Topic: Analysis - page 251. (Read 941563 times)

Says h3speros. 

These are my thoughts also about the case of lucs recent post. But I disagree on one thing, It's rocket scientist, not rocker.

We should really define what is a dramatic sell off. Is it that weeny kind of sell off, meaning 560 - 500. A capitulation sell off, meaning 440 - 275, or a cataclysm going back to ancient trend line in the 100's.

Dramatic Sell offs regarding bitcointalk-dramaqueen is even starting with 20.00$ dumps.

i think the point is this: if you say it's bearish and get a selloff you are right. if you say it's bearish and get rally you are wrong. attacking vagueness means nothing in that case.

a drop 20 points to 550 is not dramatic.

Or actually there was a concerted selling effort to keep us below 600.

You missed the point of what I said. A vague enough statement always hits the mark. We go down to $530? "Dramatic selloff confirmed". We go down to $300? "Definitely dramatic selloff". We bounce back from $550? "Kind of a dramatic selloff". (For the record, $530 seems a good candidate imo).

About the other point: I've said it often enough in this thread - masterluc has an amazing read on the market. I never dismiss his predictions thoughtlessly. I do however point out when they're not so much predictions but more 'vague, ominous sounding murmurs'.

don't forget who predicted a multi-year bear market after the december top -- our very own lucif. whether that is still on the cards is up for debate, but 8 months later, still going strong.

whether we hit 300 or 450, that would be a dramatic selloff indeed.

Good kings all around. Luc has been prescient several times before and we should give him props for that.

In addition, it doesn't take a rocker scientist to suggest stocks are way overbought. And it's entirely possible that if the stock market goes down I a big way that bitcoin could too - although there is no real historical precedent got this.

However, we also should consider, reading over Lucs most recent posts, that there is a certain amount of regional stress he is currently over involving where he resides. This may be causing him to have a less than well rounded and objective view of the current world financial markets.

It seems like doom and bloomers have been around forever and they, for several reasons, will always be.

Doom and gloom, baby. Doom and gloom.

The problem with predictions like that is they're almost impossible to falsify... "dramatic selloff" implies a real crash. A new capitulation low. Say, going back to $300, maybe even lower.

Or maybe not. Let's say price is going down another leg, hitting $500, maybe even high $400s. The prediction will "sound" right as well afterwards, or at least some will claim it does (while I would hardly call it "dramatic").

Same for the stock markets. "About to crash", or "entering a longer bear market"? The two are not the same, but a vague enough statement can afterwards be claimed to have "predicted" it.

It would be easy to agree with this but the only caveat is fiat creation by central banks and the potential for future fiat creation by central banks.  Frankly, I don't think anybody knows how this will affect markets going forward.  A deflationary collapse would have to be swift and powerful, which is definitely possible.  I believe we will see volatility increasing in fiat currencies with wild swings on both the deflationary and inflationary sides.  The aftermath will leave bitcoin and possibly a select few other chains emerge as dominant money and global finance and gold as a last resort backup storage of wealth imho.

thats what they want you to think but there is no hiding actually... 

What are you saying is collapsing then? The stock market, the FIAT currencies, governments? Or do you also think that Bitcoin collapses? Wouldn't bitcoin be a perfect haven against a collapsing 'traditional' economy?

Or sections of society have no money and switch to using digital currencies. Would be more efficient than bartering.

If you see a deflationary collapse like 2008 coming where, you know, everything collapses vs. fiat currency ... Why not? Is the point of speculation to preserve and increase purchasing power or is it some sort of feel good mentality?

Holding real money thus.

And what do you suggest? Holding fiat can not be the solution

 Thanks for your analysis I will hold and be patient, waiting for the higher price 

Bitcoin is on one step from long dramatic selloff imho.

Global stocks are about to crash. This monopoly game is almost over and all money and property will be returned back to the box.

I still disagree on the "patient" money won't chase. Fortress chased in 2013. Institutional money is NOT as smart as everyone thinks its is. Some players are smart, but not most perhaps. Its kinda like VCs. A lot of VCs aren't that smart. Look how much money is getting thrown into stupid bitcoin projects and start ups. And its like that with every fad - and by fad I do not mean useless - just popular in the VC world.

Patient money will absolutely buy on exchange. They just dont want to. But if/when it becomes their only choice - they will go to Coinbase.

Not conspiring, but you can't tell me that a huge amount of people here don't chant "HODL HODL HODL". Now, I know there is more to Bitcoin than just this forum, but I'm sure it could be considered representative of the whole.

The miners have never put every coin on the exchanges. Before the reward drop to 3600/day, there was no way we were seeing 7200/day of freshly mined coins. Plus, the volume on exchanges would easily swallow that up anyway. I don't think this is entirely the issue we're seeing. I would think it's more along the lines of the collective of the three. Half the reward, off-exchange buying and the hodl that is lessening the total supply on exchanges. This is IF there is actually less on exchanges. This is an unknown except by exchange operators. Shallow depth doesn't necessarily mean less available, because they might not be in an order at that moment.

This "patient" money won't chase because they don't use exchanges. They may offer more to the entity they are buying from, but that isn't directly (that was for molecular ) causing a price rise on the exchanges since they use the exchange price and offer a few % more. The exchange price dictates what they are willing to pay, not the other way around. I get your point that lowered supply on exchanges causes an excess demand situation, so it's the exchange participants that make the price rise and then the off-exchange price will rise. This also assumes that buyers aren't lessened by off-exchange buying.

Every coin that is sold, was also bought. There are plenty of coins waiting to be sold, but just haven't hit their selling point yet. Whether that is their personal profit zone, or their personal panic zone, they haven't hit it yet. Enough rise as well as enough drop will bring these coins out at some point.