If you're not out, get out.

[Rampion]

Someone mentioned it recently, that the 2013 "bubble" deflate is more like the August 2012 shock than the 2011 bubble.
If so, then it could easily oscillate around $100-$120 for the rest of year, only to begin a further climb in 2014.

In that case more than a bubble deflating it would just have been a correction.

Honestly, that could be still possible, but I don't think so - the hype cycle and speculative mania in March-April was so blatant I doubt we won't see further visits to $80, possibly $50, I won't even discard going deeper than $50 for a bit (but not much deeper, and if I'd have to take a bet, I'd bet that we won't go lower than $50).

This hype cycles always work the same, a lot of new guys are attracted by the parabolic growth, fiat start flowing to exchanges like a river in the rain season, and when the price crashes that money flow just slowly drains out... It's a slow process, fiat pours out of the exchanges slowly, but it pours out because so many of the new guys entered the market just for the quick buck.

Still, there is significant % of the guys attracted by the hype that end up understanding BTC, and they fell in love with it... The core of hardcore-believers is growing, even if the fiat is slowly pouring out. So, we will probably see very cheap coins soon, but nevertheless Bitcoin is stronger than ever.

[1713286888]

1713286888

[1713286888]

1713286888

[1713286888]

1713286888

[solex]

Yes. Makes sense.
I think the recent 136 is an important level. If it can top it then the bull-market is still very much on. Similarly, if the recent 88 is breached then a real bear-market is underway.

[RationalSpeculator]

We have to admit at that time, this kind of posts caused discomfort among everybody. BTC had never proved to be able to resist what he was facing: bubble pop followed by slow and continuous decline, negative media exposure, etc... We all knew it was not a "ponzi", but still, it was not empirically proved that it could resist the stress it was under.

This is why I always say that this is no 2011. This time the doomsayers are mocked. Most of the people is sure that BTC will rise again stronger sooner or later, even if it goes to single digits for a while (which won't happen IMO). The ones who sold, are just waiting for cheaper coins to load the truck. The "bitcoin is a ponzi" has empirically proved as a false statement, nobody with half a brain could say such a thing in 2013. In 2011 it was different.

Bubbles have to burst all the way down before growth is resumed. But this time the bottom will be higher than most 2011-butthurt-bears expect.

I agree.

[Dalib]

shortly:
When I look at the development of Bitcoin prices for 12 months:

Last year in June, it was possible to buy Bitcoin for around $ 5
In January this year about $ 15
in April this year about $ 55
now $ 88

Even if it was half the price than it is now, it would be appreciation of 900%.
This is not a bad investment for me

[Rampion]

shortly:
When I look at the development of Bitcoin prices for 12 months:

Last year in June, it was possible to buy Bitcoin for around $ 5
In January this year about $ 15
in April this year about $ 55
now $ 88

Even if it was half the price than it is now, it would be appreciation of 900%.
This is not a bad investment for me

I think Bitcoin it's been a good investment for 99% of the members on this forum. Some noob may have bought at $200 and panic-sold at a loss after the April, 10th crash, getting burned, but IMO that would have been a terrible mistake, as they should have just holded or played with the market to lower their average entry price. Bitcoin's minimum potential is 5 figures of $ per Bitcoin, everybody with half a brain understands that, but it is not a get-rich-quick scheme. There is high volatility and high risks, but also huge potential gains.

[anu]

Bitcoin is over.

I've been saying for months

I was right. You were wrong. Now suffer.

I am not much into necrothreads, but I am 100,0% sure we find "Bitcoin is dead" threads with you as OP from 2011.

[molecular]

Yes. Makes sense.
I think the recent 136 is an important level. If it can top it then the bull-market is still very much on. Similarly, if the recent 88 is breached then a real bear-market is underway.

I have similar thinking. My trigger levels are farther away, though: $149 for bull and $80 for bear, based on an old analysis from early May which is still valid imo.

[bitbybit2]

Where were they when bitcoins reached 200 dollars. Speculators are just out there to show the world that they are imbeciles. They cannot sense how the world perceives them because they are imbeciles.

[chmod755]

Bitcoin is over.

I've been saying for months

I was right. You were wrong. Now suffer.

Hello Nagle,

I just made a transaction and it perfectly works. You are wrong. I'm not suffering.

Goodbye.

[samson]

$20-$30 looks reasonable to me if we discount that bubble

[bitbybit2]

Yes. Makes sense.
I think the recent 136 is an important level. If it can top it then the bull-market is still very much on. Similarly, if the recent 88 is breached then a real bear-market is underway.

I have similar thinking. My trigger levels are farther away, though: $149 for bull and $80 for bear, based on an old analysis from early May which is still valid imo.

https://i.imgur.com/GdlnBdVm.png

Echoes of the past can't be used to predict the future of Bitcoin. It is not a corporation and it doesn't move like it is a corporation.

[bitbybit2]

If you are not out then stay inside. Stay out of the crowd. They think ANOVA or analysis of variance is their forte. Well they haven't even heard of it. 

[cypherdoc]

Y'all really know how to hurt a guy by bringing back all these Nagle threads.

I'll say it again: Nagle is an idiot!

[oakpacific]

So they were right? Bubble did not deflate completely and it dropped 2.5 times further down?

Few people in the thread were entirely right. Nagle certainly wasn't.

I'm the original poster in this topic. I called the collapse of Bitcoin on June 11, 2011.  I wrote "Bitcoin, the new "digital currency", looks like a Ponzi scheme. Only Ponzi schemes chart like that. When Ponzi schemes crash, they crash fast, and they crash all the way." "There's no revenue model here. All growth comes only from new investors. This is a bubble in its pure form."

It's been all downhill since then. The price was $17 then. It's dropped $4 per month for the last four months.  It's at $2.52 now.

Our criterion for "Dead" on Downside was when the price was off 90% from the high. Bitcoin is now dead.

We warned you. You didn't listen.

If you have substantial cash in an exchange, get it out now. We're going to find out quite soon which exchanges have all the customer's cash and which don't.

He called bitcoin "dead" $0.52 and 30 days away from the two year low from which we haven't come remotely close to having seen again.

This is the best call in the entire thread.

Of course... if either Nagle or Foo was confident in their predictive ability, they would've shorted btc at 5:1 leverage on Bitcoinica and made a fortune. They can still short if they're confident. But I'm guessing they prefer to make predictions without backing them.

Enjoy your euphemism. The rest of us are building stuff.

He didn't make a right call, what he was saying can never be defined as a "call", just saying it's going to go down doesn't make it a "call", to make a call he has to give a target a priori, which he didn't, it's all hindsight.

[Operatr]

Well, have fun with your soon to be worthless fiat money then OP.

[randrace]

[justusranvier]

He didn't make a right call, what he was saying can never be defined as a "call", just saying it's going to go down doesn't make it a "call", to make a call he has to give a target a priori, which he didn't, it's all hindsight.

I mean in the vernacular sense.

Nagle said Bitcoin was dead, and evorhees said he and others were still building it. Evorhees was correct and Nagle was incorrect.

[wachtwoord]

Bitcoin is stronger than ever.

This statement has been true everyday since Bitcoin's conception

[Brunic]

It's funny that the image in the OP is the 2013 chart, not the 2011 one.

I think somebody edited that first post. 

[01BTC10]

It's funny that the image in the OP is the 2013 chart, not the 2011 one.

I think somebody edited that first post. 

bitcoincharts image are dynamic.