Pages:
Author

Topic: BITSTAMP eXchange wall Observer. second biggest and best exchange - page 32. (Read 89337 times)

uyo
newbie
Activity: 36
Merit: 0
Volume has been a joke for days now, anyone care to explain to an amateur why the price is rising?

Observing order book I would say that someone is pushing price up at Mtgox (also volume raised there lately), Bitstamp is following (at lower speed).  But I'm also an amateur.
legendary
Activity: 2324
Merit: 1125
Volume has been a joke for days now, anyone care to explain to an amateur why the price is rising?

Because Bitcoin is massively undervalued.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 251
Moon?
Volume has been a joke for days now, anyone care to explain to an amateur why the price is rising?
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1007
Judging from the Y axis values, that isn't a log chart. And even if it were, small movements at the bottom of the chart are perfectly visible.

Depends on how exactly the y axis is set up. But the point is moot because you're right, the scale is linear.



The only possible narrative to draw from that chart is that Bitstamp volume is flat while Gox volume is decaying to match it. I interpret the approach to this limit as speaking to the meager arbitrage volume between Gox and Bitstamp. Which, given the depth of Gox's order book does not bode well for Bitstamp. It means that Bitstamp is beholden to this arbitrage volume during both high and low volume periods.

Or is it?

Arbitrage volume is low because there's not enough profit/too much risk due to the fiat cashout delay on mtgox, plus the actual risk (real or not) of insolvency. I see (mtgox) order book size as mostly unrelated to that, it's a combination of fiat being stuck on the exchange, mtgox historically being the preferred exchange for large traders, and money sitting on the sidelines by those who are out of the loop/simply not interested in the mtgox metagame. Bitstamp order book on the other hand always had a decent sized ask side, but bid size was and is meager. There will be a tipping point where the advantage of the higher depth on mtgox will no longer outweigh the benefits of higher (and more consistent) volume on bitstamp -- only then will market depth on bitstamp match its volume. If mtgox fixes their shit before that point is reached, bitstamp will probably remain secondary, but I don't see any improvements on mtgox so far. ("10 wires per day." Really?)

Gox's order book size is unrelated to the arbitrage volume, that was the point.

Nothing has changed regarding average volume on Bitstamp. The takeaway is that as volume returns to Gox all we will see is bigger arb channels that still don't get filled. Bitstamp remains no threat to Gox, and as sketchy as Gox is, this does not bode well for Bitstamp. The point.

And that was my point: if volume *doesn't* return to mtgox, the status quo is not sustainable.
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1007
Judging from the Y axis values, that isn't a log chart. And even if it were, small movements at the bottom of the chart are perfectly visible.

Depends on how exactly the y axis is set up. But the point is moot because you're right, the scale is linear.



The only possible narrative to draw from that chart is that Bitstamp volume is flat while Gox volume is decaying to match it. I interpret the approach to this limit as speaking to the meager arbitrage volume between Gox and Bitstamp. Which, given the depth of Gox's order book does not bode well for Bitstamp. It means that Bitstamp is beholden to this arbitrage volume during both high and low volume periods.

Or is it?

Arbitrage volume is low because there's not enough profit/too much risk due to the fiat cashout delay on mtgox, plus the actual risk (real or not) of insolvency. I see (mtgox) order book size as mostly unrelated to that, it's a combination of fiat being stuck on the exchange, mtgox historically being the preferred exchange for large traders, and money sitting on the sidelines by those who are out of the loop/simply not interested in the mtgox metagame. Bitstamp order book on the other hand always had a decent sized ask side, but bid size was and is meager. There will be a tipping point where the advantage of the higher depth on mtgox will no longer outweigh the benefits of higher (and more consistent) volume on bitstamp -- only then will market depth on bitstamp match its volume. If mtgox fixes their shit before that point is reached, bitstamp will probably remain secondary, but I don't see any improvements on mtgox so far. ("10 wires per day." Really?)
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1030
Volume didn't pick up on bitstamp to completely make up for the loss of volume on mtgox. So overall volume went down.

Thanks, I was under the impression that volume was fleeing mtgox to other exchanges.


But what appears to be a flat line is actually slightly going up (remember, log chart)

Judging from the Y axis values, that isn't a log chart. And even if it were, small movements at the bottom of the chart are perfectly visible.
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1007
If volume was moving to bitstamp, shouldn't it be increasing in that chart? I see it is quite flat…

Volume didn't pick up on bitstamp to completely make up for the loss of volume on mtgox. So overall volume went down. But what appears to be a flat line is actually slightly going up (remember, log chart), *and* it is a near constant volume in overall falling volume, in other words, the relative importance of bitstamp went up.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1030
If volume was moving to bitstamp, shouldn't it be increasing in that chart? I see it is quite flat…
legendary
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
Quote
mtgox isn't dead yet it still has volume during volatile movements.
Your right Gox is't dead yet, but it may has cancer. There was a time it had more or less 100% market share. The way things are evolving gox plays second fiddle to Bitstamp in the US soon. 


doubt it bitstamp does not have the people to set up shop in the usa, perhaps they would but why bother with the massive regulatory costs involved

Does this graph NOT disprove that theory of volume migrating to bitstamp? Because.. it sure looks that way. Looks like bitcoin trading volume has just simply plummeted from the April highs.

Also, does http://trading.i286.org/bitstamp/?item=btc¤cy=usd function for any of you? MTGox version loads fine for me. Bitstamp one stopped working yesterday for me.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 501
Ching-Chang;Ding-Dong
Not in the US, but in USD. BitStamp isn't located in the US and services many currencies as well as USD (converted upon deposit/withdraw).
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057
Marketing manager - GO MP
Nice chart, thanks. It seem to follow natural exponential decay.
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1010
he who has the gold makes the rules
Quote
mtgox isn't dead yet it still has volume during volatile movements.
Your right Gox is't dead yet, but it may has cancer. There was a time it had more or less 100% market share. The way things are evolving gox plays second fiddle to Bitstamp in the US soon. 


doubt it bitstamp does not have the people to set up shop in the usa, perhaps they would but why bother with the massive regulatory costs involved
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1001
Energy is Wealth
Quote
mtgox isn't dead yet it still has volume during volatile movements.
Your right Gox is't dead yet, but it may has cancer. There was a time it had more or less 100% market share. The way things are evolving gox plays second fiddle to Bitstamp in the US soon. 
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1003
WePower.red
That $123 wall is going to fall or be removed in 24 hours. We are sliding down.
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1007
Instead of looking at walls unfiltered, I prefer to see how the bid/ask ratio changes over time. 3 days ago I posted here that this ratio went up drastically, and price followed (125 to 128).

The reversal of that ratio, starting yesterday, was even sharper. And price is already following again. Here's the corresponding 1w graph from coinorama:



How do you read this? And don't just say "manipulation", but specify what's the goal of it. 'cause it sure doesn't look like straight-forward pump-and-dump, the increase was too incremental, and there was no huge sell-off at the peak either.

I admit, I'm unsure what the reason is behind this. Could be an attempt to artificially prop up price, before the July uptrend finally breaks down. Could be an attempt to actively *bring down* the July uptrend. Could be plain old market insecurity ("is the trend over? or not?"). Your guess is as good as mine.
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
It seems USD13 is the price per bitcoin to do arbitrage between gox and stamp.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 506
Oh look, someone ate most of the bidwall. Btw that 800 ask isn't particularly large, and i  don't think its new either

yea and then they bought it right back 60 seconds later for a $ less minus fees...

History graph doesn't show any indication of that...?

yes there is no way to prove that it was the same actor, but someone came in and bought 900ish right after around 1100 was dumped

Okay, so the guy sold and then put up an ask wall? Because doing an 1100 sell caused $3 slippage. A 900 buy would have probably moved the price to eating into the $128 askwall.

Could also just be someone painting the ticker for vol, bringing stamp usd 24hr volume up to 50% which looks impressive for anyone not realising there's only peanuts being traded virtually anywhere atm.

legendary
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
Oh look, someone ate most of the bidwall. Btw that 800 ask isn't particularly large, and i  don't think its new either

yea and then they bought it right back 60 seconds later for a $ less minus fees...

History graph doesn't show any indication of that...?

yes there is no way to prove that it was the same actor, but someone came in and bought 900ish right after around 1100 was dumped

Okay, so the guy sold and then put up an ask wall? Because doing an 1100 sell caused $3 slippage. A 900 buy would have probably moved the price to eating into the $128 askwall.
full member
Activity: 193
Merit: 100
Always riding the Bull...
Oh look, someone ate most of the bidwall. Btw that 800 ask isn't particularly large, and i  don't think its new either

yea and then they bought it right back 60 seconds later for a $ less minus fees...

History graph doesn't show any indication of that...?

yes there is no way to prove that it was the same actor, but someone came in and bought 900ish right after around 1100 was dumped

That would be some expensive manipulation.

Let's say he's gotten his fee all the way down to 0.25% To trade 2000 coins in both directions:

2 x 2000BTC x .0025 = 10BTC * $125/BTC = $1250.

The cost of doing business. Expensive is a relative word...
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
Oh look, someone ate most of the bidwall. Btw that 800 ask isn't particularly large, and i  don't think its new either

yea and then they bought it right back 60 seconds later for a $ less minus fees...

History graph doesn't show any indication of that...?

yes there is no way to prove that it was the same actor, but someone came in and bought 900ish right after around 1100 was dumped

That would be some expensive manipulation.

Let's say he's gotten his fee all the way down to 0.25% To trade 2000 coins in both directions:

2 x 2000BTC x .0025 = 10BTC * $125/BTC = $1250.
Pages:
Jump to: