire if bitcoin goes to a million, but more like a 16 millionaire in BTC with a few more million in fiat, if I got the math right. It seems you'd have to hold several hundred BTC (today) to make the cut, or else rake less than 17%.

@siegfried Your scenario assumes that the 11,000 individuals holding over 100XBT won't sell a single one all the while prices are going to 1 million each.  An extremely unlikely scenario.  For example look at the super perma bulls on this forum and see the kind of things they all bought when XBT hit over $1000 recently.  Spending a lot of XBT in the process even while supposedly believing that XBT is going to the moon.  There will be dilution along the way while perhaps new players will be accumulating. 
@bclcjunkie  The article seems to omit the key detail of how his boombust contracts are zero trust?  Is there more info somewhere else?

You make a good point. So the number of individuals holding 100 BTC or more in 2016 will be fewer than the 11,000 today, but it will still be several thousand bitcoin 100 millionaires. That is, if the price reaches 1 million dollars.

[rpietila]

You make a good point. So the number of individuals holding 100 BTC or more in 2016 will be fewer than the 11,000 today, but it will still be several thousand bitcoin 100 millionaires. That is, if the price reaches 1 million dollars.

If anything, this proves that Bitcoin will not revolutionize the power structures at $1M yet, just disturb them. Many in the old world positions will acquire a lot of bitcoins in the process (it is actually an integral part of the process, mind you ) further lessening the impact. I was a millionaire before buying any bitcoins, and totally an investor, not nerd type. The ones who buy in 2014 will mostly be good guys like me, with more or less money. Also bad guys will buy but not nearly in proportion to their current influence.

At $10M it would be more pronounced but that would mean that bitcoins are valued to the entire world, which is quite futuristic.

[rpietila]

Today's cigar is Partagas Lusitanias, a 2-hour long stick with a robust taste and surprisingly affordable (about $42 where I live). It was especially funny to watch a heart attack prevention video that strongly emphasized to quit smoking immediately. I for one smoke only quality stuff that I believe enhances my total well being. Now, the belief maybe incorrect.. In this world most of the things they tell you are lies, so it is often very hard to tell

We just crossed the previous downtrend highs in BS. Now Loaded has promised that the $1k wall will be eaten, and I think this could very well be the case. The volume is so low that to acquire a decent number of coins, it is now there. In the long run, the number of bitcoins matters more than short term considerations. This is also a perfect technical area to have a downturn. Analysis encouraged!

I am quite busy with other developments, and eager to show them here also. For this reason it would be very nice if any of the contributors could help me in finding the figures for the usage growth in December, and post them in the distribution thread. Would you not like to know the growth rate in bitcoin usage over the month? I would

[merkin51]

rpietila, when you post an update, is there any chance you could do a short "laymans terms" summary at the end of those of us who are still new to all of this? I'm fascinated by all the analysis on this board, but I get lost pretty quickly right now.

[c0ldfusi0nz]

You make a good point. So the number of individuals holding 100 BTC or more in 2016 will be fewer than the 11,000 today, but it will still be several thousand bitcoin 100 millionaires. That is, if the price reaches 1 million dollars.

If anything, this proves that Bitcoin will not revolutionize the power structures at $1M yet, just disturb them. Many in the old world positions will acquire a lot of bitcoins in the process (it is actually an integral part of the process, mind you ) further lessening the impact. I was a millionaire before buying any bitcoins, and totally an investor, not nerd type. The ones who buy in 2014 will mostly be good guys like me, with more or less money. Also bad guys will buy but not nearly in proportion to their current influence.

At $10M it would be more pronounced but that would mean that bitcoins are valued to the entire world, which is quite futuristic.

OK, I could follow your logic all the way up to "good guys" and "bad guys." Why are you a "good guy" and what makes the other people "bad guys?"

[rpietila]

rpietila, when you post an update, is there any chance you could do a short "laymans terms" summary at the end of those of us who are still new to all of this? I'm fascinated by all the analysis on this board, but I get lost pretty quickly right now.

What is even better, I have compiled a list of the must-know threads to get you started!

[Trolololo]

Nice thread!

I bought at 200$, after Chinese national news program actually endorsed bitcoin, and sold at 1020$, at the start of December, when it seemed that the volumes won't be able to support the price. Now I have only bought back maximum 5% of the previous sum invested and have only held for short periods for personal entertainment.
To me, this ongoing uptrend doesn't make any sense and my doubts go to:
a) A typical pump and dump scheme by people with deep pockets
b) Organized market manipulation by presenting false market data

I just can't see anything in the development of bitcoin on what to speculate the supposedly growing demand. New markets haven't been opened in important geographical locations, no new laws have passed to support the integrity of cryptos, no new endorsements have been made by influential channels. Just a pack of hazy rumors about possibilities of new payment options and wall street interest. But on the negative side it is public that China government declared that they don't want to see any legal business activity regarding bitcoin. And the rise of the Chinese market was the thing that actually made the price rise to 1200$ from 100$. So, I'm totally clueless on how could someone see that the actual demand will rise in the near future..

When the bitcoin market is so heavily manipulated, then the price could rise even more. But then it's impossible to speculate how far will it rise and how fast and low will it drop. This is just gambling then, and I never gamble with sums that have any importance.

+1

Some arguments against the correction ending at $455 is that the time it took was too short for the rally preceding it, there was no divergence in the underlying indicators on larger time frames at the bottom, and this rise since has no impulsive properties (There is too much overlap in the waves so looks to be corrective in itself).

+1