Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 4829. (Read 26608056 times)

Hey don't be knocking my buddy. I'm starting to like him actually.
Now I don't have to open cmc and have my screen polluted with billions of shitcoins.

Was just thinking.

Bitcoin has built a big brand.  Most people in the US (I would guess) have HEARD of it.

But what percentage of us have bought it, or used it (inset your own country if you like)?

Is there ANY chance that number of people does NOT start going up?

It's gonna be pretty soon when we start to really notice it, isn't it?

Explanation

I think it was blockchain dot com.

Probably Fillippone's thread captures some of the contemporary discussions of various MSTR BTC acquisition strategies as they were unfolding, including their public disclosures in the early days (some of those public disclosures of the BTC that were bought would involve MSTR purchases, as well as Saylor having had bought a little bit before MSTR bought.. so Saylor might have described some of his own purchases (17k BTC) as a kind of "test case" to make sure the process works.. blah blah blah...

If that Fillippone thread does not contain detailed enough information, there are probably areas in which you (or anyone else) could drill down into the thread links or the links to twitter threads that might end up giving some further details about what happened, to the extent anything might be out there regarding actual disclosures of actually what happened, rather than summaries of what they claimed to have had happened.

MicroStrategy Buys $250M in Bitcoin, Calling the Crypto ‘Superior to Cash’

I remember Saylor or someone like that going into some details that created some impressions that he was buying retail like everyone else, but maybe even Saylor's newbie aspect could have been him winging it in terms of just describing the process that coinbase goes through to make sure that the BTC price did not move.  

I never did imagine Saylor doing any of the potentially tedious number of buys himself, but I did imagine some kind of assistant of his engaging in such process, and afterwards, Saylor could review the account transactions to see thousands of transactions.. and sure it is also possible that some Coinbase bots were doing such transactions (and MSTR/Saylor paid a fee for such service), but Saylor embellished a wee bit to vaguely make it seem as if either he or one of his guys was making such transactions.  

I recall in early days, Saylor was publicly expressing a lot of exasperations of amazement in regards to how much liquidity existed in bitcoin in terms of the millions of dollars of BTC that were purchased over a short period of time and the BTC price/market absorbed those purchases without hardly even moving the BTC price.  Of course, he could have been looking at a Coinbase spreadsheet that got sent to him after the transactions were made on his behalf at Coinbase, rather than anything that either he or one of his associates had done.

Explanation

You have more info than me.  And the buys could have happened on an exchange publicly.  My thoughts are 100% speculation... no facts.   But if you were Armstrong (I think I remember a story is was CB?  But either way)  And you had a customer who wanted to get 9 figures of USD into bitcoin... how would you do it?

It's fun to imagine Saylor in his Bathrobe mashing buy on 1k lots of bitcoin.  But not only would this take a looooong time but it would BLOW up the price.

I would love to read more about how they actually did it... is that out there somewhere?

I am not saying that you are wrong about these points, and it is even possible that MSTR has changed its ways somewhat, but based on some of its earliest of disclosures in late 2020 (several of them, in fact), I was under the impression that they were engaged in some kind of spot price multiple transactions in order to acquire their bitcoin.

Of course, on a personal level I remain constantly skeptical of representations that seem a bit out of the ordinary or difficult to pull off in reality, but there really is no concrete way to negate a claim that a person is making, such as Michael Saylor's disclosures of having had picked up his BTC (at least the first batch that he described) through a multi-tude of small transactions.  

Another somewhat contradictory claim that Saylor made was that before he began to make his relatively large-ass bitcoin transactions, he put his lil selfie in contact with some people behind the scenes at Coinbase, which also suggested that he might have been getting some special arrangements or the Coinbase folks were helping him out to make sure that he could acquire his initial purchases of personal and company BTC of around 37k BTC (which would been around $370 million), and I cannot imagine any behind the scenes Coinbase (or any other exchange) that would fail/refuse to give some personal attention to someone intending to use their services for that level of initial BTC purchases.

I recall that Saylor said that he could help any other BIG fishies, such as Elon or other executives who were considering converting decent quantities of their company treasuries into bitcoin allocations, to get in touch with the "right" Coinbase peeps to help facilitate such bitcoin acquisitions without moving the BTC price too much.

Of course, it is healthy to take these kinds of representations with a decently-sized grain of salt, while at the same time acknowledging what they are claiming that they did may well likely have some truth to it.


You are no way any kind of novel character when it comes to various kinds of speculating about OTC transactions taking place for many years.. for sure as long as I have been in the space, and likely longer than that because in the beginning there were hardly any exchanges available anyhow so sometimes there were just side deals with BIG holders.




For sure there are incentives to work off the books, too.. so no one is going to proclaim that bitcoin cannot or should not be used for various kinds of direct transactions, including BIG ASS ones, except perhaps folks who either do not understand bitcoin or are hostile to bitcoin.


To the extent that you might be saying that you do not know what the fuck the meaning of supply shock is, then I am with you on that point... but it sounds good, especially in terms of just throwing in some random phrase that helps any of us to appear that we know what the fuck we are talking about. hahahahaha


Maybe you need to 'splain ur lil selfie a wee bit moar better, philip? #nohomo

What you are implying is counter-intuitive.  Are you saying that the anticipation of lower fees will help status quo miners to profit more because such status disincentivizes new entrance from coming into mining?

Seems to me, in and of itself, lower fees means that miners should be less happy, less willing to mine, more likely to create BIGGER operations, less likely to have smaller operations even try to compete for what fees are available (presuming most of the payoff for mining thereby comes from the current 6.25 BTC rewards rather than fees).

Explanation

You know one very interesting factor is how quickly the smart money realizes the absolute waste of time that the alts are.  Preston Pysh (I think) said at BitBlockBoom this last weekend that managers of 9 and 10 figure accounts are not going to trust a leader of a blockchain project who picks his nose and sticks it to the wall to not change monetary policy on them... again.

We know the dumb money will never realize this.  But the big money is starting to coalesce around the Corn as it should...

Once the somewhat less smart money starts to abandon the sinking ships of the bigblock nightmares, where is that money going to go?

Tether?

This idea leaves out the bearish option (lol).  When you see the two major cycle tops dropping.  This is a "Dave the Wave" sort of prediction.  That the parabola is softening all the way up.  So 2017 had less magnitude than 2013 (55%), and 2021 could have less than 2017 making a top of something like 150k possible:

2021=2013 -> 542k
2021=2017 -> 300k
2021=2017x.55 -> 150kish.

BUT!!!  It also leaves out the "supercycle" scenario... the one in which 2021 is BIGGER than either previous top.

I have no model for that one...  but I'd take it.

this dude comes frome this:



to that:



which makes me feel:



 

no ta skills here! so pls don`t blame the messenger

Who was it?

Coinbase articles about rolling out bech32 are online from 2019?  I can't figure out what big exchange it was.  I was assuming coinbase.  That jerkface has been one of the worst things to happen to bitcoin.  It's a shame honey badger has not destroyed him.

Tricky , but maybe very very very good for mining.

And as to nations coming on board...  we are in the calm before the storm.

We like to talk about "fuck you money".  What about the poor billions in nations enslaved by the current system... what happens when they say "fuck you"?  Oh and it's not like us "rich westerners" are not also just farm animals to them.  Like George Carlin said: "It's a BIIIG club, and YOU AINT in it".

No one is more aware of the way the bullshit has been run than those in developing nations.  Now many of them (see Venuzeula) are on the take... but some of them (ES or Tonga) are not... and in time they are all going to drop out of the rigged game that the rich countries have been playing with them for >50 years.



https://twitter.com/noisevault/status/1432390064605118465

Explanation

There we go!! You got this!

(I feel like we have been talking about supply shocks in one form or another for a decade...  but this time its DIFFERENT! )

You know... to be completely serious.  (I MEAN IT)

It is inevitable. 

There is going to come a point where even the speculators say... OK I am not selling into *THIS*.  And we realize how minuscule the actual real liquid BTC float actually is.

I have been speculating for months (maybe over a year now) that most of the action for bitcoin trade has been happening away from the retail exchanges.  I think most of the big trades are happening on OTC desks.  This is where Microstrategy, and Greyscale et al buy their corn.  It's not like they use Tradeogre... lol.  And really what we are seeing cleared out are OG whales and miners backstock that they want to part with.  I have speculated that there has been a LOT of this.  Early bitcoiners with 4-5 digit holdings are most certainly hedging all kinds of regulatory risk as well as wanting to just go ahead and buy the nice house or diversify into real estate, collectables etc.  While the miners also have back stock, and are willing to sell X amount for either the same sorts of reasons, or for cap-ex stuff.

But what happens after the third or fourth El Salvador rolls out.  And the retail markets hit phase II.

So far  (as in since 2010) it's been rich folks in the east and west speculating.  But more and more it's going to be users in developing countries using it to trade and save. And eventually we run out of loose float.  Many of the hands buying are pretty strong...

I honestly do not think we have seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the feedback loop we all know is possible.

Call it whatever you like... supply shock?  Ok.

well if you cant beat em... supply shock incoming