Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 05:11:34 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 [679] 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1807515 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 07:36:53 PM
 #13561

2.  Pantera Capital, 2 days after the selloff, issues not only one but two uber bullish reports on Bitcoin.  its Bitcoin vs Gold report unapologetically and unabashedly forecasting $4.3M/BTC.  they don't normally publish this frequently:

https://cdn.panteracapital.com/wp-content/uploads/Bitcoin-vs-Gold.pdf

https://cdn.panteracapital.com/wp-content/uploads/Pantera-Bitcoin-Letter-September-2014.pdf

I'm gonna have to correct this part of your theory.

The Bitcoin vs Gold report was originally published in their September Investors letter.

https://cdn.panteracapital.com/wp-content/uploads/Pantera-Bitcoin-Letter-August-2014-31.pdf







i'm aware of that.  so why republish it 2d after the selloff?

did they announce this?

seems to me it is just a spin off their newsletter that they formatted to fit their "Bitcoin research" section

note that I somewhat agree with you theory.

see my tweet in reply to Dan's here : https://twitter.com/bergalex/status/519335473895182336

look at the date of the republishing:  October 7, 2014

https://cdn.panteracapital.com/wp-content/uploads/Bitcoin-vs-Gold.pdf
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481346694
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346694

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346694
Reply with quote  #2

1481346694
Report to moderator
explorer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 07:36:55 PM
 #13562

how likely is it that an unregulated exchange in Slovenia has $9-10M sitting around on its exchange waiting to be mobilized on a Sunday?
What do you think it means? Also, a much smaller amount than 30k was bought in one gulp near the end, I think it was less than 10k BTC, so it's more likely.
It appeared to me that the last 12 - 14k of the wall was primarily scooped up by Loaded.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg9100535#msg9100535

I watched the wall from the first dump, along with the WO thread, and the timing fit.  With nobody making outright claims, it seems reasonable given his history...
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 07:38:36 PM
 #13563

how likely is it that an unregulated exchange in Slovenia has $9-10M sitting around on its exchange waiting to be mobilized on a Sunday?
What do you think it means? Also, a much smaller amount than 30k was bought in one gulp near the end, I think it was less than 10k BTC, so it's more likely.
It appeared to me that the last 12 - 14k of the wall was primarily scooped up by Loaded.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg9100535#msg9100535

I watched the wall from the first dump, along with the WO thread, and the timing fit.  With nobody making outright claims, it seems reasonable given his history...

Loaded says this on Monday, the day after the wall got taken down.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 07:39:47 PM
 #13564

My quick and dirty valuation of BTC in 2020 is also based on M2.  Not completely incomprehensible that BTC could be 5% of M2 by 2020, or $2300 or so per BTC.

This would imply that you're also predicting a significant change in bitcoin's historical growth rate starting now.  What would make you believe that growth would be vastly slower moving forward?



Peter, (correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that dot at about $4000 not $2300) that aside when I say the graph it looked a lot like the Bitcoin inflation curve, giving this meager projection more validity.

It got me thinking that the growth in network value and demand with a fixed supply (diminishing inflation) that the relationship would decouple over time as the price would rise as supply shrinks, and that wasn't evident in your model.

I guess that is what Marcus was thinking here by using the market cap which accommodates inflation.


Total BTC value (CAP) and number BTC TXS squared excluding popular addresses (with a simple exponential fit line). Data from Blockchain.info.

On current trend of ~4years, CAP ~$100 billion Aug. 2015, $1 Trillion Aug. 2016 (after next halving) ... unless TXS hit some limit.


Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
thezerg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile
October 08, 2014, 07:43:28 PM
 #13565

I like your theory, especially because it explains the trust required to have fiat on BitStamp.  

Let me add to it by suggesting that a blockchain analysis (which I didn't do) might prove that large miners exist who were holding coins.  These miners might be holding hoping for a price reversal, but they would have a must sell price to ensure continuity of the business (better to sell at 5% profit and keep mining then at 5% loss and have to turn off the electricity).  It would not be too hard to guess that approximate price.  

Therefore the Manipulator(TM) could do better then just hope for a weak hand.  He KNEW weak hands were out there, their approximate holdings, and what their approximate sell price would be.  

Some confirmation of this miner-seller theory:  The BTC price is approaching the marginal cost to mine (the trigger point for miner sales) if the hash rate levels off or drops... its too early to tell, but it definitely looks like there might be a hiccup happening: https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate

explorer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 07:50:43 PM
 #13566

how likely is it that an unregulated exchange in Slovenia has $9-10M sitting around on its exchange waiting to be mobilized on a Sunday?
What do you think it means? Also, a much smaller amount than 30k was bought in one gulp near the end, I think it was less than 10k BTC, so it's more likely.
It appeared to me that the last 12 - 14k of the wall was primarily scooped up by Loaded.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg9100535#msg9100535

I watched the wall from the first dump, along with the WO thread, and the timing fit.  With nobody making outright claims, it seems reasonable given his history...

Loaded says this on Monday, the day after the wall got taken down.

Actually it was within a few minutes. 
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 07:53:26 PM
 #13567

...<pantera manipulation theory>...


Maybe you can merge that theory with my OTC-buy theory?



Didn't he first put the wall up at $280, take it down for an hour or two, then put it back at $320? And it was getting nibbled at $320 too. Then it disappeared and came back at $300, where it obviously got eaten until gone. I really don't understand why he moved it from $320 to $300 given that it was getting action at $320...*iff* he was (even poorly) rationally trying to price-maximize.

Obviously tossing up a single 30k wall doesn't make too much sense for someone who's primary objective was rationally selling that stash. But I can maybe buy the theory of an irrational/undisciplined/freaked-out holder *except* for the move from $320 to $300, since there was indeed stable action at $320.

The only fully rational motivation I can see is if he was trying to achieve a low but stable price for a period of hours during which to secure an OTC deal in the other direction. He tried $280, but it was unstably crashing the price, so he tried $320. He got good interest there with a stable price, so he decided to see if he could do better and keep things stable at $300. Price pegged right up against the wall without crashing, so he stuck with it, and priced a bigger buy deal on OTC based on a stable price of $300. ...

Who knows... Not all players are rational, so it could be anything. Whatever; even the big trades are insignificant noise in the long run.

i think you have to back up one step and explain the inexplicable selloff since June in the face of all this good news.  and as someone who follows price quite closely using btccharts as well as other tools, much of the selling has seemed unnatural, forced, and timed.  it really looked like someone looking to force a capitulation.

the abrupt appearance and now disappearance of the trolls needs explaining as well.


Well, my theory is just pointing out that placing the wall originally at 280 (where it was destabilizing the market), then moving to 320 (where it was getting action), then to 300 isn't rational *unless* you're trying to set up some OTC trade in the other direction and need a "stable" multi-hour average on Bitstamp as a pricing reference for the OTC trade. So to fit that with your theory, you could still argue that it was Pantera executing the final load-up via such an OTC trade, and the 30k wall was theirs and simply necessary for the price-fix. Still fits with your point asking who would trust an unregulated Slovenian exchange with 30kBTC...

Anyway, I honestly don't know what to think. I don't really understand moving the wall from $320 to $300 outside of the price-fix OTC-buy theory which seems a little complicated for my usual liking. But, as I repeatedly say, I'm not a trader, so I have little instinct for how much shenanigans like that actually happen. Maybe it's more common than I think.





Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:02:31 PM
 #13568

this is interesting.  falllling registers here on the forum May 27, 2014 with last post Oct 4, 2014.

i didn't even notice this until now but it happens to match my theory that a coordinated selloff enabled by trolls started at the peak in June:

600watt
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316


View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:04:37 PM
 #13569

this is interesting.  falllling registers here on the forum May 27, 2014 with last post Oct 4, 2014.

i didn't even notice this until now but it happens to match my theory that a coordinated selloff enabled by trolls started at the peak in June:



i thought the guys got banned ? no ?
explorer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:04:54 PM
 #13570



Well, my theory is just pointing out that placing the wall originally at 280 (where it was destabilizing the market), then moving to 320 (where it was getting action), then to 300 isn't rational *unless* you're trying to set up some OTC trade in the other direction and need a "stable" multi-hour average on Bitstamp as a pricing reference for the OTC trade. So to fit that with your theory, you could still argue that it was Pantera executing the final load-up via such an OTC trade, and the 30k wall was theirs and simply necessary for the price-fix. Still fits with your point asking who would trust an unregulated Slovenian exchange with 30kBTC...

Anyway, I honestly don't know what to think. I don't really understand moving the wall from $320 to $300 outside of the price-fix OTC-buy theory which seems a little complicated for my usual liking. But, as I repeatedly say, I'm not a trader, so I have little instinct for how much shenanigans like that actually happen. Maybe it's more common than I think.






At 320 and 310 there was still a fair bit of action under the wall. When it got snugged up with the 299.99 bid wall, it  became flavor of the day...
Ivanhoe
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 841



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:05:17 PM
 #13571

this is interesting.  falllling registers here on the forum May 27, 2014 with last post Oct 4, 2014.

i didn't even notice this until now but it happens to match my theory that a coordinated selloff enabled by trolls started at the peak in June:


Here's another one.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=159160
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:08:55 PM
 #13572


Well, my theory is just pointing out that placing the wall originally at 280 (where it was destabilizing the market), then moving to 320 (where it was getting action), then to 300 isn't rational *unless* you're trying to set up some OTC trade in the other direction and need a "stable" multi-hour average on Bitstamp as a pricing reference for the OTC trade. So to fit that with your theory, you could still argue that it was Pantera executing the final load-up via such an OTC trade, and the 30k wall was theirs and simply necessary for the price-fix. Still fits with your point asking who would trust an unregulated Slovenian exchange with 30kBTC...

Anyway, I honestly don't know what to think. I don't really understand moving the wall from $320 to $300 outside of the price-fix OTC-buy theory which seems a little complicated for my usual liking. But, as I repeatedly say, I'm not a trader, so I have little instinct for how much shenanigans like that actually happen. Maybe it's more common than I think.


6 hours on a Sunday is not enough time, nor even a possible time, to set up an OTC trade of that magnitude. 

those things take days, if not weeks to negotiate and setup for that amount.

if you look at the address and read Dan Moorehead's tweets, the 30K BTC were transferred to Bitstamp just before the wall went up on Sunday and the coins originating from that address were accumulated from April 2013.
explorer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:10:20 PM
 #13573

this is interesting.  falllling registers here on the forum May 27, 2014 with last post Oct 4, 2014.

i didn't even notice this until now but it happens to match my theory that a coordinated selloff enabled by trolls started at the peak in June:



i thought the guys got banned ? no ?

I'll have to Check my ignore list, but we're there not falling accounts with varying number of L's as they were banned ?  The latest still_fall(l? )ing was just the other day.  Nothing proves it to be the same actor,  mind you.
blaaaaacksuit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280

Who cares?


View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:10:38 PM
 #13574

Definitely agree that the trolls were part of whatever this smack down was all about.  If they start posting again watch out!
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:10:52 PM
 #13575

this is interesting.  falllling registers here on the forum May 27, 2014 with last post Oct 4, 2014.

i didn't even notice this until now but it happens to match my theory that a coordinated selloff enabled by trolls started at the peak in June:


Here's another one.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=159160

little harder to explain his register date but quite suspicious that he stops posting on Oct 4.  they just disappeared (were dismissed).
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 816



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:12:18 PM
 #13576

Andreas  A. in front of the Canadian Senate in 5 minutes!

http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/Guide.aspx?viewmode=4&categoryid=-1&eventid=9692&Language=E
Ivanhoe
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 841



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:12:33 PM
 #13577

this is interesting.  falllling registers here on the forum May 27, 2014 with last post Oct 4, 2014.

i didn't even notice this until now but it happens to match my theory that a coordinated selloff enabled by trolls started at the peak in June:


Here's another one.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=159160

little harder to explain his register date but quite suspicious that he stops posting on Oct 4.  they just disappeared (were dismissed).
There are lot's of account for sale, maybe this was one of those.
It's far fetched, but a possibility.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:15:04 PM
 #13578

here's the BearWhale address, which suggests to me the seller wasn't involved in a conspiracy:

solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:15:32 PM
 #13579


Well, my theory is just pointing out that placing the wall originally at 280 (where it was destabilizing the market), then moving to 320 (where it was getting action), then to 300 isn't rational *unless* you're trying to set up some OTC trade in the other direction and need a "stable" multi-hour average on Bitstamp as a pricing reference for the OTC trade. So to fit that with your theory, you could still argue that it was Pantera executing the final load-up via such an OTC trade, and the 30k wall was theirs and simply necessary for the price-fix. Still fits with your point asking who would trust an unregulated Slovenian exchange with 30kBTC...

Anyway, I honestly don't know what to think. I don't really understand moving the wall from $320 to $300 outside of the price-fix OTC-buy theory which seems a little complicated for my usual liking. But, as I repeatedly say, I'm not a trader, so I have little instinct for how much shenanigans like that actually happen. Maybe it's more common than I think.


6 hours on a Sunday is not enough time, nor even a possible time, to set up an OTC trade of that magnitude. 

those things take days, if not weeks to negotiate and setup for that amount.

if you look at the address and read Dan Moorehead's tweets, the 30K BTC were transferred to Bitstamp just before the wall went up on Sunday and the coins originating from that address were accumulated from April 2013.

That 30k sell looked like it was a panicked one-off decision, by a non-trader who was suffering from seeing a paper holding of $30m decrease steadily to $10m. Greed and fear all over again. The decline to $300 had a lot of people thinking that $200 or even $100 was imminent. It is reasonable that at least one of those people had a large holding and acted accordingly.

Blitz­
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596


"Cut Your Loose"


View Profile
October 08, 2014, 08:18:53 PM
 #13580

this is interesting.  falllling registers here on the forum May 27, 2014 with last post Oct 4, 2014.

i didn't even notice this until now but it happens to match my theory that a coordinated selloff enabled by trolls started at the peak in June:

http://i.imgur.com/n4w5iuZ.png
Here's another one.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=159160

little harder to explain his register date but quite suspicious that he stops posting on Oct 4.  they just disappeared (were dismissed).
No offense, but you're such a conspiracy nut often times. Cheesy

He was banned on that date. That's why he pops up with new accounts all the time. He's actually still posting, but he and his new posts just get nuked from the forum.

"Bitcoin had been transformed from an anarachistic challenge to the financial status quo, to the crypto spawn of Satan, fuelled by cut-throat greed and delusions of avarice." - MatTheCat
"these people don't seem to want to stop till Bitcoin is completely destroyed and left like an old cum rag in the corner of the room." - ShroomsKit
Pages: « 1 ... 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 [679] 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 ... 1560 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!