Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[N12]

the main thing here is, Pantera essentially controls the #1 exchange that the whole community keys off of.  and they probably can see the internal order books.  why not manipulate it for the chance to make extraordinary life changing profits?

Now I see what you mean. I completely forgot that Pantera invested in Bitstamp. Do they have majority share?

[brg444]

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

[brg444]

it should also be mentioned that they most certainly bid on the USMS auction and struck out.

https://twitter.com/dan_pantera/status/483710410588037120

[cypherdoc]

the main thing here is, Pantera essentially controls the #1 exchange that the whole community keys off of.  and they probably can see the internal order books.  why not manipulate it for the chance to make extraordinary life changing profits?

Now I see what you mean. I completely forgot that Pantera invested in Bitstamp. Do they have majority share?

as far as i know, they are the only investment fund with a stake in Bitstamp.

[cypherdoc]

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

[explorer]

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]

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]

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.

[thezerg]

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]

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]

...<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.

[cypherdoc]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[cypherdoc]

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]

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