Topic: false signal resulted rally in China, and it won't stop. - page 4. (Read 17603 times)

Yes, this rally has no relations to goverment, just big investors from Wenzhou get involved in.

If goverment want to test bitcoin, then the company would be Tencent, not baidu

Do you honestly believe that this is 'right'?

Second, do you honestly believe that the government can't just manipulate it into looking like they allowed people to launder millions of illegal income?

Third, do you believe it is even possible for a business of their nature to NOT have the potential to allow money laundering?

You surly studied a lot on the facts, so much so that you may even been to China or studies China, but your thinking is western. You are thinking on the line that one event leads to another, with a set of rule, not on the line that how leaders will consider the issue. In fact you talk as if the leaders ain't present in the picture.

The essence is: It's people making decision on people's fate. You are thinking whether someone did something wrong. IMHO this is a typical western idea. Please keep talking like that, that helps China be more aware of your way of thinking which would helps us in the end. But things happens in China is thus colored in your view. Wise investors avoids this coloring. You can analyses things with this coloring, but how do you predict things with this coloring?

Let's look at Mr Zeng's case again and see the decision making process. Is he prosecuted because he is not innocent? I took it trivial and I didn't study if he is innocent; there are other frauds going on unpunished. This morning on my way to breakfast my breakfast shop is there no longer, 50 police man lines up blocking the way as the building being torn down. (It is true and it is exactly 2 hours ago, location is east to Xi'ErQi subway station, I was too cowardy to take a picture.) They call it removal of illegal building, but there is another one just next to it untouched. Everybody are illegal, who decided which one to survive? Is it by rule or by the thinking of someone powerful? 吸储 (accept saving from public) is a serious crime (for its potential of public rally), and I am a customer of exactly one of such 'illegal' business which just got an award from local government. Will this company no longer be tomorrow? Will the wheel of fate turn and their leader be in jail soon? Perhaps, that's why they offer 15% yearly return (some do 30% or more). If they collapse I will accept my lose, it is not because it is illegal, but that it is chosen for sacrifice.

In my post I never metiond Zeng is innocent. He sacrified in a power struggle; his innocence or lack of it is irrelevent. Truth is, somebody want somebody dead and he managed it. Perhaps the victim displeased a some powerful leader, or he needs to be out of a bigger picture. Whoever did it has the authority (not lawful authority) to sell the asset of the company and frame him, and even if the central government knows this leader crossed the line by causing public rally (not by being ruthless), the central government cannot punish the leader on the spot, fearing it be taken as a success of defense by the people. The wise memebers in the centrol government may even carefullly remove the leader who sacrified Mr Zeng a few years later after the event, but not on the spot, least that authoritive image be maintained.

Look at the recent scrutiny against Starbuck. Is Starbuck being really too expensive? No, the government is looking for a sign of obiedience, like the obeidience they obtained from BMW, apple and western milk vendors. Just sit and watch the event unfold, Starbuck will folllow the order and lower the price. Obey, you have chance to earn back the money later. If you talk about facts, whether or not Starbuck is too expensive or guilty, you are seeing the woods not the forest.

I am from desert area of China. In school days I used to defend myself with a pen kinfe. I fought my way to Beijing and survived, although my citizenship remains provincial I consider myself lucky. My friend briefly jailed for trying to report the event of Q-i-a-n-Y-u-n-h-u-i. Married raising a kid without own house, I actuallly learned my English from reading Shakespeare and Tennyson. I never had a chance to go to an English speaking country, twice I was denied of visa for flight risk, such is how western system of law and personal freedom entrusts me. Why do I mention this? Our world is different. The opulence the west enjoys, we work hard to gain equal footing. From grass root I know survival and I know it is not easy here. Now China talks loudly about justice-by-law, while to us it is just a fasionable new trend, and other trends has flown before, what doesn't change is that you obey whoever can hurt you without being punished - this rule works everywhere. Admittedly China has gone a long way and now that you are likely to stay out of trouble trying to be law-abiding (unlikely really law-abiding, because they outlawed too many), but you are not so sure, especially in the mine-field of public stability issue like 吸储 (accept saving from public). Our Econimist Mao Yushi 茅于轼 is a public figure. He operates microfinancing for rural development 10 years and in an interview he said that he still dare not 吸储 (accept saving from public) which is the key step for his dream of self-sustaining rural development, and who are you to think you are to enjoy a better fate than a well respected audacious figure like him, whom if prosecuted would backfire PR disaster to China government? If, BTCChina is hacked and stolen beyond what they can cover on their own, and crowds gather together to protest for the lose of their family saving, that converts the event from a tax and license problem to a stability problem, they can't be confident about their petty life. If, for another scenario they are caught in the picture of fight-againt-corruption and someone want a number of money laundry to sacrifice, they can't be confident about their petty life. In both senarios I don't even involve government's attitude towards non-fiat currency. And I am speaking of cmmon sense, BTCChina knows it, it just take some courage to speak it frankly.

Where I live, if you rent 1000 months, you spend enough to buy the house. The news report says a figure much lower than 1000, and they are sensored. So either I live in a very special area of Beijing (could be, because it is greener here and we have elders in the community -- the less valued locations are full of youngsters), or the newspapers are lying. I didn't do a full study of everywhere in Beijing.

People defend for Zeng because of two things:
1) The so called 'fraud' was supported by the government then, and he was caught after the government leader was changed and his assert was grabbed by the government without giving a chance for him to pay back the investors.
2) Just after the death penalty was approved, the execution was done quickly before notifying his family.
They are not saying Zeng is innocent and the death penalty is completely unfair.

There're also two things to clarify:
1) He indeed caused people to lose billions of CNY, and was not innocent at all.
2) His death penalty was debated for years online and finally approved by the Supreme Court, and his daughter knew that before he was executed. She just did not get notified the exact day of the execution and did not get her chance to see his father for the last chance. It was not a secret execution imagined by many westerners.

Let's come back to the topic. If BTCChina suddenly disappears with billions of CNY from the traders, then yes, they deserve death penalty. If they allow people to launder millions of illegal income or help people to transfer millions of CNY to overseas (to avoid this, BTCChina has daily BTC withdraw limit of 10BTC for unverified users), they maybe jailed for many years. But if they are forced to close by the government just because BTC trading is not supported, they will at most be charged on taxing and license issues.

Trolls gotta troll.

You are right on this, an experiment shows they accept direct transfer to specific person (not company). It's a mistake of my notes, and on this they are exceptional.


If they intend to flee with all trader's money is a subject matter to be decided (not to be mooted). In Zeng Chengjie's case, the company was seized by government, which contain fund from a very large group of people, and most asset was sold by the government in a hurry at low price, then, they accused the company owner for not being able to pay the fund (of course, as they are sold cheap), and execution was fast. So it was not Zeng intend illegal thing for the money, but a decision was made that he must intend so.

From your langauge I assume you are aware things here enought to tell provincial government act differently than a central government. It is harder for central government to direct such a show as in Zeng's case and "find" a money fraud which doesn't exist. So yes, they are not "risking" their lives if the thing is handled by central government. But although central government doesn't often act ruthles childishly, like Zheng Chenjie's case, it nevertheless is ruthless when it consider authority is in danger and an example has to be made, like the other case with another Mr Zeng (Zeng Junjie), so if btcchina people are in real danger depends on two factors, 1: if the case is a central government issue and 2) if the case evolved that needs to be taken as a challane of national authority (e.g. fiscal). I summarized these two factors as "nevertheless they are risking their lifes" because I do think so.

It seems like in any state like china, with a rapidly growing economy but also with inflation, Bitcoin would be a huge boon.

Since people are accumulating wealth, rather than spending it, they need a savings vehicle, but inflation is destroying those savings. Also, they have a lot of income, so they don't necessarily need for the savings to be very liquid. Finally, the government is known to confiscate wealth. Bitcoin is the natural answer.

Of course. I could be "over-optimistic", that's what I said 

Factors that work in favour of bitcoin in regards to the Chinese market:

- Chinese lose money in banks through inflation, so they're always looking for something to invest in to protect wealth.  Recently its been property, but bitcoin also has the advantage of being easily movable outside of the country.

- Some major cities (Shanghai for example) have put limits on the number of properties that can be bought.  People with savings will be looking for something else to dump money into.  Bitcoin has the distinct advantage of not requiring any storage space and also being an easy place to hide wealth.


Factors that work against:

- Because many Chinese are looking for anything to put their money into they're prone to fads and bursting bubbles.  See the China Garlic Bubble of 2010 for example.  If bitcoin's price or popularity starts to deflate you will see a very rapid rush for the exits.

- If bitcoin is seen as becoming a threat by the central government there could be a very swift and severe crackdown on exchanges.  Despite stereotypes China is a pretty open society with citizens enjoying a lot of freedom, but anything that may cause harm to the government is harshly dealt with.


Some of my relatives are Chinese and own investment properties there.  They keep the properties empty as a 'used' apartment is seen to be worth less, unlike in my home country where investors try to cram in a renter even at a loss to claim the tax concession.

Are you Chinese? Are you in the best position to talk of objectivity? I'm not, and I'm not going to make a rash judgment and assume what OP is saying is unlikely. But your idea of punishment under the Chinese system definitely sounds like the perspective of a westerner. There are many executions in China for what are white collar crimes in the west. Zeng Chengjie was executed 2 years ago for fraudulent fundraising and was executed before his family was notified. They maintain his innocence. People are illegally imprisoned all the time. Talk of law and lawyers means nothing when they will disappear you and imprison your lawyers if need be. As of a couple years ago, people could be executed for petty crimes like drunk driving and bicycle thievery. And in China, there is a history of executions (including public executions) as a warning/deterrent.

"Killing a chicken to scare the monkeys"

The kicker is that we know so little about executions in China because data about them are treated as state secrets.

They may be taxes & fined  if its a small operation, but if Bitcoin grows enough they could potentially face more problems. Especially when you consider the fact that the potential that they will flee with all the trader's money increase's with its purchasing power.

Well we only got to 205.5 less than 24 hours ago, kind of early to be saying it will never go through. Getting over 200 was the big deal, now things are likely consolidating, a little pause to all this would be just fine.  

EDIT: LOL exactly ten minutes later we just hit 207.47. 

interesting!!

do you mean monthly rent being 200 times more than value of property?

I am afraid I have to disagree with you on two things:
1) BTCChina accepts direct bank transfer.
2) Running an bitcoin exchange is different than running a stock exchange or opening a virtual IPO. It's just a platform for people to buy/sell a commodity (BTC is not treated as currency yet in China). So I don't think they are risking their life.  They may be force closed and fined, or even charged for tax, license issues, but definitely not terminated as long as they do not just flee with all traders' money.
I like your analysis, but please don't exaggerate and keep objective.  

I see walls building up. And makes me feel we'll never go beyond 205.5.

Where is the line?

The behaviour of a gambler and a desperate investor is the same, if they don't have faith in what they are investing in.

For your information, in some areas of Beijing the rent-to-purchase ratio of real estate is already at the level of 1000:1 (norm is 200:1), that is much beyond when Japan had their real estate bubble burst. And real investors, investors betting the happiness of the rest of his life and his family's, are still pouring money into Beijing real estate purchase. Are they investors or gamblers? Just this morning I read a post someone saying he put his life's saving into bitcoin and wishing it to triple, so that he can cash out and buy real estate in Beijing and thus move to live in Beijing. There are much less logic behind investment, only sentiment matters.

I am stil betting this madness can go on a few days - after that, it depends on the sentiment.

I answered this before, and you haven't read it. Just search for keyword "Zeng" in this thread. Here is more information: among the 7 Chinese exchange service providers that I am monitoring, only btcchina published a name and an address on their website, all others anonymous. All exchange providers do not accept direct bank transfer (nor domestic nor international) and only accept money through virtual accounts on alipay/tenpay (like paypal in China) because it is easier to fake personal information on these virtual accounts. Now you realize being anonymous is bad for running exchange service business - how do you entrust others to put money on your trading account? So why do they still choose to be anonymous? Because they want to keep their body alive, even a billionaire like Zeng cannot save his life.

In other words, those who operate btcchina is betting their lives or runnning incognito without our awareness. They are either the bravest or they are the biggest fraud. If they used real names, they still have a good chance to keep their body (not company) alive, as they are betting Central Government being more cautious on killing, while provincial government less, and bitcoin is going to be a central government issue. But nevertheless they are betting their lives. And I am not yet sure if btcchina people deserve a lot of respect, they could be just too greedy than too bold (their 0% trade fee policy and higher volume than MtGox fits the picture of the ubiquitous winner-take-all ambition in China, a characteristic of our time).

Oh yes I forgot that. Thank you! I just added it to my signature.

1H8zTiwu7cLFzoVaUkUSGZhEgE8RKxyQbZ

BTW, do you have a bitcoin address we can tip to?

Cheers,
Rusty.