News are always interpreted (or discarded) in function of the current market mood.
Like Blitz said, who cared about Cyprus? They are even less then a peck in the Bitcoin world.
And yet everyone was talking about it when the market was bullish.
Idk, that's like saying citizens in Thailand already have tons of Bitcoin that they are immediately going to dump on the market. The case in Cyprus is the opposite, the citizens will be more inclined to buy. If there are hardly any users, making something illegal (and only pseudo at that) is not a big deal.
It's about how one perceives
market actors will act -- not necessarily about how one perceives residents of Thailand will act.
Also, this doesn't exist in a vacuum. This "event" (or non-event as the case may be) takes place within the context of a very unclear and grey-market regulatory atmosphere, a landscape which is clearly changing.
I agree that the Cyprus scenario was blown way out of proportion at the time. However, I still believe the Cypriots/Argentinians will come around, just let it snowball a bit.
Then wouldn't you agree that the news itself doesn't matter -- only how it fits in with the context of market sentiment? Did anyone expect Cypriots to be buying bitcoins en masse?!
I don't disagree with anything you said.
I'm disagreeing with the differences in news. As far as I can tell nobody really knows what the stance on Bitcoin is in Thailand, just that there aren't pre-existing laws so that it is de facto illegal. Furthermore, making something illegal does not cause the price to automatically tank as Frozenlock suggested, look at drugs as an example. When the Cyprus news hit, it was actually in major media outlets and Bitcoin got a lot of attention for its qualities, ie. avoiding confiscation in scenarios like Cyprus. I haven't seen the Thailand pseudo-news rippling like that.
I want to drone on with this but I'll stop as to not derail the thread further.