Topic: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) - page 243. (Read 907227 times)

- The final ascent is indeed 100%/week as you can determine from the previous bubbles.
- I sold early in Nov-13 because I judged the final ascent from China prices that had diverged then
- Buyback better judged from exponential trendline. My personal calculation from Dec-13 was that I would be able to buy at 410 before the end of Mar-14. I panic bought a portion way too early. Forum pressure was immense.
- I think 1/3 is the prudent trading amount, perhaps 40% if you include SSS permanently sold coins
- Bitstamp has worked well for me because they know me from the forum and I am open to all KYC, essentially a public person
- They also sent 7-figure amount and my bank did not close the acct, only asked AML
- Keeping fiat/BTC in any exchange for 3 months is risky, I would repatriate some instantly and then wire back when needed, but this depends on many things.

I am about to make this a permanent feature so that you can marvel/laugh. The upper limit (50/50 that X will never be breached) is harder to determine though. I would currently say it is in high 4-figures, how about you?


My thinking goes that I benefit every time I make a trade. (If I don't benefit, I don't trade so this is kind of obvious). Currently I am not trading, because I bought my heart's content of bitcoins at 448 in 2014-2-25. Now the price is not any better. But if it goes to 200, I want to rebalance my portfolio and invest massively, which is a massive gain.

So I gain when the purchasing power of my portfolio goes up. But I also gain with every trade, because that means there is, in my opinion, an opportunity to make it go up even faster. (Actually it is the utility function, not raw purchasing power but you get the point.)

Risto, and others offering an opinion:

I am confident that I can execute a spread of sell orders near the next bubble peak. My tactic is to judge the duration of the price doubling time, and if in my estimation the price is on track to double within the next week then that is a good time to sell. We may get a sort of double peak as in November 2013, and I would sell early accordingly. The buy back, again a spread, would take place some months later, or if there is a 50% retracement from my average sell order. Comments on this tactic would be welcome.

Mainly I am interested in (1) what percentage of my holdings should be traded? (2) I do not trust Coinbase to execute the sale in a timely manner, so I am opening an account at Bitstamp - which I have plenty of time to completely verify. Would it be good practice to leave fiat at Bitstamp between the sell and buy-back? Otherwise I would open a new temporary US banking account to receive the large international wire transfer from Bitstamp. I am afraid that my bank would close my existing personal account upon receiving such a transfer.

I am asking this forum for tactical advice because I do not trust myself in the mania phase of the bubble, and would risk too much. I can afford to lose everything, yet at $5000 or more per bitcoin expected at the next bubble peak - everything in my case would be a large sum.

 

It would be interesting to see how many of those accounts are linked to already existing Bitcointalk members.

Then you're a pretty shitty salesman.


Losing credibility fast.


The "manipluators" is a relic from before your time in BTCland.  It's obviously a term coined for those who act in a manner that is illegal in normal market trading.  All the shit that people aren't allowed to do in real markets is done here because there is no regulation.  I find this pretty obvious and your response just goes to show you're being a dick for the sake of being a dick.


So then it's safe to say that I've made hundreds of thousands of dollars even though all of that is still in Bitcoin?  The terms realized losses and gains exist for a reason tough guy.

Bitcointalk had 45800 new members last month though and that was a record so growth is still happening.

I think it does seem like the press spurs new interest and it has been fairly quiet this past week or so. 

Talking about squeezing one should probably mention the 15,459,966.85 USD swaps too.

Both buyers and sellers have thrown in the towel. Which one will pick it up first? To me the answer is obvious (buyers, because the training camp for new buyers has 100,000,000s of people, whereas the potential sellers number at 1M max).

Shorting at this moment is idiocy. I'd say the 50/50 chance is that 409 will never be visited again.

Even manipulators have hardly anything to gain from selling at this point.

If I am "wrong" and it goes down, I benefit massively by being able to purchase 1000s of coins so it's a win-win

Reddit r/Bitcoin has less than 50 new users per day. That used to be over 1000 new ones per day for weeks.
Number of daily transactions is on a two-month downtrend which has fallen below its exponential trend line.
Total USD daily transaction value is also still decreasing, week by week. Scaling that index to the levels of the past (when possibly Gox wasn't already cooking their books and propping the price up) is depressing to say the least.
The volume on exchanges is ridiculous. Closer to when we were at 100$ than to 400.

How could a massive short squeeze be in the making?
What I see is oblivion coming. Either that or a steady painful decline like 2011. Painful to me as I'm almost all in.

I take it that is the Finex lend book? How does that compare to other points in history?

Quick TA update:
- 6H candle color/volume: not much volume lately hard to say anything, conclusion: can go either way
- Bid/ask strengh at market: slippage to sell 5k: $33, slippage to buy: $65, conclusion: potential for quick upside move
- Trendline comparison: we are now at -0.339 log units. The trendline is at $979 and rising $7 per day, conclusion: rock bottom
- Sentiment: getting better, which in this case is a positive thing
- Prognosis: 400 is the critical level, if it holds, upside is sure - if it falls, there may be a flash crash to lower levels. The trendline strongly indicates that it will hold and this is a bottom.

What is the duration of these candles

Exactly. That's why it would be an even better buying opportunity, I would buy more in such scenario. Not sell.

When the officials speak, there is an official opportunity to gamble.
For the quick it's an opportunity to sell high, and for the smart it's an opportunity to buy low.
I wonder if we will be under way before the 15th?
caught between the hammer and the anvil, I don't see how it can rest easy beforehand.

This is where I see we are at. a second capitulation.

Don't you think that it is a little bit silly that people sell when they are threatened? Since when have you prospered by doing what they tell you to do? I mean, in any walk of life, like nutrition, or education, or general health?

The title of this episode was: "China is used to scare people to sell at a loss to strong hands, while the US finalizes bitcoin-friendly legislation, paving the way for a mega-move at the instant when the lid is lifted."

If there is no major official announcement in China within one week. I mean a real news, not a rumor. Then I think Risto was right and we'll break back above 500 around next Wednesday.

A new rumor would have little or no effect and could just keep us in same range. But some threatening words from chinese officials before or on 15 April could still create more down action.

The chart also appears too big to my eye. As per the rules of the thread, all graphics that is not TA risks deletion. This one hardly is, and it is also misleading for the reason that LTC receives the sole credit of the LTC/BTC trading like I told above.

If someone wants to speak for LTC, how about explaining in detail, where the volume is taking place and is it really so that I can I can trade 10,000s of BTC to litecoin and back, without slippage?

Even if I could, it would only prove that LTC is in symbiosis with BTC, like trading coins against €50 bills - no way in hell should this be credited to LTC, because it is BTC that truly enables the trade. Or silver with gold. Perhaps I'm finally getting that analogy. Damn, the cryptopeople are so much smarter than me.

Right, I don't think we've seen anything interesting so far on the altcoin scene. As someone put it, it's all a big experiment.
Today, they offer about no interest in comparison with Bitcoin. I am not concerned/interested about the past altcoin scene but rather more with the future.

I agree with the article shared by Risto. Current altcoins have nothing much for them at all. The main reason I see is that the entities who launched them are more or less nothing.

I am much more concerned about altcoins that would be launched in the future by big entities that have power and followers : governments, big corporations, big non-profit organisations. The reason is that I think that they will be able to offer services and functions to the people under their influence  that will not be offered by bitcoin.

I know it might be hard for an independant powerful entity to launch a new crypto because it would be perceived as able to control it somehow for its own interests. But if the entity really plays the crypto game and implement it properly, I don't see why they should not be successful.

Let's take for exemple a giant like Google. I am sure they already have a team working on this, thinking about : how to launch GCoin, what could it bring to the google ecosystem, what advantages a GCoin holder will have to transact in Gcoin as opposed to Bitcoin, they could give the option to pay adsense with GCoin, offer to be paid for Adwords in GCoin, integrate GCoin in Android, in Google Search, Gmail, etc. I mean they have huge power, and if they understand crypto and know how to play the game fairly, they could invest their huge power and network in developing the GCoin.

The question is : why would google choose bitcoin and choose developing its crypto-based services using bitcoin versus doing it for a new GCoin ?
The same question applies to Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, and other internet giants.
I am sure many here have answers...?
If they make a true crypto without any control over it, maybe they don't have any interest to use something else than bitcoin ?

Bitcoiners will say that people will not trust a giant like google. But in practice, most people are sheeps, and it's about transacting, not so much investing. So if there are good services associated with a crypto, and people are using the google or whoever ecosystem, they will tend to do it.

It does not mean Bitcoin will not maintain its function as a crypto reference, store of value, exchange reference. But it reduces bitcoin's potential numbers and probabilities.

I am not trying to push my argument but rather am asking for counter arguments to disprove my point.

I suspect the motivation was more along the lines of being weary of  a pernicious deceit.  The abruptness made it feel more arbitrary than it really was.

Ummm... no.