All posts made by sleger in Bitcointalk.org's Wall Observer thread
1.
Post 2183937 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_10.59h):
Feel like a noob for asking - but can someone explain the bid sum/ask sum graph from blockchained.com?
Will
People buying btc because transfering money from mtgox is difficul and after US gov take care on gox everyone want to move to other exchange
I kind of agree with this being the main reason, especially as the price with other exchanges is so off (6-7$/BTC !)
2.
Post 6374737 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.40h):
AFAIK, the only model that has some claim to statistical legitimacy is the log-Brownian (or geometric-Brownian) model, which gives a very broad probability distribution, having 50% chance above today's price, 50% below, for any future date.
50% chance above and 50% below, for any future date, are you serious ? Are you really a professor ? You should check your maths here...
3.
Post 6374945 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.40h):
AFAIK, the only model that has some claim to statistical legitimacy is the log-Brownian (or geometric-Brownian) model, which gives a very broad probability distribution, having 50% chance above today's price, 50% below, for any future date.
50% chance above and 50% below, for any future date, are you serious ?
Yes. What will be the price on Nov 17, 2014, at 17:23:11 UTC? The log-Brownian model say that it will be more than 487.15 USD with 50% probability, less than that with 50% probability. (OK, there is some probability that it will be EXACTLY 487.15 USD,but it is very small.)
I do not know what the price will be but the log brownian model does NOT say that (I am just repeating myself here) ...
Look at a call closed formula price, N(d2) represents the probability of the call being in the money, if you put S=K (our example here) you are left with N(something negative) which means that the probability that the price ends up above current value is ... less than 50% !
And below current value is ... more than 50%.
Try to think about why, if you still dont understand in a few hours, feel free to ask me.
EDIT: forgot the "but" in first sentence
4.
Post 6390689 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.40h):
AFAIK, the only model that has some claim to statistical legitimacy is the log-Brownian (or geometric-Brownian) model, which gives a very broad probability distribution, having 50% chance above today's price, 50% below, for any future date.
50% chance above and 50% below, for any future date, are you serious ?
Yes. What will be the price on Nov 17, 2014, at 17:23:11 UTC? The log-Brownian model say that it will be more than 487.15 USD with 50% probability, less than that with 50% probability. (OK, there is some probability that it will be EXACTLY 487.15 USD,but it is very small.)
I do not know what the price will be but the log brownian model does NOT say that (I am just repeating myself here) ...
Look at a call closed formula price, N(d2) represents the probability of the call being in the money, if you put S=K (our example here) you are left with N(something negative) which means that the probability that the price ends up above current value is ... less than 50% !
And below current value is ... more than 50%.
Try to think about why, if you still dont understand in a few hours, feel free to ask me.
EDIT: forgot the "but" in first sentence
Hi Jorge, got it now ? Never saw an answer from you...
5.
Post 6391939 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.40h):
I do not know what the price will be but the log brownian model does NOT say that (I am just repeating myself here) ...
Look at a call closed formula price, N(d2) represents the probability of the call being in the money, if you put S=K (our example here) you are left with N(something negative) which means that the probability that the price ends up above current value is ... less than 50% !
And below current value is ... more than 50%.
I don't understand your notation,
here is mineBasically, in the log-Brownian model the difference between successive values of Z(i) = log(P(i)) are independent random variables with probability distributions that are symmetric about zero. Therefore after any number n of steps the probability distribution of Z(i+n) will be symmstric about the starting value Z(i). That means Z(i+n) wil be less than Z(i) with 50% probability. Since log is monotonic, it preserves cumulative probabilities, therefore P(i+n) will be less than P(i) with 50% probability. What is wrong with this argument?
(Strictly speaking, "Brownian" requires a normal distribution of increments with zero mean and fixed variance. In practice the variance varies slowly and the distributions have fatter tails than the norma; but by the law of large numbers they become near-normal for large n.)
My notation is the standard financial notation as found under wikipedia black-scholes article (S=spot price, K=strike ...). So now you have my notation please take a look at my argument again.
To come back to yours, I think the error is in the first sentence : "the difference between successive values of Z(i) = log(P(i)) are independent random variables with probability distributions that are symmetric about zero"
Small proof: under log brownian (with no drift) the important basic concept is that the best expectation of price in the future is the current value of the price. Your hypothesis does not respect that.
For instance let's say Pi=exp(1) so Z(i)=1, now we simulate a 1 step tree with 50% chance of going up 0.1 and 50% chance of going down 0.1 to simplify (doesnt change the result), and we compute Expectation[P(i+1)] which should be equal to exp(1). Well, Expectation[P(i+1)]=0.5*exp(1.1)+0.5*exp(0.9) which is not exp(1).
Also you can ask any bank quant, under simple log brownian mode, an at the money binary option (pays 1 if stock is above, 0 below) its theoretical price is strictly less than 0.5, which is exactly the probability of ending above current value, which is also exactly the value of the N(d2) I mentioned in my post before.
6.
Post 6423436 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.40h):
To come back to yours, I think the error is in the first sentence: "the difference between successive values of Z(i) = log(P(i)) are independent random variables with probability distributions that are symmetric about zero"
Small proof: under log brownian (with no drift) the important basic concept is that the best expectation of price in the future is the current value of the price.
OK, it seems that I was using a definition of "log Brownian" that is not the standard one used in finance.
Indeed I was assuming that the increments D(i) = Z(i+1)-Z(i) = log(P(i+1)/P(i)) were normal variables with
zero mean, so that Z(i) would be a Brownian variable as it is usually defined in other areas - with no trend. (Note that I am a prof of
computer science, not economics!)
However, as you point out, by that definition the expected price E(P(i0+n)) would grow exponentially with n; which does not make sense in the trading context, where the "efficient market hypothesis" demands E(P(i0+n)) = P(i0). (Or does it? See below.)
We agree at least that in a log-Brownian model the increments D(i) = Z(i+1)-Z(i) = log(P(i+1)/P(i)) should be assumed to be independent random variables, yes?
The standard way to achieve E(P(i0+n)) = P(i0), in finance, seems to be: assume that the increments D(i) are Gaussian variables with slightly negative mean, mu = -sigma^2/2. That is, one assumes a slight negative trend in the log-price Z(i) so that the broadening of the log-normal distribution of P(i0+n) as n increases preserves the mean P(i0). Is that correct?
That assumption satisfies the "efficient market hypothesis", but implies (as you pointed out) that the price is slightly more likely to go down than to go up at each step. Then Prob(P(i0+n) < P(i0)) increases with with the stride n. Which seems weird too.
We can get rid of this weidness by assuming a probability distribution for D(i) such that E(D(i)) = 0, E(exp(D(i))) = 1. It seems that these two conditions cannot be obtained with a Gaussian distribution, except in the limit when sigma → 0. However, they can be achieved with other distributions that are symmetric about zero
, especially if they have fatter tails than the Gaussian. And, indeed, the most obvious deficiency of the log-Brownian model seems to be that, in real data, the distribution of the increments is not Gaussian.
If my math is correct, the distribution of the n-step increments too would satisfy both conditions: E(Z(i0+n)) = Z(i0), and E(P(i0+n)) = P(i0). Moreover the distribution of Z(i0+n), being the convolution of n symmetric distributions, would be symmetric about Z(i0), implying that Prob(Z(i0+n) < Z(i0)) = 1/2, and hence Prob(P(i0+n) < P(i0)) = 1/2.
With these assumptions, even though the distribution of P(i0+n)/P(i0) approaches a log-normal distribution as n increases (by the central limit theorem), it remains sufficiently "log-abnormal" to satisfy those conditions (which a true log-normal distribution cannot achieve, it seems).
Perhaps you can tell me what would be a convenient
"fat-tailed" symmetric distribution to assume for the increments D(i) that would satisfy both conditions. (Perhaps a mixture of Gaussians with zero mean whose variance has log-normal distribution? I would have a justification for that choice...)
Finally, about the "efficient market hypothesis": shouldn't it say that E(P(i0 + n)) = P(i0)*Q^n, where Q > 1 is the typical ROI factor of a generic investment per time step? That is, if E(P(i0+n)) = X, then P(i0) should be
less than X, otherwise other investments would be more profitable.
With that modification to the "efficient market hypothesis", the distribution of D(i) must satisfy E(exp(D(i)) = Q, not 1; and one can achieve that even with a
zero-mean Gaussian if desired. In that case one would have a legitimate log-Browninan model (with Gaussian increments) such that that E(Z(i0+n)) = Z(i0), E(P(i0+n)) = P(i0)*Q^n, and Prob(P(i0+n) < P(i0)) = 1/2. Does this make sense?
EDIT: not sure whether the distribution must/may have fatter tails than a Gaussian. Too sleepy to think now...
- "We agree at least that in a log-Brownian model the increments D(i) = Z(i+1)-Z(i) = log(P(i+1)/P(i)) should be assumed to be independent random variables, yes? " yes
- "Is that correct?" yes
- "Then Prob(P(i0+n) < P(i0)) increases with with the stride n. Which seems weird too." At first maybe, but this makes sense as the expectation of the price in the future being the current price, and the price being limited on the downside to 0, the pdf (probability density function) of the price in the lower than current area is higher to compensate for the fat tail of the density. Think that if current price is 100, there is a small but non zero probability that it will be 1million in 1 year. To keep expectation in 1 year being 100 and since we can't have negative prices, it means there is a large weight on small positive values, and therefore the probability of price being lower must be higher. I don't think there is any way to avoid that, one must just get convinced that it is not weird. And it isn't, if you look at historical prices of financial time series, this is a true historical fact.
- "Finally, about the "efficient market hypothesis": shouldn't it say that E(P(i0 + n)) = P(i0)*Q^n, where Q > 1 is the typical ROI factor of a generic investment per time step?" your Q is usually the risk less interest rate, which we assumed here to be 0 when we said no trend in the price
Glad we agree !
7.
Post 6443638 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.41h):
450 wall at stamp is being eaten
edit: eaten
Yes but there is a (large?) hidden order on bfx at same price keeping the price down
8.
Post 6895055 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.46h):
I dont see why you just ignore the people who know this market infinately better than you.
Infinaty times zero is still zero.
Actually it is not...
9.
Post 6895134 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.46h):
I dont see why you just ignore the people who know this market infinately better than you.
Infinaty times zero is still zero.
Actually it is not...
You may be confusing infinaty with infinity. Infinity times zero is NaN, of course.
ahah ok I see
10.
Post 7058951 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.48h):
And a new 600+btc ask wall is back...
11.
Post 7788824 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_12.58h):
Whoever can get them back can get all back. Isn't 670BTC a bit expensive for Karma ?
12.
Post 9268127 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.25h):
Either they keep them, or it's multi-sig where keys are needed from both parties to move the coins.
Yes, seems quite obvious they would keep the coins directly...
13.
Post 9371692 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.27h):
some idiot on bitfinex is offering 61btc swap at 0.013% when he can get 0.031% from demand...
And another idiot does not know how the swaps market work or can not read that the offer is for 2 days whereas the demand is for 30 days... Maybe, just maybe, he might need his coins back sooner than 30 days...
14.
Post 9409859 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.28h):
On the brightside the price of btc currently $326
is up 162% from $201 last November.
hmm no it's not :
the price is 162% of what it was last November
OR
the price is up 62%
15.
Post 9847316 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.39h):
Good to know!
Then I will try to figure out who will provide the necessary 335-350 billions USD for that to happen...
Any help would be appreciated.
Ok I am going to help you, there is only 25k$ needed for the price to reach 25k$/btc, how did you get your 350bn$ figure from ?
16.
Post 9847377 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.39h):
Lol. Nice math you have there...
Think again: 13,6 mil (bitcoins in circulation already) multiplied by 24650USD (25000/target price -350/actual price)
Don't forget to add 3600 fresh btc/day (from mining) multiplied by 200...350days
I was trying to give you a hint but it did not work. Who said all 13.6mil coins have to be sold for the price to reach any value
I gave 25k$ as an example as if everyone removes their ask, and one btc sells for 25k$ (or even a fraction of 1btc) then the price IS 25k$/btc.
You're welcome.
17.
Post 9847869 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.39h):
Think again: 13,6 mil (bitcoins in circulation already) multiplied by 24650USD (25000/target price -350/actual price)
Don't forget to add 3600 fresh btc/day (from mining) multiplied by 200...350days
So all 13.6 million bitcoins are traded daily on the exchange?
Did I say or imply that somewhere?!
Yes, it was implied in this equation:
13,6 mil (bitcoins in circulation already) multiplied by 24650USD (25000/target price -350/actual price)
He doesn't get it still, crazy !!
18.
Post 9903208 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.40h):
wow thats alot of shorts on bitfinex...
Because there are less leveraged longs ?
19.
Post 10156006 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.48h):
wallow, wallow, good, that's good, let all that hate out ... it might stop your wife and kids getting their ritual beatings
I usually enjoy your posts but if you keep this up you're going on ignore too.
He got attacked in a stupid way, and responded in a funny-ish one, I would say that's a very good post, compared to the average level of this thread
20.
Post 10166244 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.49h):
I don't understand. At around 200 USD, mining is not profitable at all but the difficulty doesn't crash !
How can mining company still be running right now ?
It is profitable once the hardware is bought, since they have it, they keep mining
21.
Post 10268918 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
ARE YOU HAPPY?
You made somebody lose 5770 BTC in a margin call because he went long when you screamed "last chance to buy!"!!!
In liquidations at OKcoin:
OKCoin Margin Call
2015-01-26 23:39:23 Close Long $270.50 15608Cont≈฿5770.0555
Where did you get that okcoin info?
You need to have an account.
You go to the "Trade" page, you go to "Liquidation", you click "Last 7 Days: Filled" and you have all the margin calls of all users.
If I read that correctly that's just a number of coins sold. Not actual loss.
Correct, that is the order to close the position, meaning he has lost his collateral which is usually 1/10th of the position, or 577btc not 5770 !!
22.
Post 10268976 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
I can kill it 1/3 of it, but I'm all shook up fromthe dumps and my mind is saying NO so I'll jump back in when waters are better. I got out last night at 292 and I don't want to loose any earned profits
I've been chipping at it.
Trying to keep my margin call way low just to play it safe.
Looks golden.... will panic buy $282-$287.
3600 to go on it! ($360,000)
look at the next_week contract, there is also 8k+ lots
23.
Post 10269182 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
Its a long being margin called and force liquidated ... you can see the order in the liquidation page. Must have bought very close to the top. Now below his margin level so OKCoin has a limit order in for liquidation.
Again, it is a long being liquidated
Also ty btw
!
Indeed, and he had 3 open position on each contract for 8k+ contracts each (total 24k contracts or 2.4m$ worth of position), ouch
24.
Post 10272046 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
No you're wrong, these are stop loss close orders from shorts actually, you can see it in orderbook page of the website.
25.
Post 10273199 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.53h):
A fair few longs being liquidated on 796 futures. Another sleepless night coming up I think.
When there is blood in the streets!
Blood is like 200. I was there
Meh, too much blood and I got squeezed @ Okcoin.
GG fuckin bears!
Fuck!
Never using Coinbase again.
So you're never using Coinbase because you lost your money playing with okcoin, what's the link between the two ?
26.
Post 10369194 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.56h):
Anyone else see the huge buy orders and market buys on bitfinex around 215-216? A lot of coins were accumulation there. Like thousands.
uhh pretty sure that was a market sell....
There was a 1k bid that was eaten quite quickly at 215 exactly when the price reached that level, but it did not deep further after that
27.
Post 10491041 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.59h):
Who knows if a bull run kicks in, I think BTC is pretty beat up right now, and I can see it really picking up from these levels sharpish....
Lots of good reasons to be buying BTC at the moment...
Will be interesting
Thousands of shorts opened up on futures
LOL ... By definition just as many shorts as longs were opened...
28.
Post 10493753 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_13.59h):
nah... buying them back when you panic sell @ 120...
Won't happen. I'll panic buy maybe. You do realize I can keep buying indefinitely, right? My poor market timing just means that I trade a certain amount of fiat for bitcoin on a regular basis. The lower it goes, the MOAR I buy.
"I can keep buying indefinitely"
=> you are the central bank of which country then ?
29.
Post 10559855 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.00h):
300 by the weekend gentlemen!
New fiat will be entering the exchanges.
BTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
And Wall Street will be entering the market any day now™
see sig ↓
I hope that you realize that "sub" means below right ?
30.
Post 10569696 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.00h):
It would be nice to pick up a bitcoin for a hundred bucks again
as a long time miner and holder, i'm with you on this!
I hope you realize that it means that all your current bitcoins (that you are holding) will be only worth $100, right...
31.
Post 10570032 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.00h):
It would be nice to pick up a bitcoin for a hundred bucks again
as a long time miner and holder, i'm with you on this!
I hope you realize that it means that all your current bitcoins (that you are holding) will be only worth $100, right...
never sold a bitcoin! and i will only do it if i'm sure i can buy more in less than 1 month
That is fine, but it is the same than an apple stock holder saying that he is hoping his shares will go down 60% because then he will be able to buy more... This guy would simply be forgetting that if they drop 60% there might be a reason for this...
32.
Post 10659990 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.02h):
if the high was worth the pain ?
33.
Post 10670221 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.02h):
Support at 270 seems to be rock solid
Great timing !
34.
Post 10825659 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
1: bid sum is an excellent predictor of BTC prices. History shows that the two are very well correlated. If it's price that contributes to a rise in bid sum or the other way around is irrelevant.
What you wrote contradicts itself :
you said it is a predictor and then you say you don't know which one leads the other. Correlation is not prediction.
35.
Post 10825884 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
1: bid sum is an excellent predictor of BTC prices. History shows that the two are very well correlated. If it's price that contributes to a rise in bid sum or the other way around is irrelevant.
What you wrote contradicts itself :
you said it is a predictor and then you say you don't know which one leads the other. Correlation is not prediction.
It predicts NOW, not the future.
Now it is your turn to contradict yourself :
predicts & NOW
36.
Post 10832132 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.05h):
Question: besides ltc, is there a way to short most altcoins ? Does any exchange offer margin trading or futures or other derivatives on altcoins which would allow one to be effectively net short some altcoin ? Thank you for pointing me in the right direction
37.
Post 11116273 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.11h):
What happens to Bitfinex if the long squeeze comes and the bids get wiped? Will the dollar lenders lose their money if the longs are unable to close?
I certainly hope so, otherwise why would they get paid 30% if there was no risk involved ?
38.
Post 11116727 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.11h):
I just can't find any proper information if such an event were to occur. I would assume bitfinex would cover the difference, but if its not stated then I would assume the lenders would get a % back of the funds lent.
They do not have a policy, they will decide what to do when that happens based on how big the loss is.
It DID happen one in the past and the loss was small enough they could take it and they took the loss, otherwise their exchange would be dead (all customers would have gone). So next time they might do it if the loss is not too big, but bitfinex does not have 25m$ of reserves, nor would they want to give it away should this happen.
In case of strong flash crash, only part of the lending money would be lost anyways, so lenders would take a haircut if Bitfinex can not / does not want to absorb the loss. But then again, it is completely normal, otherwise they should get 0.25%APR on their money, not ~30% !!
39.
Post 11156883 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.12h):
Where is it easy to tell that it's been 6000 so far? I assume that's across multiple exchanges.
Finex
Edit: 8000 and counting as we speak!
That is incorrect though, it was not 6000 market buy, there were buys and sells, many trades, but no 6000 market buy.
40.
Post 11156982 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.12h):
Where is it easy to tell that it's been 6000 so far? I assume that's across multiple exchanges.
Finex
Edit: 8000 and counting as we speak!
That is incorrect though, it was not 6000 market buy, there were buys and sells, many trades, but no 6000 market buy.
No one can tell for sure - except he has eyes on the order book. I could bet though that this was not a bunch of "regular" buys and sells if you like. Small fish couldn't have lift such a high bid rate in such a small time. This is definitely a whale (or more) and I can assure you they're Loaded.
Well the data is public with timestamp so yes it is possible to tell, for sure.
I traded over 1500btc during these 5 minutes, so I can say for sure this was not one person.
41.
Post 11156989 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.12h):
Holy fuck a 30,000+ contract short @ OKcoin just got pinched.
Fucking rekt!
Shorting for a $5-$8 fall after that poor person shit gets filled! LOL ouch.
Hurts to watch
That was a margin call, 10k btc short position got liquidated !
42.
Post 11176258 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.12h):
4000btc ask wall up to 236 on bfx. (But half of it is fake)
43.
Post 11282268 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.13h):
asks being moved around by CDEL & PUMA.
Would be cool to see a trade.
Spread is vanishing. Went from $6 to less than $0.5
How can Citadel already have GBTC shares. I doubt they invested in the fund one year ago ?
44.
Post 11293543 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
My mind is boggled. That's about $25,000... so it meets the minimum bid requirements for the BIT. You can immediately arbitrage that if you re-buy the BIT. *argh*!
This is just playing / probing to these guys. Let's take a look at one of the bidders, Citadel. From Wikipedia:
"Citadel is the eleventh largest hedge fund manager in the world, and the second largest multi-strategy hedge fund manager in the world."But keep in mind that the total volume of matured GBTC stocks is less than 150,000 bitcoin. Not much in the big picture.
That is incorrect, Citadel here is acting as a broker, they are not the one buying, they are executing orders on behalf of someone else (like Ameritrade, eTrade etc...)
45.
Post 11293629 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
My mind is boggled. That's about $25,000... so it meets the minimum bid requirements for the BIT. You can immediately arbitrage that if you re-buy the BIT. *argh*!
This is just playing / probing to these guys. Let's take a look at one of the bidders, Citadel. From Wikipedia:
"Citadel is the eleventh largest hedge fund manager in the world, and the second largest multi-strategy hedge fund manager in the world."But keep in mind that the total volume of matured GBTC stocks is less than 150,000 bitcoin. Not much in the big picture.
That is incorrect, Citadel here is acting as a broker, they are not the one buying, they are executing orders on behalf of someone else (like Ameritrade, eTrade etc...)
What do you mean I'm incorrect? Be specific please.
I thought that was clear already : Citadel is not the bidder.
46.
Post 11293806 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
Citadel is the bidder. On the list of bidders. They are hedgefund managers. They buy on behalf of their clients. You probably just read me wrong, no problem
Believe what you want, but Citadel is not taking a long position on GBTC.
47.
Post 11293950 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
Citadel is the bidder. On the list of bidders. They are hedgefund managers. They buy on behalf of their clients. You probably just read me wrong, no problem
Believe what you want, but Citadel is not taking a long position on GBTC.
How do you know?
The bid is from Citadel Securities.
48.
Post 11293970 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
Citadel is the bidder. On the list of bidders. They are hedgefund managers. They buy on behalf of their clients. You probably just read me wrong, no problem
Believe what you want, but Citadel is not taking a long position on GBTC.
I know that they are hedgefund managers. They manage the largest funds in the world. I also know what a hedgefund manager is. I don't understand what the problem is?
No clearly you don't get it, but it is also obvious you are not an expert of this world. I believe you linked wikipedia before, so maybe read this part :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citadel_LLC#Citadel_Securities
49.
Post 11294227 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
I never claimed to be an expert of this world, nobody are. But I actually read that part (same wiki page that I linked to) before you posted this link.
Citadel LLC is a large organisation. Naturally, they have different business segments. I'm not going to discuss this anymore unless you come up with a valid point. I'm not here for a troll fight.
Well, I have, because I know this domain very well and the fact that it is Citadel Securities, mean it is not the hedge fund business. You can choose to believe me or not of course
50.
Post 11294468 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
I never claimed to be an expert of this world, nobody are. But I actually read that part (same wiki page that I linked to) before you posted this link.
Citadel LLC is a large organisation. Naturally, they have different business segments. I'm not going to discuss this anymore unless you come up with a valid point. I'm not here for a troll fight.
Well, I have, because I know this domain very well and the fact that it is Citadel Securities, mean it is not the hedge fund business. You can choose to believe me or not of course
What is your point?
This:
That is incorrect, Citadel here is acting as a broker, they are not the one buying, they are executing orders on behalf of someone else (like Ameritrade, eTrade etc...)
They are not buying for their hedge fund, someone simply traded on their trading platform.
My point was (1 million posts ago, lol) that Citadel Securities brings great liquidity to GBTC, while the ask side has max 150.000 bitcoin in matured funds.
From Wikipedia: "Citadel Securities ... execute one out of every four retail trades at the NYSE and NASDAQ."
But you also said (in bold) :
My mind is boggled. That's about $25,000... so it meets the minimum bid requirements for the BIT. You can immediately arbitrage that if you re-buy the BIT. *argh*!
This is just playing / probing to these guys. Let's take a look at one of the bidders, Citadel. From Wikipedia:
"Citadel is the eleventh largest hedge fund manager in the world, and the second largest multi-strategy hedge fund manager in the world."But keep in mind that the total volume of matured GBTC stocks is less than 150,000 bitcoin. Not much in the big picture.
which was very very misleading, as someone else pointed out...
51.
Post 11313195 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
Yep just noticed we are a hair off 31k shorts. Someone is going to get burned when this resolves
And leveraged longs don't matter, because ... ?
52.
Post 11314392 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
Indeed. And, for man-on-the-street traders, FDIC insurance is a pretty massive step forward for a Bitcoin exchange.
Yes, but is only on the USD there, so keep your BTC safe (as much as possible) elsewhere
53.
Post 11322429 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
Worst time to buy.
Do you know what "worst" means ? If so, then why was when the price was above 1k a better time to buy ?
54.
Post 11322502 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.14h):
Worst time to buy.
Do you know what "worst" means ? If so, then why was when the price was above 1k a better time to buy ?
Above 1 k was THE worst time to buy, obviously.
Ok so you don't know what worst mean. You meant to use "bad" or "very bad".
55.
Post 11365455 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
The correlation is negative, obviously. Otherwise my argument makes no sense.
The comment makes no sense
Inverse correlation between $ and BTC price flatters the BTC:USD chart more than that of any other currency as the dollar weakens
My assumption is that BTC:USD is NOT constant, quite the opposite. We're already in a BTC:Euro bull market, for example. I'm basically saying that the market has more upward momentum than the BTC:USD charts are showing. How much more is unknown.
I am going to join the other posters and agree that your comments do not make any sense.
56.
Post 11385651 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
Oh and if you are feeling kamikaze-level brave, chinese exchange 796 (
https://796.com/) offers 50X leverage.
Margin call with a $3 move, lmao. Good luck with that.
I WANT IT SO BAD.
Time to learn Chinese.
I would go for it, but there would be a fear that the google web translate tool may make a mistake on a word, I click the wrong button, and Im out my life savings
Why wouldn't you just select "English" as language on the website
57.
Post 11429959 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
Bulls incomming
That 1k bid wall on bfx was eaten in a few seconds in 2 trades !
58.
Post 11442901 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.15h):
Which would explain why no one seems able to predict the price, even in the short term.
Such person able to do this would not be posting it here anyways, so you would not be aware.
59.
Post 11483127 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
Insanely high 2500 BTC ask-wall on Finex @ 236.75....
Don't worry it's a fake wall
60.
Post 11508325 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
Reinforcement bids came on BFX.
Few coins on offer to short.
RSI is oversold.
Dumpers what ya gonna do now?
Buy back cheaper ?
Cut shorts with profit ?
What else ...
61.
Post 11515525 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.16h):
Didn't they go zero-fee for this whole month? Or am I thinking of some other exchange?
Yes, or at least so it says on their front page
62.
Post 11593249 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.17h):
Bitreserve essentially just introduced free short-selling by locking the USD value without fees - no leverage tho.
So it is not short selling by definition, as short selling implies you do not have the bitcoins to start with.
63.
Post 11852336 (copy this link) (by sleger) (scraped on 2020-04-04_Sat_14.20h):
And how do you trade from a closed exchange ?
