[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 290 KB, 1080x1994, Screenshot_20190511-103427_1_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13597298 No.13597298 [Reply] [Original]

WHAT THE FUCK IS FUCKING HAPPENING????
HOW THE FUCK IS THIS SUSTAINABLE HOW THE FUCK IS IT???????
HEY GUYS WELCOME TO THE FUCKING SUSTAINABLE TREND, HERE AT THE SUSTAINABLE TEND (tm) WE KEEP FUCKING GOING UP AND UP WITH NO FUCKING SENSE OF RETRACEMENT OR FUCKING STOPPING FOR FUCK SAKE
FUCKING WHALES KEPP SUSTAINING SUSTAINABLE TRENDS LIKE THIS GOOD JOB YOU FUCKS

>> No.13597305

>>13597298

>nu-biz bobos thinks crypto goes down forever

>> No.13597310

>>13597298
get FUCKED, bobo !
>dollaro
kek

>> No.13597337
File: 179 KB, 887x1356, 1549445747908.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13597337

>>13597298
Yeah, lol, imagine the idiots that bought this chart in November of 2017. Haha.. wait

>> No.13597351

>>13597298
too much money on the sidelines and shorters being liquidated, that's how it's sustainable. what a retarded question, there's no better reason for an uptrend

>> No.13597378
File: 65 KB, 1621x751, zoom out faggot.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13597378

>>13597298
Zoom out faggot.

>> No.13597394

It wasn’t. Dumping now.

>> No.13597397

>>13597298
It's a new paradigm. Don't overthink it.

>> No.13597399

>>13597378
>"zoom out"
>zooms in
Fuck you retard

>> No.13597409

>>13597399
OP's chart goes from late April 2019 to early May 2019
My chart goes from late 2017 to early May 2019.

Whoops, sorry about your brain.

>> No.13597415

>>13597310
amigo amigo it was my dollaroooo

>> No.13597441

500 DOLLARYDOOS??!?

>> No.13597605

>>13597378
>watching CMC chart

rip

>> No.13597615

>>13597298
Exit scam of all exit scams. Let’s see what happens When Binance doesn’t reopen withdrawals on Tuesday

>> No.13597616

>>13597605
Beats still watching the Bitfinex chart like so many faggots out there.
In fact, it's probably the best way to look at BTC.

>> No.13597635

>>13597615
Locked deposits and withdrawals means people can't add funds for buying more cones, and can't withdraw their cones to stop selling.
Now explain how this facilitates a pump.

>> No.13597686
File: 203 KB, 1440x893, GC.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13597686

>>13597605
or you watch the bistamp log chart with week/month candle. Don't think you see this on CMC btw

>> No.13597708

>>13597298
BOUGHT 100K CAPS

>> No.13597713
File: 154 KB, 1433x861, Month.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13597713

>>13597616

>> No.13597719

>>13597686
>Bitstamp
>58th Bitcoin market by volume
Watching one market is retarded enough, but you're doubly retarded.

>> No.13597729

>>13597713
Cup AND HANDLEEEEHHHH AAAAAH

>> No.13597737

LMAO at bobos waiting for $2k.
It's not happening. Are you going to fomo in at $8k? $10k?

>> No.13597739

>>13597719

it's literally top3 btc/usd, retard

>> No.13597746

>>13597739
>top 3 btc/usd
And 58th overall

>> No.13597747

>>13597729
Meme AND MEEEEEME AAAAAH

>> No.13597753

>>13597739
Don't enlighten him. We need retards like this one.

>> No.13597797

>>13597753
No, we need retards like you complaining about "no volume" while watching a single trading pair on a single exchange, lmao.

>> No.13597813
File: 153 KB, 1786x1831, 1553287621610.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13597813

>>13597719
>muh volume

>> No.13597829

>>13597813
>be watching a single trading pair on a single exchange
>scratch your soft skull wondering why the volume is so low

>> No.13597846

>>13597797
is this bait or are you just new?

>> No.13597855

>>13597719
It's also one of the oldest chart available & reliable

kek, newfag

>> No.13597864

>>13597797
>the most retarded people are always the most vocal and ascertained in their conviction
This is not about your irrelevant opinion on volume flow or lack of understanding on how markets auction.
This is about Bitstamp being the 'cleanest' spot market one can track. Fuck, I just spoonfed a newfag.

>> No.13597869

>>13597829
I'm agreeing with somebody here and disagreeing with somebody else though I'm not exactly sure who's who. The whole theory that this pump doesn't have any volume behind it is a joke since the 24 hour volume right now is over 1% (possibly much higher depending on which exchanges' volume figures you trust) of the entire marketcap of bitcoin which is much higher than the typical amount of about 0.4%. In short, it's pumping (or it was), volume is high based on the percentage of total market cap, and that's about where I stand on it.

>> No.13597898

>>13597846
>>13597855
>>13597864
see >>13597829

My god you people are retarded.

>>13597869
It's retarded to look at a single exchange's volume, and think that's all of BTC's volume.
If you agree with this statement, then you're agreeing with me.

>> No.13597931

>itt: drooling retards who have no fucking idea how to read volume

>> No.13597937

>>13597298

>Muh sustainable

Was that a sustainable dump, bitch?

>> No.13597946

>>13597813
Alright, let's just use that image.
See if you can wrap your tiny tiny brain around the extremely simple concept I'm trying to teach you.

>total volume: 1.2 billion
>Bitstamp volume: 0.13 billion
>"Hurrrrrrr why does Bitcoin only have 0.13 billion in volume?"
t. everyone disagreeing with me.

>> No.13597976

>>13597898
>>13597946
>It's retarded to look at a single exchange's volume, and think that's all of BTC's volume.
>If you agree with this statement, then you're agreeing with me.
Weeeeelllll, see that's the thing. I think what >>13597686 is trying to do is support his position by pointing out the relative volume from Bitstamp which is obviously going up. He's probably not trying to use the absolute numbers from Bitstamp, just the relative value. The idea being if Bitstamp is going by a certain percentage then the rest of the market is probably within a given margin also going up by that percentage. He's saying this is a more reliable indicator than the CMC figures.
And, anon.. he's actually right. Bitstamp is a well known reliable exchange that is not suspected of faking its volume. And if the volume on Bitstamp goes up a certain percentage it's reasonable to extrapolate that to the rest of the market since arbitrage in crypto is so efficient as can be shown by comparing the charts of all the known reliable exchanges for as long as they've been around. Note also that among the generally accepted reliable exchanges, Bitstamp cruises between the 3rd and 4th highest volume for BTC/USD.
The problem with using CMC data is they draw from many exchanges that are highly suspect. Exchanges like Coinbene, LBank, Bibox. The volume is not only fake but it distorts the relative values since the volume on these exchanges does increase and decrease organically with the real market. That means "low" volume on CMC is too high and the "high" volume is too low. The signal is compressed. You have to throw that out.
So between Bitstamp and CMC, I'd choose Bitstamp for my relative figures. And if I wanted an accurate picture of the entire market, I'd likely use https://www.bitcointradevolume.com/ which pulls from the 10 exchanges generally accepted as being "real" economic trading with little to no fakery.
I hope this helps. And calm down a little. This shit isn't really that important

>> No.13597978

>>13597898
>>>13597616
>He watch CMC volume

PLEASE SOMEBODY HELP HIM

>> No.13597986

>>13597946
>"Hurrrrrrr why does Bitcoin only have 0.13 billion in volume?"
Nobody is saying that. Good God you are fucking retarded. I know for a fact that you have never looked at a volume profile in your life. Fucking kill yourself you smug imbecile.

>> No.13597987

>>13597978
Miles better than watching a single exchange.
You genuine retard lmao.

And whatever aggregate you're watching, it's going to show the same proportional volume over time.
Sorry about your brainletism.

>> No.13598000

>>13597986
>Nobody is saying that.
Literally everyone disagreeing with me is saying that.

Here's me 40 minutes ago:
>>13597719

>> No.13598008

>>13597976
>He's probably not trying to use the absolute numbers from Bitstamp, just the relative value.
My entire argument all this time was that it's retarded to look at a single exchange thinking that's all the volume.
Everyone arguing against me was arguing against this.

>> No.13598011

>>13597987
never said that I'm watching only a single exchange you fucking dumbo. Holy crap can you even read

>> No.13598020

>>13598000
And they are just as fucking clueless as you are. I am watching a group of retarded children argue about something they know nothing about. Volume is such a simple concept yet you faggots still don't get it.

>> No.13598026

>>13598011
>never said that I'm watching only a single exchange
I never said you were.
I implied many were. See all those threads about the "low volume" with a screenshot of a Bitfinex chart lately.
Too bad you started arguing in defense of basing volume on a single exchange.
Maybe learn to read next time.

>> No.13598028

>>13598008
>My entire argument all this time was that it's retarded to look at a single exchange thinking that's all the volume.
>Everyone arguing against me was arguing against this.
If that's the case then that's a pretty stupid argument to make which is why I was saying I'm not even sure who I'm agreeing with. But what I wrote is my position on the whole thing so hopefully it helps some newb who didn't otherwise know.

>> No.13598037

>>13598020
And how am I clueless?


>>13598028
>that's a pretty stupid argument to make
lmao, so you think it's a good idea to think a single exchange's volume is all of BTC's volume?

>> No.13598046

I just sold my BTC for a 250 EUR profit, I learnt my lesson unlike the countless times before where I hold BTC to gain nothing.

>> No.13598054

>>13598037
>lmao, so you think it's a good idea to think a single exchange's volume is all of BTC's volume?
No man, I'm saying that's the stupid argument. So stupid I suspect there's more of a miscommunication going on here than anything else as surely nobody is literally under the delusion that Bitstamp is all of bitcoin volume. It sounds moronic to even type it out. I think I need to just close the tab.

>> No.13598059

>>13598046
but this time it's different

>> No.13598065

>>13598054
>No man, I'm saying that's the stupid argument.
Ah.

>So stupid I suspect there's more of a miscommunication
I'm sure of it.

I said it's dumb to watch a single exchange and think that's aggregate volume, and a bunch of frens thought I said it's dumb to watch a single exchange period.

>> No.13598071

>>13597298
wellcomme to beetgoin

>> No.13598078

>>13598046
This is how I know btc is going to continue up. When you sell, it rises. Who knows why...

>> No.13598079

>>13598046
See you FOMOing at 20k

>> No.13598084

>>13598054
same here, cringe af. you are right senpai

>> No.13598086

>>13597337
you can't compare a market going into new ATH every week to one recovering from a +80% drop

>> No.13598094

>>13597946
you are just confused. pretty stupid to have such a heated discussion about a small confusion. these guy talked about actual volume, you're talking about the fake volume on cmc. i would personally, just like most of the people in this thread, rather care about the actual volume. but of course you're right in the sense that bitstamp has less volume on *chuckle* coin...oh god no... co.. coinmarketcap *dies from laughter*

>> No.13598095

>>13598084
>cringing at yourself
A solid step towards becoming a non-brainlet.

>> No.13598105

>>13598094
>these guy talked about actual volume
A single trading pair on a single exchange.

>you're talking about the fake volume on cmc
At least it's an aggregate.
Whichever aggregate you watch, it's going to show the same proportional volume over time.

>> No.13598107

>>13597298
>BITCOIN can't be explained or predicted or makes any sense. Which makes it a dangerous investment.

>> No.13598114

>>13598095
go back to your coinmarketcap and gtfo

Rest in rip in riperoni

>> No.13598153

>>13598114
>coinmarketcap
Sure beats looking at a single trading pair on a single exchange, lmao@u.

>> No.13598157

Stop
Limit
Order
$6800

>> No.13598180

>>13598153
https://messari.io/onchainfx
https://openmarketcap.com/
https://www.bitcointradevolume.com/

Here, this is for you. Ignorant pleb

>> No.13598188

>>13598180
see >>13598105
>Whichever aggregate you watch, it's going to show the same proportional volume over time.

>> No.13598191

>>13597298
Bitcoin DOLLARO lmao
hello José Luis Juan

>> No.13598206

>>13598180
Also, does CMC beat thinking "one exchange = all volume" or not?

>> No.13598213

>>13597616

He doesn't know what trading view is

>> No.13598224

>>13598213
I think so

>> No.13598239

>>13598213
>>13598224
They have a few aggregates as well.
Your point?

>> No.13598251

lol the retarded bulls thinking somebody will fomo at 20k. I have my positions and fiat on the side.

I will never fomo at any price above 3.5k, never. I would rather just not buy in and keep my money.

Bulltards.

>> No.13598254

>>13598105
>Whichever aggregate you watch, it's going to show the same proportional volume.
Friend, that's not true though. Look at the top exchanges for BTC/USD, you Coinbene, Bitforex, LBank, etc. These are exchanges that are fueling a huge part of the CMC aggregate volume figures since they are at the top. Now you may think, big deal, who cares if it's fake.
The problem with the fake high volume is this volume does not move correctly and in lockstep with the volume of real exchanges. They don't spike when real exchanges spike, they don't dip when real exchanges dip. The exchange owners running fake volume bots will adjust the bots up and down but it always lags the real market and on some exchanges they don't even bother to adjust the bots at all. So the volume for some exchanges just looks flat all the way across whereas a real exchange will not only go up and down but will do it on a 24 hour basis as the different markets wake up and go to sleep.
What I'm saying is using CMC as a relative or absolute indicator is a flawed concept and should never be done at all cuz the fake volume is so high it overwhelms the real stuff.
You may be asking yourself, why would an exchange do this? Why create fake volume and skew the market. Simple. The higher the volume an exchange can convince a hapless coin developer of, the more that exchange can convince that developer to pay to be on the exchange. Exchanges have a huge economic incentive to fake volume and they don't care if it looks real, tracks the market or anything else. They only care that it is real enough to convince people it is real. As a wise learned investor you should know never trust an exchange.
Spotting real volume is not too hard. Look at the graph, does it spike and dip correctly and in lockstep with regulated exchanges like Gemini? Is there wash trading evidenced by buys and sells of equal amounts? If so, it's fake. Are there lots of buys and sells of a very high amount in single trades? Probably fake.

>> No.13598259

>>13598239
please stop calling it aggregates fucking newfag

>> No.13598268

>>13598254
>Look at the top exchanges for BTC/USD, you Coinbene, Bitforex, LBank, etc.
I just told you to look at aggregates, and you're back to looking at single exchanges.

>>13598259
why?

>> No.13598269

>>13598251

you are literally seething faggot lmao

>> No.13598276

>>13598251

So you wouldn't buy in at $3.5k even on a run up to $20k? Lmfao you absolute brainlet. There's got to be zero braincells in your skull to miss $16.5k of upside.

>> No.13598279

>>13597635
less supply, higher price

>> No.13598293

>>13598268
>I just told you to look at aggregates, and you're back to looking at single exchanges.
Those exchanges I mentioned (and many I didn't mention) pretend to have such a high amount of volume that their figures overwhelm the aggregate figure. It's estimated that over 90% of the aggregate volume figure on CMC is fake. If the fake volume isn't going up and down at the rate of the real market volume then the increases and decreases you are relying on as your indicator are literally wrong. The aggregate figure reported by CMC is wrong in absolute as well as relative value. And not just wrong but extremely wrong. You can't trust it at all.

>> No.13598308

>>13598293
>Those exchanges I mentioned (and many I didn't mention) pretend to have such a high amount of volume that their figures overwhelm the aggregate figure.
This happens with various exchanges over time, which is why you look at aggregates for a general idea and comparison over time.

>> No.13598336

Get fucked spaghetti nigger

>> No.13598340

>>13598279
Less demand too.

>> No.13598354

>>13598308
>This happens with various exchanges over time, which is why you look at aggregates for a general idea and comparison over time.
If 90% of the exchanges are posting fake volume and your figure is including these exchanges then your figure is wrong. It's as simple as it is. I could make "BizScammerExchange" which claimed 1 petatrades per second were happening on its platform and if I maintained this figure all the time then that exchange would account for 99.999% of the "volume" on CMC. It would make it look like the volume literally never changed since my single exchange would account for so much of the figure. Now take this figure make it slightly less extreme and divide it up into 200 individual exchanges and that's something like what is happening. That really is as simple as it is. Maybe take some time to think about it. This thread will expire, we're all anonymous. In the next thread you can argue my position as if it were yours and none will be the wiser.

>> No.13598364

>>13598354
>If 90% of the exchanges are posting fake volume and your figure is including these exchanges then your figure is wrong.
Sure it's probably wrong.
So the best you can hope to do is look at the proportions.

>> No.13598516
File: 114 KB, 277x400, 1551301619667.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13598516

Keked at the people thinking"dollaro" is Spanish

>> No.13598584

Am not buying your shitcoin, bulltards.

>> No.13598812

>>13598584
Then do not. Why posting here?