# Lifestyles & Discussion > Bitcoin / Cryptocurrencies >  Guys.  Buy in.

## muh_roads

I'm not really at liberty to say how I know this, but the next paradigm shift is $4000

After July it will go parabolic again.

Sorry if this sounds pumpydumpy, but I am excited.  I have come to trust this person who is a connected 2009 whale.

Financial liberty is rising.

----------


## muh_roads

Also, exchanges will be switching to "Bits".  No longer BTC soon.

They decided to skip mBTC and are jumping straight to uBTC.  But it won't be called uBTC.

A whole Bitcoin will soon be known only as 1 million "Bits".

----------


## FSP-Rebel

Btw, blockchain is being a bitch tonight.

----------


## squarepusher



----------


## Suzu

Buy into what please?

----------


## Reason

> Buy into what please?


bitcoin.....

----------


## PaulConventionWV

So you're saying $4000 is the target for the next bubble?

----------


## muh_roads

> Buy into what please?


I'm sticking with BTC.  LTC/BTC pair fell as low as 0.007 during the last bubble.  But then it had an epic pump.

I'm being told BTC will rise.  LTC will have one or two good pumps later.  But now is not the time, supposedly.

----------


## muh_roads

> So you're saying $4000 is the target for the next bubble?


I'll pass along info when I get it.  We'll be flipping BTC into LTC & NMC at some point, but not now.

----------


## muh_roads

New ceiling and floor targets discussed in the whale'o'sphere.  Still a steady climb to $800 by the end of July.  New paradigm will be $4,000 to $6,000 and the new floor after the pop will be $2,000 to $4,000 this year.   

Aside from Paypal, more multi-billion dollar market cap companies like DISH will be coming on board very soon.

Better stake your claim in the 21m before all you can afford is "Bits".  "Bits" (1m per 1 BTC) will be what Bitcoin is known as by the masses after the next shift.  Bitpay, Coinbase and most exchanges have agreed to switch to this denomination.

LTC will continue to drop.  012 may be the new buy-in.  It dropped to 007 during the previous shift before shooting to 051.  The whales are mostly focused on BTC right now.  But unlike the previous bubble, LTC will be pumped twice I am hearing instead of just once.

----------


## anaconda

> New ceiling and floor targets discussed in the whale'o'sphere.  Still a steady climb to $800 by the end of July.  New paradigm will be $4,000 to $6,000 and the new floor after the pop will be $2,000 to $4,000 this year.


So after rising to $800 by August 1, when can we expect $4000?

----------


## muh_roads

> So after rising to $800 by August 1, when can we expect $4000?


All I've been told is "quickly".  Things are still being calculated in regards to how the whales will work together and what amount they and their groups are willing to play with of their own stash. My group leader has yet to have that conversation with me about how much I will use.   I haven't decided.  I'm leaning towards 10-15%.  But he is starting to go around talking to group members individually.

A lot of whales have been accumulating during this up and down ride between $300 to $1200 so they had enough in cash to contribute to the next rise.  This is how they will exit and slowly disperse the currency to reduce downward volatility.  We'll be approaching the middle of the s-curve in terms of downward resistance.  The majority of the whales are 20-40 something libertarian computer geeks.  Heavy math & programming skills.

Bots are what play the market.  Learning about Technical Analysis might be best if you want to ride in their shadow.

The hardcore money risking pump bots will be turned on when the good news comes out.

So since this is a total guess and the only info I have is "quickly", I will personally say it is August to the end of the year.  This is not an expert opinion.  But it is going to get nuts really quick because of mass corporate adoption.  DISH started something that will be like adding a rocket engine to the moon rocket with each new giant company that comes on board.

Whenever it pops it will be less volatile than before.  This will convince more people (comparisons to bank interest) and the time between the next two bubbles will theoretically be smaller.  After each paradigm shift, you will see the previous generation or two reinvesting capital back into the system, services, and infrastructure.

I personally think we'll be approaching the middle of the s-curve within the next year.  It's going to get weird and hearing about things from the investment side makes more sense now when I hear Winklevoss say crazy things like $400b market cap as a small bull scenario and it will happen faster than anyone suspects.

Sorry if all I can provide is "quickly".  The groups work together like a mafia.  I am not in the 21,000 BTC club or the 2,100 club.  I could've been in the 2100 club if I didn't sell what I did in 2012.  But oh well.

I'm starting to care a lot less about my past mistakes with all this stuff I am hearing.  lol

----------


## squarepusher

could be $15,000 next stop

----------


## oldietech

gonna have to see a whole lot more volume in breaking the resist levels than what I see now.  Perhaps if we break 700 with something more than the paltry 500k weekly that this reversal has shown I'll take a piece.

I think we'll see 500 again before 800.  Of course people who have billions to blow can trash conventional wisdom and head fake us to whatever price levels they want to say I told you so at.  

Looking at the technicals tho, seems to me the sellers just got exhausted after 13/17 weeks in the red.  

Strong resist at 700, China volume already peaked in this mini recovery.  L2 is signaling selling pressure on the horizon.

You would have had to caught the falling knife in April to be well positioned to snap up this next burst to 800 IF it comes.  Otherwise, follow the volume trend if you are into swinging this market.  

Of course perma bulls and those who believe the thing is going to always have these mega bursts and new paradigm are already all in, right?  RIGHT???

----------


## Schifference

I think every American Citizen has a Right to Free Bitcoin just like Health Care and Cellular phones.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> gonna have to see a whole lot more volume in breaking the resist levels than what I see now.  Perhaps if we break 700 with something more than the paltry 500k weekly that this reversal has shown I'll take a piece.
> 
> I think we'll see 500 again before 800.  Of course people who have billions to blow can trash conventional wisdom and head fake us to whatever price levels they want to say I told you so at.  
> 
> Looking at the technicals tho, seems to me the sellers just got exhausted after 13/17 weeks in the red.  
> 
> Strong resist at 700, China volume already peaked in this mini recovery.  L2 is signaling selling pressure on the horizon.
> 
> You would have had to caught the falling knife in April to be well positioned to snap up this next burst to 800 IF it comes.  Otherwise, follow the volume trend if you are into swinging this market.  
> ...


The perma bears are just as crazy, drawing their red lines in the most unlikely places when they should know better.

----------


## muh_roads

I love how quick the wind changes.  LMAO

Now being told it is going to go either way, shoot to the moon or down again.

Yep, stick to TA.  But there is big news coming.  Follow the upward stair climbing analysis I guess?

Alright, fuggit...Imma jus gunna tell j00 whuts goin on.  Then I'm gonna go into $#@!ing hiding...lol  If you want to communicate further.  Create a hushmail account and PM it to me.

----------------------------------------------

Bitpay, Coinbase, and Gyft have been busy bees with all of their investment capital while the trolls make fun of Bitcoin.  The amount of retailers signing on before XMAS 2014 is staggering.  The info is being timed when released.  You wouldn't believe the list I seen.

I pooped my pants.

Feel these nipples!

We have a new lobbying wing that has the power to fund a 3rd party and win.  Just who that person is, I don't know.  But a $#@! load of profit is coming.

----------


## amonasro

I haven't had too much time for TA (stuck in Nowheresville, US with crap internet) but it seems to me a correction is in order. I don't doubt there's big news coming, but markets will be markets. We've had three enormous legs up on the 12h chart, and rallies don't generally extend beyond that seeing 3 is a magic number in TA. It's a good rally, just not a tear-your-face-off exponential rally. We get that later

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> I haven't had too much time for TA (stuck in Nowheresville, US with crap internet) but it seems to me a correction is in order. I don't doubt there's big news coming, but markets will be markets. We've had three enormous legs up on the 12h chart, and rallies don't generally extend beyond that seeing 3 is a magic number in TA. It's a good rally, just not a tear-your-face-off exponential rally. We get that later


It won't be a huge correction.  IMO we've already gone almost as low as we're bound to go before continuing up.  I think it should make one more low before reversing and heading up, which is basically the same pattern it followed last time, and it has been remarkably consistent thus far with bubbles of the past.

----------


## NoOneButPaul

There isn't a bitcoiner out there who can explain to me why it should hold 100X more value over all of the other cryptos. 

I strongly suspect as bitcoin goes higher that people who trade these currencies will dump bitcoins for lower cryptos that have yet to make their move. Eventually they will all balance out but for the time being it seems bitcoin is still in a bubble relative to the rest of the cryptos. 

No one can explain why bitcoin should be worth that much more than the others... the idea is wonderful but why wouldn't I just buy lite or dark coins instead?

----------


## muh_roads

> There isn't a bitcoiner out there who can explain to me why it should hold 100X more value over all of the other cryptos. 
> 
> I strongly suspect as bitcoin goes higher that people who trade these currencies will dump bitcoins for lower cryptos that have yet to make their move. Eventually they will all balance out but for the time being it seems bitcoin is still in a bubble relative to the rest of the cryptos. 
> 
> No one can explain why bitcoin should be worth that much more than the others... the idea is wonderful but why wouldn't I just buy lite or dark coins instead?


Okay then I will be the first to explain it to you.

Suspect nothing.  Dumping Bitcoins into alts has already been happening in the last 6 months.  People have already been playing cheap alt-coin markets and have been getting burned.  Take it from me.  There is a reason they are called $#@!coins.

Buy whatever you want if you feel that way.  People are playing alt-coin markets a lot and doing well as well.  But they are penny stock equivalents, don't kid yourself.  You really got to pay attention or you will lose all your shiny new Bitcoins.  You need to buy Bitcoin in most cases first before you can buy alts because their ratios are paired with BTC and that is what they are denominated in.

Why is Bitcoin more popular?  Bitcoin is far more accepted.  The network is stronger (Auroracoin and Asiacoin forked to hell and couldn't recover after their attacks).  Litecoin doesn't really offer anything new.  Scrypt ASIC's coming out will be in greater quantity than BFL 65nm generation and could cause a massive amount of sell pressure.  A lot of Scrypt coins are going to die.

Darkcoin might be a good buy.  It runs on x11 (GPU only for a while until x11 ASIC's come out).  Its market cap didn't get a big enough head start if you expect longterm growth.  Coins like CryptCoin, X11coin and Vericoin have proven to implement differing anonymous sending methods.

I hear Cryptcoin will have the most unique and secure method.  Darkcoin still hasn't technically finished their implementation yet.  Cryptcoin dropped after the last pump so you might be able to make a quick amount on their next rise.  They aren't done.

Look at alts then look at Bitcoin charts.  You may think Bitcoin is volatile but you should check out the alts.  They are less dispersed with more $#@! whales waiting to dump on you.  Every time a $#@!coin is dumped, it is difficult to recover because most just realized they lost a bunch of Bitcoins and now they are bagholders in a $#@!ty alt-coin.  That is hard to recover from unless the coin is doing something unique.

Darkcoin had its pumps, I'm not sure what its future will hold...  Silk Road already used an anonymous tumbler that supported Bitcoin with whatever amount came into the Escrow.  The criminal complaint against the SR creator already stated that the tumbler worked well in hiding original sources.  As well as using PGP in PM's over there.

Get involved.  Buy $#@!coins if you have a grudge against capitalism and are jealous of early Bitcoin adopters.   I could give two $#@!s...lol

You need BTC to buy $#@!coin alts.  You'll soon realize how much of a mistake it was when the $#@! whales out there bag transfer to you if you aren't a good day trader.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> There isn't a bitcoiner out there who can explain to me why it should hold 100X more value over all of the other cryptos. 
> 
> I strongly suspect as bitcoin goes higher that people who trade these currencies will dump bitcoins for lower cryptos that have yet to make their move. Eventually they will all balance out but for the time being it seems bitcoin is still in a bubble relative to the rest of the cryptos. 
> 
> No one can explain why bitcoin should be worth that much more than the others... the idea is wonderful but why wouldn't I just buy lite or dark coins instead?


That's easy.  It was the first one.  It got a head start.  Just like two competing businesses with the same business model, the first one to set up shop wins because it attracts a base and nobody sees the need to switch to another one.  

I guess you can't really argue that that's objectively the way it _should_ be, but who's keeping score?  That's the way it is because that's the way the market made it happen.  Sorry if you were a fan of another crypto currency, but bitcoin is it.

There doesn't have to be a reason.  The simple fact is that the market demanded a crypto-currency, and bitcoin filled that demand.  The others are just copycats.  If you understand the free markets at all, then you will understand that that is a perfectly good reason why bitcoin is more valuable than all of the others.  They don't have to be of equal value just because they have a similar concept.  Imagine all the donut shops that were started up beside an already-running Dunkin' Donuts.  Does it necessarily follow that some Joe Shcmeaux donut shop should compete with Dunkin Donuts just because it, too, is a donut shop?  

Not a chance.

----------


## evilfunnystuff

> There isn't a bitcoiner out there who can explain to me why it should hold 100X more value over all of the other cryptos. 
> 
> I strongly suspect as bitcoin goes higher that people who trade these currencies will dump bitcoins for lower cryptos that have yet to make their move. Eventually they will all balance out but for the time being it seems bitcoin is still in a bubble relative to the rest of the cryptos. 
> 
> No one can explain why bitcoin should be worth that much more than the others... the idea is wonderful but why wouldn't I just buy lite or dark coins instead?


1 Widespread merchant acceptance
2 More infrastructure, developers, tools, and support
3 More miners  and a more secure network
4 More exchanges
5 Brand awareness and staying power

----------


## oldietech

> That's easy.  It was the first one.  It got a head start.  Just like two competing businesses with the same business model, the first one to set up shop wins because it attracts a base and nobody sees the need to switch to another one.  
> 
> I guess you can't really argue that that's objectively the way it _should_ be, but who's keeping score?  That's the way it is because that's the way the market made it happen.  Sorry if you were a fan of another crypto currency, but bitcoin is it.
> 
> There doesn't have to be a reason.  The simple fact is that the market demanded a crypto-currency, and bitcoin filled that demand.  The others are just copycats.  If you understand the free markets at all, then you will understand that that is a perfectly good reason why bitcoin is more valuable than all of the others.  They don't have to be of equal value just because they have a similar concept.  Imagine all the donut shops that were started up beside an already-running Dunkin' Donuts.  Does it necessarily follow that some Joe Shcmeaux donut shop should compete with Dunkin Donuts just because it, too, is a donut shop?  
> 
> Not a chance.


What?  if DD is selling a dozen glazed donuts for $800 and my shop is selling a dozen glazed donuts for $0.80 are you telling me that the next corporate meeting is going to buy DD just because it comes in a box with the DD label?  Perhaps if that is a meeting of the board yes, but if it's a department meeting for employees making $15/hour, I don't think the label on the box is gonna matter.  Just a hunch.

----------


## NoOneButPaul

Just like my mining friends explained... the reason is "it was first and is currently the most implemented" 

That's a $#@! reason when I can get 66 litecoins for the price of 1 bitcoin and there's no good explanation as to why bitcoin should be worth 66x more - it also assumes the bitcoin algo and blockchain setup for BTC is the best one when it's way too early at this stage to know if any of that is true. All it takes is a "better" crypto to come along and bitcoin's value could tank. 

Why buy something for $660 when I can get the same technology and the same revolution for $10? If bitcoin goes to 4k you really think the other cryptos will just sit there or do you think the more savy crypto investors will switch from the overvalued coin to the undervalued one? 

My money is on a bigger and better crypto, one perhaps even backed by a major bank or government, coming into the forefront that will give people more confidence to buy in. My how everyone forgets what happened to Mt. Gox so quickly...

Bitcoin could simply be DOS. We have no idea if anyone will care to hold them in 5 years if a better crypto comes along.

----------


## muh_roads

> could be $15,000 next stop


That would be $15.00 per "Bit" and is entirely possible some day.  The decentralized system of limited supply was designed to be a global wealth transfer virus that attacks the digital fiat banksta system.  I don't think it is happening this year, but who knows?

The steeper the slope is on the S-curve means the waiting time between each paradigm shift will keep getting shorter and shorter.  Hence why the venture capital industry like Winklevoss say "sooner than anyone expects".

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> What?  if DD is selling a dozen glazed donuts for $800 and my shop is selling a dozen glazed donuts for $0.80 are you telling me that the next corporate meeting is going to buy DD just because it comes in a box with the DD label?  Perhaps if that is a meeting of the board yes, but if it's a department meeting for employees making $15/hour, I don't think the label on the box is gonna matter.  Just a hunch.


Are you just playing devil's advocate because the analogy was imperfect?  That I can understand.  What I can't understand is missing the core concept behind it.  We're talking about currencies, the value of which is in direct proportion to how much people use it.

Back to the donut analogy:  It's not about how much the donuts themselves are worth, it's about how much the business is worth.  The DD that has been there for years and has a loyal customer base is worth millions of dollars.  The Joe Schmeaux donut shop that sets up right next to an already-established business will be worth very little because it has nothing unique to offer and no business infrastructure.  

Trying to compare this to the value of an individual donut is just stupid.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Just like my mining friends explained... the reason is "it was first and is currently the most implemented" 
> 
> That's a $#@! reason when I can get 66 litecoins for the price of 1 bitcoin and there's no good explanation as to why bitcoin should be worth 66x more - it also assumes the bitcoin algo and blockchain setup for BTC is the best one when it's way too early at this stage to know if any of that is true. All it takes is a "better" crypto to come along and bitcoin's value could tank. 
> 
> Why buy something for $660 when I can get the same technology and the same revolution for $10? If bitcoin goes to 4k you really think the other cryptos will just sit there or do you think the more savy crypto investors will switch from the overvalued coin to the undervalued one? 
> 
> My money is on a bigger and better crypto, one perhaps even backed by a major bank or government, coming into the forefront that will give people more confidence to buy in. My how everyone forgets what happened to Mt. Gox so quickly...
> 
> Bitcoin could simply be DOS. We have no idea if anyone will care to hold them in 5 years if a better crypto comes along.


Oh my God.  

Take an economics class.  Seriously.  This is very simple stuff.  Bitcoin doesn't have to be the best.

It doesn't have to be better than any others, it just has to be first.  That is a completely sufficient reason to justify its price relative to other cryptocurrencies.  

Also, your fundamental misunderstanding of cryptocurrency is thinking that it could possibly be backed by government.  Cryptos, by definition, defy government control.  It would be completely counterproductive for the government to invent a cryptocurrency that gave people economic independence.  

One more thing: If a better crypto was going to come along, it would have done so by now.  BTC has been around for the better part of a decade, and there are already hundreds of competing cryptocurrencies.  Why does the free market favor BTC?  In short, because it is already implemented, and other cryptos don't have enough unique qualities that make them better than BTC.  

There has been more than enough time for someone to come up with something better that would be accepted by the market, but so far, nobody has done it.

----------


## oldietech

> Are you just playing devil's advocate because the analogy was imperfect?  That I can understand.  What I can't understand is missing the core concept behind it.  We're talking about currencies, the value of which is in direct proportion to how much people use it.
> 
> Back to the donut analogy:  It's not about how much the donuts themselves are worth, it's about how much the business is worth.  The DD that has been there for years and has a loyal customer base is worth millions of dollars.  The Joe Schmeaux donut shop that sets up right next to an already-established business will be worth very little because it has nothing unique to offer and no business infrastructure.  
> 
> Trying to compare this to the value of an individual donut is just stupid.


No.  You seem to be saying that people prefer one donut over another because of who made the donut.  I am saying a donut is a donut and people will eat an $0.80 box of donuts before they eat an $800 box of donuts.

You are putting a premium on the value of the brand, which makes sense to me.  People will probably buy a $1.00 box of Dunking donuts before they by my $0.80 box of donuts.  Understandable.

I think you miss my point, the price gap between Bitcoin and other types of donuts, er whatever cryptos, I think is more than a difference in brand.  I'd look more at the distribution mechanisms.  

It has already been mentioned in this thread that in order to buy in to other crypto's, you have to buy in to Bitcoin first.  

I would also think that because the conversion infrastructure from common currency to this specialized currency is focused on converting BTC for retailers. That is probably the biggest difference in price.  

So we know that LTC for instance cannot compete with BTC as far as brand loyalty.  But the question should be raised, when the time comes for the infrastructure to add on other conversion options for whatever reason, what is that going to do to the value of BTC? 

I don't think there is really a good argument for WHY there hasn't been a more competitive infrastructure.  I think that is because those who are vested and are creating the infrastructure realize that interfacing with an unlimited number of alternatives will dilute the value of their investment.  

There is a reason the market has hedged with alts.  The price difference at this time between two similar products is not really explained by brand loyalty.

----------


## muh_roads

> My money is on a bigger and better crypto, *one perhaps even backed by a  major bank or government*...



 

I'm actually not laughing.  I am sad I read that on RPF.  I'd expect such a response by clueless socialists like on the Democratic Underground, not here.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> No.  You seem to be saying that people prefer one donut over another because of who made the donut.  I am saying a donut is a donut and people will eat an $0.80 box of donuts before they eat an $800 box of donuts.
> 
> You are putting a premium on the value of the brand, which makes sense to me.  People will probably buy a $1.00 box of Dunking donuts before they by my $0.80 box of donuts.  Understandable.
> 
> I think you miss my point, the price gap between Bitcoin and other types of donuts, er whatever cryptos, I think is more than a difference in brand.  I'd look more at the distribution mechanisms.  
> 
> It has already been mentioned in this thread that in order to buy in to other crypto's, you have to buy in to Bitcoin first.  
> 
> I would also think that because the conversion infrastructure from common currency to this specialized currency is focused on converting BTC for retailers. That is probably the biggest difference in price.  
> ...


I'm not talking about the donuts.  Did you read my last post? 

It's not about brand loyalty, either.  That misses the point entirely.  Brand loyalty assumes that there are no reasons other than company infrastructure for the customer to adhere to the brand.  In the case of cryptocurrencies, however, people do not really have a choice between cryptocurrencies like they do between certain consumer products.  This is because bitcoin is not a consumer item.  

People can't just switch to Litecoin and get the same results as they would with bitcoin because a cryptocurrency's value is directly proportional to how much it is used.  Not so for Abercrombie and Fitch or Dunkin Donuts.  If the market has already developed the infrastructure for BTC, why would people waste the time and money it would take to switch to an otherwise equal cryptocurrency just to get the same result?

Like all people who disagree with the market, you're blaming the position of BTC on manipulation by big BTC whales protecting their investments.  You fail to realize, however, that the entire market is thinking exactly like these whales are.  People don't want to create a hundred alternatives because the already have one that does the job just fine.  It would be completely counterproductive for the market to branch off into a hundred different subsections that accomplish the exact same thing.  

Instead, the entire market, not just the whales, have rallied around BTC because it was first, it is sufficient, and adopting other cryptocurrencies is a waste of everyone's time.

----------


## oldietech

> I'm not talking about the donuts.  Did you read my last post? 
> 
> It's not about brand loyalty, either.  That misses the point entirely.  Brand loyalty assumes that there are no reasons other than company infrastructure for the customer to adhere to the brand.  In the case of cryptocurrencies, however, people do not really have a choice between cryptocurrencies like they do between certain consumer products.  This is because bitcoin is not a consumer item.  
> 
> People can't just switch to Litecoin and get the same results as they would with bitcoin because a cryptocurrency's value is directly proportional to how much it is used.  Not so for Abercrombie and Fitch or Dunkin Donuts.  If the market has already developed the infrastructure for BTC, why would people waste the time and money it would take to switch to an otherwise equal cryptocurrency just to get the same result?


Yes.  Because it's far less expensive.

----------


## muh_roads

> No.  You seem to be saying that people prefer one donut over another because of who made the donut.  I am saying a donut is a donut and people will eat an $0.80 box of donuts before they eat an $800 box of donuts.
> 
> You are putting a premium on the value of the brand, which makes sense to me.  People will probably buy a $1.00 box of Dunking donuts before they by my $0.80 box of donuts.  Understandable.
> 
> I think you miss my point, the price gap between Bitcoin and other types of donuts, er whatever cryptos, I think is more than a difference in brand.  I'd look more at the distribution mechanisms.  
> 
> It has already been mentioned in this thread that in order to buy in to other crypto's, you have to buy in to Bitcoin first.  
> 
> I would also think that because the conversion infrastructure from common currency to this specialized currency is focused on converting BTC for retailers. That is probably the biggest difference in price.  
> ...


Comparing Crypto to donuts shows how little you understand what is going on here.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Yes.  Because it's far less expensive.


It's far less expensive because it does not have the infrastructure.  That's how the market works.  The more useful something is, the more it costs.  Bitcoin is more useful due to its infrastructure, therefore it costs more.  

My God, I didn't think this kind of economic ignorance was possible here.

It doesn't matter what the price is in dollars.  The dollar amount just reflects the relative strength of each currency.  Bitcoin is worth more than Litecoin for the same reason that the dollar is worth more than the Chinese Yuan.  People use dollars here, they don't use yuan.

----------


## oldietech

> Comparing Crypto to donuts shows how little you understand what is going on here.


Accusing me of making the comparison shows how little you follow the conversation in this thread.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Accusing me of making the comparison shows how little you follow the conversation in this thread.


I certainly didn't make the comparison.  I was talking about business models.  You could replace donuts with whatever.  I was talking about the business, not the product.  You were the one that started talking about the product.

----------


## RonPaulIsGreat

> There isn't a bitcoiner out there who can explain to me why it should hold 100X more value over all of the other cryptos. 
> 
> I strongly suspect as bitcoin goes higher that people who trade these currencies will dump bitcoins for lower cryptos that have yet to make their move. Eventually they will all balance out but for the time being it seems bitcoin is still in a bubble relative to the rest of the cryptos. 
> 
> No one can explain why bitcoin should be worth that much more than the others... the idea is wonderful but why wouldn't I just buy lite or dark coins instead?



1. reason is bitcoin has active competent developers.  99% of alt coins don't even have one developer capable of making real changes to the coin. As in most coins are simply copies of other coins, with at most a couple variables tweaked. You might say that is no big deal, well you'd be mistaken. Why, because if a vulnerability is identified, most alts won't get fixed for days, weeks or never. If new integration potential happens, bitcoin will be the first to do it, in a manner that has been tested is most likely to be bug free. 

2. It is branding, just like youtube dominates online video, and google dominates search. It would take quite awhile even if something better in online video for youtube to be abandoned. So, Bitcoin has an edge there that I see zero contenders threatening anytime soon. If you read forums, you see alt attacking allts, but you never see anyone attack bitcoin, as in saying there coin is going to replace it any time soon. So, right now there is not even the beginning of a move towards any other coin "ruling" all coins, that would take years if it ever happened. Right now there is no other coin that is fully functional, that even has a chance. 

3. Security of the network. Bitcoin has the most computing power "protecting" the blockchain than anything else on the planet. All bitcoin clones are not nearly as secure, direct sha256 clones, actually are the least secure, as they could be overpowered by a fraction of the bitcoin hash being directed at them. LTC is probably the second most secure, but far less given that the asic farms aren't completely "known" and the cost to overpower that network would be less. All other coin algos are untested in their security, for example, cryptonote coins, are very insecure, in that the "efficiency" of the miners is constantly being improved. As in a month ago if you had the optimized cryptonote miner, and a gpu farm you could have easily controlled the network, now that is still possible but will become harder as more optimized miners get distributed to the wild. 


So, why is bitcoin the standard, it is secure, it has competent developers, it has branding. 5 years from now that may change, but for now and at LEAST the next year that will be the case.

----------


## oldietech

> It's far less expensive because it does not have the infrastructure.  That's how the market works.  The more useful something is, the more it costs.  Bitcoin is more useful due to its infrastructure, therefore it costs more.  
> 
> My God, I didn't think this kind of economic ignorance was possible here.


There are 2 infrastructure requirements to covert common currency to crypto.

1.) an exchange.
2.) the transaction technology.

The exchange allows consumers to go directly to market to accumulate the specialized currency.  It also allows the merchant to price his goods in terms of the specialized currency.

The technology allows the end user, the middle man, and the merchant to perform the transaction efficiently.

The infrastructure that is in place now has been obviously built around BTC.  But, looking at the infrastructure requires what is really stopping an alt from leveraging what already exists?

No new infrastructure requirements are needed in order to trade LTC on an exchange.
No new infrastructure requirements are needed in order to transact in LTC.  

So really you have to ask, why aren't alts supported within the infrastructure?  My best guess is that infrastructure funding agreements with the various capital investments are currently focused on bitcoin only.  

Bitcoin isn't more useful due to it's infrastructure, after all it is the same infrastructure that CAN support any alternative. Bitcoin is not technically any more useful than any alternative.  Bitcoin IS USED MORE because the capital investment currently only supports Bitcoin.   

One of the big issues with distribution that I see, this is not a demand market.  It is a supply market.  This means wide scale adoption is predicated on getting this specialized currency in to usage by as many people as possible.  

It makes sense that the investment capital is focused on one brand at this time.  Due to the technical infrastructure requirements, most of the investment capital is being spent on bringing down the barriers that consumers have with access and usage.  It makes sense because training consumers to use this advanced technology is easier when the consumer can focus on one network.  

I think your comments about economic ignorance display their own ignorance for understanding what is happening over the long term.  Clearly you are enamored with the current price levels, and if you have been successful thus far in your investment, then why change your thinking that brought you that success?

I am not asking you to give up on what works for you.  I just think there is a much better explanation for the reason why alts do not currently fetch the same price as the main, or vice versus, than what you have offered.  

I do believe there will come a day when several alternatives will directly compete on the same infrastructure that the early investors laid down for crypto as a whole. 

That day is technically not far off. What is unknown is if current vested interest will find it beneficial to make that infrastructure support option available on there own, OR if they will wait for competition to drive that shift.  

At this time, I do believe most capital interests understand that adding support in the infrastructure (which in a practical sense is as trivial as starting up an alt network and adding the software hooks in the support layer technology) for alts will undermine their current positions which have leveraged the perceived scarcity of this specialized currency.    

In other words, introducing an alternative to bitcoin in the niche economy diminishes the return on their own capital which is necessarily priced in terms of the special currency.  Why should I as a consumer or merchant be forced to only use bitcoin?  Because if I had an unlimited number of choices, the value of each choice is spread out across the spectrum rather than concentrated or otherwise bottle necked thru the one channel. 

Make no mistake, the profits of this system, the ROI is based on the investor being able to accumulated bitcoin cheaply thru fees, and then resell high thru consumers demand.  

Since consumer demand is uncontrollable, the best way insure ROI for these capital investors is to protect the value of one of these networks (the first) from being diluted which is what would happen if LTC was introduced to the exchanges and the large merchant wallets like coinbase.  I believe the price of both would quickly reach parity when adjusted for the uniqueness of each network.  

Alts aren't as expensive because alts aren't supported by the capital investors at this time.  As a side note, it is concerning as someone who is rooting for crypto to take off that despite the inflow of capital, the demand hasn't really taken off.  It is equally concerning that the competition space within the infrastructure seems to be non existent for whatever reason.

----------


## oldietech

> I certainly didn't make the comparison.  I was talking about business models.  You could replace donuts with whatever.  I was talking about the business, not the product.  You were the one that started talking about the product.


you said,




> Does it necessarily follow that some Joe Shcmeaux donut shop should compete with Dunkin Donuts just because it, too, is a donut shop?


are you suggesting the donut shops would compete without actually selling products, in this case donuts?

How is it even possible to speak of a business model with no regards to the goods or services that the business produces?

And to answer your question, Yes, by definition a donut shop makes and sells donuts and would necessarily compete with any other shop that makes and sells donuts.

LOL, I simply used the comparison you made to engage the conversation, now supposedly my arguments are invalid because of that?  wow... lol..  But sure go ahead and use whatever business or product you want as X.  Doesn't change anything I said either.

----------


## muh_roads

All this anti-Bitcoin babble is $#@!ing hilarious.  Who cares if something replaces Bitcoin 5 years down the road?  You hate 5 years of profits?  It's like being given a second chance at buying Microsoft stock in the 70's.  But then deciding to wait until something better comes along like Google in the 2000's or iomega in the 90's.

You're gonna miss a giant 2014 rise because of xmas retail adoption.  Will it happen in 2015?  I don't know...

Diversify for $#@! sake.  I am not 100% in Bitcoin just like how you shouldn't be 100% in silver.  Shift funds around.  Sell high.

The free market has backed Bitcoin and it will do so for a while yet it seems.  Go where the free market goes.

----------


## evilfunnystuff

So oldie, instead of arguing it to death why don't you just go buy a basket of alt's, I truly hope you make some fat stacks.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> you said,
> 
> 
> 
> are you suggesting the donut shops would compete without actually selling products, in this case donuts?
> 
> How is it even possible to speak of a business model with no regards to the goods or services that the business produces?
> 
> And to answer your question, Yes, by definition a donut shop makes and sells donuts and would necessarily compete with any other shop that makes and sells donuts.
> ...


You don't understand.  I'm not comparing bitcoin to the product.  I'm comparing bitcoin to the business itself.  Does that make it any clearer?  

The goods or services produced could be anything.  Donuts was just an example.  It could be shoes and the analogy would still be the same.  We're talking about a market for two businesses with nearly identical business models.  It doesn't matter what they sell.  

Bitcoin is the original crypto-currency.  In order for other cryptos to compete in the same market, they have to offer something unique and useful or they're just flooding the market. The market is going to pick one and stick with it because it would be stupid to have several competing currencies when one will suffice, just like it would be stupid to have 10 donut shops on the same block.  The market will pick one and the others will go out of business.

You have real problems with reading comprehension.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

This is really simple.  The capital investment only supports bitcoin because the market only needs ONE crypto-currency, and bitcoin was the first one.  No other crypto has offered any competition because it came later and didn't offer anything new that would make it more valuable than bitcoin.  Since the market only needs one crypto-currency, the market has stuck with bitcoin.  There doesn't need to be a reason why.  

If cryptos are going to be successful, the market cannot spread itself so thin over all other cryptos, so the people chose one single coin as the main coin, and bitcoin was it.  It really is that simple.

----------


## oldietech

> You don't understand.  I'm not comparing bitcoin to the product.  I'm comparing bitcoin to the business itself.  Does that make it any clearer?  
> 
> The goods or services produced could be anything.  Donuts was just an example.  It could be shoes and the analogy would still be the same.  We're talking about a market for two businesses with nearly identical business models.  It doesn't matter what they sell.  
> 
> Bitcoin is the original crypto-currency.  In order for other cryptos to compete in the same market, they have to offer something unique and useful or they're just flooding the market. The market is going to pick one and stick with it because it would be stupid to have several competing currencies when one will suffice, just like it would be stupid to have 10 donut shops on the same block.  *The market will pick one and the others will go out of business.*
> 
> You have real problems with reading comprehension.


Right, and the question was, why would the market pick the $800 "one" and not the $0.80 "one" all else being equal?  Your answer was, "cause it's the first".  You could line up 10 donut shops on the block and if all of them were priced exactly the same, then the consumer choice would be based on things that the consumer values.  

But, when you have such a huge gap in price between nearly identical products, I would suspect there are other things to consider.  I seriously doubt that consumer demand is what is driving the price at this point.  I believe the price is being driven by the investment capital that is looking to control the flow of this specialized currency.  That is all well and good for the time being.  Eventually, it will come down to demand.  Apparently there is a handful of people willing to pay the price to use this technology.  I suspect that the vast hoards expected for whom this technology has pinned it's hopes on switching to will be looking for a much lower entry point.  

of course one way around that price perception barrier is fractional bitcoins.  That would be a simple change in the way the exchanges present the data.  That was already mentioned here.  The layman looks at the price of "bitcoin" and says sheesh $800 bucks?  No way.  So just divide the bitcoin into a fraction say 1/100th of a bitcoin is now actually a bitcoin.  Then you can say one bitcon is $8.  Oh now the layman can afford that.  

That little bit of market psychology I think has much more to do with the price difference between Bitcoin and alts.  Hell for that matter, Just multiply a litecoin by 100 and call that a litecoin.  Now all of a sudden the "value" of litecoin is GREATER than bitcoin.  

But of course you should know by now what happens when the perception of scarcity is lost in the crypto space.  After all, that is the lynch pin to the success of any crypto.

Sounds like what you have comprehended in your economic studies is that a successful business model is only evidence by the formation of a monopoly.  THAT as you say is a real problem in understanding.

----------


## oldietech

> This is really simple.  The capital investment only supports bitcoin because *the market only needs ONE crypto-currency*, and bitcoin was the first one.  No other crypto has offered any competition because it came later and didn't offer anything new that would make it more valuable than bitcoin.  Since the market only needs one crypto-currency, the market has stuck with bitcoin.  There doesn't need to be a reason why.  
> 
> If cryptos are going to be successful, the market cannot spread itself so thin over all other cryptos, so the people chose one single coin as the main coin, and bitcoin was it.  It really is that simple.


Says who?  Certainly not the market.

----------


## amonasro

> So oldie, instead of arguing it to death why don't you just go buy a basket of alt's, I truly hope you make some fat stacks.


Right. The whole "bigger and better crypto" argument has been done to death. The fact is Bitcoin is the first to market to have a mining industry built around it, it hasn't broken yet and the myriad of alts generally don't do something better enough to warrant a mass transfer of wealth to them. When it happens, we'll all know about it.

----------


## evilfunnystuff

> Right. The whole "bigger and better crypto" argument has been done to death. The fact is Bitcoin is the first to market to have a mining industry built around it, it hasn't broken yet and the myriad of alts generally don't do something better enough to warrant a mass transfer of wealth to them. When it happens, we'll all know about it.


I do think we will see another "big coin" eventually, but it's gonna be a while.

----------


## stuntman stoll

I view every crypto currency other than bitcoin as counterfeit

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Says who?  Certainly not the market.


Well, actually, yes, the market does say that.  Just look at the price of bitcoin.  That means the market agrees with me.

Now tell me, why would we need more than one?  Why wouldn't one be enough?

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Right, and the question was, why would the market pick the $800 "one" and not the $0.80 "one" all else being equal?  Your answer was, "cause it's the first".  You could line up 10 donut shops on the block and if all of them were priced exactly the same, then the consumer choice would be based on things that the consumer values.  
> 
> But, when you have such a huge gap in price between nearly identical products, I would suspect there are other things to consider.  I seriously doubt that consumer demand is what is driving the price at this point.  I believe the price is being driven by the investment capital that is looking to control the flow of this specialized currency.  That is all well and good for the time being.  Eventually, it will come down to demand.  Apparently there is a handful of people willing to pay the price to use this technology.  I suspect that the vast hoards expected for whom this technology has pinned it's hopes on switching to will be looking for a much lower entry point.  
> 
> of course one way around that price perception barrier is fractional bitcoins.  That would be a simple change in the way the exchanges present the data.  That was already mentioned here.  The layman looks at the price of "bitcoin" and says sheesh $800 bucks?  No way.  So just divide the bitcoin into a fraction say 1/100th of a bitcoin is now actually a bitcoin.  Then you can say one bitcon is $8.  Oh now the layman can afford that.  
> 
> That little bit of market psychology I think has much more to do with the price difference between Bitcoin and alts.  Hell for that matter, Just multiply a litecoin by 100 and call that a litecoin.  Now all of a sudden the "value" of litecoin is GREATER than bitcoin.  
> 
> But of course you should know by now what happens when the perception of scarcity is lost in the crypto space.  After all, that is the lynch pin to the success of any crypto.
> ...


It doesn't matter how much one unit of a certain currency costs.  An Iraqi dinar costs fractions of a penny, so why don't you get rid of your dollars and go become a dinar millionaire?  

Better yet, trade in your dollars for Zimbabwean currency and be a trillionaire!  You'd have it made because that currency is soooo cheap, right?

Well, I'm waiting...

----------


## muh_roads

> I view every crypto currency other than bitcoin as counterfeit


The system was designed to be upgraded and assimilate new features.  This is why Bitcoins lead can never be beaten.

The coin with the biggest ideas that isn't a $#@!coin I'd say is Ethereum.  It could do to contract lawyers one day as what Bitcoin will do to banks.  It can do lots of things.  You can code a completely decentralized P2P exchange within the coin.  Think of it as an OS for crypto-currency.  You can use any programming language you wish to implement your service features.  (It's what turing-complete means)

If Ethereum does prove useful, Bitcoin developers have gone on record saying they will assimilate its features.  But there might be some great swing trading with that one.  Like Darkcoin.

Bitcoin has such a gigantic market cap.  $#@!coins won't beat it.

----------


## oldietech

> Well, actually, yes, the market does say that.  Just look at the price of bitcoin.  That means the market agrees with me.
> 
> Now tell me, why would we need more than one?  Why wouldn't one be enough?


So looking at price doesn't really say anything about what the market needs.  Bitcoin does have more than 90% market capitalization at this point.  That doesn't mean the market agrees with you.  

I already said that the price of bitcoin is being driven by investment capital rather than utilization, although recent research has shown that there is an element of usage driving value.  

It never hurts to have a backup plan.  That would be one reason.  But there are many more reasons.  I small example, look at the desktop operating system market.  Dominated by Microsoft Windows, and one of its competitors isn't even a company with profits.  But you'd never hear anyone say why would we need more than one operating system.  

I find it strange that this is what your argument has come to.

----------


## oldietech

> It doesn't matter how much one unit of a certain currency costs.  An Iraqi dinar costs fractions of a penny, so why don't you get rid of your dollars and go become a dinar millionaire?  
> 
> Better yet, trade in your dollars for Zimbabwean currency and be a trillionaire!  You'd have it made because that currency is soooo cheap, right?
> 
> Well, I'm waiting...


I am not talking about the cost.  I am talking about the value which is priced i dollars.  Clearly Bitcoin is more highly valued than all the others.  The question is why?  I think the answer is because that network is getting all of the initial investment capital.  The issue is that in order for those investments to have a return, non investors need to adopt and use that currency.

Besides the advanced technology usage barrier that is being worked on, there is also the price of acquiring the technology that has consumers balking at converting their USD.  

Bitcoin is a specialized currency.  It's a new form of currency.  It is non standard.  Most people are not going to realize that 1 bitcoin can be infinitely divisible.  You mentioned a unit of currency.  Please define a unit of bitcoin.  

Is it not 1 BTC?  So consumers identify with currency units as dollars. 1 dollar.   In order to spend bitcoin, people think they have to buy 1 BTC.  That is just market psychology.  Sure, people like you realize what is going on, but there is a strong resistance to learning all the technicalities of how a currency works. 

This is why I believe as mentioned earlier, there is talk of breaking the unit down into being a fraction of the original bitcoin.  Very similar to a stock split, like Apple just did.  The problem you won't hear about or chose to ignore is that by saying ok 1/100 of a bitcoin is now the unit.  Well really there is no difference between 1/100th of a bitcoin and 1 bitcoin.  None at all.  1/100th of a bitcoin and do exactly the same thing as 1 bitcoin.  

What changes is the psychology.  Now people will think they can afford it.  Nothing changes in how the exchanges work, nothing changes in the technology.  What might change is that you will get more people thinking they can afford to take a risk and "try out" bitcoin.  

That is all well and good until the price starts being driven up again by more investment capital pouring in as consumers start using the specialized currency.  Of course that won't be a problem for folks who can infinitely split their coin in to smaller and smaller pieces.  The will just rinse and repeat the process.  Since there is no limit to how many times this may technically occur, we have to look for other limits to find a ceiling.  One limit would be once everyone on earth has enough pieces of bitcoin then the price will be finally discovered by the totality of the market, I think ultimately that is the goal of anyone holding bitcoin.  

Some other not so happy limits are people discovering that there are alternatives that do the same thing.  I believe an infinite amount of alternatives is more beneficial to the consumer than an infinite amount of divisions.

People need a reason to use crypto in the first place.  And there are some valid niche reasons to do so.  One of the things that I think merchants are going to discover is that they can create their own cryptos.  I could even see trade organizations setting up between suppliers, manufacturers and retailers to utilize the technology in a closed network and then link their internal currency with their customers.  

Sure right now it seems like having one world currency is a great idea, but in time, I believe the market will reject that once it is revealed how manipulative currency monopolies and cartels are. Meaning the technology will be adapted to the true market demand once utilization of the technology moves beyond the niche currency space.  That I believe is where the investment dollars are going towards, and yeah, you need to have skin in the game to experiment with that tech.  Not much cause after all, I could run my entire closed network trade organization off one bitcoin, thanks to the ability to split it into 1 million pieces and then extend the code to break each of those into a million more.  BUT, why not let the early adopting consumers pay for the R&D for you?  It's been the way tech has come to market since I've been alive and especially electronic tech.  No reason to change that now.  

So I understand that I joined a thread where someone was telling me what to do with my money.  I just didn't realize I'd be getting so many other bad suggestions to go along with it.  Right now and Iraqi dinar or a Zimbabwean dollar is about as useful to me as a bitcoin or a crypto coin.  

I hope crypto takes off and shines.  When it becomes widely adopted, I am sure I will use it just like anyone else.   As an investment?  It seems to be more of a gamble, and I can get better odds at the casino tbh.  

You are having a good run right now if you got in early.  But man how many times are you gonna pull that one arm bandit before the house gets theirs?  I'll wait and see if I can find some gaps in the technology that I can do something about.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> I am not talking about the cost.  I am talking about the value which is priced i dollars.  Clearly Bitcoin is more highly valued than all the others.  The question is why?  I think the answer is because that network is getting all of the initial investment capital.  The issue is that in order for those investments to have a return, non investors need to adopt and use that currency.
> 
> Besides the advanced technology usage barrier that is being worked on, there is also the price of acquiring the technology that has consumers balking at converting their USD.  
> 
> Bitcoin is a specialized currency.  It's a new form of currency.  It is non standard.  Most people are not going to realize that 1 bitcoin can be infinitely divisible.  You mentioned a unit of currency.  Please define a unit of bitcoin.  
> 
> Is it not 1 BTC?  So consumers identify with currency units as dollars. 1 dollar.   In order to spend bitcoin, people think they have to buy 1 BTC.  That is just market psychology.  Sure, people like you realize what is going on, but there is a strong resistance to learning all the technicalities of how a currency works. 
> 
> This is why I believe as mentioned earlier, there is talk of breaking the unit down into being a fraction of the original bitcoin.  Very similar to a stock split, like Apple just did.  The problem you won't hear about or chose to ignore is that by saying ok 1/100 of a bitcoin is now the unit.  Well really there is no difference between 1/100th of a bitcoin and 1 bitcoin.  None at all.  1/100th of a bitcoin and do exactly the same thing as 1 bitcoin.  
> ...


I'm going to have to stop you right there.  You were doing fine up until the point where you claimed that bitcoin is a "currency monopoly."  A monopoly, by definition, is

1. _n_ the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.

I'm sorry, but bitcoin is not exclusively owned or controlled.  By its very nature, it cannot be and would be worthless if it was.  Perhaps you've heard of those 51% attack scares.  If that ever happens, which is very unlikely, then bitcoin will be no more.  It is, by its very nature, not a monopoly.  There may be rich people who own a large portion of it, and in fact, they may even manipulate the price, but they don't control the network.  They can't.  




> Meaning the technology will be adapted to the true market demand once utilization of the technology moves beyond the niche currency space.  That I believe is where the investment dollars are going towards, and yeah, you need to have skin in the game to experiment with that tech.  Not much cause after all, I could run my entire closed network trade organization off one bitcoin, thanks to the ability to split it into 1 million pieces and then extend the code to break each of those into a million more.  BUT, why not let the early adopting consumers pay for the R&D for you?  It's been the way tech has come to market since I've been alive and especially electronic tech.  No reason to change that now.  
> 
> So I understand that I joined a thread where someone was telling me what to do with my money.  I just didn't realize I'd be getting so many other bad suggestions to go along with it.  Right now and Iraqi dinar or a Zimbabwean dollar is about as useful to me as a bitcoin or a crypto coin.  
> 
> *I hope crypto takes off and shines.  When it becomes widely adopted, I am sure I will use it just like anyone else.   As an investment?  It seems to be more of a gamble, and I can get better odds at the casino tbh.*


What do you mean, you can get better odds at the casino?  The price has been consistently rising for most of its existence, and if you got in, chances are you have made some money.  If you got in recently, you may have lost some, but that's a far stretch from saying it's anything like a casino where the odds are ALWAYS stacked against you.  The odds in this case are stacked for you.  




> You are having a good run right now if you got in early.  But man how many times are you gonna pull that one arm bandit before the house gets theirs?  I'll wait and see if I can find some gaps in the technology that I can do something about.


This isn't a game of chance.  It would seem you can pull "that one arm bandit" quite a few times.  I have no reason to believe that bitcoin is going to become obsolete now.  If there was a reason, then somebody would have found it by now.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> So looking at price doesn't really say anything about what the market needs.  Bitcoin does have more than 90% market capitalization at this point.  That doesn't mean the market agrees with you.  
> 
> I already said that the price of bitcoin is being driven by investment capital rather than utilization, although recent research has shown that there is an element of usage driving value.  
> 
> It never hurts to have a backup plan.  That would be one reason.  But there are many more reasons.  I small example, look at the desktop operating system market.  Dominated by Microsoft Windows, and one of its competitors isn't even a company with profits.  But you'd never hear anyone say why would we need more than one operating system.  
> 
> I find it strange that this is what your argument has come to.


You're comparing a monopoly on a particular product, dominated by Microsoft Windows, to a currency which has a value that is determined by its adoption, not by its use as a consumer product.  You can't compare a currency to a product.  

Besides, even if you could use that argument, it wouldn't really work in your favor.  Clearly the market is dominated by Windows for a reason, so it follows that Windows is superior to all of the other operating systems, unless you think THAT market is being manipulated, too.  Price tells us a lot about what the market thinks, and right now, the market has deemed bitcoin as more valuable than all of the other cryptos.  Your only defense is that the market is wrong and is being manipulated, but that is rarely the case.  We have a few famous instances like the silver spike in the 80s, but this has no similarities with that.

----------


## oldietech

> I'm going to have to stop you right there.  You were doing fine up until the point where you claimed that bitcoin is a "currency monopoly."  A monopoly, by definition, is
> 
> 1. _n_ the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.
> 
> I'm sorry, but bitcoin is not exclusively owned or controlled.  By its very nature, it cannot be and would be worthless if it was.  Perhaps you've heard of those 51% attack scares.  If that ever happens, which is very unlikely, then bitcoin will be no more.  It is, by its very nature, not a monopoly.  There may be rich people who own a large portion of it, and in fact, they may even manipulate the price, but they don't control the network.  They can't.  
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean, you can get better odds at the casino?  The price has been consistently rising for most of its existence, and if you got in, chances are you have made some money.  If you got in recently, you may have lost some, but that's a far stretch from saying it's anything like a casino where the odds are ALWAYS stacked against you.  The odds in this case are stacked for you.  
> ...


I see you latched on to and argued only the words you wanted to hear rather than taking my point in context of the discussion.  I didn't say that Bitcoin was a pure monopoly which is what you want to argue against.  Do you doubt that there is a cartel structure in place in the crypto market for bitcoin?  You shouldn't because you have advocated for that fiercely.  Cartels and monopolies have the same effect on price and induce entry barriers for competition. 

When I say currency monopoly, I am speaking in context of specialized currency market, crypto.  You advocate for bitcoin to be the only specialized currency in that space.  You are part of the bitcoin cartel.  This one sentence right here is where I think you should really think about. 




> If cryptos are going to be successful, the market cannot spread itself so thin over all other cryptos, so the people chose one single coin as the main coin, and bitcoin was it.


Consider the petro dollar cartel.  For a long time, no other currency competed with the USD as a currency in exchange for oil.  What you are claiming is that it is good for crypto currency to have no other competition in the crypto space when used as a currency to exchange for goods and services.  You would like to see  bitcoin as the only network with "the exclusive control of the supply in a commodity".  That is the definition of a currency monopoly when the commodity is crypto currency.  

The fact that all the major investors and infrastructure projects (exchanges, merchant wallets, etc) are exclusive to bitcoin is evidence of the cartel.  The fact that most bitcoin holders and advocates are also colluding to keep the focus on bitcoin as "the only solution the market needs" is also evidence of the cartel.  There doesn't need to be a monopoly in the pure sense to recognize that manipulation to the upside is and has been underway for some time now.  

What needs to be addressed is why you feel like including the other alternatives into the expansion plans will hurt the technology and investment as a whole.  I think you know that the success of cryptos is hinged on the perception of scarcity.  I think instinctively you also know that because an unlimited number of bitcoin clones may be created, and because there is nothing distinctive about one clone from the next, there really is no scarcity.  Artificial scarcity is exactly what it is.  

What is really concerning to me is that the artificial scarcity is dependent on the cartel to maintain the exclusiveness of the network.  I think this leads to bad investment and bad allocation of resources.

I get that this is a free market experiment I think that is awesome.  I also think that in the free market, people are free to allow their greed to run rampant with no encumbrances.  I don't want federal regulation of crypto.  But I can see that regulation is coming to the infrastructure around it.   I think one of the best ways resist state interference is to spread the idea far and wide.  

But, your capital investments are being directed by individuals with similar attitude as you seem to have.  In fact its so pervasive in the sub culture that has propped up around bitcoin since the price shot up from a few bucks and people were still able to participate from their home computers.  Bitcoin is not what it once was.  It's become a lumbering dinosaur already and people are losing interest because it's turned into such an exclusive commercial thing.

Crypto needs alts to be successful and step up to compete so that the technology is continuously refined and innovated and used in new and interesting ways.  Innovations that do more than just make a handful of people rich.  Innovations that solve problems rather than creating advanced versions of the old ones.  This was the promise that got people interested in it in the first place.  I think the technology has a whole lot more in store down the road.  Bitcoin is a beta test.  It's a trial run.  

The difference in exchange value between owning a piece of the bitcoin network ledger and owning a piece of an alts network ledger can be explained by monopoly pricing and by cartels acting to exclusively promote bitcoin as the "only crypto" "we" need.

----------


## oldietech

> You're comparing a monopoly on a particular product, dominated by Microsoft Windows, to a currency which has a value that is determined by its adoption, not by its use as a consumer product.  You can't compare a currency to a product.  
> 
> Besides, even if you could use that argument, it wouldn't really work in your favor.  Clearly the market is dominated by Windows for a reason, so it follows that Windows is superior to all of the other operating systems, unless you think THAT market is being manipulated, too.  Price tells us a lot about what the market thinks, and right now, the market has deemed bitcoin as more valuable than all of the other cryptos.  Your only defense is that the market is wrong and is being manipulated, but that is rarely the case.  We have a few famous instances like the silver spike in the 80s, but this has no similarities with that.


It is a valid comparison.  Earlier you chided me for focusing on the product instead of your business model analogy.  You do the same thing here by saying "bitcoin is a currency not a product".  You completely ignore the context of the comparison.  Why?  You claim that because of the price of bitcoin, this is proof that the market doesn't need or want an alternative.  

I showed you an industry where the competition is price at 0, and yet you will not make the claim that competition is bad for, not needed, or not wanted in that industry.  You see the whole point was to disprove your idea that somehow the huge price difference between two shall we say "things" can lead to the conclusion that the higher priced "thing" is the market way of saying, "this is the only one of this type of thing I want".  That is so bad to make that conclusion based on the price difference.   That is what you said.  


Here is a refresher in case you lost track of what we are talking about.  




> *The market will pick one and the others will go out of business.*
> *the market only needs ONE crypto-currency
> *


I ask, Says who? Certainly not the market.




> Well, actually, yes, the market does say that. Just look at the price of bitcoin. That means the market agrees with me.


So, simply apply your analogy to anything else in the world.  I get that you think currency is different than other stuff for sale or trade.  I could argue that, but that is another topic I think.  Even given the idea that usage in trade is what drives the price valuation of currency, this is only a currency ideal.  Other drivers for bitcoin price valuations are speculative interests, manipulative control by the bitcoin cartel, "mining" interests, and of course the perception of scarcity.   

I have shown that in other markets outside of the bitcoin specialized currency market, huge price gaps and overwhelming market capitalization do not lead to the same conclusions that you have made.  The market only needs one.  The others will go out of business.  This is simply not a true condition of any market.  Why should it be true for bitcoin specialized currency, or any currency for that matter?

What makes currency so special that is preferable to only have one currency and no others?  I just think that notion is fundamentally flawed. you probably will not persuade me from changing my beliefs in that. Do you have some hard facts that undermine the fundamentals and the role of competition in the free market.

----------


## muh_roads

Still on target.  Whales say above $700 by the end of June.

----------


## oldietech

> Still on target.  Whales say above $700 by the end of June.


Willy the Whale?

----------


## muh_roads

> Willy the Whale?


The range sounded ridiculous at first so I didn't post.  The actual number given was $700-$1000 after the end of June.  Estimates are being adjusted up dramatically now.  New target for end of July is $2,000.  lol.  We'll see if that actually happens.

Check out the red candle down on BTC-e on June 4th.  That be my bud Willy.  He sold 6 orders of 666 BTC @ $666.  He's now rebuying.  I feel honored to be part of such a group and they've proven to me they are very connected.

BTW guys, the ETF's are going to be added soon to places like Scottrade & E-Trade.  

Even if you don't believe in Bitcoin you should acknowledge the serious interest.  People are gonna miss an epic move.  Worrying about missing $20 swings will soon be a thing of the past.  I don't think people realize how many salesmen and saleswomen are out in the field representing Coinbase & Bitpay.  The Winklevoss investment rounds have been put to good use.  Xmas retailers like money with very little fees or having to worry about handling the coin themselves.

People should really take advantage of this pullback.  I'm excited.  After July is going to be amazing.  I'd expect a new retailer mentioned like DISH or Expedia every day or so.  There is going to be so much news coming from all directions.  It sounds like it will be massive.

----------


## oldietech

> The range sounded ridiculous at first so I didn't post.  The actual number given was $700-$1000 after the end of June.  Estimates are being adjusted up dramatically now.  New target for end of July is $2,000.  lol.  We'll see if that actually happens.
> 
> *Check out the red candle down on BTC-e on June 4th.  That be my bud Willy.  He sold 6 orders of 666 BTC @ $666.  He's now rebuying.  I feel honored to be part of such a group and they've proven to me they are very connected.*
> 
> BTW guys, the ETF's are going to be added soon to places like Scottrade & E-Trade.  
> 
> Even if you don't believe in Bitcoin you should acknowledge the serious interest.  People are gonna miss an epic move.  Worrying about missing $20 swings will soon be a thing of the past.  I don't think people realize how many salesmen and saleswomen are out in the field representing Coinbase & Bitpay.  The Winklevoss investment rounds have been put to good use.  Xmas retailers like money with very little fees or having to worry about handling the coin themselves.
> 
> People should really take advantage of this pullback.  I'm excited.  After July is going to be amazing.  I'd expect a new retailer mentioned like DISH or Expedia every day or so.  There is going to be so much news coming from all directions.  It sounds like it will be massive.


According to tradingview, BTC-E high for 6/4 was 659.0.  bitcoinwisdom has the same data a day behind on 6/3 (probably time zone difference).

I checked the two previous days in June where the price touched 668.42 (green candle on June 3rd trading view) and 667.70 (green candle on June 1st trading view).

I verified on bitcoin wisdom, same data day behind(again time zone).

Bitcoin hasn't sniffed 666 but 3 other days since mid Feb.  and that was back in March.  So, I honed in on those two GREEN CANDLE day where your "bud" Willy supposedly proved these 6 trades to you, looking for evidence of a 2.6 million dollar 4k bitcoin transaction (or series of transactions) since those are the only 2 days where what you told me to check out could even be possible.

So I start out looking at June 3rd for BTC-E at trading view.  Looks like the the only candle that contains the $666 figure you stated is at 5am.  Volume on this candle was 833.  

So I figure perhaps your special group made the move on the other day, June 1st on trading view.

Ahhh, there we go.  A 1 hour candle with 3600+ shares.  Lets look at that candle, cause that's the only one that comes close to representing what you wanted me to look at. 

So this candle is a red candle on June 1st 6pm BtC-E trading view chart, just to make sure we are on the same page.  Same data is on bitcoin wisdom June 1st 2pm chart.

This candle has high of 667.70 and a low of 617.89.

Looking at the 5 minute candle intervals, it would have been impossible for your whale team alpha to have sold 6 blocks of 666 bitcoins @$666. 

The only trades executed in 5 minute intervals that included a price @$666 (or higher) came at the :25 minute trade block for a total volume of 89 bitcoins.  

SO, what this sounds like is that someone told you they executed a market sell order when the price was at $666.  But a market sell order hardly matters as far as the price the trade executes at.  They decided to dump 4k shares in 6 blocks probably sequentially (when one block was gone, they put the next block up).  They just happened to pull the trigger at $666.  They didn't actually sell at that level. 

So best you can do to figure out their resist point would be to take the average price of that 1 hour candle which is something like 642.70.

Of course market sell orders would also show a solid volume bar at the lowest interval for the size of the block.  That ain't happening either.  

So you either made that $#@! up to make it sound cool  (6 blocks of 666 @ $666) OR, someone lied to you and you didn't bother to fact check, OR you filtered the information that you allegedly received and regurgitated it in an incomprehensible way.  

Regardless, watching the L2, the big rebuy blocks over the last hour keep moving further and further down.  I am sure the strategy is unbelievably great.  Who could second guess selling right at the peak and picking up right at the bottom?

More than anything, if what you say is true, then pushing around a market with a cap of nearly 10 billion with a couple million dollars is indicator to me of an extremely thin market with very little liquidity.  

Hope it works out for you, but I'd be a bit more careful whose advise I hitch my wagon too.  Anyone that is that deep in thin market with low liquidity is looking for bag holders.

----------


## muh_roads

> According to tradingview, BTC-E high for 6/4 was 659.0.  bitcoinwisdom has the same data a day behind on 6/3 (probably time zone difference).
> 
> I checked the two previous days in June where the price touched 668.42 (green candle on June 3rd trading view) and 667.70 (green candle on June 1st trading view).
> 
> I verified on bitcoin wisdom, same data day behind(again time zone).
> 
> Bitcoin hasn't sniffed 666 but 3 other days since mid Feb.  and that was back in March.  So, I honed in on those two GREEN CANDLE day where your "bud" Willy supposedly proved these 6 trades to you, looking for evidence of a 2.6 million dollar 4k bitcoin transaction (or series of transactions) since those are the only 2 days where what you told me to check out could even be possible.
> 
> So I start out looking at June 3rd for BTC-E at trading view.  Looks like the the only candle that contains the $666 figure you stated is at 5am.  Volume on this candle was 833.  
> ...


lol that was way more analysis than what was needed if u just asked.  Yeah it was market, obviously nothing takes at the top like that.  Started as a scare wall.  I don't believe the entire lot was filled.

----------


## oldietech

> lol that was way more analysis than what was needed if u just asked.  Yeah it was market, obviously nothing takes at the top like that.  Started as a scare wall.  I don't believe the entire lot was filled.


I don't think any of the alleged 666 lots were filled.  The biggest move I saw was 598 at 5 minutes.  Unfortunately I can't get data on the 1 minute intervals, but I seriously question the veracity of the claim of selling 4k @ $666.  That is 2.6 million.  That makes it more likely this is a big fish story you've passed along.

I will ask now, do you have any proof from this person or group that they are day trading anywhere near the level you claimed?  Honestly I don't really feel the need to see it because I can look at the tape an almost instantly know that you don't.  But feel free to back up these claims.

It seems like you made this claim to lend some sort of credibility to your inside information about what people with money are saying and doing, and predicting 700 by end of June.  Then you go all Goebbels on us and say 700 is the low in and quote a range from 700-1000.  

That sounds like penny stock pumping to me.  Pure propaganda.  Sounds more like someone bought in at the head fake in early March and waiting for a chance to break even or eek out a trade fee mitigate profit.

----------


## anaconda

Has slid to $575.64 now..

https://coinbase.com/charts

----------


## muh_roads

> I will ask now, do you have any proof from this person or group that they are day trading anywhere near the level you claimed?  Honestly I don't really feel the need to see it because I can look at the tape an almost instantly know that you don't.  But feel free to back up these claims.


Yes.  I've seen the walls ppl throw up to prove some of what they have.




> It seems like you made this claim to lend some sort of credibility to your inside information about what people with money are saying and doing, and predicting 700 by end of June.  Then you go all Goebbels on us and say 700 is the low in and quote a range from 700-1000.  
> 
> That sounds like penny stock pumping to me.  Pure propaganda.  Sounds more like someone bought in at the head fake in early March and waiting for a chance to break even or eek out a trade fee mitigate profit.


Watch and learn.  This isn't a stock.

----------


## oldietech

> Yes.  I've seen the walls ppl throw up to prove some of what they have.
> 
> 
> 
> *Watch and learn.  This isn't a stock.*


This is so smug and arrogant, what value does that bring to an honest discussion? Not much.  I am not impressed by people flashing their wealth.  That might impress you and you might think you can learn from that, but to me it's nothing more than amateurs at the casino.

----------


## muh_roads

> This is so smug and arrogant, what value does that bring to an honest discussion? Not much.  I am not impressed by people flashing their wealth.  That might impress you and you might think you can learn from that, but to me it's nothing more than amateurs at the casino.


You got a smug response because you are talking down to me as if I don't know what I am involved with and you're also disrespecting my team without knowing them.  I've seen our team leader sacrifice his own BTC running bots to help bring volume to alts that other team members got stuck in.

Take or leave the information I provide.  I truly don't care.  I've been involved with BTC since $10 and I have rang the alarms here for people when it was double digits when many got in.  I also warned people to get out of Gox in very early 2013 when I first seen warning signs.

Ask all the questions you want, but don't act as if you know more than me in regards to what we're doing here.  I have gone through so much and seen a lot in the near 3 years I've been doing this to get to where I'm at.

----------


## oldietech

> You got a smug response because you are talking down to me as if I don't know what I am involved with and you're also disrespecting my team without knowing them.  I've seen our team leader sacrifice his own BTC running bots to help bring volume to alts that other team members got stuck in.
> 
> Take or leave the information I provide.  I truly don't care.  I've been involved with BTC since $10 and I have rang the alarms here for people when it was double digits when many got in.  I also warned people to get out of Gox in very early 2013 when I first seen warning signs.
> 
> Ask all the questions you want, but don't act as if you know more than me in regards to what we're doing here.  I have gone through so much and seen a lot in the near 3 years I've been doing this to get to where I'm at.


Out of curiosity, "back in the day" did people trade donuts for crypto?  Do they do it now?  

Wouldn't you necessarily want people to compare your crypto to pretty much everything?

How does this sound now?  




> Comparing Crypto to donuts shows how little you understand what is going on here.

----------


## muh_roads

> Out of curiosity, "back in the day" did people trade donuts for crypto?  Do they do it now?  
> 
> Wouldn't you necessarily want people to compare your crypto to pretty much everything?
> 
> How does this sound now?


First of all, it isn't "my" crypto.

You are hearing about Bitcoin because it is a scientific breakthrough in the field of cryptography that can no longer be centrally controlled.  Families in really $#@!ty oppressive countries with strict currency controls couldn't send money to their relatives easily until now.

----------


## oldietech

> First of all, it isn't "my" crypto.
> 
> You are hearing about Bitcoin because it is a scientific breakthrough in the field of cryptography that can no longer be centrally controlled.  Families in really $#@!ty oppressive countries with strict currency controls couldn't send money to their relatives easily until now.


So you don't own any crypto?  Well, assuming you did, wouldn't you want to compare your crypto (the crypto you what?  control?)  to other goods and services?  Isn't that what happens when you prices something in a currency?

1 donut = x crypto.  Solve for x.  

I am guessing there really isn't that high of a demand to possess crypto for the point of comparing it with goods and services.  Perhaps the demand is increasing.  I am certainly looking for evidence of this.  It would seem the supply side has a strong demand to be able to convert crypto to cash, and it appears relatively cheap or even free for a supplier to do this thanks to the capital investment focusing on conversion utilities.  

So all the news of the retailers beginning to accept crypto is sort of meh.  Its a simple matter of setting up a merchant account with one of the few capital firms that handle the currency swap.  

I would be more interested is seeing smaller retailers begin holding reserves in the form of crypto and making inventory purchases out of those reserves.  I'd also be more interested in seeing increased incentives for consumers to make the conversions themselves.  

For instance, where are the retailers that are pricing their products in bitcoins and offering consumers incentive to use bitcoin to make their purchases?  I am sure those are out there, and I'd be curious to know if those retailers are reserving or converting those sales and at what ratio.  

I think I am hearing about bitcoin because of the massive pump that occurred last year more than anything.  There really isn't much of a breakthrough more than it is an innovation.  None of the technology that makes up the bitcoin core is ground breaking in and of itself.  However the innovative mashup does seem to be an advancement in terms of how those technologies are utilized.  

I am 100% positive that wealth transfer is not a driver of the price of bitcoin.  Access to the exchange markets is severely limited.  Those individuals would first need to convert their local currency into an exchange accepted currency first, and that is the choke point.  Those dictators much like the dictators right here in the United States maintain economic dominance of their subjects through currency controls.   

I am willing to entertain the idea that bitcoin provides a conduit for anonymous wealth transfers in those types of situations, but to think that bitcoin actually solves a the problem of escaping the currency monopolies in any given state, well I'd need to see some evidence of that.

----------


## muh_roads

> *I am guessing* there really isn't that high of a demand to possess crypto for the point of comparing it with goods and services.  Perhaps the demand is increasing.  I am certainly looking for evidence of this.


Bolded part is all that was needed to invalidate the rest.  The test for scarcity is to try and get some.  Go for it.




> So all the news of the retailers beginning to accept crypto is sort of meh.  Its a simple matter of setting up a merchant account with one of the few capital firms that handle the currency swap.


That is a giant step that you think is simple.  Most people still think it is illegal.




> I would be more interested is seeing smaller retailers begin holding reserves in the form of crypto and making inventory purchases out of those reserves.  I'd also be more interested in seeing increased incentives for consumers to make the conversions themselves.


Overstock.com CEO mentioned their ratio.




> For instance, where are the retailers that are pricing their products in bitcoins and offering consumers incentive to use bitcoin to make their purchases?  I am sure those are out there, and I'd be curious to know if those retailers are reserving or converting those sales and at what ratio.


Coinbase merchants websites lists them.  If you want to see lots of mom & pop action, go visit New Hampshire.




> *I think* I am hearing about bitcoin because of the massive pump that occurred last year more than anything.


I just liked the bolded part.




> There really isn't much of a breakthrough more than it is an innovation.  None of the technology that makes up the bitcoin core is ground breaking in and of itself.  However the innovative mashup does seem to be an advancement in terms of how those technologies are utilized.


You just blew my mind.  I won't listen to the smartest people in the room on bitcointalk anymore.  Instead you are my #1 go to source now for the latest tech updates regarding this industry.




> *I am 100% positive* that wealth transfer is not a driver of the price of bitcoin.


You sound like a betting man.




> Access to the exchange markets is severely limited.  Those individuals would first need to convert their local currency into an exchange accepted currency first, and that is the choke point.  Those dictators much like the dictators right here in the United States maintain economic dominance of their subjects through currency controls.


https://localbitcoins.com/

Foreign countries use their own versions behind Tor if needed.  SR2 is another popular method for those people.




> I am willing to entertain the idea that bitcoin provides a conduit for anonymous wealth transfers in those types of situations, but to think that bitcoin actually solves a the problem of escaping the currency monopolies in any given state, well I'd need to see some evidence of that.


http://www.businessweek.com/articles...rtual-currency

----------


## oldietech

> Bolded part is all that was needed to invalidate the rest.  The test for scarcity is to try and get some.  Go for it.
> 
> 
> 
> That is a giant step that you think is simple.  Most people still think it is illegal.
> 
> 
> 
> Overstock.com CEO mentioned their ratio.
> ...


It's anybodies guess.  As I said, I am looking for evidence.  You didn't provide so your opinion is invalid too, no?   Bitcoin is not scarce at all.  Anyone with access to an exchange and common currency that exchange uses can own a piece of the ledger.  

Doesn't take much to open up a merchant account, companies are used to doing this online for 10 years by now.  

Yeah, I don't really think that overstock is a smaller retailer, but seeing the ratio is a step in the right direction.  

Yeah, those companies don't list in bitcoin.  They list in USD and then multiple the USD price by the current exchange rate.  Not really what I am looking for.  Yes, I suppose the next time I want to buy a donut with bitcoin, N.H. probably has that.  

Well, I have no other reason to be aware of bitcoin other than the price pumps.  It was a niche that I wasn't particularly interested in until then.  I am glad I heard about it and started investigating to see what all the buzz was about.  The overwhelming majority of conversation is about the price.   Case and point, this thread. 

You'd probably be better off doing your own research on the technology so you may understand it at whatever level befits you.  But, its a fact that bitcoin is an innovative mashup rather than a "scientific breakthrough".   I don't mean to tamper your enthusiasm, but be honest, at what point does hype translate into something tangible for you?  Perhaps you feel really good about the value of bitcoin based on some not so truthful propaganda that the stake holders would like you to repeat? 

I only wager what I can afford to lose, and I only wager when my decisions can influence the odds.   

So local bitcoins has limits for trade.  exactly as i mentioned.  Would you consider sending someone 100USD a wealth transfer?  Perhaps your idea of wealth transfer is sending pocket change out of the country.   I just thought you meant something else.  

We'll see where that goes.   I appreciate the link to that anecdotal evidence.   Not quite what I had in mind for escaping currency monopolies, but at least its something.

----------


## muh_roads

> Bitcoin is not scarce at  all.  Anyone with access to an exchange and common currency that  exchange uses can own a piece of the ledger.


BTC @ $600 with a mining production difficulty of 12 billion is much more scarce than BTC @ $10 with a difficulty of 1 million.




> Yeah, those companies don't list in bitcoin.  They list in USD and then  multiple the USD price by the current exchange rate.


They don't list as Bitcoin because dollars still dominate.  The point is to get involved before others do.  And by others, I mean the financial sector.  We're not even talking about the masses at this point.  Big money investment is the next phase.




> Yes, I suppose the next time I want to buy a donut with  bitcoin, N.H. probably has that.


You aren't much of a technology investor, are you?  You are waiting to see consumer adoption.  It will be too late by then to make any sort of meaningful profit in the same way that people benefited from investing in internet services in the early 90's.

The final phase is consumer adoption.  The current phase is still infrastructure build-up.  Fully attaching Bitcoin to FOREX, e.g.




> Not really what I  am looking for.


Who expects full maturity of a technology up front before investing?  Think of Bitcoin as if it is the internet in 1996.  When I first got involved, it was like internet 1992.  I've seen a lot change in just a couple years.




> Well, I have no other reason to be aware of bitcoin other than the price  pumps.  It was a niche that I wasn't particularly interested in until  then.  I am glad I heard about it and started investigating to see what  all the buzz was about.  The overwhelming majority of conversation is  about the price.   Case and point, this thread.


You should really make a new thread if you have questions.  Yes this thread is about where the price will go next.  That should've been apparent in the OP.




> You'd probably be better off doing your own research on the technology so you may understand it at whatever level befits you.


lol
May I ask your age?




> But, its a fact that bitcoin is an innovative mashup rather than a "scientific breakthrough".


lol
The man asking questions says "it's a fact", ladies and gentlemen.

Sending a piece of data (blockchain key access) from one wallet to another without that data being a duplicate over a decentralized system that encrypts the identity of both parties is a scienfic breakthrough in the field of cryptography.

You should attempt to create your own Genesis Block from scratch if you think this isn't a big deal.




> I don't mean to tamper your enthusiasm


lol
Trust me, you aren't.
I think you missed the part where I said I have been involved since 2012.  Acting as if you know more than me while simultaneously asking questions is quite hilarious.




> but be honest, at what point does hype translate into something tangible for you?


My mortgage has been paid off.  Others who adopted earlier than me are creating their own businesses and startups surrounding crypto.  After each paradigm shift in the price you will see people reinvesting back into the ecosystem with their own ideas on improving services and apps.  I plan to.




> Perhaps you feel really good about the value of bitcoin based on some not so truthful propaganda that the stake holders would like you to repeat?


Perhaps you make a lot of assumptions about people you know nothing about?




> So local bitcoins has limits for trade.  exactly as i mentioned.  Would  you consider sending someone 100USD a wealth transfer?  Perhaps your  idea of wealth transfer is sending pocket change out of the country.   I  just thought you meant something else.


You and I could meet in a park with our own wallet apps.  There is no limit on that.

btw, $100 is a lot of money to someone in Kenya.




> We'll see where that goes.   I appreciate the link to that anecdotal  evidence.   Not quite what I had in mind for escaping currency  monopolies, but at least its something.


If anything I provide is going to be resisted with the word "anecdotal", then I have bigger fish to fry than to be your personal Google search engine for you.

----------


## oldietech

> BTC @ $600 with a mining production difficulty of 12 billion is much more scarce than BTC @ $10 with a difficulty of 1 million.
> 
> 
> 
> They don't list as Bitcoin because dollars still dominate.  The point is to get involved before others do.  And by others, I mean the financial sector.  We're not even talking about the masses at this point.  Big money investment is the next phase.
> 
> 
> 
> You aren't much of a technology investor, are you?  You are waiting to see consumer adoption.  It will be too late by then to make any sort of meaningful profit in the same way that people benefited from investing in internet services in the early 90's.
> ...


Scarcity, yes.  I have an apple and cut in in half and eat one half and put the other in a frig.  That is how you just described scarcity.

It would appear that there is a lack of confidence in the currency if people are unwilling to take it at face value.  By get involved I assumed you mean give up something of value for something of speculative interest.  That is a risk that some have taken and so far have been rewarded for.  I am not disparaging that in the least.  Good for big money getting in.  There are lots of market opportunities to get in before the next wave of speculation.  For instance, have you heard of solar roadways?  Not that I am investing in that either at this time, but it's not like bitcoin is the only technology to invest in.  It's simply on my radar.  I don't think you are really qualified to tell me the when and the where to get involved.  But, I entertain your suggestions because I appreciate perspectives outside of my own.  

Why question what I invest in?  Don't you have a group of people to tell you how to invest your money?  For the record, I have been investing in technology since before the internet.  This isn't the first revolutionary technology I have seen and it surely won't be the last.  You have no idea what I am waiting for.  You have no idea what I am doing.  I can speculate without putting my money to work.  It's safer that way if you main investment goal is to preserve capital.  It sounds to me like you missed out on the .com cycle.  Don't assume that others did.  If you understood technology investing, you wouldn't think that consumer adoption is the final phase.  Ask facebook if having everyone in the world using their website was the final phase.  Ask Bill Gates if having a PC on every "desktop" was the final phase.  Ask any of the telcoms if having last mile infrastructure to every home in the United States is the final phase.  

I do.  I don't invest in unproven ideas, concepts, or business models when it comes to technology.  Learned that the old fashioned way.  Bitcoin is still in the beta test phase.  It's kinda neat to see people risking real money on that.  I did, what I could afford to lose and after manipulating the odds of success in my favor.  That doesn't mean I float the same propaganda as the people who are staking their future financial success on the thing.  My future financial success is staked elsewhere.  So I remain critical of the technology until I see solid and convincing evidence that it will be more than just an exclusive niche for early adopters to make money off of.   But, then again, it's a currency.  It's not worth the effort to flip a currency on forex unless you control a nice fat margin account, not interested in playing that stacked game again.   Not sure why FOREX would be a goal of any bitcoin believer to be honest.  Sounds like pie in the sky to me.  

Bitcoin is nothing like internet 1992 or internet 1996.  Regular people could intuitively use internet 1992-1996.  The problem of adoption was cost.  Getting on the internet in 1992-1996 was a simple as dialing a phone number.  There was no risk in clicking a link.  The profit model for invested companies was a real life profit model.  Advertising and buying and selling real goods and services.  The internet then was basically a new media.  Bitcoin is built on top of the same protocol as the internet is, I will grant you that.  But that is about where the similarities end.  Bitcoin itself is as evolved as it is ever going to get because the people invested in it will not allow it to evolve in the way it needs to, because doing so will mean breaking what they have now.  That is why I encourage alts.  To get away from the crypto cartel known as bitcoin and to explore deeper more meaningful innovation using the same open source protocols.  

What change have you seen to bitcoin, honestly?  Some service have positioned themselves between the txin and txout?  The hardware used has ramped up to Moore's law?  The myriad of changes that are in each release are transparent to the target audience.  This is nothing like the changes in the internet from dial up to DSL to broadband.  Yes, lots of changes in beta mode to make the software actually usable by non tech people.  Great, lets get it on then!  What are we waiting for the price to go to 5000 before we start making changes to make the thing attractive to the investors and the masses?  

Ok, no.  I am not making another thread.  I am following the discussion topic.  I am looking for a question mark in the quote you commented on.  Nope don't see one.  

There are no age requirements for doing your own research.  So no, you may not ask my age.  

Again, I didn't see a question mark anywhere for you to be going on about me asking questions.  But I know you have to try and recover somehow, i guess pretending like I am being inquisitive is it.  I guess you've never heard of SSL.  and you laugh at me?  It's not a big deal at all.  The major innovation here is the mashup of cryptographic message signing, hashcash, and peer to peer networking.  The hardcoded log file limits and incremental difficulty algorithm applied to the hashcash functionality are unique attempts to create artificial scarcity. Everything else beyond that is bells and whistles.  

I never said "this" wasn't a big deal.  I said it wasn't a scientific breakthrough.  Its an innovation.  Happens daily in technology.  I am not surprised.  I happen to like this one because it challenges the status quo insofar as money is concerned.  Doesn't mean I need to hyperventilate myself with BUY BUY BUY all the time.  

Well, good because for a minute there I thought you were going to cry..   No you have reiterated over and over again on your status among the early adopters.  Here is a pat on the back and a good job for ya.  I really have no desire to prove who knows more.  I just know that you've said some pretty false comments in your support of bitcoin and I am just trying to stick with facts.  So yeah I contradict you.  If you feel like this is me trying to know more than you, whatever, but the smart people I know ask more questions than anyone.  Sounds reasonable.  It's the ones that seem to laugh hysterically at seemingly paradoxical information and become locked in a state of stupor that I tend to shy away from. 

Hey that's great, you paid your mortgage with bitcoin!  I am glad you finally found something that is successful for you!  I mean seriously, I can't imagine what you would have done if bitcoin had never come along.  I bet there are 100's of people who have finally been able gain financial freedom via this once in a lifetime opportunity.  FOr everyone else, there is mastercard.  lame joke right?  But ok, so your answer to my question, at what point does the hype translate into something tangible, is I paid my mortgage with the thing.  See this sounds like a late night infomercial.  Really, how many people do you think are going to be able to pay their mortgage thru bitcoin investment?  Cause you know, your mortgage company didn't take bitcoins as payment.  So those bitcoins had to be sold.  So you needed a buyer, in fact you needed a buyer that was willing to pay vastly more than you initially did to pay your mortgage.  How long is that going to go on?  You really want me and the people on this forum to do that? Eventually, there is going to be a large swath of bag holders, you realize that right?  Eventually someone is going to buy a bitcoin and never ever see 1% capital gain, much less 100% or 1000%.  You have no idea if that is today or not.  You just know you are on the gravy train right now.  

Perhaps. 

Yes, but if you and I had kenyan money we could not buy bitcoin.  We'd need to meet in the park and agree to trade dollars or whatever other currency first.  It's funny how people argue so hard core for bitcoin that when converting from USD to bitcoin that bitcoin price levels in terms of USD somehow reflect bitcoin value, but then others see it exactly the opposite when it comes to converting USD to other common currency, like the Kenya.  Perhaps you know this already, but $100 USD in Kenya buys you about the same amount of stuff as $100 USD in the united states, AFTER converting to kenyan money.  

I think your argument was transferring wealth out of oppressive dictatorships.  The places where oppressive dictatorships exist to the point where this type of wealth transfer is a real concern (basically backdoor unregulated currency swaps), is precisely the types of places where there is no access to foreign currency that is usable for purchasing bitcoin.  Other than that, it is nothing more than a novelty that bitcoin facilitates backdoor unregulated currency swaps.  And yet earlier on you explained to me that the next step was getting on FOREX.  by by backdoor unregulated currency swap.  

It was absolutely anecdotal,  The article itself says no one knows how many people are breaking the currency laws in Iran and the trade laws in the US to use the bitcoin backdoor.  The only number given was something like 32.  I am sure the elites in Iran have found a way to skirt those laws using bitcoin.  Folks on the street?  A way to escape the state currency monopoly?  You anecdote gives me some measure of hope, like I said, see where it goes and I do appreciate the link.  But again, not really what I had in mind.  I think the currency revolution will be much much more localized than what we see with bitcoin.  Like I said, at least its a start.

----------


## anaconda

Why did BTC go from approximately $670 to $570 last week?

----------


## oldietech

here ya go muh---

http://www.economist.com/blogs/schum...coin-argentina

this article describes exactly why I made my argument about the driver of bitcoin price NOT being wealth transfer as you described.  So to recap...

You said..




> Families in really $#@!ty oppressive countries with strict currency controls couldn't send money to their relatives easily until now.


I said..




> I am 100% positive that wealth transfer is not a driver of the price of bitcoin. Access to the exchange markets is severely limited. Those individuals would first need to convert their local currency into an exchange accepted currency first, and that is the choke point. Those dictators much like the dictators right here in the United States maintain economic dominance of their subjects through currency controls.


Now, if you will notice, the link I posted cites bitcoin foundation numbers on Argentine utilization.  There is also much stronger evidence of the spread of bitcoin usage including a local online exchange.

HOWEVER, as I said, the choke point is that in order to get the stuff in to the country to begin with, the local currency needs to be converted to a currency that actually can be used to purchase bitcoin on the international exchange.  

You said this wealth transfer can now be done easily.  In fact, the opposite is true thanks to the additional layer needing both poor oppressed locals and expat family members needing to understand this new system of transfer.  I'd argue that the good old fashioned black market and postal services are still far far easier and safer method, and probably more used method too, for this type of transfer than bitcoin.

----------


## muh_roads

> Why did BTC go from approximately $670 to $570 last week?


Whales corrected from 670 to 610+ range.  Was always the intent.  They move and try to match TA as often as possible and only move on news.  The rest below 610 was US Marshall auction FUD.

700+ by the end of June is still the goal.

I'm not sure if I am able to mention this, but I don't think it is news anymore to the BTC community.  The Paypal thing is happening.  It is real.  Expect an announcement soon.

----------


## muh_roads

> here ya go muh---
> 
> http://www.economist.com/blogs/schum...coin-argentina
> 
> this article describes exactly why I made my argument about the driver of bitcoin price NOT being wealth transfer as you described.  So to recap...
> 
> You said..
> 
> 
> ...


You're putting words in my mouth.  I never said it was the driver.  And my use of the word "easily" is meant to be compared against a flat out "no u can't wire" by the traditional banking system.

The world has 7 billion? people.  Many are unbanked.  I can't account for what people are doing or the percentages.  I'm just mentioning one of its uses that I've read about more than once on bitcointalk.  I didn't bookmark, sorry.

There is a CEO who runs a BTC company called Xapo.  I believe he has an interesting family story since he comes from Argentina.  Just off the top of my head if you want to search something.

----------


## KingNothing

> Why did BTC go from approximately $670 to $570 last week?


Because no one uses it as an actual currency and people are just trying to get rich quick with it?

----------


## evilfunnystuff

> Because no one uses it as an actual currency


Tell that to all the businesses that accept BTC, or are in the process of implementing it.

----------


## stuntman stoll

> Why did BTC go from approximately $670 to $570 last week?


I believe it dropped when the fbi announced they were going to auction off a chunk of their stolen bitcoin.

----------


## oldietech

> I believe it dropped when the fbi announced they were going to auction off a chunk of their stolen bitcoin.


That and it was technically overbought (on the daily) on top of the concerns about mining centralization.  

There is the potential for a nice break out looking at the weekly inverse head and shoulders.  Left shoulder week of Feb 19th, head week of April 9th, right should week of June 11th (this week).

Neck line to break is approx. 650, altho I'd be looking to put in at 630 which would be the 78.6% fib retrace from the bottom (head) of 339.79 to the recent high (left shoulder) 710.

This is on bitstamp, same pattern on all the other majors per bitcoin wisdom.

Target would be 650 + (650-339) = 961 

That coincides with the high from week of 11/20/2013.  

HOWEVER, there are a lot of reasons I don't see that playing out.  

#1, that is an intraday candle pattern, not a closing pattern.  The pattern is not robust if you look at the closings only.  
#2, the strong resist at the 78.6% retrace
#3, volume is not confirming the pattern
#4, bear market counter trend resistance channel.  

But, the pattern is there and breaking thru 630 convincingly (strong, I mean very strong volume) would be an excellent entry point.

----------


## muh_roads

Update.

Whales have turned their bots back on within the last 48h now that the auction FUD is out of the way.  They will spike it up in between each flatline.  Where those intervals occur I'm not sure...a single whale hopes to make a 10% profit at best with this strategy in other markets.  When many BTC whales are involved, I'm not sure how it works yet.  But they all talk and know each other.

Last time I heard $700-800 would be the next quick stop.  Not gonna happen for the end of June here but delayed by 2 weeks now?  I haven't been updated on new targets.  Not many ppl to talk to right now.  Lots of people doing IRL stuff while they flipped their bot switches on to go do things.

When you see rising action in between each large spike up on the flat line, that is someone that has taken the bait.  If you think BTC is really stable lately...that is because they know how to set it that way now.  Surprised to hear the companies, groups, and organizations ppl come from.  Media would probably have a field day with it.

Sorry if that makes the whole thing sound creepy and manipulated.  It sorta is.  Even legal markets are like that.  HFT black boxes make it much worse in the "legal" markets.  If it is any consolation, every early adopter and whale I am aware of hates the Fed, the banking and credit systems...lol  They are either libertarians, anarchists, or a mix in between.

For some it is a game of bragging rights to accumulate BTC.  For others it is reinvestment capital to put into other personal BTC ventures these people are pursuing.

The profit taking always happens when bad news comes out.  But only heavy, serious profit-taking will occur on news that is similar to the China ban FUD.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Update.
> 
> Whales have turned their bots back on within the last 48h now that the auction FUD is out of the way.  They will spike it up in between each flatline.  Where those intervals occur I'm not sure...a single whale hopes to make a 10% profit at best with this strategy in other markets.  When many BTC whales are involved, I'm not sure how it works yet.  But they all talk and know each other.
> 
> Last time I heard $700-800 would be the next quick stop.  Not gonna happen for the end of June here but delayed by 2 weeks now?  I haven't been updated on new targets.  Not many ppl to talk to right now.  Lots of people doing IRL stuff while they flipped their bot switches on to go do things.
> 
> When you see rising action in between each large spike up on the flat line, that is someone that has taken the bait.  If you think BTC is really stable lately...that is because they know how to set it that way now.  Surprised to hear the companies, groups, and organizations ppl come from.  Media would probably have a field day with it.
> 
> Sorry if that makes the whole thing sound creepy and manipulated.  It sorta is.  Even legal markets are like that.  HFT black boxes make it much worse in the "legal" markets.  If it is any consolation, every early adopter and whale I am aware of hates the Fed, the banking and credit systems...lol  They are either libertarians, anarchists, or a mix in between.
> ...


Thanks for the update.  But being that the news about the auction is supposed to break on Monday, shouldn't we wait until then before we can say the FUD is really out of the way?  Is there still apprehension about that news?

Obviously, the market hasn't been flooded by new bitcoins yet, but do you think news about the buyers and the price can still have a big impact, either good or bad?

----------


## muh_roads

> Thanks for the update.  But being that the news about the auction is supposed to break on Monday, shouldn't we wait until then before we can say the FUD is really out of the way?  Is there still apprehension about that news?
> 
> Obviously, the market hasn't been flooded by new bitcoins yet, but do you think news about the buyers and the price can still have a big impact, either good or bad?


They wanted to turn the bots on 24hr before the auction.  I don't know how the strat operates.  The one thing these ppl won't share is their bots. Nor who they commissioned if not coded themselves.  A bit frustrating but understandable from their point of view.  I only know they set a time and range in a separate interface to snipe the orderbook stealthily.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> They wanted to turn the bots on 24hr before the auction.  I don't know how the strat operates.  The one thing these ppl won't share is their bots. Nor who they commissioned if not coded themselves.  A bit frustrating but understandable from their point of view.  I only know they set a time and range in a separate interface to snipe the orderbook stealthily.


Ok, but I was wondering how you think the news on Monday will affect the market.  How is the FUD out of the way if we still haven't had the news yet?

----------


## muh_roads

> Ok, but I was wondering how you think the news on Monday will affect the market.  How is the FUD out of the way if we still haven't had the news yet?


Actually it is out there that auction is over...on twitter.  Not familiar with regular channels aside from that cover by bloomberg.

I think Monday will be mostly calm.  Wally the whale is still saying $1000 by the end of July.  I guess we'll see.  July is supposed to be a big news month.  The BTC Foundation is controlling the info release unfortunately.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Actually it is out there that auction is over...on twitter.  Not familiar with regular channels aside from that cover by bloomberg.
> 
> I think Monday will be mostly calm.  Wally the whale is still saying $1000 by the end of July.  I guess we'll see.  July is supposed to be a big news month.  The BTC Foundation is controlling the info release unfortunately.


I know the auction is over.  But what was the price/who were the buyers?

----------


## muh_roads

> I know the auction is over.  But what was the price/who were the buyers?


Hopefully more of that info comes out this week...

https://twitter.com/barrysilbert/sta...51689381904384




> Results of our US Marshals bitcoin syndicate:  Bidders - 42  Bids received - 186  BTC quantity bid - 48,013  Winners notifed by USMS on Mon

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Hopefully more of that info comes out this week...
> 
> https://twitter.com/barrysilbert/sta...51689381904384


It supposedly comes out on Monday.  That's what I was asking you about.  How do you think that additional info will affect the market?

----------


## FSP-Rebel

> It supposedly comes out on Monday.  That's what I was asking you about.  How do you think that additional info will affect the market?


The bears are leaving, rejoice. This shalt not come again anytimesoon.

----------


## muh_roads

> It supposedly comes out on Monday.  That's what I was asking you about.  How do you think that additional info will affect the market?


They didn't get that good of a deal.  Info is coming out.  Was about $10 cheaper than spot price on exchanges...lol

weird.  Total was $28.4m

Anywho, news will be positive I think.  Bloomberg interview on Friday started the good news and it is permeating now.  The majority of bidders sound like holders not dumpers.

There will be 4 more auctions in the future.

Bots were pumping okcoin hard first, strat is working on all of them. China is needed in appearance only.  Westerners are pumping it since they opened markets to us...lol

We might actually hit $700 on the last day of June here...

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> The bears are leaving, rejoice. This shalt not come again anytimesoon.


Just woke up to this, and I am happy.  Unfortunately, I had sold everything at 602 in anticipation of a short spike downward, but I set my stop order at 610, so I didn't miss out on much.  It's past 620, the 12h 7/30 MAs just crossed, and another 1w 7/30 MA cross is imminent.  To me, that's about as much evidence as you could ask for that we're in a full-blown bull market.

----------


## muh_roads

Sorry for this late reply...couldn't connect with my group today but they got a whiff of something they didn't like and pulled bot support.  I have to inquire more and I'm not sure what is going on 100%.  We will still be above $600...may retrace close to that.

It's nothing serious.  Just heavy selling into the whales atm.  Auction FUD was a smoke and mirrors transfer of wealth.

It is back to charts again.  I'll post when the whales are back on.

I hate giving sell advice.  I'm just gonna hold as I can't play tiny waves like these other guys can.

----------


## muh_roads

Update.

Real money is flowing in right now.  Whales aren't doing much at all.  Auction FUD out of the way combined with newegg is going to be very positive as the news spreads further.

Possible Downside:  The new money flowing in might not know that all 30k of coins went to a single buyer at the USMS Auction.  But they paid $1K each for them is the rumor...so this person wants a return beyond $1K at the very least if true.  They won't be dumping them for less...lol

Read the Book of Wolong if anyone hasn't yet.  Whales recommended I read it.  I've learned a lot since my Doge mistake.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

So did you figure out what it was they didn't like?  Are they still out of the market now?

----------


## muh_roads

> So did you figure out what it was they didn't like?  Are they still out of the market now?


They didn't dislike anything, I misunderstood.  They were profit-taking.

Bots are back on.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> They didn't dislike anything, I misunderstood.  They were profit-taking.
> 
> Bots are back on.


I see.  I was wondering if you could take a look at this chart for me and tell me what you think about it.

https://www.tradingview.com/v/82wGwlnO/

Could we be seeing the start of the next paradigm shift in a week or so, or will it plateau at about 800 first?

----------


## muh_roads

> I see.  I was wondering if you could take a look at this chart for me and tell me what you think about it.
> 
> https://www.tradingview.com/v/82wGwlnO/
> 
> Could we be seeing the start of the next paradigm shift in a week or so, or will it plateau at about 800 first?


It seems to be inline with what they keep saying they are going to push to.  $800-$1000 by the end of July.

These guys are flipping their bots off and on.  I personally can't keep up.  I think it is only going to get harder for me to follow them and give quick tips on what is going on...but I'll try my best.

I wish I could be part of the cool kids to use bots of their quality.  I'm inquiring with as many people as I can but not having any luck so far about buying my own interface.

----------


## muh_roads

I haven't followed trading view long enough to determine who knows their $#@! or not.  Everyone seems to like this guy...

https://www.tradingview.com/v/NimgwH...cation_publish

----------


## newbitech

> That and it was technically overbought (on the daily) on top of the concerns about mining centralization.  
> 
> There is the potential for a nice break out looking at the weekly inverse head and shoulders.  Left shoulder week of Feb 19th, head week of April 9th, right should week of June 11th (this week).
> 
> Neck line to break is approx. 650, *altho I'd be looking to put in at 630* which would be the 78.6% fib retrace from the bottom (head) of 339.79 to the recent high (left shoulder) 710.
> 
> This is on bitstamp, same pattern on all the other majors per bitcoin wisdom.
> 
> Target would be 650 + (650-339) = 961 
> ...


just following up on the post above this one....

https://www.tradingview.com/v/nIWHo655/




> Forecast is bearing fruit at all levels, as we are finally arriving at the pan-ultimate resistance level. *630*-78 was the lowest value of a significant overhead resistance defined a month ago (see: "Houston, Do You Copy? - https://www.tradingview.com/v/2z40pI45/).
> 
> Note that the arrows are left to suggest a probable price action pathway. This is not a predictive result, but a suggestion that retesting of a then-resistance-now-support level is probable before a continued rally to higher levels. The real obstacle is defined by both *630*.78/667.80 range. Any price action above this will warrant new analysis.



I don't follow this guy, never heard of him before.  But, I'd like to point out that I take much grief because of my fundamental analysis.  The attitudes I have received at this forum from people has been extremely condescending, if not down right hostile.  But, I stand by everything I say, and if I am ever wrong I will have no problems changing MY attitude.  

Seeing people post stuff like the above brings a smile to my face.  Sort of a vindication.  I do understand that TA and fundamental analysis are two different ways of looking at any given capital market.  Bitcoin is nothing special in that regard.  

I do however believe that all the wishcasting or doomcasting has no place in either fundamental or technical analysis.  Just because my analysis is not peppered with usual hype and propaganda (wishcasting) doesn't mean that my analysis is tinged with FUD and double talk (doomcasting).  I remain fundamentally unbiased and as always, if I have a good low risk entry point based on solid technical analysis (into a market I am interested in), I will make a play.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> I haven't followed trading view long enough to determine who knows their $#@! or not.  Everyone seems to like this guy...
> 
> https://www.tradingview.com/v/NimgwH...cation_publish


Two I like ChrisdunnTV and LowPro.  They've had a pretty good track record, and LowPro keeps everything in perspective and has a high accuracy rate as far as I can tell.  Chris doesn't post that much, but he has a good idea of how prices will act at critical levels of support and resistance.  I've gotten to the point where I can tell people apart by what tools they use in their charts.  Many of them disregard important trendlines and look for head and shoulders everywhere, not to mention stupid bat patterns.

Another thing I've noticed about people who are skeptical (not that there's anything wrong with that) is that they rely on volume indicators.  Many times, volume won't look good until the price has already begun moving and sometimes even not until a good while afterward.  What a lot of people fail to realize with BTC in particular, is that the higher prices have resulted in less volume simply because people aren't trading as much of it because of the high price.  Another thing to consider is the spread of bitcoin ATMs and other off-line exchange platforms that take away from online exchange volume.

One other thing that I can't really prove but highly suspect is that a lot of weak hands have been shaken out by the previous bubble cycle.  I know that the Gox bubble was supposed to shake a lot of weak hands out, but the recent bear trend took a lot longer to reverse than previous ones.  As evidence of this, I've noticed that a lot of people who were constantly on this forum have since left or lost interest, assuming bitcoin wouldn't recover this time, just like it was during the last recovery phase.  People lost interest and gave up, but the market has now been through a lot more than it has ever been through before and confidence is recovering quite a bit.  I expect the price to reflect this.  There's just too much good news coming out.

----------


## newbitech

http://www.investopedia.com/articles.../02/010702.asp

http://www.investopedia.com/universi...hanalysis5.asp

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomaspra...recedes-price/

Price follows volume, volume confirms price.  

Nothing special about the bitcoin trading market to change the information above.

Good read on the volume signal and market manipulation in the major stock indices ->  http://blog.milesfranklin.com/price-follows-volume

Like this quote




> Follow the volume to know where price will eventually go.  That is what all the greats have done since the beginnings of capitalism… which is what made them the “greats!”

----------


## nayjevin

> One other thing that I can't really prove but highly suspect is that a lot of weak hands have been shaken out by the previous bubble cycle.  I know that the Gox bubble was supposed to shake a lot of weak hands out, but the recent bear trend took a lot longer to reverse than previous ones.


Opinion of how many weak hands have been shaken out is in direct proportion to one's desire to feel like a strong hand.




> As evidence of this, I've noticed that a lot of people who were constantly on this forum have since left or lost interest,


People, or sock puppets?




> assuming bitcoin wouldn't recover this time, just like it was during the last recovery phase. People lost interest and gave up,


I don't know what to assume about people's assumptions.  To me it looked like BTC was finally stabilizing, then a pointless bubble occured, it corrected (head and shoulders) and now price is following news.  A great percentage of market capital still appears to be speculatory money.




> but the market has now been through a lot more than it has ever been through before and confidence is recovering quite a bit.  I expect the price to reflect this.  There's just too much good news coming out.


It's hard to say.  It depends so much on what a few individuals believe.  I would imagine that a large percentage of market capital is controlled by long-term bulls on the technology.  How much each individual wants in the market at any given time goes toward price.

News has been good, and seems to me price is reflecting that.  Technology hasn't changed though, fundamentals are essentially the same, although the rate of adoption and innovation may be significantly increasing.  It would tend to follow axiom, like the technology.

Bulls will be bullish tho.




> Another thing to consider is the spread of bitcoin ATMs and other off-line exchange platforms that take away from online exchange volume.


That's an interesting thought.

----------


## newbitech

> Another thing to consider is the spread of bitcoin ATMs and other off-line exchange platforms that take away from online exchange volume.


That is an interesting thought.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Opinion of how many weak hands have been shaken out is in direct proportion to one's desire to feel like a strong hand.


I'm feeling pretty strong, considering that I bought into the recent uptrend.  




> People, or sock puppets?


People.  I'm actually not talking about your beef with presence.




> I don't know what to assume about people's assumptions.  To me it looked like BTC was finally stabilizing, then a pointless bubble occured, it corrected (head and shoulders) and now price is following news.  A great percentage of market capital still appears to be speculatory money.
> 
> It's hard to say.  It depends so much on what a few individuals believe.  I would imagine that a large percentage of market capital is controlled by long-term bulls on the technology.  How much each individual wants in the market at any given time goes toward price.
> 
> News has been good, and seems to me price is reflecting that.  Technology hasn't changed though, fundamentals are essentially the same, although the rate of adoption and innovation may be significantly increasing.  It would tend to follow axiom, like the technology.
> 
> Bulls will be bullish tho.


All good points.  There are still quite a few speculators involved, and although I don't necessarily like it, I feel that the presence of heavily interested whales is one factor that contributes to my bullish point of  view.  The fact that somebody just bought 30k worth of BTC for over 1k each definitely makes a difference.  It's not just a few guys that are taking a vested interest in this technology.  For lack of a better word, it's society.  There's no way this would have happened a couple of years ago.

From a technical perspective, I don't think the price is just "following news".  There is a set path that's going to play out barring any catastrophic changes.  Breaking the uptrend now would be a big deal because it would interrupt the entire cycle and throw BTC into uncharted territory, which would likely prevent it from recovering substantially for a long time.

----------


## muh_roads

New FUD.  European Central Bank beating its chest over the last 24h.

----------


## nayjevin

> People.  I'm actually not talking about your beef with presence.


Me either - but sock puppets are most likely where profit is to be had by using them.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Me either - but sock puppets are most likely where profit is to be had by using them.


I'm talking about real people who have history with this message board.

----------


## muh_roads

Not much to update here.  Whales are being secretive right now, which makes me uncomfortable when I get no info.  But there is nothing bad on the horizon.

The charts are "barcoding" right now.  The last 4 times this happened it transitioned into a very steady flat line before the next lift off.  Things are primed right now to happen again.  Diff is at 17b right now.  The average person can't mine for profit anymore until the price climbs.  This causes people to buy direct like October last year.

Also log into your Paypal.  Dramatic GUI overhaul over the last week.  Kinda looks like Coinbase now.  I think they are preparing for the digital crypto wallets.

Check out my "$#@!coin Updates" thread if you are bored with the BTC action but want some potential large gains.

----------


## goRPaul

Dell announced today that they will be accepting Bitcoin soon. Is this the kind of news we should be expecting the rest of the year?

----------


## goRPaul

Dell announced today that they will be accepting Bitcoin soon. Is this the kind of news we should be expecting the rest of the year?

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Dell announced today that they will be accepting Bitcoin soon. Is this the kind of news we should be expecting the rest of the year?


This is just another one in a string of similar announcements, and I think there are more to come.

----------


## goRPaul

The way I see it, projections are totally bogus. The Dell announcement wasn't as big a deal as some may have thought. It's still good news anytime large retailers begin accepting BTC, but I think the effect on its value is becoming muted.

I think the next major breakthrough for Bitcoin will be when employers offer to pay their employees at least partially in BTC. That's when I expect to see the value rise like it did last year. Thoughts?

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> The way I see it, projections are totally bogus. The Dell announcement wasn't as big a deal as some may have thought. It's still good news anytime large retailers begin accepting BTC, but I think the effect on its value is becoming muted.
> 
> I think the next major breakthrough for Bitcoin will be when employers offer to pay their employees at least partially in BTC. That's when I expect to see the value rise like it did last year. Thoughts?


When a system is valued based on the number of connections it can make, the effect of adding possible connections is never "muted."  A telephone system that can connect, say, 100 people, is still better than a system that connects 99.  I suppose the effect does wear off the more it spreads, but IMO that point has not come yet.  Still relatively few retailers have been added to the network, and it has a sort of snowball effect when it happens because other retailers won't want to lose out on the customer base that uses BTC.  

That said, you're right.  Getting paid in BTC would signify a big step, but I think that will happen as a result of adoption, not as a precursor to it.

----------


## nayjevin

> The way I see it, projections are totally bogus. The Dell announcement wasn't as big a deal as some may have thought. It's still good news anytime large retailers begin accepting BTC, but I think the effect on its value is becoming muted.
> 
> I think the next major breakthrough for Bitcoin will be when employers offer to pay their employees at least partially in BTC. That's when I expect to see the value rise like it did last year. Thoughts?


Price has reflected hope for adoption, now adoption is occurring, so no reason to believe the price would rise as a result of it.  Pure speculation money is slowly replaced by transaction money.

----------


## muh_roads

Update.

So the BitLicense FUD is holding things back.  People don't want to buy into it right now.  There is also a lot of frustration within the community over the Bitcoin Foundation as well.  They are being too secretive.  And since the top members are coinbase and bitpay, they are in total control of when information gets released regarding retailers.  People aren't happy about it.

Things may go lower.  There was a pre-bubble shakeout spike last time.  That had more to do with SR though so we'll see.

On the brightside, the price has been "barcoding" which is a good sign.  This is the same little dance it has done the last 4 times before the next moon.

----------


## Suzu

> There was a pre-bubble shakeout spike last time.  That had more to do with SR


What is "SR" please?

----------


## amonasro

> What is "SR" please?


Silk Road.

----------

