Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 23866.

Coinshot

hero member

Activity: 521

Merit: 500

Quote from: akujin on December 31, 2014, 03:34:10 PM

Quote from: galdur on December 31, 2014, 12:11:57 PM

Bitcoin bull to the moon in 2015

Aww.. The poor bull thought he's finally going to the moon... He didn't know he wouldn't be able to put his helmet on

Excellent, top trolling!

Happy New Year, I hope we see a bull run sometime soon. I think there may be one in the second half of 2015.

ChartBuddy

legendary

Activity: 2380

Merit: 1823

1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ

Explanation

Newbie1022

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: indiemax on December 31, 2014, 03:49:08 PM

Quote from: Newbie1022 on December 31, 2014, 03:46:09 PM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on December 31, 2014, 03:34:42 PM

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 03:07:53 PM

please explain to me how further delay of something that people are eagerly anticipating for a boost in prices is positive. Clearly their last submission was not approved or they would not need to submit another one. Clearly this pushes back the timeline. At best it's neutral if you were not expecting an imminent launch.

The whole news article was complete misrepresentation and omitted most of the facts. That is spinning ... or just piss poor journalism, probably the latter Wink

Here is a diff of this latest amended proposal (version 5) and the previous one (version 4):
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qxgah/diff_of_the_newest_winklevoss_filing_here/

They update some data about the state of bitcoin (e.g. adoption) and change the State where the fund is incorporated, from New York to Delaware. Would this change improve the chances of approval?

The plan is still to trade the fund on NASDAQ anyway.

Could the state change be tied to the licensing issue. Delaware is the traditional state for incorporation so that would normally be neutral, but the fact that they changed it this late in the game suggests something is the matter.

yup,they don't like it atm,changes required before approval

Yea, and that is not a small change at all. That is a structural change, not just shifting a little bit of wording around. Tough to know because we aren't prevue to the discussions, but just my two cents as a lawyer.

indiemax

hero member

Activity: 722

Merit: 500

Quote from: Newbie1022 on December 31, 2014, 03:46:09 PM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on December 31, 2014, 03:34:42 PM

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 03:07:53 PM

please explain to me how further delay of something that people are eagerly anticipating for a boost in prices is positive. Clearly their last submission was not approved or they would not need to submit another one. Clearly this pushes back the timeline. At best it's neutral if you were not expecting an imminent launch.

The whole news article was complete misrepresentation and omitted most of the facts. That is spinning ... or just piss poor journalism, probably the latter Wink

Here is a diff of this latest amended proposal (version 5) and the previous one (version 4):
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qxgah/diff_of_the_newest_winklevoss_filing_here/

They update some data about the state of bitcoin (e.g. adoption) and change the State where the fund is incorporated, from New York to Delaware. Would this change improve the chances of approval?

The plan is still to trade the fund on NASDAQ anyway.

Could the state change be tied to the licensing issue. Delaware is the traditional state for incorporation so that would normally be neutral, but the fact that they changed it this late in the game suggests something is the matter.

yup,they don't like it atm,changes required before approval

Newbie1022

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on December 31, 2014, 03:34:42 PM

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 03:07:53 PM

please explain to me how further delay of something that people are eagerly anticipating for a boost in prices is positive. Clearly their last submission was not approved or they would not need to submit another one. Clearly this pushes back the timeline. At best it's neutral if you were not expecting an imminent launch.

The whole news article was complete misrepresentation and omitted most of the facts. That is spinning ... or just piss poor journalism, probably the latter Wink

Here is a diff of this latest amended proposal (version 5) and the previous one (version 4):
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qxgah/diff_of_the_newest_winklevoss_filing_here/

They update some data about the state of bitcoin (e.g. adoption) and change the State where the fund is incorporated, from New York to Delaware. Would this change improve the chances of approval?

The plan is still to trade the fund on NASDAQ anyway.

Could the state change be tied to the licensing issue. Delaware is the traditional state for incorporation so that would normally be neutral, but the fact that they changed it this late in the game suggests something is the matter.

jertsy

sr. member

Activity: 341

Merit: 250

Quote from: galdur on December 31, 2014, 03:38:10 PM

Quote from: akujin on December 31, 2014, 03:34:10 PM

Quote from: galdur on December 31, 2014, 12:11:57 PM

Bitcoin bull to the moon in 2015

Aww.. The poor bull thought he's finally going to the moon... He didn't know he wouldn't be able to put his helmet on

B-bull don´t need no helmet for space.

It´s just there for photographic effect.

Space helmets are for wimps?

galdur

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Quote from: akujin on December 31, 2014, 03:34:10 PM

Quote from: galdur on December 31, 2014, 12:11:57 PM

Bitcoin bull to the moon in 2015

Aww.. The poor bull thought he's finally going to the moon... He didn't know he wouldn't be able to put his helmet on

B-bull don´t need no helmet for space.

It´s just there for photographic effect.

JorgeStolfi

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1003

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 03:07:53 PM

please explain to me how further delay of something that people are eagerly anticipating for a boost in prices is positive. Clearly their last submission was not approved or they would not need to submit another one. Clearly this pushes back the timeline. At best it's neutral if you were not expecting an imminent launch.

The whole news article was complete misrepresentation and omitted most of the facts. That is spinning ... or just piss poor journalism, probably the latter Wink

Here is a diff of this latest amended proposal (version 5) and the previous one (version 4):
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2qxgah/diff_of_the_newest_winklevoss_filing_here/

They update some data about the state of bitcoin (e.g. adoption) and change the State where the fund is incorporated, from New York to Delaware. Would this change improve the chances of approval?

The plan is still to trade the fund on NASDAQ anyway.

akujin

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: galdur on December 31, 2014, 12:11:57 PM

Bitcoin bull to the moon in 2015

Aww.. The poor bull thought he's finally going to the moon... He didn't know he wouldn't be able to put his helmet on

cryyptc

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

#BITCOIN4LIFE

Quote from: ChartBuddy on December 31, 2014, 03:00:18 PM

Explanation

//^$500!!!GOGOGOGOO+

Newbie1022

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: jertsy on December 31, 2014, 03:14:55 PM

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 03:07:53 PM

Quote from: Hunyadi on December 31, 2014, 02:57:39 PM

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 02:53:51 PM

Quote from: Newbie1022 on December 31, 2014, 02:10:44 PM

Disregard short squeeze. People are not incorrectly reading bad news as though it were good news like they normally do. Bring on the end of the world.

haha
I was waiting for someone to try and spin this further delay and uncertainty surrounding the ETF as good news, but it seems not to be happening. I think they've spotted the snipers in the bushes Grin

You sir are trying to do the spinning Roll Eyes

No sir , just calling it how it is Wink

If I am spinning, please explain to me how further delay of something that people are eagerly anticipating for a boost in prices is positive. Clearly their last submission was not approved or they would not need to submit another one. Clearly this pushes back the timeline.
At best it's neutral if you were not expecting an imminent launch.

The whole news article was complete misrepresentation and omitted most of the facts. That is spinning ... or just piss poor journalism Wink

+1

I almost took the author's word for it. Thankfully others took the time to do some proper research.

Bingo! There was a quick spike before people figured out what the news really was. Fortunately, nobody appears to have gotten caught too far out on that limb.

Chalkbot

legendary

Activity: 896

Merit: 1001

Quote from: griffinriz on December 31, 2014, 03:09:03 PM

we are going to 2xx Huh

There will also be party shrapnel. That's not nothing.

jertsy

sr. member

Activity: 341

Merit: 250

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 03:07:53 PM

Quote from: Hunyadi on December 31, 2014, 02:57:39 PM

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 02:53:51 PM

Quote from: Newbie1022 on December 31, 2014, 02:10:44 PM

Disregard short squeeze. People are not incorrectly reading bad news as though it were good news like they normally do. Bring on the end of the world.

haha
I was waiting for someone to try and spin this further delay and uncertainty surrounding the ETF as good news, but it seems not to be happening. I think they've spotted the snipers in the bushes Grin

You sir are trying to do the spinning Roll Eyes

No sir , just calling it how it is Wink

If I am spinning, please explain to me how further delay of something that people are eagerly anticipating for a boost in prices is positive. Clearly their last submission was not approved or they would not need to submit another one. Clearly this pushes back the timeline.
At best it's neutral if you were not expecting an imminent launch.

The whole news article was complete misrepresentation and omitted most of the facts. That is spinning ... or just piss poor journalism Wink

+1

I almost took the author's word for it. Thankfully others took the time to do some proper research.

griffinriz

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

we are going to 2xx Huh

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Hunyadi on December 31, 2014, 02:57:39 PM

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 02:53:51 PM

Quote from: Newbie1022 on December 31, 2014, 02:10:44 PM

Disregard short squeeze. People are not incorrectly reading bad news as though it were good news like they normally do. Bring on the end of the world.

haha
I was waiting for someone to try and spin this further delay and uncertainty surrounding the ETF as good news, but it seems not to be happening. I think they've spotted the snipers in the bushes Grin

You sir are trying to do the spinning Roll Eyes

No sir , just calling it how it is Wink

If I am spinning, please explain to me how further delay of something that people are eagerly anticipating for a boost in prices is positive. Clearly their last submission was not approved or they would not need to submit another one. Clearly this pushes back the timeline.
At best it's neutral if you were not expecting an imminent launch.

The whole news article was complete misrepresentation and omitted most of the facts. That is spinning ... or just piss poor journalism, probably the latter Wink

ChartBuddy

legendary

Activity: 2380

Merit: 1823

1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ

Explanation

Hunyadi

legendary

Activity: 1281

Merit: 1000

☑ ♟ ☐ ♚

Quote from: phoenix1 on December 31, 2014, 02:53:51 PM

Quote from: Newbie1022 on December 31, 2014, 02:10:44 PM

Disregard short squeeze. People are not incorrectly reading bad news as though it were good news like they normally do. Bring on the end of the world.

haha
I was waiting for someone to try and spin this further delay and uncertainty surrounding the ETF as good news, but it seems not to be happening. I think they've spotted the snipers in the bushes Grin

You sir are trying to do the spinning Roll Eyes

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Newbie1022 on December 31, 2014, 02:10:44 PM

Disregard short squeeze. People are not incorrectly reading bad news as though it were good news like they normally do. Bring on the end of the world.

haha
I was waiting for someone to try and spin this further delay and uncertainty surrounding the ETF as good news, but it seems not to be happening. I think they've spotted the snipers in the bushes Grin

luckygenough56

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1012

not enough desperation we will drop

indiemax

hero member

Activity: 722

Merit: 500

I'm sure Bitcoin will rise from the ashes but not enough people have been burnt yet Grin

Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 23866. (Read 26711605 times)