How many bitcoins they have Total ? 100k ? 120k ?
It's on first post -> 134364 btc right now
Topic: GBTC Bitcoin Investment Trust Observer - page 68. (Read 262371 times)
It's on first post -> 134364 btc right now
How many bitcoins they have Total ? 100k ? 120k ?
This is most likely a single entity, and it has spent 10 million dollars just in November
What do you mean? Isn't this just SecondMarket buying?It is assumed that SMBIT only buys BTC when some client buys their shares (10 shares = 1 BTC). If that is true, there seems to be a client who buys 2.5 million dollars worth of shares each week. But we do not know, really.
yesterday bought 2100+ (11/25/2014)
today bought 4500+ (11/26/2014)
two day together, another ~ $2.5 M was added.
today bought 4500+ (11/26/2014)
two day together, another ~ $2.5 M was added.
updated. This is most likely a single entity, and it has spent 10 million dollars just in November
What do you mean? Isn't this just SecondMarket buying?
who knows, it might continue next week
yesterday bought 2100+ (11/25/2014)
today bought 4500+ (11/26/2014)
two day together, another ~ $2.5 M was added.
today bought 4500+ (11/26/2014)
two day together, another ~ $2.5 M was added.
updated. This is most likely a single entity, and it has spent 10 million dollars just in November
yesterday bought 2100+ (11/25/2014)
today bought 4500+ (11/26/2014)
two day together, another ~ $2.5 M was added.
today bought 4500+ (11/26/2014)
two day together, another ~ $2.5 M was added.
I would somewhat doubt that the miners would sell their bitcoin in advance via futures contracts like this as they would have no way of knowing what the difficulty will be in the future and as a result has no way of knowing their future mining revenue in terms of bitcoin and would be very risky for them.
A mining operator who is building a multimillion mining facility should want to secure a contract that guarantees a return and shifts the risks (and any extraordinary gains) to the VC investors, as much as possible. Say, the investor gives N million dollars every month for M months, and in return keeps all the coins that the installation mines during that time frame, independently of the difficulty and price.
Of course, they may not find investors in those terms, and may have to share the risk and unpredictable profits.
This is probably not that far from what is happening, but I doubt it is completely "independent [...] of [market] price.". Quite possibly a mix... I can see two ways big operations would hedge their risks: a contract at a fixed price, high enough to cover their costs. I doubt that however, since there is option two, which seems economically more favorable to the mining operation: long running contract loosely based on market price (perhaps based on some slow average, or some other filter that takes out the extremes), then hedging against the unknown worst case, i.e. price dropping below profitability, through futures.
I would somewhat doubt that the miners would sell their bitcoin in advance via futures contracts like this as they would have no way of knowing what the difficulty will be in the future and as a result has no way of knowing their future mining revenue in terms of bitcoin and would be very risky for them.
A mining operator who is building a multimillion mining facility should want to secure a contract that guarantees a return and shifts the risks (and any extraordinary gains) to the VC investors, as much as possible. Say, the investor gives N million dollars every month for M months, and in return keeps all the coins that the installation mines during that time frame, independently of the difficulty and price.
Of course, they may not find investors in those terms, and may have to share the risk and unpredictable profits.
2132XBT bought yesterday. I have a feeling that this could be the last batch of Tuesday buying
In principle, yes. That's why I've said for a while now, in opposition to some of the uberbulls, that if truly big capital wants to enter, they will probably do so off-exchange, by contractually binding large mining operations' outputs to themselves. That might still leave traces in the overall supply situation and have some effect on on-exchange prices, but probably be less of an impact than if they'd outright buy the same amounts on-exchange.
SecondMarket buys are publicly visible (or at least: the outcome is visible publicly, we don't know where and how they're getting their orders filled), that much is clear. So the psychological effect (if it exists) does apply.
I would say that secondmarket likely gets it's bitcoin from large holders aka whales (maybe from contracts to buy at market rates at anytime in the limited future) or potentially buys on exchanges outright bought 2000+ btc
Something seems to have changed...Their buys used to have an "organic" feel, somehow inversely related to the BTC price. But then suddenly, after months of stagnation, we had two false starts, then three buys of 6000-7000 BTC on three successive weeks. This 2000 BTC buy, if confirmed, breaks this new pattern to some extent, but still goes against the general price trend.
Could this apparent change be related to that still-mysterious SEC letter -- allegedly prohibiting withdrawals (liquidation) of shares, but not deposits (investments)?
bought 2000+ btc
about $800 k
Will we see anther big buy today? 
I think this week will be interesting, given the auction is coming up, if they will still buy bitcoin from their sources or saving the ammo for the auction.
I don't think that this means higher prices, but it WOULD mean higher prices if this continues unabated or increases in volume and frequency.
Exactly right.
Particularly if they could keep this up (the # of BTC purchased per period) through and after the next halving.
I don't think that this means higher prices, but it WOULD mean higher prices if this continues unabated or increases in volume and frequency.
Exactly right.
In principle, yes. That's why I've said for a while now, in opposition to some of the uberbulls, that if truly big capital wants to enter, they will probably do so off-exchange, by contractually binding large mining operations' outputs to themselves. That might still leave traces in the overall supply situation and have some effect on on-exchange prices, but probably be less of an impact than if they'd outright buy the same amounts on-exchange.
Anyway, the above is conjecture: it's only to point out why it is possible that big capital is entering a substantial position without us noticing directly that this is happening.
SecondMarket buys are publicly visible (or at least: the outcome is visible publicly, we don't know where and how they're getting their orders filled), that much is clear. So the psychological effect (if it exists) does apply.
But maybe I misunderstood the question?
I totally agree with you here, so let's sit and watch if this (public) buying continues. After all, the total amount of bitcoins is known and predictable, so this can't go on largely unnoticed forever. Anyway, the above is conjecture: it's only to point out why it is possible that big capital is entering a substantial position without us noticing directly that this is happening.
SecondMarket buys are publicly visible (or at least: the outcome is visible publicly, we don't know where and how they're getting their orders filled), that much is clear. So the psychological effect (if it exists) does apply.
But maybe I misunderstood the question?
IDK, it seems pretty significant to me. Imagine how much of the volume is daytrading garbage... 6k of real buys is probably the net change of 60k+ volume... or 600k+ on Chinese exchanges.
If you constantly remove 1k BTC a day from markets, it will cause upward pressure, of course, but it will take time for it to build. I don't think these 20k are significant, unless buying continues at the same pace for a couple of months.There are two aspects of large, public buys or sells: the net effect on overall buying/selling, and the psychological effect. Your point re: net effect is correct of course, but the same could then be said (more or less) about the SR auctions (which are also just a week or two of mining subsidies). What it ignores is the substantial effect such orders have on the market in addition to it. Similarly to how Bitstamp's "bearwhale" created panic at first, then, when it turned out there is actually the demand to absorb the offer, created a (minor) rally, I believe that there's a (hard to quantify maybe) market impact of learning that large, presumably private, investors are buying at these prices, more than they did in the months before.
In principle, yes. That's why I've said for a while now, in opposition to some of the uberbulls, that if truly big capital wants to enter, they will probably do so off-exchange, by contractually binding large mining operations' outputs to themselves. That might still leave traces in the overall supply situation and have some effect on on-exchange prices, but probably be less of an impact than if they'd outright buy the same amounts on-exchange.
Anyway, the above is conjecture: it's only to point out why it is possible that big capital is entering a substantial position without us noticing directly that this is happening.
SecondMarket buys are publicly visible (or at least: the outcome is visible publicly, we don't know where and how they're getting their orders filled), that much is clear. So the psychological effect (if it exists) does apply.
But maybe I misunderstood the question?
Well, 21 thou in 2-3 weeks (depending if you count the week preceding the first buy) is 1-1.5thou BTC/day.
Considering that current production is "just" 3.6 thou BTC/day, it is a substantial number and it is just one fund.
I don't think that this means higher prices, but it WOULD mean higher prices if this continues unabated or increases in volume and frequency.
I am of the opinion that if you see one fund doing this, then there are more doing the same and, of course, some doing the opposite.
Jump to: