Topic: . - page 14. (Read 35852 times)

Yes, I am expecting the current trend to continue to 180 and maybe even to a new ATH.

The news surrounding bitcoin is unprecedented, and the fact that most speculators are not speculating on these new developments, and instead pretending that everyone will suddenly lose confidence and sell it down to new lows, is kinda weird...

I understand that 2011's bubble deflated much futured down, but thats because everyone lost confidence and sold, this is clearly not going to happen today, the only thing that can save you bears is if some retarded whale starts dumping coins in a panic as another country declares bitcoin legal tender.

I did a quick analysis earlier today, comparing the late May situation (that ended in the month long downtrend)  to now. Using the indicators and tools that I usually find reliable, I can't see a fundamental difference between now and then.

Which doesn't mean that we're heading for a reversal, just that, with one difference(*) perhaps, May and August look similar, and the former situation saw to a drastic, rather unexpected, reversal.

(*) the one difference I can see and that I would say is perhaps relevant is the duration of the uptrend until the reversal: when price started to fall in May, we only had a two week run-up behind us. Today, we're in a solid uptrend for almost two months.

ya

and IMO this market hasn't hit the irrational stage yet...

Its perfectly rational to think 1BTC will soon be worth 200-500$ given the bitcoins relentless growth, and peoples ever increasing confidence in it, due to a worldwide phenomenon know as, getting butt fucked by your bank.

hehehehe  

Markets stay irrational longer than the contents of your MtGox USD stash.....

this thread is going to cost a lot of people a lot of bitcoin...

there's nothing to indicate a reversal is coming...

Thanks... I feel a reversal coming as well, just can't put a value on it

does this low peak estimate still stand? I understand it may not take place on that day, however, I'm curious value wise.

Ok, thanks for posting the new prediction.
However, it does not fit with my EW sub-sub-wave recognition. I expect the peak no later than tomorrow the 30th August, although I can't see any sign in market indicators yet.
The 30th fits from a temporal perspective, but not from money flow or MACD. And the peak could be quickly followed by a whale dump including the 127$ buy wall.
That's what happened in May, with a 25k+ BTC buy wall, also at 127$ IIRC. It could happen again.
Also, the 137$ peak value: it's too high IMO, it would require a buy of 1.8 M$ plus resistance. Do you see that much money available for the push?

Chodpaba, would you like to share with us an updated prediction for today's peak?
Yesterday I expected a rather large buy, not whale but large enough to move the price up a bit.
Very short term market indicators were improving and several times small players tried to start
a mini-rally, but seller pressure was too high and kept pushing them back. Considering the
high seller pressure ( as I write this ), is the 137$ peak still in the cards?

And if you investigated and found some reasons for the error to predict the last big rise?
I tried to find the error in my EW recognition, and beside the obvious mistake of counting the
rebound as the first sub-wave, I found that the noise in the price is too high to accurately
recognize EW (actually, sub-sub-waves). From the 20th to the 23rd August there were too many
ups and downs, courtesy of the panic buyers, and the sub-sub-waves got distorted badly.
I do however see promise in counting sub-sub-waves in market indicators, other than price.

another way to look at this, which would also filter for specific sized events, is to do an event-triggered average.

the event could be a price movement of X% (e.g +/- 5) with a volume requirement of Y std dev (e.g. 3) away from the mean for the exchange over some time Z (eg. 4hr). this would then filter for only the largest events on the respective exchanges.

then take those timestamps (t=0) and select the data from the other exchange from say t +/- 4 hrs. make 2 event-triggered averages, bitstamp-triggered Gox average, and Gox-triggered bitstamp average.

alter the variables x,y,z to increase or decrease sensitivity.

for clarity, that's a 30 min fixed offset over the entire history you test on, right?

(by the way, how do you run those tests? something custom made or matlab+mtgox data?)

This goes completely against my intuition on this, and my (non testable, I admit) observations. Like I already said, I never expected a one-way influence of one on the other with a constant lead time, but I expect there to be some consistent effect. I have no idea of showing it though, so I have to come back to it when I can think of a way.

Or the effect isn't picked up because that way of looking at it is too coarse, and the leading time might not be constant either, for example could depend on volume or volatility, in which case your global offset wouldn't be the right tool either.

Had planned to say this for a while now, but I really appreciate that you post on here, chodpaba. The level of mathematical sophistication of your methods is way above what others write on here, myself included. Plus, you have the integrity to admit when your methods missed their target.

That said, one of your basic assumptions, that you've mentioned in a discussion before, is not adequate anymore: that a price model can be built on mtgox data alone. (Disclosure: I trade on bitstamp)

The argument for that assumption usually goes like: price on mtgox and all other exchanges are almost perfectly correllated (plus/minus some near constant price difference perhaps), and trends start on mtgox, so the price on other exchanges is largely a function of mtgox price.

I simply don't think that's the case anymore. For example, yesterday:





During most of the day, both exchanges were in a weak downtrend. A few large buy orders (in the range of 400k USD) turned the trend around on bitstamp Monday night. 6 or so hours later, mtgox really kicked off the current trend, with a buy volume of almost 4M USD. I'm sure on a bigger scale, it will look again like they're neatly correlated, but it's not at all clear to me that the big positive trend on mtgox is unrelated to the previous positive trend on bitstamp.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think mtgox and bitstamp are equally important in determining the price. Bitstamp has about half the total volume of mtgox now, but probably its influence on the price is an even smaller fraction. Doesn't really matter though, even if bitstamp only accounts for, say, 15% of the price development, that's a pretty big chunk to ignore IMO.

Interested in your opinion on this. (you could argue of course that since they're so strongly correlated, any influence other exchanges have on the price will eventually show up on the mtgox price itself, but for a serious predicitive model, that's kind of sloppy.)

found your answer in another thread:

OK, thanks. It's believable, but I have serious doubts that the 135 resistance level will be broken.
Many got stuck there 3 months ago. If however the 135 is broken, I wouldn't be surprised to see 150.
Currently there are about 1.5M$ not deployed, which money if used to buy could set things rolling upwards.

PS. Important memo to myself: don't count the rebound as the first Elliot sub-wave!

Now what did you do?

55K isn't that bad.  It was lower in April.

Gox is seriously starting to run out of BTC, its down to 55K, that's 2 weeks of mining.  Clearly the flow of coins onto Gox has largely ceased and people their are essentially trading a limited pool back and forth.  When supply dropped to these levels in early January it was the beginning of the bubble which saw supply shrink to around 25K just prior to the crash.  Could we be re-entering that kind of bubble market?  I'm doubtful, the 2013 bubble had much much higher volume all through the run up then we can sustain now, if not for these whale-buys their would literally be no activity at all.   Clearly these prices are not bringing in vast numbers of speculators that we saw earlier this year, only established players are playing this market and their funds are limited.