I'm not a chartist, but it seemed to me that bitcoin was (is) oversold in the short term.
I do like this prediction, but I'm biased:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckj...oin-hitting-91000-by-march-2020/#15ce4dd142e6
Bitcoin Price Thread
- Thread starter Magna
- Start date
I'm not a chartist, but it seemed to me that bitcoin was (is) oversold in the short term.
I do like this prediction, but I'm biased:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckj...oin-hitting-91000-by-march-2020/#15ce4dd142e6
From Forbes:
Where should I start?:
1. 91K, really? Not 90 or 100, but 91???
2. Using charts to predict very long term, when fundamentals should dictate the long term of anything?
3. I could use charts to predict 3 digits by 2020, and I would be more right, because bubble burst.
4. Just because 4 ATHs recovered from 70+% drops, that doesn't mean there will be a 5th ATH. Again, fundamentals. They also don't get just how much money is needed to constantly buying up newly mined coins to keep the price up. At 50K, that is 90 million bucks every day.
5. Even the HF guys says that they are diversifying among cryptos, thus basically telling us that other cryptos stealing BTC's thunder. How does that add up to 91K?
etc.etc.etc.
Where should I start?:
1. 91K, really? Not 90 or 100, but 91???
2. Using charts to predict very long term, when fundamentals should dictate the long term of anything?
3. I could use charts to predict 3 digits by 2020, and I would be more right, because bubble burst.
4. Just because 4 ATHs recovered from 70+% drops, that doesn't mean there will be a 5th ATH. Again, fundamentals. They also don't get just how much money is needed to constantly buying up newly mined coins to keep the price up. At 50K, that is 90 million bucks every day.
5. Even the HF guys says that they are diversifying among cryptos, thus basically telling us that other cryptos stealing BTC's thunder. How does that add up to 91K?
etc.etc.etc.
If Forbes would be good in investment advice they would not do what they do now.
They would compete with GoldmanSachs, Medallion, Virtue...
They can write anything.
Thomas Lee was the guy who predicted bitcoin would hit $6,000 by 2018 when bitcoin was still below $2,000. I agree with you that predicting 2 years out is just a wild guess, so just take it with a grain of salt.
And that actually happened in 6 months, so in a way he undershot it. But predicting a 900% increase when the asset already did a 1000% in a year.... And again, using just price instead of fundamentals?
He's actually more of an FA guy than a TA so he's not short on the fundamentals reasoning.
I actually skipped through it, but didn't hear any great argument I am not already aware of. Maybe the "uncorrelated alpha" is a good one, but it argues just for generally cryptos and not for BTC.
So let's say I am a HF manager and want to put 5% of my capital into cryptos. What do you think just how small a piece BTC would get? After all, if I like cryptos I might actually choose one based on features (and possible best expectations) and not on history.
BTC has been proved itself way too inflexible and resistant to change.
It's illegal to manipulate the markets and CME futures have US government eyes on them.
But, I actually think you're on to something, although the numbers are probably in the order of $100M to $200M. Search on Reddit and there were many discussions that during the runup to the $19K price of bitcoin, there were instances of tether printing (creation) of $100M or $200M "seemingly" coinciding with pumping the price of bitcoin whenever the price started to pull back. [This is an aside whether USD tether was a scam or not, meaning whether it was backed by actual $].
The "crash" brought about by the Mt Gox trustee selling supports this theory as that selling should have been easily absorbed by the market, but alas, the bitcoin exchanges are not that liquid and much of the $6B daily volume shown on coinmarketcap.com are probably "fake". When the Mt Gox trustee sold at the top, it changed the market sentiment and started a downtrend/bear market. When he stopped, bitcoin market started to shoot up again, but when he started selling, same thing would happen, reversed the uptrend. He's done now, so should be interesting if we recover to above $11K, where he started his last selling spree cycle.
Mt Gox trustee selling should have been an auction, similar to the way the US is handling it, and would have gotten the best price without crashing the bitcoin markets or causing negative sentiment that continued until now.
I have a couple of problems with your post.
Manipulate, schmanipulate. So whales can't buy or sell large amount of stocks? Not to mention only the futures part is regulated and bitcoin isn't, so what can I do, I move the BTC price? Not my fault. That isn't manipulation, just simple cause/effect.
Second, I don't believe the MtGox trustee caused the crash. Sure selling large amount of BTCs didn't help, but it was a nobrainer that 20K couldn't stay up. If you had a decent amount of BTC, you had to cash out at least some of it...
But anyway you are saying that this BTC/futures double play could be done except it might be illegal and it needs a bit more money. Maybe if the BTC part is done in more brokerages where the effect on the price is more effective. Now we are talking about manipulation...
Manipulate, schmanipulate. So whales can't buy or sell large amount of stocks? Not to mention only the futures part is regulated and bitcoin isn't, so what can I do, I move the BTC price? Not my fault. That isn't manipulation, just simple cause/effect.
Second, I don't believe the MtGox trustee caused the crash. Sure selling large amount of BTCs didn't help, but it was a nobrainer that 20K couldn't stay up. If you had a decent amount of BTC, you had to cash out at least some of it...
But anyway you are saying that this BTC/futures double play could be done except it might be illegal and it needs a bit more money. Maybe if the BTC part is done in more brokerages where the effect on the price is more effective. Now we are talking about manipulation...