Very bearish Elliot Wave analysis

[Alonzo Ewing]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8Zuj8xYUpY

It goes on and on, so you can skip to the right part, but the big picture message is, Don't expect $5000 for another 3-4 years, and be prepared for the price to possibly go way down in the intermediate term.

(Note that he does expect a low soon in the short term.)

Do any of the e-wavers have any feedback on this?

[YipYip]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8Zuj8xYUpY

It goes on and on, so you can skip to the right part, but the big picture message is, Don't expect $5000 for another 3-4 years, and be prepared for the price to possibly go way down in the intermediate term.

(Note that he does expect a low soon in the short term.)

Do any of the e-wavers have any feedback on this?

CRypto does not do TA sop well as there

a) Not enough history
b) Not enough liquidity/volume
c) Is fundamentally driven market
d) Is a movement more than a commoditity

But hey you may be right ..but i doubt it 

[Alonzo Ewing]

To clarify, that's not me making the analysis, but rather, someone else.

[prophetx]

woah video is 3 hours long

[RyNinDaCleM]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8Zuj8xYUpY

It goes on and on, so you can skip to the right part, but the big picture message is, Don't expect $5000 for another 3-4 years, and be prepared for the price to possibly go way down in the intermediate term.

(Note that he does expect a low soon in the short term.)

Do any of the e-wavers have any feedback on this?

I think it's DanV.

I completely agree that that is a possible outcome. I do however, think it is too early to try to project something like that out, yet.

[Arghhh]

I find that lots of people doing TA in BTC often fails because of several things:

1) Failure to take into account exponential user adoption in an otherwise uncapitalized market.
2) Failure to take into account unforeseen news, for better or worse.
3) Failure to take into account foreseen news, such as new exchanges opening, and capital investment pouring in.
4) Failure to take into account unforeseen BTC development timelines, such as sidechains.
5) Ultimately not being able to see the forest for the trees.

The "rules" that Dan keeps bringing up doesn't work in the face of sudden developing news. Will we be talking about "corrections", "a, b, and c" when Second Market opens to the greater public? I think not. Will we be talking about "regression" and "downtrend" when sidechains crushes the altcoin market? No!

These guys doing TA in BTC assumes that they are still in a stock market when really, BTC is a stock, a currency, and an emerging technology that is the internet of money. The Elliott Wave analysis works only on a micro timescale, when it comes to macro timescale, these guys can't see the forest for trees!

$5000 isn't much. Think about it. All it takes is a $50 billion market cap and we know that's just 1/10th of Apple. You're going to tell me that BTC as a global currency can't even be a fraction of Apple? The guy doing the TA is too busy with his "A, B, and C" rules to see the emergent bigger picture: BTC doesn't play by the convention stock rules.

Not seeing $5000 for 3-4 years? Sure, if we assume that the bitcoin technology stays the same, the userbase stays the same, and capital not pouring in. There will be no Second Market, no Winklevoss ETF, no US exchanges opening, no sidechain, and on and on.

[chessnut]

bullish EW analysis  

https://www.tradingview.com/v/TD36eFyF

[Bitcoin BEAR]

I find that lots of people doing TA in BTC often fails because of several things:

1) Failure to take into account exponential user adoption in an otherwise uncapitalized market.
2) Failure to take into account unforeseen news, for better or worse.
3) Failure to take into account foreseen news, such as new exchanges opening, and capital investment pouring in.
3) Failure to take into account unforeseen BTC development timelines, such as sidechains.
4) Ultimately not being able to see the forest for the trees.

The "rules" that Dan keeps bringing up doesn't work in the face of sudden developing news. Will we be talking about "corrections", "a, b, and c" when Second Market opens to the greater public? I think not. Will we be talking about "regression" and "downtrend" when sidechains crushes the altcoin market? No!

These guys doing TA in BTC assumes that they are still in a stock market when really, BTC is a stock, a currency, and an emerging technology that is the internet of money. The Elliott Wave analysis works only on a micro timescale, when it comes to macro timescale, these guys can't see the forest for trees!

Not seeing $5000 for 3-4 years? Sure, if we assume that the bitcoin technology stays the same, the userbase stays the same, and capital not pouring in. There will be no Second Market, no Winklevoss ETF, no US exchanges opening, no sidechain, and on and on.

1) It's only Exponential during rises. This doesn't mean the user base is not expanding, just that it isn't likely that it's exponential right now. Proof would be gladly accepted.
2) Irrelevant! The effect news will have is dependent on the way it is perceived. News is perceived differently in rises than declines.
3-a?) New exchanges are only a short term bump in the overall picture. And "All this new money pouring in..." you guys sound like the Litecoiners when Gox was supposedly going to add LTC to the exchange. Again, it was a short term bump and then leveled off.
3-b?) I don't know what these "sidechains" are, but anyone can read about the development going on in the BTC world if you just look.
4) ...

[MatTheCat]

bullish EW analysis  

https://www.tradingview.com/v/TD36eFyF

Depends on how far you want to go back before you start counting. Everything going on right now in Bitcoin tells me this 'bullish analysis' is nothing more than wishful thinking. Just be sure that you don't place so much faith in it that you are willing to bet the house on it......or even more than a few shillings for that matter.

[prophetx]

the short of it is... be prepared for a significant buy opportunity going into summer

[Alonzo Ewing]

The "rules" that Dan keeps bringing up doesn't work in the face of sudden developing news. Will we be talking about "corrections", "a, b, and c" when Second Market opens to the greater public? I think not. Will we be talking about "regression" and "downtrend" when sidechains crushes the altcoin market? No!

The argument against the idea that Second Market's ETF/exchange is that it's priced in by early adopters.  One could imagine the Second Market exchange opening with a ton of fanfare with a lot of newcomers rushing to buy Bitcoin, but the price not making new highs because the early adopters will sell to these newbies.  I'm not saying this WILL happen, but rather, it's a possibility to account for.

The altcoin market is tiny: Litecoin has 1/10 of the market cap as Bitcoin.  The next biggest market cap is 1/10 of Litecoin.  In other words, you can approximate the entire alt-coin market cap as 1/10 of Bitcoin's.  If you're being charitable, it might be more like 1/5.  Either way, that's a max 20% gain if Bitcoin takes over the entire alt-coin market cap.

Having said that I do believe one bullish argument you noted: $6 billion is not enough of a market cap on which to run the world's financial system.  That's why I keep holding my position.

[YipYip]

I find that lots of people doing TA in BTC often fails because of several things:

1) Failure to take into account exponential user adoption in an otherwise uncapitalized market.
2) Failure to take into account unforeseen news, for better or worse.
3) Failure to take into account foreseen news, such as new exchanges opening, and capital investment pouring in.
3) Failure to take into account unforeseen BTC development timelines, such as sidechains.
4) Ultimately not being able to see the forest for the trees.

The "rules" that Dan keeps bringing up doesn't work in the face of sudden developing news. Will we be talking about "corrections", "a, b, and c" when Second Market opens to the greater public? I think not. Will we be talking about "regression" and "downtrend" when sidechains crushes the altcoin market? No!

These guys doing TA in BTC assumes that they are still in a stock market when really, BTC is a stock, a currency, and an emerging technology that is the internet of money. The Elliott Wave analysis works only on a micro timescale, when it comes to macro timescale, these guys can't see the forest for trees!

Not seeing $5000 for 3-4 years? Sure, if we assume that the bitcoin technology stays the same, the userbase stays the same, and capital not pouring in. There will be no Second Market, no Winklevoss ETF, no US exchanges opening, no sidechain, and on and on.

1) It's only Exponential during rises. This doesn't mean the user base is not expanding, just that it isn't likely that it's exponential right now. Proof would be gladly accepted.
2) Irrelevant! The effect news will have is dependent on the way it is perceived. News is perceived differently in rises than declines.
3-a?) New exchanges are only a short term bump in the overall picture. And "All this new money pouring in..." you guys sound like the Litecoiners when Gox was supposedly going to add LTC to the exchange. Again, it was a short term bump and then leveled off.
3-b?) I don't know what these "sidechains" are, but anyone can read about the development going on in the BTC world if you just look.
4) ...

Just to make a point as we have been around for a while

3-b ...Gox statement caused a expo rise from 5 cents to $2-4  ... so i dont know how you would caputure that on an elliot wave

[Arghhh]

I find that lots of people doing TA in BTC often fails because of several things:

1) Failure to take into account exponential user adoption in an otherwise uncapitalized market.
2) Failure to take into account unforeseen news, for better or worse.
3) Failure to take into account foreseen news, such as new exchanges opening, and capital investment pouring in.
3) Failure to take into account unforeseen BTC development timelines, such as sidechains.
4) Ultimately not being able to see the forest for the trees.

The "rules" that Dan keeps bringing up doesn't work in the face of sudden developing news. Will we be talking about "corrections", "a, b, and c" when Second Market opens to the greater public? I think not. Will we be talking about "regression" and "downtrend" when sidechains crushes the altcoin market? No!

These guys doing TA in BTC assumes that they are still in a stock market when really, BTC is a stock, a currency, and an emerging technology that is the internet of money. The Elliott Wave analysis works only on a micro timescale, when it comes to macro timescale, these guys can't see the forest for trees!

Not seeing $5000 for 3-4 years? Sure, if we assume that the bitcoin technology stays the same, the userbase stays the same, and capital not pouring in. There will be no Second Market, no Winklevoss ETF, no US exchanges opening, no sidechain, and on and on.

1) It's only Exponential during rises. This doesn't mean the user base is not expanding, just that it isn't likely that it's exponential right now. Proof would be gladly accepted.
2) Irrelevant! The effect news will have is dependent on the way it is perceived. News is perceived differently in rises than declines.
3-a?) New exchanges are only a short term bump in the overall picture. And "All this new money pouring in..." you guys sound like the Litecoiners when Gox was supposedly going to add LTC to the exchange. Again, it was a short term bump and then leveled off.
3-b?) I don't know what these "sidechains" are, but anyone can read about the development going on in the BTC world if you just look.
4) ...

1) I agree with you that the userbase growth is not expanding exponentially right during correction, but it does on a yearly timescale.

2) News is relevant to BTC at this point. Not just the bad news like we've been seeing lately, but the news that pushes BTC in a positive direction as well, think Cyprus.

3) In reference to the analysis in OP's posted video, he just looks at patterns, never taking into account tech development or VC capital flowing into BTC. It will have consequences.

4) There are many people who think how much bitcoin is worth is based on their individual sentiment, rather than looking at the bigger picture and seeing what it actually is worth in the market. An example from March 2013:

I'm not quite so pessimistic as the OP. I do think the real value of Bitcoin is somewhere between $5 and $9.99.

[chessnut]

bullish EW analysis  

https://www.tradingview.com/v/TD36eFyF

Depends on how far you want to go back before you start counting. Everything going on right now in Bitcoin tells me this 'bullish analysis' is nothing more than wishful thinking. Just be sure that you don't place so much faith in it that you are willing to bet the house on it......or even more than a few shillings for that matter.

I started counting from 1200. can wee all agree that was the beginning of the correction? I hope so.

[Ibian]

Why are people still questioning this? The price goes up in huge jumps. Minor changes between those jumps are meaningless in the bigger picture. For permabears to be taken seriously they would first have to explain why "this time it's different" without appearing to be blatantly trolling. And they can't do that.

[Bitcoin BEAR]

I find that lots of people doing TA in BTC often fails because of several things:

1) Failure to take into account exponential user adoption in an otherwise uncapitalized market.
2) Failure to take into account unforeseen news, for better or worse.
3) Failure to take into account foreseen news, such as new exchanges opening, and capital investment pouring in.
3) Failure to take into account unforeseen BTC development timelines, such as sidechains.
4) Ultimately not being able to see the forest for the trees.

The "rules" that Dan keeps bringing up doesn't work in the face of sudden developing news. Will we be talking about "corrections", "a, b, and c" when Second Market opens to the greater public? I think not. Will we be talking about "regression" and "downtrend" when sidechains crushes the altcoin market? No!

These guys doing TA in BTC assumes that they are still in a stock market when really, BTC is a stock, a currency, and an emerging technology that is the internet of money. The Elliott Wave analysis works only on a micro timescale, when it comes to macro timescale, these guys can't see the forest for trees!

Not seeing $5000 for 3-4 years? Sure, if we assume that the bitcoin technology stays the same, the userbase stays the same, and capital not pouring in. There will be no Second Market, no Winklevoss ETF, no US exchanges opening, no sidechain, and on and on.

1) It's only Exponential during rises. This doesn't mean the user base is not expanding, just that it isn't likely that it's exponential right now. Proof would be gladly accepted.
2) Irrelevant! The effect news will have is dependent on the way it is perceived. News is perceived differently in rises than declines.
3-a?) New exchanges are only a short term bump in the overall picture. And "All this new money pouring in..." you guys sound like the Litecoiners when Gox was supposedly going to add LTC to the exchange. Again, it was a short term bump and then leveled off.
3-b?) I don't know what these "sidechains" are, but anyone can read about the development going on in the BTC world if you just look.
4) ...

1) I agree with you that the userbase growth is not expanding exponentially right during correction, but it does on a yearly timescale.

2) News is relevant to BTC at this point. Not just the bad news like we've been seeing lately, but the news that pushes BTC in a positive direction as well, think Cyprus. I can't prove this, but I think it was more of the people who were already in Bitcoin saw a reason to rally. They bought on the rumor expecting others to do the same and it snowballed from there.

3) In reference to the analysis in OP's posted video, he just looks at patterns, never taking into account tech development or VC capital flowing into BTC. It will have consequences.

4) There are many people who think how much bitcoin is worth is based on their individual sentiment, rather than looking at the bigger picture and seeing what it actually is worth in the market. An example from March 2013:

I'm not quite so pessimistic as the OP. I do think the real value of Bitcoin is somewhere between $5 and $9.99.

lol Yep! At that time, it was worth between $5-9.99. Now it may be worth a little more, perhaps $25-50, or maybe $10-35... This is not my own sentiment. This is based on actual use and not the speculative demand.
As a side note; The mining difficulty is based on speculative demand too. I don't care what a miner thinks he deserves for a Bitcoin because he decided to start mining late. If the price hadn't risen (from speculative demand) then there wouldn't be so many miners pumping the difficulty up, and in turn, these prices would not be expected for a mined coin. It's a vicious cycle, but the fundamentals simply do not support this price. Get rich quick boys do.

[Ibian]

It has always been worth at least 6 digits. Most of the world is just slow to catch on.

[Arghhh]

I'm not quite so pessimistic as the OP. I do think the real value of Bitcoin is somewhere between $5 and $9.99.

lol Yep! At that time, it was worth between $5-9.99. Now it may be worth a little more, perhaps $25-50, or maybe $10-35... This is not my own sentiment. This is based on actual use and not the speculative demand.
As a side note; The mining difficulty is based on speculative demand too. I don't care what a miner thinks he deserves for a Bitcoin because he decided to start mining late. If the price hadn't risen (from speculative demand) then there wouldn't be so many miners pumping the difficulty up, and in turn, these prices would not be expected for a mined coin. It's a vicious cycle, but the fundamentals simply do not support this price. Get rich quick boys do.

How do you separate actual use from the speculative demand? I'd like to see data backing that it's not just your own sentiment.

I can claim that one BTC is worth a million, and would be as valid as your opinion of $25, but in the end, the price is dictated by the market, clear and simple. It's currently $429.

[prophetx]

just listened to the very end and him talking about whales buying as "people crying get me out"

[Siegfried]

I find that lots of people doing TA in BTC often fails because of several things:

1) Failure to take into account exponential user adoption in an otherwise uncapitalized market.
2) Failure to take into account unforeseen news, for better or worse.
3) Failure to take into account foreseen news, such as new exchanges opening, and capital investment pouring in.
3) Failure to take into account unforeseen BTC development timelines, such as sidechains.
4) Ultimately not being able to see the forest for the trees.

The "rules" that Dan keeps bringing up doesn't work in the face of sudden developing news. Will we be talking about "corrections", "a, b, and c" when Second Market opens to the greater public? I think not. Will we be talking about "regression" and "downtrend" when sidechains crushes the altcoin market? No!

These guys doing TA in BTC assumes that they are still in a stock market when really, BTC is a stock, a currency, and an emerging technology that is the internet of money. The Elliott Wave analysis works only on a micro timescale, when it comes to macro timescale, these guys can't see the forest for trees!

Not seeing $5000 for 3-4 years? Sure, if we assume that the bitcoin technology stays the same, the userbase stays the same, and capital not pouring in. There will be no Second Market, no Winklevoss ETF, no US exchanges opening, no sidechain, and on and on.

1) It's only Exponential during rises. This doesn't mean the user base is not expanding, just that it isn't likely that it's exponential right now. Proof would be gladly accepted.
2) Irrelevant! The effect news will have is dependent on the way it is perceived. News is perceived differently in rises than declines.
3-a?) New exchanges are only a short term bump in the overall picture. And "All this new money pouring in..." you guys sound like the Litecoiners when Gox was supposedly going to add LTC to the exchange. Again, it was a short term bump and then leveled off.
3-b?) I don't know what these "sidechains" are, but anyone can read about the development going on in the BTC world if you just look.
4) ...

1) I agree with you that the userbase growth is not expanding exponentially right during correction, but it does on a yearly timescale.

2) News is relevant to BTC at this point. Not just the bad news like we've been seeing lately, but the news that pushes BTC in a positive direction as well, think Cyprus. I can't prove this, but I think it was more of the people who were already in Bitcoin saw a reason to rally. They bought on the rumor expecting others to do the same and it snowballed from there.

3) In reference to the analysis in OP's posted video, he just looks at patterns, never taking into account tech development or VC capital flowing into BTC. It will have consequences.

4) There are many people who think how much bitcoin is worth is based on their individual sentiment, rather than looking at the bigger picture and seeing what it actually is worth in the market. An example from March 2013:

I'm not quite so pessimistic as the OP. I do think the real value of Bitcoin is somewhere between $5 and $9.99.

lol Yep! At that time, it was worth between $5-9.99. Now it may be worth a little more, perhaps $25-50, or maybe $10-35... This is not my own sentiment. This is based on actual use and not the speculative demand.
As a side note; The mining difficulty is based on speculative demand too. I don't care what a miner thinks he deserves for a Bitcoin because he decided to start mining late. If the price hadn't risen (from speculative demand) then there wouldn't be so many miners pumping the difficulty up, and in turn, these prices would not be expected for a mined coin. It's a vicious cycle, but the fundamentals simply do not support this price. Get rich quick boys do.

You assume that Bitcoin has zero use as a store of value. A price of 50 dollars/BTC, total market cap 600 million dollars, assumes that one million users have a demand of only 600 dollars worth of Bitcoin per person. Anyone who believes that is totally disconnected from reality.