Action 
Hammer time !
Topic: Rally!!!!! - page 18. (Read 81262 times)
Action
It was funny to see all that cautious selling below $6.5. Now they'll have to buy back!
One thing I've learned over the past year, you pretty much always get a chance to buy back below your sell point. If I had sold below $6.5 I wouldn't be worried at all right now.
remember every time you learn something the market adjusts itself for it
Well, of course you'll note that I'm not selling any of my coins and haven't for a while.
Holding out for the block reward and hopefully $10 ?
We all are
! 
It was funny to see all that cautious selling below $6.5. Now they'll have to buy back!
One thing I've learned over the past year, you pretty much always get a chance to buy back below your sell point. If I had sold below $6.5 I wouldn't be worried at all right now.
remember every time you learn something the market adjusts itself for it
Well, of course you'll note that I'm not selling any of my coins and haven't for a while.
It was funny to see all that cautious selling below $6.5. Now they'll have to buy back!
One thing I've learned over the past year, you pretty much always get a chance to buy back below your sell point. If I had sold below $6.5 I wouldn't be worried at all right now.
remember every time you learn something the market adjusts itself for it
It was funny to see all that cautious selling below $6.5. Now they'll have to buy back!
One thing I've learned over the past year, you pretty much always get a chance to buy back below your sell point. If I had sold below $6.5 I wouldn't be worried at all right now.
Yeah, until you don't...
It was funny to see all that cautious selling below $6.5. Now they'll have to buy back!
One thing I've learned over the past year, you pretty much always get a chance to buy back below your sell point. If I had sold below $6.5 I wouldn't be worried at all right now.
It was funny to see all that cautious selling below $6.5. Now they'll have to buy back!
Nice, 6.63827.
goes Bitcoin!
goes Bitcoin!
BOOM
$6.65
Consumers basically don't have much choice but to interact unless they want to become freegan monks.
Of course, the point is that their interactions qualify as free interactions only if they can choose not to interact with a particular agent (otherwise it's a forced interaction). That's what makes an efficient market, not some kind of imaginary symmetry.
Any market that is implied to be a 'free' market means that participants have equal opportunity to act on information flow (...) There are a few asymmetries that can arise. One is privileged access to information, such as (...)
What distinguishes a relationship in a free market environment is not perfect symmetry, nor the free and smooth flow of information, but the possibility to refrain from interacting. That's it.
I understand (perhaps) what chodpaba is getting at.
Any market that is implied to be a 'free' market means that participants have equal opportunity to act on information flow, and unless the contracts/instruments are extremely expensive (Like Berkshire preferred shares) most people can invest if they'd like.
There are a few asymmetries that can arise.
One is privileged access to information, such as being in the colocation rack right next to the exchange data feed - your machine sees the data a few milliseconds faster than anyone else, and can act upon it quicker. (High Frequency Trading has driven this madness.)
The second is obfuscation of trade size and depth - usually found in "Dark Pools" that cross large orders internally. (This has also been spurred by High Frequency Trading, big players need somewhere to take shelter from the predators of bid/ask spreads.)
So just using those examples you have a market that implies 'free market' opportunities, but the real costs in being competitive far outweigh most people's ability. Its expensive to get colocated near the exchange, it isn't trivial or cheap to set up an account large enough to qualify for Dark Pool trading. So, most retail investors are getting hamstrung by ruthless automated 'scalpers' that ping-pong the bid/offer as fast as possible to 'ping' the order book, front-running you on your trades.
Oh, and did I mention the exchanges give high-volume HFT traders rebates for doing business with them?
Don't forget that these 'providers of liquidity' switch off when the bids disappear, so there's nothing to stop the tsunami of offers - one of the factors in the "Flash Crash".
I'll take bitcoin trading over the current algo-driven hell that the retail markets are today, thanks.
Any market that is implied to be a 'free' market means that participants have equal opportunity to act on information flow, and unless the contracts/instruments are extremely expensive (Like Berkshire preferred shares) most people can invest if they'd like.
There are a few asymmetries that can arise.
One is privileged access to information, such as being in the colocation rack right next to the exchange data feed - your machine sees the data a few milliseconds faster than anyone else, and can act upon it quicker. (High Frequency Trading has driven this madness.)
The second is obfuscation of trade size and depth - usually found in "Dark Pools" that cross large orders internally. (This has also been spurred by High Frequency Trading, big players need somewhere to take shelter from the predators of bid/ask spreads.)
So just using those examples you have a market that implies 'free market' opportunities, but the real costs in being competitive far outweigh most people's ability. Its expensive to get colocated near the exchange, it isn't trivial or cheap to set up an account large enough to qualify for Dark Pool trading. So, most retail investors are getting hamstrung by ruthless automated 'scalpers' that ping-pong the bid/offer as fast as possible to 'ping' the order book, front-running you on your trades.
Oh, and did I mention the exchanges give high-volume HFT traders rebates for doing business with them?
Don't forget that these 'providers of liquidity' switch off when the bids disappear, so there's nothing to stop the tsunami of offers - one of the factors in the "Flash Crash".
I'll take bitcoin trading over the current algo-driven hell that the retail markets are today, thanks.
It will be a market regulated by strictly market consumers i.e. a free market. I already told you free doesn't mean anything goes. Free means no rulers imposing arbitrary rules through violence.
That still doesn't mean anything.
The violence done to you can be arranged through several removes. You will think you are making bank when you are really getting screwed. The powerful will always be subject to the moral hazard they create for themselves, and you pay for.
This is bullshit and you know it. And if you don't, I'm going to stop wasting my time with someone who clearly has no idea how people act and why they act the way they act.
It will be a market regulated by strictly market consumers i.e. a free market. I already told you free doesn't mean anything goes. Free means no rulers imposing arbitrary rules through violence.
If chodpaba's hypothesis of collusion is correct, there will be arbitrary rules imposed, through the threat of financial ruin.Yes there would be arbitrary rules imposed, but not collectively, not with violence, and not by a ruler, but by those consumers who felt such rules are what they require before they'd be willing to do business. That's how a "free" market works.
It will be a market regulated by strictly market consumers i.e. a free market. I already told you free doesn't mean anything goes. Free means no rulers imposing arbitrary rules through violence.
If chodpaba's hypothesis of collusion is correct, there will be arbitrary rules imposed, through the threat of financial ruin. Jump to: