Vague similarities...

[oda.krell]

I keep wondering if where we are now







is essentially where we were back then







But then I think that'd be too easy.... Bitcoin price has a habit of biting you in the ass if you rely on half arsed pattern recognition too much.

...

......

You can probably tell my thoughts don't run particularly deep these days

[notme]

Overall we look much more bullish this time around.  However, we clearly still have some bearishness to work through somehow.

[Tzupy]

Movements take about 2x longer now than in April 2013, so my guesstimate is late April, not late May.
The difference is back then most coins had already appeared in the books during corrective wave A,
and that's why wave A was so harsh, while now most coins have yet to come (mostly from China).

[HairyMaclairy]

My thoughts are that people have "news fatigue" right now (I am certainly feeling it) and it is going to take much stronger FUD or good news to impact on the market.   Eg Ghash is back at 38% and no one cares.  So I am expecting a period of stability unless something really really drastic happens.  Of course Bitcoin loves to bite you on the ass so you can never be too sure but there you are. 

[1Pakis]

Just by looking at the two pictures I say that the current chart looks more bullish.

[pietje]

We will see what happens. Still dont think you can compare them or that the final drop still needs to come.
Still if you hold back then at $120 you would be very happy now.

[1Pakis]

I actually hold from sub the 30's.
I also bought some at 90$ last summer.

[RyNinDaCleM]

I think this...

Looks more like this (red circle)...



Though this consolidation is more like a triangle, so it seems more likely to break up with a target of around $1120 before breaking back down

[spiderbrain]

It feels similar to me. I think we may have another brief sub 600 period before everyone gets it out of their system and some new money feels it's safe to come in. Once there's a major panic crash and it doesn't go as low as the last one then we may be ready for the next leg up. However, I am getting bored waiting for it!

[The Bitcoin Foundation]

It feels similar to me. I think we may have another brief sub 600 period before everyone gets it out of their system and some new money feels it's safe to come in. Once there's a major panic crash and it doesn't go as low as the last one then we may be ready for the next leg up. However, I am getting bored waiting for it!

Exactly my thoughts. if you are buy and hold till $100,000 then non of this really matters. But we all know we are here to get ass many coin ass possible. Theres always going to be 50% drops  in BTC its rare but if you are patient, Just set your buy order accordingly and go on with life. Chances are your order will be filled within 6 months and now you have double the  amount of BTC for when it actually does hit $100,000 you can look back and laugh at being twise as rich by just buying off the 30 week EMA.

DOnt get greed and expect a 1000 to 100 drop just set it at half and let it trail , It will eventually get filled

[RenegadeMind]

Overall we look much more bullish this time around.  However, we clearly still have some bearishness to work through somehow.

Bears make awesome rugs.

[oda.krell]

I think this...

Looks more like this (red circle)...



Though this consolidation is more like a triangle, so it seems more likely to break up with a target of around $1120 before breaking back down

Nice observation. I mean, it's all rather uninformative eyeballing, but your eyeballing was slightly less uninformative than mine :P

[piramida]

You guys are grasping for straws. No really, you are. Take any part of any scale graph of anything and it would be "similar", it will have ups, downs, green and red candles, that's about all of the similarities that you consider substantial enough to base some deductions upon.

Really, tossing a coin would be much more scientific. So just do that. You can toss any number of times until the outcome would be bearish (i.e. 1 more heads than tails), that would be a certain sign of an incoming doom.

[dg2010]

Stop looking at the fucking graphs seriously.

Open your eyes to the world around you. Thousands upon thousands of companies, investors, individuals are getting into Bitcoin since the recent price rise.

Companies around the world are starting to accept bitcoin. New services are coming online all the time. This is an ATH of Bitcoin awareness and it's increasing every day.

Stop thinking about 2 months, 3 months, this is the beginning of mass adoption and acceptance. 2014 is going to be the year that launches Bitcoin into the mainstream.

[oda.krell]

Hahaha, I finally start understanding what motivates guys like Blitz and ElectricMucus... Hey, two posters above me, your bull tears are absolutely delicious :3

Seriously though, go re-examine your life. If you can't stomach some bearish (and admitted from post one: non-rigorous) speculation on the specu-fucking-lation subforum then you're obviously more than just a bit imbalanced*



* by which I mean you probably didn't take out your initial investment yet, and it shows. Oh, how it shows.

[HeliKopterBen]

After the April 2013 crash, guys were thinking it was a replay of the 2011 crash.  It wasn't.  As you said, that would be too easy.

[N12]

Stop looking at the fucking graphs seriously.

Open your eyes to the world around you. Thousands upon thousands of companies, investors, individuals are getting into Bitcoin since the recent price rise.

Companies around the world are starting to accept bitcoin. New services are coming online all the time. This is an ATH of Bitcoin awareness and it's increasing every day.

Stop thinking about 2 months, 3 months, this is the beginning of mass adoption and acceptance. 2014 is going to be the year that launches Bitcoin into the mainstream.

You have your account since 2011, did you not see how new services, users, companies flocked to Bitcoin all the time while the price first collapsed and later on stagnated for a long time? It did nothing. Prices are a collective mass delusion and its ebbs and flows are very loosely linked to reality.

[Rub3n]

Im not really trying to see any similarity's. Id say, watch the news and make sure you don't see a similarity when its already to late.

[dg2010]

You have your account since 2011, did you not see how new services, users, companies flocked to Bitcoin all the time while the price first collapsed and later on stagnated for a long time? It did nothing. Prices are a collective mass delusion and its ebbs and flows are very loosely linked to reality.

Yes funny this is my second account, I lost access to my first one when I changed e-mail/lost password.

And yes I've been following Bitcoin every day for over 3 years. There is no doubt there was lots of rubbish information but I never believed the hype. The hype in 2011 is nothing compared to today. Today we have companies like Overstock taking Bitcoin, Paypal are talking about it. In 2014 Amazon might well accept it. This is not 2011.

And it's interesting that you refer to the past bitcoin price to justify your position today yet you fail to remember that anyone investing in 2011 would be a rich man today.

[piramida]

* by which I mean you probably didn't take out your initial investment yet, and it shows. Oh, how it shows.

You are as blind in that assumption as you are blind in looking at the graphs, i.e. a complete miss. I could not care less to actually get "unbalanced" by your pattern observations, just pointed out a fact that a coin toss would result in a much better prediction power than your TA. If you want to present a bearish point of view, you should try harder, your reasoning at the moment is even less credible than proudhon's "sources" or somebody else's dream, definitely much less funny since you seem to actually believe the gibberish that you post.

PS and btw, I'm not saying that bitcoin is positioned to go higher now, that would be a silly guess. From TA point of view, the current situation is bearish, but definitely not for the "reasons" that you posted. From the fundamentals, the price should be rising. So while we are waiting for some actual movements to start, I can't pass responding to a silly troll thread like yours one here.

[oda.krell]

You are as blind in that assumption as you are blind in looking at the graphs, i.e. a complete miss. I could not care less to actually get "unbalanced" by your pattern observations, just pointed out a fact that a coin toss would result in a much better prediction power than your TA. If you want to present a bearish point of view, you should try harder, your reasoning at the moment is even less credible than proudhon's "sources" or somebody else's dream, definitely much less funny since you seem to actually believe the gibberish that you post.

vs.

But then I think that'd be too easy.... Bitcoin price has a habit of biting you in the ass if you rely on half arsed pattern recognition too much.

or

Nice observation. I mean, it's all rather uninformative eyeballing, but your eyeballing was slightly less uninformative than mine :P

Reading is hard. Let's go shopping!

[piramida]

Adding "but bitcoin price can do whatever it wants" does not make the prior analysis less silly.

[N12]

oda, that's what happens when you even dare suggest that Bitcoin could maybe possibly decrease in value in the short and medium term. Bitcoin cultists to the rescue. Price graphs are useless, technical analysis is a distraction.

And it's interesting that you refer to the past bitcoin price to justify your position today yet you fail to remember that anyone investing in 2011 would be a rich man today.

Well, guess who did … I didn't achieve this by listening to the fiat cultists at the time, and I will certainly not achieve to protect myself like I have done in the past by listening to Bitcoin cultists.

On the topic: We are in a clear triangle now, and we are nearing its end. 880 and 1022 on MtGox are its last borders as I see it.

[piramida]

Price graphs are useless, technical analysis is a distraction.

You know that technical analysis is a useful tool to estimate sentiment. This here is not even trying, though. I agree that we approach a triangle tip. It might go both ways from there.

[T.Stuart]

Price graphs are useless, technical analysis is a distraction.

You know that technical analysis is a useful tool to estimate sentiment. This here is not even trying, though.

You know I wish some TA analysts (not necessarily OP) would remember this - TA is a tool to estimate sentiment. It is not the other way around - sentiment should not bend to the will of TA. For example I've seen analysts write about hodling as if it is some kind of cheating - not fair because it might skew TA. But it is the job of the analyst to factor hodling into their estimate, not for hodlers to conform to the analyst's personal estimates!

[MAbtc]

Though this consolidation is more like a triangle, so it seems more likely to break up with a target of around $1120 before breaking back down

Interesting to hear this from you. Regarding this triangle, what gives you the impression of a bullish bias?

[N12]

I wouldn't dismiss "eyeballing" certain segments of Bitcoin's history and comparing it to past ones. Since the psychology in Bitcoin always works the same, certain patterns emerge that repeat themselves. 1093 certainly has the potential to be what 166 was last year.

For example I've seen analysts write about hodling as if it is some kind of cheating - not fair because it might skew TA.

Noone serious would say such nonsense. And like it or not, the charts do lead the sentiment because sentiment is influenced by the booms and busts. Sentiment is at its worst at the very bottom and highest at the top. It is very easy to track this, just look at the way the hype works (there are many metrics, like Google trends, Wikipedia hits, client downloads, etc.) and how it dies down … it is a lagging indicator.

[oda.krell]

Adding "but bitcoin price can do whatever it wants" does not make the prior analysis less silly.

Nobody said "price can do whatever it wants". I simply said, from post one, "this is not serious TA, but eyeballing charts". I post more seriously in other threads, but consolidation times like this can be frustrating.

There's something amusing about your insistence to point out that my OP is baseless speculation: this subforum is *full* of baseless speculation why we're about to go TO DA MOON, usually with no such thing as a disclaimer that's it's speculation rather than TA. Maybe some bias there, after all?

Oh well, never mind. Join the tea leaf reading group or don't.

* * *

How do we feel about the single (high volume) bottom so far? I never quite made up my mind if we actually found support (at a level based on some less obvious trend, perhaps) on Dec. 18, or if we're in for another re-test of a capitulation bottom?

[N12]

How do we feel about the single (high volume) bottom so far? I never quite made up my mind if we actually found support (at a level based on some less obvious trend, perhaps) on Dec. 18, or if we're in for another re-test of a capitulation bottom?

The million dollar question … Literally.

A problem with 455 is that it's a mere 63% off the top, and it was no particularly high volume either. But, purely from the changed look of the chart because of the uptrend from 455, it looks unlike 2011. While that doesn't necessarily mean it can't play out similarly or even worse regardless, I think there's at least as good an argument to be made for a larger triangle/sideways move that will take months to conclude, and thus, a bottom higher than 455.

In any case, Bitcoin has fundamentally become a dangerous game because miners have had such large marginal profits for an unprecedented amount of time. Here's the chart I watch for that. Just ignore the pre-ASIC period and the y axis labelings, the only thing that matters is the relative trend here. New lows in margin profits mean higher and higher pressure on miners, and eventually, they will have to sell nearly all of the daily supply, of which I suspect, unlike any real world mining market, a large part has been withheld from the market until now.
We are speculators. If we even get a whiff of this, we bail and force them to sell an even larger percentage because of the decreased price. It's a positive feedback loop of nightmarish proportion, and it is what happened in 2011. The difficulty even began to decrease because it became unprofitable – something I don't expect to happen with ASICs because they can only do SHA256, but I do expect the difficulty growth to decrease extremely, and that could be a hint for investors.

[T.Stuart]

How do we feel about the single (high volume) bottom so far? I never quite made up my mind if we actually found support (at a level based on some less obvious trend, perhaps) on Dec. 18, or if we're in for another re-test of a capitulation bottom?

The million dollar question … Literally.

A problem with 455 is that it's a mere 63% off the top, and it was no particularly high volume either. But, purely from the changed look of the chart because of the uptrend from 455, it looks unlike 2011. While that doesn't necessarily mean it can't play out similarly or even worse regardless, I think there's at least as good an argument to be made for a larger triangle/sideways move that will take months to conclude, and thus, a bottom higher than 455.

In any case, Bitcoin has fundamentally become a dangerous game because miners have had such large marginal profits for an unprecedented amount of time. Here's the chart I watch for that. Just ignore the pre-ASIC period and the y axis labelings, the only thing that matters is the relative trend here. New lows in margin profits mean higher and higher pressure on miners, and eventually, they will have to sell nearly all of the daily supply, of which I suspect, unlike any real world mining market, a large part has been withheld from the market until now.
We are speculators. If we even get a whiff of this, we bail and force them to sell an even larger percentage because of the decreased price. It's a positive feedback loop of nightmarish proportion, and it is what happened in 2011.

Do you have some sources to back this up? I would be interested to read up on this.
The counter-argument goes that mining difficulty increasing will raise the price of Bitcoin, isn't it?
Thanks for any sources!

[N12]

Yes … Charts.

Here are charts for difficulty (alltime log chart included): http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ Compare them with the price chart and it is easy enough to see.

Mining difficulty doesn't increase the price of Bitcoin, it is a common error. Certainly noone is refraining from buying Bitcoin because the difficulty is too low or selling them due to this. As always, price is the leading indicator.

edit: Sorry, I missed the bolded part. Unfontunately, it is probably impossible to show this, but the source of my suspicions rests on the fact that exchanges are seeing very little influx of Bitcoin even in times when prices don't increase. It would be extremely difficult for Bitcoin to become as illiquid as it did if you had a constant influx of 3600 BTC/day. Aside from that, simply sentiment: It makes sense for miners to become irrational and get caught up in the Bitcoin hype so that they don't sell a single coin more than necessary to cover expenses. There are also anecdotes of miners confirming this.

[T.Stuart]

Yes … Charts.

Here are charts for difficulty (alltime log chart included): http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ Compare them with the price chart and it is easy enough to see.

Mining difficulty doesn't increase the price of Bitcoin, it is a common error. Certainly noone is refraining from buying Bitcoin because the difficulty is too low or selling them due to this. As always, price is the leading indicator.

edit: Sorry, I missed the bolded part. Unfontunately, it is probably impossible to show this, but the source of my suspicions rests on the fact that exchanges are seeing very little influx of Bitcoin even in times when prices don't increase. It would be extremely difficult for Bitcoin to become as illiquid as it did if you had a constant influx of 3600 BTC/day.

Let's just say for the sake of argument that mining becomes so clearly unprofitable that miners start pulling out. With the network where it's at, at what stage does this become an obstacle to the network's ability to function usefully (timely confirmations etc.)? Can you point me towards any recent study of this?

[N12]

I don't know of any elaborate writings on this, but I can tell you that it's not a problem for the network: Difficulty would just decrease. The network functions fine at any difficulty. Remember, Satoshi mined on his own in the beginning. The only problem could possibly be an extremely abrupt decrease so that transactions take too long to go through, but at 10 minutes per block, how likely is that?

Electricity in some parts of the world or situations is free, and ASICs have an extremely high efficiency, so it probably won't happen for a longer time. Once an ASIC is unprofitable, the owner will simply sell it to another who has lower costs. Mining is a professional business, the resources will get allocated to those who can make best use of it.

[HairyMaclairy]

I have heard one miner claim that a single block eruptor has enough processing power to process all current transactions on the entire bitcoin network.  

Obviously it would be massively profitable on transaction fees alone (without even thinking about block reward) so I don't think we need to worry about running out of processing power.

[T.Stuart]

I don't know of any elaborate writings on this, but I can tell you that it's not a problem for the network: Difficulty would just decrease. The network functions fine at any difficulty. Remember, Satoshi mined on his own in the beginning. The only problem could possibly be an extremely abrupt decrease so that transactions take too long to go through, but at 10 minutes per block, how likely is that?

Electricity in some parts of the world or situations is free, and ASICs have an extremely high efficiency, so it probably won't happen for a longer time. Once an ASIC is unprofitable, the owner will simply sell it to another who has lower costs. Mining is a professional business, the resources will get allocated to those who can make best use of it.

Thanks for your explanations.

[HairyMaclairy]

In the real world 90% or more of all diamonds mined have been held back from market creating artificial scarcity. This is starting to break down now and diamond prices are starting to fall.  

http://depletedcranium.com/the-facts-about-diamonds-and-why-i-dont-like-de-beers/

[Tzupy]

... it looks unlike 2011 ...

The problem with the 2011 bubble deflation is that Gox was hacked and closed down for several days, in the middle of wave B, so the equivalent of this 6th January rise to 1093$
is missing from the 2011 charts. Remains to be seen how low it will drop now, in 2011 it dropped to about 11.5$ on the 5th July, that was a 64% drop from the 32$ peak.
For comparison, 64% of 1240$ is 445$, so this bear market still may be closer to 2011 than to 2013.

[N12]

I forgot about that. Even though I'm not sure a week of market suspension (just looked it up on the charts, there's data from 19th and after that, 26th of June) is enough to disturb that, it's a good argument particularly in conjunction with an initial drop of the same magnitude, thanks for reminding me.

I have to say though, in 2011, we did bounce off 10 to 25, an enormous bull trap in proximity of the 32 high, and on the 13th of June, it left this price behind to 18-17, so I'm leaning towards discounting this week's pause. The difference is that this countertrend rally off 10 lasted a mere 1-2 days. At the time, I would have easily believed MtGox's 1068 to be equivalent to that 25 since it was a countertrend of only 3 days.

[T.Stuart]

As much as it is fun comparing bubbles the fact is they happened for different reasons and have resolved differently. I said the China bubble would resolve higher [EDIT: in proportion] than previous bubbles and I think it's going to keep going as is. We'll see!  

[windjc]

Yes … Charts.

Here are charts for difficulty (alltime log chart included): http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ Compare them with the price chart and it is easy enough to see.

Mining difficulty doesn't increase the price of Bitcoin, it is a common error. Certainly noone is refraining from buying Bitcoin because the difficulty is too low or selling them due to this. As always, price is the leading indicator.

edit: Sorry, I missed the bolded part. Unfontunately, it is probably impossible to show this, but the source of my suspicions rests on the fact that exchanges are seeing very little influx of Bitcoin even in times when prices don't increase. It would be extremely difficult for Bitcoin to become as illiquid as it did if you had a constant influx of 3600 BTC/day. Aside from that, simply sentiment: It makes sense for miners to become irrational and get caught up in the Bitcoin hype so that they don't sell a single coin more than necessary to cover expenses. There are also anecdotes of miners confirming this.

How many newly mined coins are being sold off exchange? Prove to me that it is not a substantial amount and I will give your theory more credibility.

And before you scoff, just think if the above question is true. What are the implications in future price?

During the first run up in China back in November when it went to 8000, the exchange was literally running out of coins. Was this just because of miner's greed or could there be other potentials factors? I think it's important to analyse all possibilities, not just the ones you saw in effect in 2011.

[MAbtc]

How many newly mined coins are being sold off exchange? Prove to me that it is not a substantial amount and I will give your theory more credibility.

Since this clearly can't be proven either way, where does that leave us?

[windjc]

How many newly mined coins are being sold off exchange? Prove to me that it is not a substantial amount and I will give your theory more credibility.

Since this clearly can't be proven either way, where does that leave us?

Guessing.

I just think that the argument about invisible rising selling power is no less possible than invisible buying power.

[N12]

I'm aware of the possibility, and as I've said before, it's impossible to prove or disprove this.

However, mining is fairly distributed and, because of the ASIC boom, the distribution probably changed from the previous GPU one. I'm not sure how hedge funds would go on about contacting miners due to that distribution, or vice versa. There is no real futures market I'm aware of. If you want to make that case, then I think it's more likely for hedge funds to set up mining operations of their own; purely for accumulation.

In any case, there will be a large portion of the daily mined coins that goes to miners who have no channels to reliably sell Bitcoins other than exchanges – that is my speculation and I believe it's a reasonable and educated guess based on the things I listed here and the previous post.

Right now, supply on exchanges is mildly increasing and if you add up multiple exchanges together, it is not all that low. If there is accumulation, then the accumulators either ran out of powder or they don't wish to accumulate anymore. Of course, this is all too easily visible based on SecondMarket's change in buying behavior alone: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=337486.0

[windjc]

I'm aware of the possibility, and as I've said before, it's impossible to prove or disprove this.

However, mining is fairly distributed and, because of the ASIC boom, the distribution probably changed from the previous GPU one. I'm not sure how hedge funds would go on about contacting miners due to that distribution, or vice versa. There is no real futures market I'm aware of. If you want to make that case, then I think it's more likely for hedge funds to set up mining operations of their own; purely for accumulation.

In any case, there will be a large portion of the daily mined coins that goes to miners who have no channels to reliably sell Bitcoins other than exchanges – that is my speculation and I believe it's a reasonable and educated guess based on the things I listed here and the previous post.

Right now, supply on exchanges is mildly increasing and if you add up multiple exchanges together, it is not all that low. If there is accumulation, then the accumulators either ran out of powder or they don't wish to accumulate anymore.

Ok. As long as we can agree that we are all just speculating. However, I would argue that miners may not be a dumb as you make them out to be - and by dumb I mean not networking within their ranks to understand what channels exist outside of exchanges. For instance, if I was a decently sized miner, I'd love to procure as many options for selling as possible.  I would also be interested in price stability.

For instance, I doubt Loaded is the only broker operating in the world, nor do I believe is the only large broker operating in the world. Remember, ALOT of people want anonymity and now exchanges no longer offer that. Have you considered how BIG this reality may actually be? I mean there is a reason that trillions are in offshore accounts, right?

[RyNinDaCleM]

Though this consolidation is more like a triangle, so it seems more likely to break up with a target of around $1120 before breaking back down

Interesting to hear this from you. Regarding this triangle, what gives you the impression of a bullish bias?

First things first...
Why would you phrase this like this? Do I come off as a permabear? Because I assure you I am not. I am just objective in my analysis. A realist, if you will.

On to my reasoning...
Because there is a slightly bullish feel amongst (what I believe to be) a greater bearish mid-term, I do believe it is more likely to rise out of the triangle. While there is the possibility to break down (shown in fig.1) there are other reasons to break up (the rest)


Fig.1

Illustrated here, you have two outcomes. One where a typical 4th wave triangle (EM, I don't want to hear any shit ) pattern breaks up, and out, (labeled in cyan) and is the whole consolidation for wave-4. The other would be a larger ABC where the triangle is the B-wave (labeled in red).

The target I mentioned is only an estimate using the height of the a-wave of the triangle. This is a typical target for triangles, though it can fall short and it can rise above it, but it gives you an idea where to look for exit points. Even with this uncertainty, you have clear stop points if it goes against your trade. Since nothing is perfect in EW or TA, having well defined stops are a great way to minimize risk. You would set a stop-sell just below the lower trend line, or a stop buy above the upper trend line.

Enough about the usage.

This all plays into a larger picture that is a real possibility. The chance of a larger 4th wave triangle on the Daily-Weekly time frame (fig.2). A breakout would complete the triangle B-wave before reversing back down in the C.


Fig.2

[MAbtc]

First things first...
Why would you phrase this like this? Do I come off as a permabear? Because I assure you I am not.

Of course you don't. I said this because 10 days ago, you wrote, "This rise was not of the bullish type!" I was not sure what time frames we were talking about here.

On to my reasoning...

Much appreciated, thank you.

[johnyj]

Situation are much more different now, miners do not need to cash out on exchanges, they could sell the coins to just their friends dues to much higher public interest, and they can even purchase something from overstock.com

The only thing worries me is that huge trading volume on some exchanges in china, are those real volume or just artificially made by exchanges? If they are real, it seems the speculators in china indeed put large amount of capital in the game and they might create heavy volatility in bitcoin. It feels like all the money printed by FED ends up in china and used to pump and dump the bitcoin

[HairyMaclairy]

Zero fees + bots = huge volumes even if it's just the same 20 btc going round and round in circles.

Daily volume under these circumstances is pretty meaningless. 

[oda.krell]

I'm aware of the possibility, and as I've said before, it's impossible to prove or disprove this.

However, mining is fairly distributed and, because of the ASIC boom, the distribution probably changed from the previous GPU one. I'm not sure how hedge funds would go on about contacting miners due to that distribution, or vice versa. There is no real futures market I'm aware of. If you want to make that case, then I think it's more likely for hedge funds to set up mining operations of their own; purely for accumulation.

In any case, there will be a large portion of the daily mined coins that goes to miners who have no channels to reliably sell Bitcoins other than exchanges – that is my speculation and I believe it's a reasonable and educated guess based on the things I listed here and the previous post.

Right now, supply on exchanges is mildly increasing and if you add up multiple exchanges together, it is not all that low. If there is accumulation, then the accumulators either ran out of powder or they don't wish to accumulate anymore. Of course, this is all too easily visible based on SecondMarket's change in buying behavior alone: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=337486.0

I personally believe a substantial number of coins (but still less than 50% of total volume) are sold off-exchange these days, but I admit, there is no way for me to prove my claims either. My main reason for this belief being that there is enough evidence by now that big (or at least: bigger than hobbyist's) money is entering the market, but at the same time, I have a hard time imagining them wiring a few millions over to Japan or Slovenia.

Here's one smaller observation that perhaps matters in this context: If I look at the order book at all, I only consider relative bid/ask ratios, and their change over time, to be half-way reliable. But isolating for a moment the raw ask sum over time, there is, I believe, a pretty clear downwards trend visible over the past years, not easily accounted for by the reward halving alone. Whether that means more holding or more OTC is of course just anybody's guess again. 'Holding' would be bullish across all time frames, while 'OTC' would introduce an element of uncertainty ("maybe they're selling way below mtgox price?!") that could, at least short/medium term, be quite bearish.