Topic: Looks like the manipulator is failing you guys, muahahahaha (Read 5846 times)

Maybe I got it wrong, oops.

The point is: be careful who you listen to, they may not have your best interests at heart.

What is this, bitcoin price for ants?

I believe Bitcoin is currently in the consolidation phase. Just like after having an orgasm you would take some 10 minute break before going for another round but then again some people prefer to go to sleep instead.

It looks like a new support base being built to me...

The fact that we haven't fallen yet is evidence to support a likely upwards movement.

Combine this with the new mainstream adoption trend and I see new upwards movement coming fast.

PS
Apparently my mother bought Bitcoin about a week ago because she read a news article on them. She told me that she felt like this was going to be a big deal. I was shocked.

The situation back then was completely different.

-There was a strong six months old downtrend in place
-Back then we saw huge buy orders with single entities buying tens of thousands of bitcoins
-Price was down 90% from the ATH

There is also a lesson, that I learned myself at that time:

I wanted to buy at the 2$ double bottom, but could not because I had no dry powder left. I finally entered at 5$ though, which was good enough for me.

Right now we are in a situation, where it is still not clear if we will have a dip or a crash. A decisive move upwards is unlikely imho.

OP done gone stupid

OP still here trying to get those $2 Bitcoins. Lesson learned for the newcomers. Don't be that guy in 3 years.

Real simple solution. Do what I do, put in a buy order just before the bid wall then put in a sell order 10% higher than the bid wall. You'll always make 10%.

What I think happened is knightmb or another large coin holder sold or lent a significant amount of coin in June to a professional market maker who has been trading the price of Bitcoin down. They were doing buy walls to support their sells, but lost control when another large holder of coin sold into the wall. Now they can't do the buy walls anymore and we're seeing healthier bids.

There did appear to be some arbitrage bots/holders appropriately operating again that were not while the person with the large bidwalls was operating. My guess is one of the arbitrage bots got burned on this most recent uptick from $2 while the other one made off really really well.

this

If there is a manipulator trying to profit by putting in enormous sell orders ( like on November 14th) and then buying back at a lower price (like on November 29) I don't think this strategy will work for him very long. As the market matures, people will see this and stop panic selling at low prices because they know there will be a huge buy order coming in later on (as there must be if this manipulator continues manipulating)

There is at least one. We had orders worth over 200k USD placed in seconds; if that trader is a professional, we should assume he doesn't move with all at once and should have had more than 500k available at some point.

I think we're seeing the healthy jagged lines of genuine multi-party buyer support at these price levels.

Do you really think there is just one person with over $100K on MtGox?

Looks like the manipualtor stopped using his 50K bidwall,. he is trying to push the market but using much smaller bid walls. I think after his last wall got sold into, he doesn't want to make his bidwall an easy place for early adapters to cash their coins out into.

the manipulator listing on eBay, naturally he hides his icy image

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170740576988

yeah I just reported it. maybe a mod will split it soon

Holly SHIT! OBAMA IS THE MANIPULATOR!
That or this thread went completely off-topic...

There's data out there that give strong hints, though they aren't (and can't be) conclusive.  Compare the top 1% now, to the top 1% from 40 years ago.  It's easy: just look at federal income tax data, which shows the top 1% has 2.5 times higher annual gross income.  You'd have a hard time convincing the top 1% from 40 years ago that they worked 2.5 times less, or are 2.5 times dumber than today's 1%: they'd say you're full of shit from their rocking chair in the nursing home, and you might even get punched for calling them lazy.  The go-getters today are not significantly different from the go-getters 40 years ago, yet they're taking home an additional 1.5 trillion dollars compared to the 1970 go-getters.  That's enough for a pay raise of $12,500 per household in America, and they're getting that additional money not because they are harder working, or because the bottom 150 million Americans are lazy, but because there have been structural changes that make it possible to concentrate wealth, both in terms of pay-to-play politics with tax cuts for the richest members of society, and technological changes like, I dunno, software "manufacturing", where the billionaires that came out of Microsoft and Google only had to make a good product once, and then replicate it almost cost-free so that hundreds of millions of people could use the identical product.  That whole industry didn't used to exist, and it's a good example of technological change that has made wealth concentration easier.

As far as laziness of the other 99%: the 82 million full-time employed people in the US work an average of 8.17 hours per day (I just looked it up here), yet tens of million of them are broke, and millions declare bankruptcy.  How can this possibly be because the full-time employed are lazy? I know it's a popular talking point, but it doesn't make sense, and it strikes me as just a convenient way to dismiss anyone that's not rich.

And apologies to all for the US-centric tangent.

If you hadn't needed to take out loans to go to school in the first place, don't you think things might have been easier?  The effective taxation rate of the top 1% of the country was 27% in 2007, and they pulled in a combined $2 trillion. Raising their effective taxation rate by 10%, to 37% - which is what it was in 1970 - would raise an additional $186 billion dollars.  Students take out $100 billion in loans every year.  Might it best for everyone - including the richest - if more people were happy instead of living in austerity?  And it's not like the top 1% is going to suffer, or that they won't be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor.  Yes, they'll take home a bit less income, but the top 1% might come out ahead overall because any business(es) they run (if any) would have a larger pool of educated people to draw from if money weren't an obstacle to anyone's education.  And they don't have to pay employees as much because employees won't be having to pay off student loan debt, so the overall cost is actually a wash.  It's just a matter of distribution.

I appreciate the desire to live within the system, and how much of a challenge it is.  It's not easy.  But it wasn't always this way: people didn't used to have a huge debt burden just to be a productive member of society.  And if they every have to take a year off - for health issues, job retraining, school, a sabbatical, or just to wander the world - they fall seriously behind on payments and are hit with punitive fees.  There are serious overtones of indentured servitude if you think about it.

Yesterday was when the provision that required insurance companies to spend 80% of their money on providing health services took effect.  Next year, your insurance costs are likely to go down or stay the same.

Actually, hedge fund managers are the best paid right now, $880 million _average_ for the top 25 hedge fund managers, who combined pull in 4 times what all Fortune 500 company CEOs pull in ($8M each, in case you were wondering).  Taxing hedge fund manager's earnings at 50% instead of the current 15% capital gains tax would raise an extra $7.7 billion, which is almost half the NASA budget right there for those 25 people.  You don't think that's broken?  I think it's representative of a systemic problem.  No matter how smart they are, the efforts of those 25 people aren't worth the same as 440,000 teachers at $50k/year, and their worth to society is far lower.  And they definitely aren't any smarter or harder working than their predecessors 30 years ago, who were in the same offices doing the same kinds of work, but yet only took home a tenth that much money.  No, there have been enormous systemic change over the past 30 years in favor of those with large amounts of capital, and it's created an unfair system with disproportionate incomes.  Hint: computers are a big reason it's easier than ever to concentrate wealth.

Blame the Founding Fathers, who wrote that into the constitution.  The federal judiciary was designed to change very slowly with lifetime appointments, "'Til death do us part.", so that they aren't influenced by the need to get re-elected.  Which seems like a good idea to me given how politicians are required to behave to get re-elected. Do you really want to see everyone on the supreme court beholden to public opinion when making rulings?

For what it's worth, I think the end game of the Occupy Wall Street movement is a new amendment to the constitution that overturns Citizens United, and I'd like to see the US also spend $5 billion a year and provide public financing of all elections to federal office.  We, as a society, already pay the $5 billion, but right now politicians owe favors to specific high-wealth individuals in return for their donations.  It doesn't have to be this way.

Wow, I'm far more optimistic.  Free health care and free college seems to work for Germany, which has one of the strongest economies in the world.  And if politicians weren't beholden to special interests in order to get re-elected, they might vote differently while in office (it's been shown in academic studies that House members tend to vote based on how much money they get from each industry).  Address those 3 issues, and I think even you might be hopeful that the world might seem a bit less brutal, and a bit less look-out-for-number-1.  Money is just a tool - it's not a measure of honor, it's not a measure of individual worth, and it's not a measure of morality - and right now,  money in our society is being used like using fine china to open a beer bottle.  Whatever that means.  When I think of money as a tool, and I think of most poor people as being like me but unlucky for some reason or another, it's far easier to have some empathy for them, even though I'm a part of the 1%.