Topic: Analysis - page 126. (Read 941567 times)

can  someone explain this,what does it mean?

I wasn't involved in Bitcoin in 2012, I only remembered an old timer who said btc-e had been hacked years ago. As memories can be unreliable I checked, and found this post about it. They paid everyone back out of their own pockets, and the exchange is still running three years later.

Any volume, doesn't matter. If the exchange goes to shit you lose your account, whether it has one bitcoin or a thousand, so never keep more than you can afford to lose.

As for which of the two is better, I personally prefer Bitstamp as they seem more serious and less shady than btc-e. Although 'stamp has previously gotten hacked and btc-e afaik hasn't, so there's that. edit: according to post above me they've both gotten hacked.

I mainly trade on OKCoin, the degenerate that I am Note though that Chinese exchanges are probably the shadiest and riskiest, with the trade-off being by far the most liquidity, best fees and margin options.

Nobody knows who runs btc-e and I think it might have been hacked a long time ago, but they paid everyone what they were owed and it's still running now. However it's a very low volume exchange. A hundred Bitcoins could make a big swing in price there.

Bitstamp has also been hacked, but paid everyone back, and we know who owns it. It was the highest volume exchange until the hack, then it lost it's place to Bitfinex, but now they probably share the top place for USD volume exchanges, It takes thousands of Bitcoins to swing the price on either of those exchanges.

Thank you for the answer. What about btc-e and bitstamp? In what volume will things get risky? Like 100 bitcoins, 1000 or even a few, like 10?

Yes it's risky on the high volume exchanges, and there is always the risk they could get hacked and you lose the lot. Coinbase is insured, but lower volume than the bigger exchanges, and they have more restrictions on what you are allowed to do with your coins. Gemini is also insured but has extremely low volume, though it might go up.

For those of you who do a bit of daytrading, do you sell and buy in the exchanges, like bitstamp or not? Isn't it risky, when something like MtGox could happen? I want to hear some thoughts on this!

Agreed, Masterluc warmed us not to trade it but I ignored him and lost a pile of cash by panicking. I'll leave it to the professionals and bots to trade this chaos until things calm down and there's a clear direction.

Thanks for your advice Masterluc, and sharing your knowledge with us.

OK. So after reality decided to come back, this ended up just being a huge wick on my charts... albeit, enough to have briefly lost faith in my own TA.

Faith *slightly* restored.... but I agree with Luc, that was insane.

We'll miss you lucif. This has been one of the best threads on the forum. Although maybe we can get out and explore the world now rather than constantly hitting refresh.  Come back soon.

Just wanted to chip in with the rest and say thank you for this (and your previous) thread lucif. Your continuous prophetic wisdom among this cesspit of "HODL"s and rocket pictures is what got me interested in TA to begin with, and has led to some nice profit over the years.

Although something tells me you (hopefully) won't be away for good. Analysis never ends!

Looks like we're living in interesting times again. Volatility beats stagnation, even if extreme volatility like now is difficult to trade precisely. Agreed?

Given the latest run up that broke (for a brief moment) all short to mid term trend deviations I track, I would say the market bias has changed (compared to, say, November last year), and the mid-to-long term bearish scenarios favored by some in here are becoming less likely, i.e. printing a new LL by crash or decay back to 1xx, or even briefly double digits (you know who you are, hehe). I considered these scenarios relatively unlikely already for the past few months due to the January volume, but even less so now.

That said, given how brutal (and frankly, ridiculous) this run-up was, I think an (almost) equally brutal reverse move is possible, if not likely. In (subjective) numbers, I'd put a re-test of 300 in the range of 0.3 to 0.5 likelihood, based on the enormous amplitude of this swing so far, and a breakdown and "secondary" capitulation into the 200s not much lower than these numbers.

Aside: I don't practice EW (although I can see its merits), but instead I tend to look at the market mostly from a momentum perspective ("momentum" in the traders' jargon sense of 'positive autocorrelation', not the finance sense of 'cross-sectional correlation')

Thanks for all the insights Master.
Best thread on btctalk ever(linguistic puzzles and riddles included).
We eagerly await your resurrection!
All hail Luc

Yes, come on back, Masterluc!!!  

What did Winston Churchill say?  Never, Never, Never give up!!!  

Now's the time you have to get fighting mad and chew the charts a new arss.

analysis never ends. 

master...... we're almost back to the price you sold at.. you havent missed the rocket launch. come back!

   Analysis ended ? No , it's just the beginning 

Missed the last few pages, but this has been a great thread. Very insightful. We all look forward to your re-emergence masterluc.

But family wanna eat ?!
Maybe some other type of analysis will fit BTC' moves better ?

Thanks Master for the great thread! I hope, you don't quit.

We can continue to build on the base of sober analysis established by masterluc.  For me, it has been a real pleasure following the level-headed commentary in this high quality thread.
I am going to throw out an idea that I am developing for my own use that can help bring discipline to one's trades and perhaps take some of the emotion out of things.  I am pursuing a Shannon balancing strategy, modified slightly to accommodate my financial position, and take into consideration some of the things I (think) I have learned about the bitcoin market in more than two years of trading experience.
At its most basic, the strategy entails maintaining a position half btc and half fiat through periodic rebalancing.
Consider entering a volatile market at time t(0) and price x(0).  You pursue a Shannon rebalancing strategy until time t(1).  If the market has returned to price x(0) at time t(1), you will have made a profit, unless trading fees are high and you made too many trades.  You avoid this problem by rebalancing only after significant price moves.
Let's say you enter a market by purchasing some commodity with 50% of your liquid assets.  Price drops by half.  You rebalance to 50% commodity, 50% fiat.  Then the price doubles, you rebalance to 50% again.  Your will have made a profit of 12.5% -- despite the fact that the commodity's price is the same as when you entered the market. This is disregarding trading fees.
By the same token, if the price doubles, and then halves, you would make a profit by rebalancing.
So Shannon beats holding, with the caveat that in a long term uptrend, holding beats Shannon, particularly if the market has low volatility. With bitcoin, we have both: long term uptrend and high volatility.
The Shannon strategy can be modified to take into account bitcoin's long term uptrend, profiting from short term fluctuations and long term appreciation, both.  It's surprisingly simple to do so.  But it requires careful thought and judgment to set the parameters.