Author

Topic: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) - page 203. (Read 907212 times)

hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
Here is how an EW analyst might see the future.  (abc would be longer time but I couldn't fit on chart).  I could try to rationalize the peak with something like  ' all governemnts ban btc once it is big enough to pose an actual threat to fiat currency' or 'catastrophic protocol failure or unresolvable scalability issue', 'world financial meltdown / wars' or simply 'competition from something better'.

Tera, would another hypothetical peak by the end of the year (let's assume 4,000) change your EW-analysis? IMO both could happen, your chart is as possible as yet another peak by the end of the year. I'd be fine with both, because both would bring me some severe gains and even the "bearish" hypothesis of bitcoin peaking at 20,000 would bring bitcoin to the brink of mass adoption. Most capital of the "investment hodlers" would be out by then, affirming the theory that price must go down afterwards, but that will be the point, where mass adoption could make up for that.
4,000 could be a minor peak of a minor wave within the larger wave to 20,000.  for example $266 was a minor peak and $1100 was a major peak.

Edit: I just saw "by the end of the year". I guess if that happened I would have to come up with a new analysis.
full member
Activity: 235
Merit: 100
I was promised da moon


Here is how an EW analyst might see the future.  (abc would be longer time but I couldn't fit on chart).  I could try to rationalize the peak with something like  ' all governemnts ban btc once it is big enough to pose an actual threat to fiat currency' or 'catastrophic protocol failure or unresolvable scalability issue', 'world financial meltdown / wars' or simply 'competition from something better'.

Tera, would another hypothetical peak by the end of the year (let's assume 4,000) change your EW-analysis? IMO both could happen, your chart is as possible as yet another peak by the end of the year. I'd be fine with both, because both would bring me some severe gains and even the "bearish" hypothesis of bitcoin peaking at 20,000 would bring bitcoin to the brink of mass adoption. Most capital of the "investment hodlers" would be out by then, affirming the theory that price must go down afterwards, but that will be the point, where mass adoption could make up for that.
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500


Here is how an EW analyst might see the future.  (abc would be longer time but I couldn't fit on chart).  I could try to rationalize the peak with something like  ' all governemnts ban btc once it is big enough to pose an actual threat to fiat currency' or 'catastrophic protocol failure or unresolvable scalability issue', 'world financial meltdown / wars' or simply 'competition from something better'.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 500
One Token to Move Anything Anywhere

When I look at bitcoin's long term chart, I see an elliot wave. Wave 1 went to $32. Wave 3 went to $1100. Wave 5 may go to $20,000 (briefly before it crashes into wave a). I don't know what'll happen after that. I don't think the technology is powerful enough to be trusted with or to handle the type of adoption rpetelia has in mind or anything close.

I have similar concerns but I do think with enough vested interest the development required is possible.
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
current price $440 * x10,000 multiple projection = $4,400,000 target price
4,400,000 x 21,000,000 coins = $92,400,000,000,000 ($92.4 trillion) target market cap

Now we are talking 30 times the market cap of google, 10,000 times the market cap of western union, 80 times the amount of USD currently in circulation, and 140% of the current world GDP.

This hefty figure has something to do with the population of the world (7bn) for some reason as if everyone was going to be a bitcoin user. Now let's run that figure:

92,400,000,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = $13,200 USD per person

repetelia's assertion is that bitcoin will be greater than the world gdp and that the average person in the entire world will hold $13,200 worth of bitcoins. This average spans accross every single person, including those who don't have any money, don't have computers or the internet, live in third world countries, aren't literate, or can't understand technology.

What would your estimate be?  Smiley

When I look at bitcoin's long term chart, I see an elliot wave. Wave 1 went to $32. Wave 3 went to $1100. Wave 5 may go to $20,000 (briefly before it crashes into wave a). I don't know what'll happen after that. I don't think the technology is powerful enough to be trusted with or to handle the type of adoption rpetelia has in mind or anything close.
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
92,400,000,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = $13,200 USD per person

repetelia's assertion

...was a comparison to gold going up to $13,000 per ounce at which point everyone would own that much gold, or silver going up to $2,200 per ounce, at which point it would be true re:silver.

You are free to think for yourself, which one of these actually has any chance of happening.  Wink
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 500
One Token to Move Anything Anywhere
current price $440 * x10,000 multiple projection = $4,400,000 target price
4,400,000 x 21,000,000 coins = $92,400,000,000,000 ($92.4 trillion) target market cap

Now we are talking 30 times the market cap of google, 10,000 times the market cap of western union, 80 times the amount of USD currently in circulation, and 140% of the current world GDP.

This hefty figure has something to do with the population of the world (7bn) for some reason as if everyone was going to be a bitcoin user. Now let's run that figure:

92,400,000,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = $13,200 USD per person

repetelia's assertion is that bitcoin will be greater than the world gdp and that the average person in the entire world will hold $13,200 worth of bitcoins. This average spans accross every single person, including those who don't have any money, don't have computers or the internet, live in third world countries, aren't literate, or can't understand technology.

What would your estimate be?  Smiley
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
current price $440 * x10,000 multiple projection = $4,400,000 target price
4,400,000 x 21,000,000 coins = $92,400,000,000,000 ($92.4 trillion) target market cap

Now we are talking 30 edit: 300 times the market cap of google, 10,000 times the market cap of western union, 80 times the amount of USD currently in circulation, and 140% of the current world GDP.

This hefty figure has something to do with the population of the world (7bn) for some reason as if everyone was going to be a bitcoin user. Now let's run that figure:

92,400,000,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = $13,200 USD per person

repetelia's assertion is that bitcoin will be greater than the world gdp and that the average person in the entire world will hold $13,200 worth of bitcoins. This average spans accross every single person, including those who don't have any money, don't have computers or the internet, live in third world countries, aren't literate, or can't understand technology.
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036

Quote

You really think that BTC can increase x 10,000 times from here?

Firstly, I don't think it will ever go anywhere even remotely close to that, but even if it does, I'll be out a LONG time before that Smiley

Thank you for your opinion. Unless you outnumbered us by 10,000:1, the price would already be 10,000 times higher. So we just wait for the slower ones to "get it", and get wealthy in the process!  Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 255
Was it a big 5 bank?  I know that BofA in particular pretty much cancels any bitcoin transaction that they notice.

I have my BoA account linked to Coinbase and for the most part, transactions go through. When I started out, I only did small transactions that went through without a problem. I did have several (still small) bitcoin purchases that were reversed when it came time for the transaction to clear a week or so after initiation, with no explanation other than "suspicious transaction." I sent an email pointing out that the price of bitcoin had risen during that week and it sure looked suspicious to me that they would allow one of my former purchases when the price remained stable, but then cancel this one when the price had risen. I wasn't nasty in the email, and I don't think that's what they were actually doing (then again, who knows?). They pretty quickly reversed the reversal and allowed the transaction to go through. That happened maybe 3 or 4 times last summer but since then I've had no problem.

Keep in mind that anything more than $10k per day is the magic cutoff that means you might be a drug dealer. For coinbase, I generally stay below that limit. 

I'm not worried about that.  I have nothing to hide.  They can see that I bought and sold bitcoin.  I have receipts for everything for exactly this situation.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 1001
Was it a big 5 bank?  I know that BofA in particular pretty much cancels any bitcoin transaction that they notice.

I have my BoA account linked to Coinbase and for the most part, transactions go through. When I started out, I only did small transactions that went through without a problem. I did have several (still small) bitcoin purchases that were reversed when it came time for the transaction to clear a week or so after initiation, with no explanation other than "suspicious transaction." I sent an email pointing out that the price of bitcoin had risen during that week and it sure looked suspicious to me that they would allow one of my former purchases when the price remained stable, but then cancel this one when the price had risen. I wasn't nasty in the email, and I don't think that's what they were actually doing (then again, who knows?). They pretty quickly reversed the reversal and allowed the transaction to go through. That happened maybe 3 or 4 times last summer but since then I've had no problem.

Keep in mind that anything more than $10k per day is the magic cutoff that means you might be a drug dealer. For coinbase, I generally stay below that limit. 
legendary
Activity: 3696
Merit: 5269

Well, here in the US, I don't expect any problems, but I guess we'll find out soon.  I mean, certainly I wouldn't be the first person to test Coinbase's $50,000 limit, right?  And since they have already done KYC, it shouldn't be a problem, should it?

i tried to take out 40k via coinbase in december and failed.  but the larger point is that even if coinbase does not fail, or you use local exchange, whatever, then trying to move the fiat thereafter is not necessarily going to work well.  you may be better off spending btc.

What was the nature of the failure?  Did your bank refuse the transaction?  If so, was it a big 5 bank (Wells, Chase, BofA, Citi, etc.) or a local bank, credit union, etc.?  

Unclear.  Money never showed up.  Coinbase was unable/unwilling to speak to non-merchant clients on the phone.  Email was queued unanswered for a week before I finally called the merchant support number, got an overworked harried and apologetic gentleman who said the transfer would be cancelled.  By then it had lost much of its value, so I didn't try selling any more, started accumulating again.


Was it a big 5 bank?  I know that BofA in particular pretty much cancels any bitcoin transaction that they notice.

And Chase, from what I've heard and read, they apparently hate bitcoin too.  My fiancee had a VERY bad experience with Chase once.  Stay. Very. Far. Away.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1030
Sine secretum non libertas
Was it a big 5 bank?  I know that BofA in particular pretty much cancels any bitcoin transaction that they notice.

No, it was a local bank.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 255

Well, here in the US, I don't expect any problems, but I guess we'll find out soon.  I mean, certainly I wouldn't be the first person to test Coinbase's $50,000 limit, right?  And since they have already done KYC, it shouldn't be a problem, should it?

i tried to take out 40k via coinbase in december and failed.  but the larger point is that even if coinbase does not fail, or you use local exchange, whatever, then trying to move the fiat thereafter is not necessarily going to work well.  you may be better off spending btc.

What was the nature of the failure?  Did your bank refuse the transaction?  If so, was it a big 5 bank (Wells, Chase, BofA, Citi, etc.) or a local bank, credit union, etc.? 

Unclear.  Money never showed up.  Coinbase was unable/unwilling to speak to non-merchant clients on the phone.  Email was queued unanswered for a week before I finally called the merchant support number, got an overworked harried and apologetic gentleman who said the transfer would be cancelled.  By then it had lost much of its value, so I didn't try selling any more, started accumulating again.



Was it a big 5 bank?  I know that BofA in particular pretty much cancels any bitcoin transaction that they notice.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1030
Sine secretum non libertas

Well, here in the US, I don't expect any problems, but I guess we'll find out soon.  I mean, certainly I wouldn't be the first person to test Coinbase's $50,000 limit, right?  And since they have already done KYC, it shouldn't be a problem, should it?

i tried to take out 40k via coinbase in december and failed.  but the larger point is that even if coinbase does not fail, or you use local exchange, whatever, then trying to move the fiat thereafter is not necessarily going to work well.  you may be better off spending btc.

What was the nature of the failure?  Did your bank refuse the transaction?  If so, was it a big 5 bank (Wells, Chase, BofA, Citi, etc.) or a local bank, credit union, etc.? 

Unclear.  Money never showed up.  Coinbase was unable/unwilling to speak to non-merchant clients on the phone.  Email was queued unanswered for a week before I finally called the merchant support number, got an overworked harried and apologetic gentleman who said the transfer would be cancelled.  By then it had lost much of its value, so I didn't try selling any more, started accumulating again.

full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100

[/quote]

You really think that BTC can increase x 10,000 times from here?
[/quote]

Firstly, I don't think it will ever go anywhere even remotely close to that, but even if it does, I'll be out a LONG time before that Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002

You really think that BTC can increase x 10,000 times from here?

omm nomm nommmm



+1 on that lovely graph
thx for sharing.



OooMmmm NnooOooMmmmm NoooOoOoomMMMmm Cheesy
full member
Activity: 232
Merit: 100

You really think that BTC can increase x 10,000 times from here?

omm nomm nommmm

full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100

[/quote]


With PM's and cryptos you cannot fail so badly as the risk of going to zero is rather small, and sane people realize that they don't need leverage because the upside is very good anyway if they hit big. Now, gold's upside is maximum 10x from now, silver's 100x and (to keep the similar probability) bitcoin's is 10,000x.


[/quote]

You really think that BTC can increase x 10,000 times from here?
legendary
Activity: 3892
Merit: 4331
What you are basically saying is that the guy would have to sell everything he has including metals, and take a partial mortgage on his house, and put everything in BTC, to be more than moderately invested in BTC ? This sounds way too much, don't you think ? I mean, it's maybe more than a winning bet, but is it a reasonable, responsible one ?

My personal view is : 0-1% of net worth being a small position, 2-5% moderate, 6-10% big position, 11-25% very big, 26-50% huge position, 51+% extreme position.

Assets can be classified in many ways but I would try:

- land/RE
- PMs
- businesses (that you run)
- paper investments (cash, stocks, bonds, funds, all that is correlated to fiat liquidity)
- cryptos.

I know many people that, due to mortgage, are more than 100% (in fact, often 1000% or even negative % because of negative net worth) invested in RE. No doubt RE is a good investment but not so good that you should take insane leverage. The long-term return is more like 2-5% depending on many things.

Lots of people don't have anything else but paper investments, in other words they haven't diversified at all and are 100% at the mercy of the liquidity masters. When liquidity was withdrawn from the market in late 2008, all these tanked 50-100%. They are very risky, and there is comparatively little upside.

With PM's and cryptos you cannot fail so badly as the risk of going to zero is rather small, and sane people realize that they don't need leverage because the upside is very good anyway if they hit big. Now, gold's upside is maximum 10x from now, silver's 100x and (to keep the similar probability) bitcoin's is 10,000x.

There is a claim that high volatility equals high risk, but that is fallacious. Bitcoin's volatility is so high that for every 2-year period you have always netted at least 200%. There is no security in the history of capital markets that has always shown a positive 2-year return. Therefore all the other assets have historically been of higher risk than Bitcoin (and not only lower return).

=> The upside with Bitcoin is so great and the risks so small that the only reasons to own anything at all besides them are:

* if you need the other thing
* for hedging against Bitcoin's catastrophic failure
* for short-term capital needs (because of Bitcoin's volatility).

hmmm...out of these three, what category your castle belongs to?  Wink

Seriously, though, I intend to short bitcoin via puts in my "regular" accounts when I shall consider that it peaked (short term).
I intend to do this just as a hedge against my long core position in BTC.
Winlevoss ETF will be quite handy for this purpose, hopefully.
Jump to: