Too soon. There will still be at least 3 cycles (so a decade or two) before that happens. But I think we touched the bottom this time so it probably won't get back to last week's price.
The key point made in this article (to me at least) is that for all its apparent size, the actual dimensions of this market are way way too much subject to large actor manipulation: it's never about real world economics, except where these align with criminal intent.
If it looks too good to be "true" given other circumstances, then it very probably IS too good to be true. If you have enough liquidity to play a game and secure a large financial benefit, and if you can "hide" inside a wave you created in the first place (a wave of smaller actors) then..
So ask yourself: what real world, non-fraud, non-market-manipulating reasons exist to justify this rise in value?
Madoff's clients did very well, despite real world market conditions, right up until he was arrested. Early in his career, when the market crashed, he borrowed money from family to hide his losses so that his clients would believe there were none.
It astonishes me that a "thing" that has no real value except speculation and "get rich quick" schemes after more than a decade is still being sold for 20K per unit. Amazing.
None "rely" on a speculative cryptocurrency. Mobile phone cards are relied up as currency moreso than bitcoin. It surely doesn't lend itself to easy transfer.
Blockchain tech has/had promise but crypto is totally overtaken by swindlers and scammers and people trying to make a quick buck. Promise is just promise so far. It has done far too much damage than potential good.
View all short term price predictions (and indeed, players) with cynicism. Even, to some degree, the linked article, insofar as it may claim to present a 'master plan' for the hows and whys of market movements.
No external observer has all the pertinent info, and individuals thinking that they (or others they listen to) do reliably have that information, is the general psychological driver that moves a great deal of the money involved in these quasi-casinobanks of the fledgling crypto industry.
"We’re pretty sure the number will go back down again — if you bought in below $X, you may want to cash out while you can. You can already see bobbles in the chart where bagholders tried to cash out where they could." - Almost everyone for 10+ years.
> The bitcoin price is kept where the large players need it to be. The market is thin and trivially manipulable with the billions of pseudo-dollars in unbacked stablecoins on unregulated offshore exchanges.
> The bitcoin price needs to be high enough so the big boys’ loans don’t get liquidated, but low enough so bagholders don’t attempt to cash out and crash the price. It’s a tightrope.
Can someone explain, please?
Who is meant by "big boys" and "bagholders" here?
Bagholders are holders of (smalls amounts of) Bitcoin, trivial.
Big boys are the folks running the shady exchanges that basically borrowed money ("loans") and bought bitcoin with that, is that right?
14 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 39.9 ms ] threadIf it looks too good to be "true" given other circumstances, then it very probably IS too good to be true. If you have enough liquidity to play a game and secure a large financial benefit, and if you can "hide" inside a wave you created in the first place (a wave of smaller actors) then..
So ask yourself: what real world, non-fraud, non-market-manipulating reasons exist to justify this rise in value?
This is a never endingly week argument.
I'd like to see those people actually refute the technology being totally useless.
No external observer has all the pertinent info, and individuals thinking that they (or others they listen to) do reliably have that information, is the general psychological driver that moves a great deal of the money involved in these quasi-casinobanks of the fledgling crypto industry.
> The bitcoin price needs to be high enough so the big boys’ loans don’t get liquidated, but low enough so bagholders don’t attempt to cash out and crash the price. It’s a tightrope.
Can someone explain, please?
Who is meant by "big boys" and "bagholders" here?
Bagholders are holders of (smalls amounts of) Bitcoin, trivial.
Big boys are the folks running the shady exchanges that basically borrowed money ("loans") and bought bitcoin with that, is that right?