|
WarrEagle
|
 |
April 02, 2017, 03:30:27 PM |
|
All in in LTC. LOL its gonna moon if this guys analysis is accurate. Dash made .12 can LTC do it too?
|
DELETED
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
BrewMaster
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2114
Merit: 1292
There is trouble abrewing
|
|
April 02, 2017, 03:55:49 PM |
|
All in in LTC. LOL its gonna moon if this guys analysis is accurate. Dash made .12 can LTC do it too?
i think 0.12 for litecoin at this point is a bit far fetched. it doesn't have SegWit yet and there is no other "good news" for it either. if there were we could see something happen but there needs to be some driving force apart from the pumpers pumping. and so far pumpers pumping are the only force. |
There is a FOMO brewing...
|
|
|
|
btcbug
|
|
April 02, 2017, 04:04:57 PM |
|
When I see those charts I always have to reflect on how this has all played out and I'm astounded.
So yes, the LTC chart seems to show that LTC is just playing out how we should expect really.
I had a similar reaction when I viewed today the LTC chart in perspective of this theory of first hump and then second larger hump that seems to occur in technology adoption. Although as you were saying, and I had thought myself many times, LTC didn't really seem to have any unique and valuable characteristics and I kinda assumed it was dead.
Yeah I just couldn't think of any compelling feature that could ignite LTC, but I had myopically forgotten that perhaps Litecoin could activate SegWit (and thus Lightning Networks scaling). And it hadn't completely become clear to me until 2-3 days ago, that Bitcoin was never going to fork or softfork significant changes to its protocol. I explained why. Once I realized Bitcoin is never going to allow any major changes to its protocol, then I started to think about what would Blockstream do. That is when I was ripe for realizing what the LTC spike in price is probably about. Of course most of the Bitcoiners are stuck on this concept that Bitcoin has to scale, which I have realized is entirely unnecessary (and you still need to understand this) because Litecoin can scale yet Bitcoin will still capture the lion's share of the value of the scaling of Litecoin. After you had mentioned hedging by buying other alt-coins, I got thinking that in terms of a true hedge, LTC seemed to be the most non-volatile coin for the past 2 years. I was going to make a purchase of LTC simply as a safe haven to wait out the BTC mess and I literally woke up the next morning and it had jumped from $4ish to $6ish. Once I reviewed your ideas more, it seemed to be sign and it made perfect sense that LTC would adopt SegWit and get it's second chance.
Many of us were looking at LTC and almost ready to pull the trigger. I was wanting to trade 33% of my ETH because ETH had risen from $45 to $52, so I wanted to lock-in that gain. I just was too slow in assimilating my thought process (because of being overworked and still somewhat chronically ill), so I too woke up to find the price had jumped before I had finished my analysis. But then I was able to quickly assimilate all the facts and realize what was really going is not likely just another pump & dump. Now thinking of LTC as the the Silver to BTC's Gold, again it feels like it should play out that way. I don't know how to explain it other than a feeling for me. Are you saying that you believe BTC can't rise until LTC catches up because you see it as a Gold/Silver ratio and it's too far out of line right now? Or are what specifically are you seeing in the chart?
I mean fundamentally it makes total sense to me that BTC will not go higher until the scaling issue is resolved. LTC activating SegWit doesn't solve it for BTC, but it does clear the air of the negativity surrounding the BU/Core squabble.
Not a feeling. I have explained that Bitcoin can never get scaling. The only way currently known to get scaling (note I haven't published yet  ), is private fractional reserve banking via centralized hubs with Lightning Networks. And to realize this will end up giving Bitcoin much more value than it will give to Litecoin (after Litecoin has caught up and is no longer extremely undervalued). And the only realistic way we get LN on a coin that has a suitable pedigree is Litecoin. There is no other option. Not only pedigree, but also because only Litecoin is sufficiently undervalued in order to totally shock the mining network of Litecoin such that old A4 will be mining profitably on the huge price jump so all the old A4 stock will get sold and will of course signal SegWit.
So it is just the free markets flowing downhill in the path of least resistance. No need for a feeling. It is an objective economics analysis. No need for voodoo black magic or magical guesses of seeing a witch's eye in a cloud formation.  Pedigree is a good way to put it! I agree, it's extremely important and why something like Vertcoin (anothe SegWit alt) still doesn't have a hope in hell. LTC really is the perfect candidate. It's a God-send for lack of a better word. I'm completely with you here, hence why I shifted some BTC to LTC. I think the people listening to your analysis and realising this will be laughing very soon. If this pans out you better put up a tipping address!  |
|
|
|
|
thejaytiesto
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1014
|
|
April 02, 2017, 05:01:09 PM |
|
Somehow managed to get in right at the 710ish I expected, now it all comes down to LTC being able to maintain this uptrend. Fundamentals look good and graph looks good to me too. All in in LTC. LOL its gonna moon if this guys analysis is accurate. Dash made .12 can LTC do it too?
i think 0.12 for litecoin at this point is a bit far fetched. it doesn't have SegWit yet and there is no other "good news" for it either. if there were we could see something happen but there needs to be some driving force apart from the pumpers pumping. and so far pumpers pumping are the only force. The fact that LTC limits itself to be a BTC clone is a feature, and the small differences which make it more realistic to get segwit enabled are what makes it a good candidate to actually get used in transactions along with its "original alt" network effect. As far as how high it will go.. who knows, but better be holding some LTC for the time being. |
|
|
|
|
miscreanity
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1005
|
|
April 02, 2017, 05:57:21 PM
Last edit: April 02, 2017, 06:22:16 PM by miscreanity |
|
@miscreanity what I see on those charts is that Bitcoin is making lower highs and lower lows after the $1280 (isn't that a double-top from the peak intraday price in 2013?), which is short-term bearish. And the candlesticks on Litecoin are forming a wedge pattern which about to breakout, either to the upside or downside (but normally such a pattern will continue in the direction it was on, so upside breakout). Combine that chart understanding with the fundamental understanding of Bitcoin as Nash's ideal money, and that is why I posit that Bitcoin can't move higher until Litecoin catches up. Perhaps my hypothesis is totally wrong, but I've shared it all in open source for others to respond to. Not necessarily wrong, likely just incomplete - as all of our models are. There's no way to keep up without computer assistance. I use Bitfinex numbers for Bitcoin, and on 03/25 (I dislike the American style of M/D/Y but am accustomed to it over D/M/Y) the low of 888.20 was in which was just a few dollars away from the bottom of the accelerated uptrend channel at 885.40 (uncannily, that price was a Gann level as well on the weekly charts and Bitcoin bottomed almost exactly at the cross where those two lines intersected). Since then, we can see the hourly chart has a consistent stair-step appearance with a rise followed by consolidation and little correction, if any - something that I've seen a number of times with markets that are throwing off weak hands prior to acceleration by denying (re)entry points (notably gold & silver in 2011). For these kinds of markets, keep a core position for hodling and some funds in reserve to buy on the first or second dip after a spike that breaks out of the previous range. Only use the reserve amount to trade with, and wait for a major decline that is typically >10% to even consider selling from core holdings. The spike after such a drop is the best time to sell between a 1/3-2/3 of holdings; you may only get ~80% of the high but you have much more solid confirmation. I would also avoid aggressively trading any beyond daily levels, 1-4 hour is good but be attentive.  As each of the projection lines is crossed, the price generally moves toward the top of the next channel or its midpoint. The blue line is a channel border and the dashed lines are channel midpoints. I doubt we'll have to wait more than a few weeks to start seeing some movements, but it may be a few months before the primary upward trend resumes with strength - potentially as an inflection point of the expected phase transition.
You mean the BTC upward trend? I am hypothesizing that BTC will be range-bound (eyeballing it perhaps $800 - $1150ish), until Litecoin has clearly signaled that it is resuming its relevancy and on the way towards an ATH. As for ETH, it was more compelling when it looked like there was no other Lightning Networks alternative to Bitcoin, given that Ethereum's LN clone named Raiden is nearing beta. I think those who diversified from BTC into ETH, take profits when ever it rises relative to BTC. Yes, the trend toward 2000+ in which the top of the accelerated channel is approximately 1406 for month end. If that is exceeded, I'd expect another acceleration. We'll know soon if the ~800-1150 range will hold. I'm looking at 1125-1130 and 1164 as resistance for the next few days. ETHBTC is very interesting right now. The end of the month saw BTCUSD close at the top numbers while ETHBTC closed barely above monthly support. I'm still holding because any announcement could send it to a multiple, and my positions are diversified, but where is that ETHBTC going? Is it staying in BTC? Maybe it's going to LTC? Ripple? Ripple has doubled again thanks to beating all others to the punch with payment channels. It seems as though the effort to peg the unit to $0.01 has been abandoned. The long-term downtrend line has been breached and, if it holds for the week, will be decisively broken to the upside with a target of 0.00007-0.0001 or higher. Aside from a few interesting aspects, I don't like Ripple any more than you, but it can't be ignored. The most important thing to observe now is the crypto-crypto vs fiat-crypto flow. The LTCBTC flow certainly looks to push LTC higher. However, it still does not seem to be at the expense of BTC, which is most likely due to the fiat-crypto flow; as you pointed out, Bitcoin is the gateway to the crypto environment and funds will flow through BTCUSD to others. That process is ramping up quickly - each of these wild rises in exchange rates is similar to a pot of water coming to a boil as the phase transition is approached. Due to these flows, I think we could easily see BTC and LTC rise together. LTC will simply rise faster, assuming the hypothesis holds. The fact that LTC limits itself to be a BTC clone is a feature, and the small differences which make it more realistic to get segwit enabled are what makes it a good candidate to actually get used in transactions along with its "original alt" network effect.
As far as how high it will go.. who knows, but better be holding some LTC for the time being.
Yes, LTC is the closest drop-in replacement for BTC should such an infrastructure shift become necessary. Edit: while posting, Ripple hit 0.00007 and subsequently pulled back below the 0.00005 level. I'd look to sell between 0.00006/7 on a bounce, then wait and observe. |
|
|
|
|
|
btcbug
|
|
April 02, 2017, 09:13:27 PM |
|
Regarding Ripple, I'll defer to the largest Bitcoin whale's analysis: What I mean is that Ripple is broken in the sense of severe congenital defects, the sort that cause abortion before gestation could in any way conceivably complete. Specifically :
Fatal congenital defect #1. Ripple requires any participant to trust other participants blindly. This is to say, if you trust X person to Y sum this doesn't mean that your trust is rescinded should X issue more than Y worth of debt. It simply means X may issue an infinite volume of debt and you unconditionally promise to accept Y of that. Just like that.
Fatal congenital defect #2. If #1 above somehow didn't kill the thing (for argument's sake), there's absolutely no way for you to receive compensation for the liquidity you provide. Conceivably no matter who X is, be it Russ Meyer or the very Bank of England in its heyday, as long as you take on its debt you're entitled to some sort of compensation for this. At least that's how things work in sane land, since forever. Not in Ripple, however. Your trust is unremunerated, which makes Ripple the only repo market in the history of finance working on 0% interest rates. Not even the FED pumping liquidity through the special bank windows did something like this.
Fatal congenital defect #3. If #1 and #2 above somehow didn't kill it (veering beyond the absurd by now), Ripple averages out all debt. You beg my pardon ? Good for you.
So, suppose Ripple was being used by Ben Bernanke, Christine Lagarde and Lou Jiwei, alongside a number of people randomly picked off the street. You'd sanely expect to be able to buy either BBdollars or Anondollars, separately, as distinct items. Right ? And then CLeuros and LJyuans as opposed to RandomChinesePersonIOU.
Well... that's not how Ripple works. As long as you trust both Lou Jiwei and some random Chinese dude, any people who trust the random dude and hold LJ's yuans can exchange LJ's yuans for any random dude's yuans that you hold.ii Or, as the case may be, the other way around. Always, always the other way around. So what happens when you find yourself trying to pay for a cab ride with what you thought were actual dollars but upon examination turn out to be pieces of paper with "DELLOR" scribbled in pink marker arcoss one side ? Awww, I guess you shouldn't have trusted your boss because he decided to trust his 5 year old daughter and now lookyiii. You've got a blue eye and the cab driver looks just about ready to give you another one.
Basically this boneheaded "everything's a Ripple" approach opens the entire space to the problem that lemon laws try to solve. Let's revisit that for a second, for the benefit of the completely clueless idiots who think it's their place to "create" and "innovate" retarded shit like thisiv.
So, inasmuch as used cars go, it is expensive for buyers to find the actual value of the item. Thus on any specified item buyers make offers based on a guess as to what the average value of a used car would be at any given time. Sellers either know this or soon find out (by being lowballed on good used cars) and soon enough only introduce into the market cars that are objectively worth less than the perceived average. This over time lowers the average, lowering the buyer expectation (and thus price offered) which further lowers the seller incentive and soon enough the only used cars you can buy are refurbished lawnmowers.
This is the problem that lemon laws try to solve. They fail.
So does Ripple. RIPv.
Ripple has doubled again thanks to beating all others to the punch with payment channels. It seems as though the effort to peg the unit to $0.01 has been abandoned. The long-term downtrend line has been breached and, if it holds for the week, will be decisively broken to the upside with a target of 0.00007-0.0001 or higher. Aside from a few interesting aspects, I don't like Ripple any more than you, but it can't be ignored.
I think we're probably all in agreement that Ripple isn't the disruptor technology that Bitcoin is. We're all here because we saw the potential of BTC to strip power away from banks and government and so yes, personally, I'm a bit of BTC ideologue. Putting that aside however and thinking realistically, I don't see banks going anywhere in the short - medium term. As a speculator/investor, I'd like to play both sides so that I win either way or hopefully BOTH at the same time. Ripple is the tech that banks need to remain somewhat relevant going forward in today's globalized economy. Bitcoin is not. Bitcoin is threatening to banks. We have had consistent news for 2 years of dozens of banks signing on to test Ripple. Now we have Japan. It's my belief the Ripple will be the one and there are too many banks, and big investors backing it for me to ignore. If Ripple MCap. grows to what BTC is currently, then we're talking $.50 XRP. We know what size this industry is and if Ripple adoption is widespread then $1 XRP wouldn't be out of the question at all. @iamnotback, I appreciate the info on Ripple you shared. Perhaps that is the end game and Ripple is fatally flawed. Honestly, though, I'm not emotionally attached to it and in the end we want decentralized crypto to win anyways. In the mean time though it's like @miscreanity said... it can't be ignored. |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
April 02, 2017, 10:37:40 PM
Last edit: April 02, 2017, 10:48:05 PM by iamnotback |
|
I wonder if BU is aware of the legal implications of a hard fork, forcing a community of investors to accept an incompatible change to the technology they invested in.
If BU succeeds, every Bitcoin holder can probably sue them for their losses.
cool story. can i sue Blockstream if Bitcoin loses marketshare to Ethereum due to the high fees they are promoting? No, they are not changing the commodity, and they are open about what they are doing changing bitcoin from p2p cash as envisioned by Satoshi into a settlement network, nah thats not changing it at all Who ever mines BU will lose all the money they spent on mining it. So that 50% threshold means nothing. Any fork of Bitcoin will be attacked ruthlessly by those who have enough resources to destroy any miners foolish enough to try.
The large miners/pools know this. The April's fool joke is on anyone who believes that signaling means anything on Bitcoin. It doesn't.
I've awoken from my inactivity period to take my part in this pursuit. Although economically we all understand BU has and never shall have any standing, a fork is incumbent and it's outcome is still obscure. Core hasn't been keeping the system updated, and their refusal of further updates and generally increasing the Block size is alarming and drives support away. The bitcoin unlimited bound failure doesn't lift any responsibility away from the core devs... That said, I am here to pledge my computing power and spare time onto the complete disruption of the forked blockchain, transaction, nodes and miners. I will play my role, when the day comes I expect others to join me. Just to side-step here, I am of the opinion this form has gone a bit nutty on this whole fork partisanship and ideology. Pledging to commit basically crimes and exploits is a tad extreme for a mere cryptocurrency. Like most early adopters I feel my allegiance going towards this new concept, the anonymous decentralized peer to peer market and economy. The meme has sprouted and the revolution begun. Advocating for the founder's "view" is almost laughable, satoshi would have never thought of such widespread adoption and implying so is absurd. Conservationism in revolution is an oxymoron. As much as you can be emotionally attached with whatever made early adopters millionaires and gave you a platform for incredible and astonishing innovation, the technology is bound to become obsolete and if you don't simply move on you're in fault... Please all bear in mind I am not stating this is the end, or idk giving technical opinions in evaluation of the bitcoin's intrinsic value, forks or whichever. All I'm stating that as sacks of silver carried on your belt, bitcoin too will one day fade away in favor of something more efficient. Both of you have what you think are good intentions, but you fail to recognize the most salient fact. When you two are blind to the most salient fact, then all your other conclusions are unfortunately ignorant nonsense. Not be disrespectful, but you really need to pay attention. If anyone can mutate the main blockchain, then the money is no longer immune to manipulation. And thus it is no longer a stable metric which achieves the absolutely critical goals of Nash's ideal money which is what gives crypto-currency is reason to exist in the first place. I know this is very difficult for you to wrap your mind around, because you think adoption = success, but you are mathematically incorrect. Read again very carefully the two posts I linked in the quote below. Click the links within those two post and click the links in the posts that you clicked to. In other words make sure you understand all the detailed reasoning. In finance, the tail doesn't wag the dog, rather in finance it is always the stable value of the reserves which determines whether person who is providing the finance has an accurate mathematical estimate of the quality of the reserves and thus whether they are maximizing their ROI. And in finance, the most valuable set of reserves dominates any system with less value. Until you understand finance and understand how MPEx made his million "Buttcoins" by simply providing liquidity to the speculation power brokers, then you understand nothing about money. So if you mutate Bitcoin, you remove all its value. Period. That is why the whales will never allow you to do so, and @dinofelis and I analyzed in great detail how small blocks enables the whales to destroy any miners who attempt to fork Bitcoin. You can't mutate Bitcoin, because the tail doesn't wag the dog. Also small blocks keeps the riff-raff out of Bitcoin, because democracy is a manipulation given that the cost of voting (i.e. politics) is not free. By allowing users to vote on Bitcoin's changes, it is the same as turning Bitcoin into a fiat system that will be manipulated into another hell. We've been there done that all over the world and totally fucked up our world with it. We can instead put that clusterfuck into Litecoin and then the discipline can be maintained with Bitcoin's financial dominance of Litecoin. There is a way to get scaling and that is to mutate Litecoin. And approximating 9/10th of the value created by scaling Litecoin will end up back in Bitcoin (after Litecoin's price rises back to $100 since it is so highly undervalued given it is the only option for moving forward). So there is absolutely no justifiable reason for your idiocy and squabbling. It is pure ignorance, that's all. Please rectify your ignorance so we can move forward.
Bitcoin is not a medium-of-exchange. It is a unit-of-account and a store-of-value. Litecoin will be the medium-of-exchange. Small blocks will make Bitcoin for settlement amongst power brokers of finance. It's been a long time coming Bitcoin is the individual's method of garnering a similar handle on wealth. Ripple and other systems will develop into more effective fiat replacements, allowing Bitcoin to act as a settlement currency - gold's digital analog.
|
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
April 02, 2017, 10:49:53 PM
Last edit: April 02, 2017, 11:26:52 PM by iamnotback |
|
All in in LTC. LOL its gonna moon if this guys analysis is accurate. Dash made .12 can LTC do it too?
i think 0.12 for litecoin at this point is a bit far fetched. it doesn't have SegWit yet and there is no other "good news" for it either. if there were we could see something happen but there needs to be some driving force apart from the pumpers pumping. and so far pumpers pumping are the only force. Until you realize there is no other choice for Bitcoiners. And once they realize they have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to increase their proportion of Bitcoins by a factor of 5X or 10X. The revaluation of Litecoin might be rather swift, maybe even a stampede. There is some cognitive dissonance involved. Most Bitcoiners will be too late to come to the realization. But markets are always like that. The majority is always late. Litecoin's rise may or may not be swift. There is a lot of apprehension and most don't yet understand what is going on. But I do think the reality will kick in and the economic decision will be made rather swiftly by the smart money. FOMO might kick in soon if Litecoin exceeds $10. Yet with Bitcoiners there is this like stubbornness to not invest in anything but Bitcoin, that sort of prevents them from the FOMO effect, yet enough of us peel away from the dumb majority and make fortunes trading back and forth. Litecoin already pushed back up to $7.50 some 8 hours ago. The base is building and breakouts will be attempted and eventually it will breakout in earnest. The speculators are so sensitive to this: http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.phpI thought they might wait for it to exceed 60%, but apparently they realized what I been writing about. (not meaning they got it from me, I mean the market figured it out) This is a wall of worry, but the smart money understands there is no other option. I explained all the economic logic upthread. The only other possibility would be that Blockstream dies. And I think that is not a very likely outcome. I already explained the economics of the mining ASICs on Litecoin and why it appears to be inevitable that SegWit will activate on Litecoin because of those economics. Perhaps some other groups are fighting very hard to buy up A4s and not vote for SegWit, meaning they want to destroy their capital in order to prevent Litecoin from getting SegWit and scaling. Lol. Let's see how successful that will be for them, if that is the case. Unless the antagonists can earn enough to pay off the cost of the mining equipment during the pump! And that might be why the Chinaman has to keep the price capped until the SegWit support reaches a sufficient level (or they might be selling LTC to buy A4s ). There are probably other game theories in play also, such as certain players might be incentivized to signal SegWit only at certain price levels, given implications on their other mining operations, i.e. at a certain threshold then they may calculate that LN is more profitable for them on Litecoin and than on Bitcoin (or preventing any scaling on Bitcoin or a clone). |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
April 02, 2017, 11:32:17 PM
Last edit: April 02, 2017, 11:53:39 PM by iamnotback |
|
@miscreanity what I see on those charts is that Bitcoin is making lower highs and lower lows after the $1280 (isn't that a double-top from the peak intraday price in 2013?), which is short-term bearish. And the candlesticks on Litecoin are forming a wedge pattern which about to breakout, either to the upside or downside (but normally such a pattern will continue in the direction it was on, so upside breakout). Combine that chart understanding with the fundamental understanding of Bitcoin as Nash's ideal money, and that is why I posit that Bitcoin can't move higher until Litecoin catches up. Perhaps my hypothesis is totally wrong, but I've shared it all in open source for others to respond to. Not necessarily wrong, likely just incomplete - as all of our models are. There's no way to keep up without computer assistance. I use Bitfinex numbers for Bitcoin, and on 03/25 (I dislike the American style of M/D/Y but am accustomed to it over D/M/Y) the low of 888.20 was in which was just a few dollars away from the bottom of the accelerated uptrend channel at 885.40 (uncannily, that price was a Gann level as well on the weekly charts and Bitcoin bottomed almost exactly at the cross where those two lines intersected). Since then, we can see the hourly chart has a consistent stair-step appearance with a rise followed by consolidation and little correction, if any - something that I've seen a number of times with markets that are throwing off weak hands prior to acceleration by denying (re)entry points (notably gold & silver in 2011). For these kinds of markets, keep a core position for hodling and some funds in reserve to buy on the first or second dip after a spike that breaks out of the previous range. Only use the reserve amount to trade with, and wait for a major decline that is typically >10% to even consider selling from core holdings. The spike after such a drop is the best time to sell between a 1/3-2/3 of holdings; you may only get ~80% of the high but you have much more solid confirmation. I would also avoid aggressively trading any beyond daily levels, 1-4 hour is good but be attentive. As each of the projection lines is crossed, the price generally moves toward the top of the next channel or its midpoint. The blue line is a channel border and the dashed lines are channel midpoints. Markets are fractal meaning patterns in time within larger patterns within larger time. Your chart above is afaics (or let's say IMO) only looking at the deadcat bounce off the $888 level. My comment which you quoted is referring to the wave pattern since the peak last month at $1280. You have an ascending wedge on your latest chart, and thus afaik more often break downwards, not upwards. I see BTC hugging the bottom channel line of the wedge, and this to me indicates weakness. I still think BTC is range bound until LTC catches up. I believe it is going to be epic. I am hypothesizing that BTC will be range-bound (eyeballing it perhaps $800 - $1150ish), until Litecoin has clearly signaled that it is resuming its relevancy and on the way towards an ATH.
|
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
April 03, 2017, 12:04:59 AM
Last edit: April 03, 2017, 12:15:59 AM by iamnotback |
|
Putting that aside however and thinking realistically, I don't see banks going anywhere in the short - medium term. As a speculator/investor, I'd like to play both sides so that I win either way or hopefully BOTH at the same time.
Ripple is the tech that banks need to remain somewhat relevant going forward in today's globalized economy.
There is something very strange going on with Ripple. Its features are entirely incompatible with sound banking. So it can't be for banking. Whereas LN on Litecoin will be compatible with sound private fractional reserves in alignment with Nash's ideal money concept (with the failure mode being long-term when Bitcoin becomes controlled by one whale due to concentrating effect of fungible finance). I wonder if Ripple is a bet on corrupt fiat system finding a way to force all public funds and banks into a system which self-destructs? Some people seem to think Ripple is more compatible with governments and laws? I really can't find any logic in it at all except that speculators will buy anything that the other dumb speculators will associate progress even though it isn't. I'd be very wary of holding Ripple as it appears to me to be an extremely volatile greater fool speculation (raping) tool. Ripple is having its 2nd hump adoption (similar chart pattern to LTC). And I think that is the utility of Ripple. It is way to separate more fools from their capital. So get on board and join the musical chairs raping party. Just pray you get out in time. |
|
|
|
|
trollercoaster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 03, 2017, 12:06:59 AM |
|
All in in LTC. LOL its gonna moon if this guys analysis is accurate. Dash made .12 can LTC do it too?
Once Ripple slows down I believe LTC will be next big alt to make a new ATH, an enormous amount of money is flowing through crypto at the moment, trying go "get off the grid" I think LTC is a wise choice to plant a few BTC seeds in and watch them grow |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
April 03, 2017, 12:11:32 AM
Last edit: April 03, 2017, 12:24:46 AM by iamnotback |
|
Once Ripple slows down
Edit: apologies I misread your statement. Lol, I thought you were insinuating that Litecoin needed to slow down first. A delirium moment on my part. Trying to do too much too fast. I agree the Ripple bubble may bleed into the LTC rise. Why does LTC need to slow down before the stampede? I thought it already slowed down for the past years and again when it paused under $7. When trains leave the station, they don't go in reverse to go pick up the stragglers. Seems right now is the wall of worry and dissonance. So isn't the slowing down right now? Your comment is example of the complacency and thus being already slowed down. If the fundamental value didn't exist, I'd be worried. But I am not worried because Litecoin is tremendously undervalued if my hypothesis is correct. So I am just waiting for other people to figure this out and try to stampede to catch up. Everybody now is chasing a train which already left the station, because the fundamentals are what they are (unless my hypothesis is flawed or incomplete). |
|
|
|
|
trollercoaster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 03, 2017, 12:15:56 AM |
|
Yeah it probably wont, nothing else seems to have it's crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
miscreanity
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1005
|
|
April 03, 2017, 12:24:44 AM |
|
Markets are fractal meaning patterns in time within larger patterns within larger time.
Your chart above is afaics (or let's say IMO) only looking at the deadcat bounce off the $888 level. My comment which you quoted is referring to the wave pattern since the peak last month at $1280.
You have an ascending wedge on your latest chart, and thus afaik more often break downwards, not upwards. I see BTC hugging the bottom channel line of the wedge, and this to me indicates weakness.
They certainly are fractal and I had simply zoomed into hourly for extra detail - shorter term details tend to propagate up to longer scales if the pattern persists. There are frequently three distinct, supporting trendlines - a third trendline was broken on 03/16 at about the 1165 level and that was followed by a major decline. So far the first hourly and daily uptrend lines have been broken, but the second has not yet fallen (although it is close now). Regardless of trendlines the next price target is between 1125-1130 and if it cannot get through there, it is probably going to decline into the range you propose starting with 1070. You seem to forecast further out than I'm comfortable doing. I've grown to like waiting for the charts to be fairly definitive. I still think BTC is range bound until LTC catches up. I believe it is going to be epic.
Should be fun! |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
April 03, 2017, 12:36:38 AM
Last edit: April 03, 2017, 01:26:09 AM by iamnotback |
|
You seem to forecast further out than I'm comfortable doing. I've grown to like waiting for the charts to be fairly definitive.
You are a trader. I am a value investor (with a very strong technological slant). That is why I missed for example a good trade on Ripple, because I don't appreciate Ripple's fundamental value proposition (as I understand it to be, which may be an incomplete understanding). My greatest value is as a creator and programmer so I shouldn't be doing this activity. But I had a need to do this, to turn my 10 BTC into potentially 50BTC which can aid the funding of my altcoin project (given I am not doing an ICO). Also this analysis was an offshoot of diversionary analysis I needed to do anyway to make sure I understand the Nash ideal money value proposition of Bitcoin so as to understand how my project fits into the big picture. If I disappear from speculation discussion, you'll know it is because I am head in sand on my primary vocation, although I notice I am finding it too tempting lately to go off on too many polymath-like tangents. I really need to discipline myself asap. For example, I was tempted to go off and research Ripple right now to get to the essence of it, but I decided not to. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
edgar
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1848
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 03, 2017, 02:46:51 AM |
|
ltc is actually making me emotional recently, its obviously undervalued but not exempt from manipulation.
i have been kicking myself repeatedly since trading 4 figures at 3.90 into BTC & it hasnt stopped rising!!
while BTC has been up & down, but mostly down.
im literally sickened, and been having horrific nightmares.
this level of manipulation is borderline unbearable, at least to me
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okurkabinladin
|
|
April 03, 2017, 02:47:00 AM |
|
that is the time when price is at the lowest (with the exception of weird unexpected stuff like bitfinex hack and the drop).
The Bitfinex hack overreaction was another buying opportunity.  You only registered in 2016. It is quite easy to make money while bull trend lasts. If you abided by your own advice during bear market, that is in 2013-15, you would go bankrupt. I should know, I did go bankrupt at that time. |
|
|
|
|
miscreanity
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1005
|
|
April 03, 2017, 02:58:38 AM |
|
You are a trader. I am a value investor (with a very strong technological slant).
Trading is worthwhile when the action gets busy... If I disappear from speculation discussion, you'll know it is because I am head in sand on my primary vocation, although I notice I am finding it too tempting lately to go off on too many polymath-like tangents. I really need to discipline myself asap. For example, I was tempted to go off and research Ripple right now to get to the essence of it, but I decided not to.
Good! I know the temptation. I'll be skipping the TA posts until LTC hits the 30s to focus on my other projects as well. i have been kicking myself repeatedly since trading 4 figures at 3.90 into BTC & it hasnt stopped rising!!
The crypto majors are all rising, you'll be alright. Take a deep breath and trade a trivial amount, something like 1 LTC. When you can profit often, double the size of your trades. |
|
|
|
|
|
