Maybe I am not understanding it right, but this month some of their investors who bought shares at 12$ will be allowed to liquidate, meaning that BIT will have to pay them ~60$ per share (and tear those shares up).

The BIT share price is pegged to the BTC price, so if the latter goes down to 300$ before those investors have time to liquidate, then BIT would have to pay them ~30$/share, instead of ~60$/share.   If the BTC price later returns to 600$, BIT shares will go back to 60$, the other investors (who can't liquidate yet) will be in the same state they were before --- but BIT would have saved a lot of money.

If I recall correctly, Overstock's CEO invested heavily in bitcoin,  Was that from his pocket, or through the company?

Presumably many of those who bought at 800$ just two months ago did not expect that the next significant high would be 710$. 

Also, SecondMarket's Bitcoin Investment Trust (BIT) stated that they would "start liquidity no later than March 2014".

I understand that as meaning: sometime this month, some BIT investors will finally be allowed to "liquidate" their investment, that is, convert their BIT shares into dollars at the current share value -- which is pegged to the current BTC/USD price.

Early BIT investors who choose to liquidate now will make a handsome profit (400% or more?), but the profit will be less if bitcoin price continues to fall.  Presumably some investors will choose to liquidate now.  In that case the fund will have to sell some of their BTC holdings to get the necessary USD.  Even if BIT pays out of their USD reserve, they will have to replenish it soon afterward.

BIT's bitcoin holdings  are estimated to be near 90,000 BTC.  If they have to sell some of that on the exchanges, it may easily bring the price down.  Ditto if they sell off-market but the buyers then sell on-market.

I suppose that BIT may be tempted try to drive the BTC price down before enabling liquidity, because then they would have to pay less USD to the investors who liquidate.  In that "plan", BIT would later buy back those coins on-market to drive the price back up.  I don't know whether this would work; it may push more investors to liquidate and may scare new investors (not that they have many now it seems).  Note that this manipulation is possible with bitcoin due to the limited liquidity of the exchanges.

Does this make sense?

EDIT: typo

Actually just two hours from now, IIUC.

If I understand correctly, three hours from now Huobi will open LTC trading.  Their clients may be assuming that LTC will go up after that, so they are switching to Yuan now in order to buy LTC as cheaply as possible.

What bitcoin needs to really take off is an exchange where one can buy BTC and pay with bitcoin. 

A shifted exponential A*Q**(t - t0) + B will look exponential even in a logscale plot, if B is large enough.  Here is an example with A = 20, B = 200, Q = 1.7.

Note that the function is a SIMPLE exponential, but shifted, and the Y scale is logarithmic; yet it still looks like an exponential instead of a straight line.

This is an interesting experiment that economists should write theses about: two markets trading the same commodity with very different fee structures, that generate very different volumes per trader and very different trading patterns.


I believe that there is substantial human intervention in those markets.  For one thing, as I wrote many times before, Huobi's trade stops almost completely at night, and OKCoin's gets down to a steady background that is a small fraction of the daytime volume (and may be fake?).  Also one sees some resitance at round prices, which humans like but robots should not care about. 

Is that volume "weaker" in some sense, just because it is caused by the no-fee structure?  It seems an interesting question for the theses above...

Fitting trend lines to historical prices may give heart-warming plots but is not useful for predictions, unless the trends reflect some underlying fundamental variable.

Exponential trends may be caused by "infection" in a new market: as more people invest in it, the more the item is mentioned in the news and spreads by word of mouth.  Or they maybe due to the company growing, hence opening more stores/factories/products/whatever, hence growing even more. The exponential growth stops when  that market is saturated, there is no more room for the company to grow, or something else happens (e.g. devastating news) that turns investors away. 

In that chart I see three separate exponential trends, but since they are shifted (P(t) = A*Q**(t-t0) + B, instead of just P(t) = A*Q**(t-t0)) they do not look straight in the log plot. They span

  (1) from ~Jun/2012 to ~Jul/2012 (~2 months)
 
  (2) from ~Jan/2013 to ~Mar/2013 (~3 months)

  (3) from ~Oct/2013 to ~Nov/2013 (~1.5 months)

I can only guess about the underlying causes of those exponential growth periods, but the last two seem to coincide with the opening of the Chinese markets: (2) by BTC-China in Hong Kong, (3) by Huobi and OKCoin in the mainland.  Perhaps (1) is the opening of the European market?

I would guess that in each case the trading population grew exponentially because it was driven by the "infection" process above.  Perhaps (2) stopped by market exhaustion?  Spurt (3), as we know, stopped because of the PBoC decrees.

So, the apparent  multi-year exponential growth in that graph is actually due to three successive market opening events, each much bigger than the other, spaced roughly 8 months apart.   Each gave a shifted exponential, instead of a pure exponential, because it was added to the strady-state of the previous ones. 

To continue that trend, it would be necessary to have another "market opening" event, even bigger than China's.  Itseems unlikely that a large country like China, Russia or India will remove its barriers.  Perhaps the "new market" will not be geogrphic but economic/social (say, Walmart accepts bitcoin, USA declares Bitcoin legal tender or whatever). Who knows.

Of course.  But they do have that much volume, just as an exchange with higher fees or other handicaps may have less volume.

Obviously there are other useful measures, like book depth order, etc.  It would beinteresting to see them tabulated and compared.

Nevertheless, Huobi and OKCoin do seem to have greater liquidity and stability, a narrower spread, etc..  They do seem to lead the market most of the time.  So volume, independently of the reason, may be an important variable after all..

Total trade volume today (Mon Mar/17 00:00--23:59 UTC) was ~144 kBTC.  That is  87% more than yesterday's (77 kBTC), but still 43% less than last Monday Mar/10, and somewhat below the average of recent weeks.

Trade volume outside China more than doubled (from 8.2 to 18 kBTC) but is still 46% less than last Monday's.  Bitstamp's almost tripled (from 3.30 to 9.17), but BTC-e's grew only 49% (to 3.90 kBTC). Bitfinex 's volume almost doubled (from 1.90 to 3.76) and almost caught up with BTC-e, but is still only 30% of its volume last Monday.

Trade volume in China increased 83% since yesterday (from 69 to 126 kBTC) but is still 58% of last Monday's.  Huobi recovered its lead over OKCoin (51% versus 47% of China's volume, respectively).

China's slice of the total volume increased slightly from 88% to 89%.

EDIT: that is on the exchanges that I monitor (see my previous post).  Are there any significant exchanges besides those?

Daily volumes of BTC trade to/from USD and other national currencies (in kBTC):

             !    Mon !    Tue !    Wed !    Thu !    Fri !    Sat !   Sun !    Mon !                     
  EXCHANGE   !  03/10 !  03/11 !  03/12 !  03/13 !  03/14 !  03/15 ! 03/16 !  03/17 ! Currencies considered

  Bitstamp   |  13.40 |   9.17 |  12.70 |   6.73 |   8.68 |   2.20 |  3.30 |   9.17 | USD                 
  BTC-e      |   7.16 |   5.09 |   7.96 |   7.43 |   3.76 |   2.55 |  2.62 |   3.90 | USD,EUR,RUR         
  BitFinEx   |  11.60 |   3.63 |   7.29 |   3.31 |   5.53 |   1.74 |  1.90 |   3.76 | USD                 
  Kraken     |   0.57 |   0.45 |   0.56 |   0.40 |   0.48 |   0.34 |  0.15 |   0.48 | EUR                 
  Bitcoin.DE |   0.39 |   0.41 |   0.37 |   0.35 |   0.20 |   0.12 |  0.12 |   0.40 | EUR                 
  CaVirtEx   |   0.13 |   0.18 |   0.13 |   0.13 |   0.11 |   0.06 |  0.06 |   0.10 | CAD                 
  CampBX     |   0.05 |   0.06 |   0.04 |   0.03 |   0.06 |   0.03 |  0.02 |   0.07 | USD                 

  SUBTOTAL   |  33.30 |  18.99 |  29.05 |  18.38 |  18.82 |   7.04 |  8.17 |  17.88 |                     

  Huobi      |  95.10 |  55.00 |  77.90 |  65.40 |  78.40 |  36.50 | 27.00 |  63.80 | CNY                 
  OKCoin     | 119.00 |  68.50 |  90.60 |  60.70 |  97.80 |  55.40 | 40.00 |  59.00 | CNY                 
  BTC-China  |   3.34 |   3.11 |   3.16 |   2.89 |   2.97 |   1.13 |  1.51 |   2.74 | CNY                 
  Bter       |   0.27 |   0.34 |   0.49 |   0.26 |   0.19 |   0.35 |  0.28 |   0.34 | CNY                 

  SUBTOTAL   | 217.71 | 126.95 | 172.15 | 129.25 | 179.36 |  93.38 | 68.79 | 125.88 |                     

  TOTAL      | 251.01 | 145.94 | 201.20 | 147.63 | 198.18 | 100.42 | 76.96 | 143.76 |                     

All numbers were collected by hand from the site http://bitcoinwisdom.com. Beware of possible errors.

For each exchange, the numbers include only the trade volume to/from the currencies listed in the rightmost column. Trade between BTC and other cryptocoins, such as LiteCoin, is NOT included.

Dates on the header line are UTC. Specifically, "01/15" means "from 01/15 00:00:00 UTC to 01/15 23:59:59 UTC". (Beware that the same period may span part of day 01/14 or part of day 01/16 in your local time zone.)

Chinese Dinosaur Slumber Method prediction for Tuesday Mar/18

Prediction valid for: Tuesday 2014-03-18, 19:00--19:59 UTC (not before, not after)
Huobi's predicted price: 3674 CNY.
Bitstamp's predicted price: 606 USD.


The red and green strokes are actual Huobi hourly prices.  The magenta square at right is the above prediction.  The light blue-gray squares are the older price predictions.   The blue dots are the Slumber Points, the mean Huobi prices ((L+H)/2) in the interval 19:00--19:59 UTC every day. The size of the Albertosaurus under each point indicates the night-time activity at Huobi. Specifically, the area of the reptile is proportional S = V_h/V_d, where V_h is the mean hourly volume in the three hour period 18:00--20:59 UTC (02:00am--04:59am China time), and V_d is the daily volume 00:00--23:59 UTC on the same date.  The largest Albertosauri correspond to the S = 0.010 or greater.   The size of each blue dot is proportional to its reliability weight, computed from the ratio S.  The grey lines are trends fitted a posteriori to the Slumber Points. The orange line is the trend assumed for the above prediction.

This diagram is a step towards "scientificating" the Chinese Slumber Method.  Instead of a binary classification of the Slumber Points into True (valid, used) and False (invalid, discarded), each point now gets assigned a numeric weight (shown above by the point's size) which is a decreasing function of the night-time activity ratio S = V_h/V_d. This weight is used for fitting each trend (by weighted least squares) and to choose breaks in the trends.  However the choice of the breaks and part of the fitting are still done by eyeballing.

The Bitstamp prediction, as usual, is the Huobi prediction divided by the currency conversion factor R, which these days seems to be around 6.06 CNY/USD.

NOTE: There is no NOTE this time. I may provide two NOTES next time.

A Million thanks for providing the UTC time option!!!

Apparently the lawsuit is still in progress and is scheduled to be tried in Nov/2014, may drag on to 2018:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=477142.msg5261573#msg5261573

Reply by MtGOX to the lawsuit:
http://numismatics.pwnz.org/coinlab-v-mtgox-answer-complaint/

Reply by CoinLab to MtGOX's reply:
http://thegenesisblock.com/coinlab-files-response-mt-gox-lawsuit/

Lawsuits are often settled out of court, but if that had happened I suppose that we would have known.

However, if MtGOX had settled the lawsuit by handing over 750,000 BTC instead of 75 M$, CoinLab obviously would not denounce him.

A red cape post (just to irritate the bulls  ):



(WorldCom is the third-largest bankruptcy in US history, after Lehmann Bros and Washingtom Mutual https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCI_Inc.#Bankruptcy)

Total  trade volume for today (Sun Mar/16 00:00--23:59 UTC), on the exchanges that I monitor, was only ~77 kBTC.  That is 23% less than yesterday's (~100 kBTC) and 71% less than last Sunday's Mar/09 (269).

In fact the daily volume has not been this low since the Chinese New Year week (Jan/31--Feb/05, 54--77 kBTC) and Jan/23 (66 kBTC).

Trade volume outside China actually increased 16% (from 7.04 to 8.17 kBTC).  Bitstamp (3.30 kBTC) recovered its lead, with BTC-e (2.62) second and Bitfinex (1.90) third.  Bitfinex changed its fee structure today, ostensibly to improve liquidity, but it did not help much yet: its volume increased only 9% since yesterday, less than the other two.

Trade volume in  China dropped 23% (from 93 to 69 kBTC). OKCoin slightly increased its lead over Huobi (58% and 39% of China's volume, respectively).

China's slice of total volume dropped from 93% to 89%

Daily volumes of BTC trade to/from USD and other national currencies (in kBTC):

             !    Sun !    Mon !    Tue !    Wed !    Thu !    Fri !    Sat !   Sun !                     
  EXCHANGE   !  03/09 !  03/10 !  03/11 !  03/12 !  03/13 !  03/14 !  03/15 ! 03/16 ! Currencies considered

  Bitstamp   |   9.12 |  13.40 |   9.17 |  12.70 |   6.73 |   8.68 |   2.20 |  3.30 | USD                 
  BTC-e      |   6.52 |   7.16 |   5.09 |   7.96 |   7.43 |   3.76 |   2.55 |  2.62 | USD,EUR,RUR         
  BitFinEx   |   8.29 |  11.60 |   3.63 |   7.29 |   3.31 |   5.53 |   1.74 |  1.90 | USD                 
  Kraken     |   0.64 |   0.57 |   0.45 |   0.56 |   0.40 |   0.48 |   0.34 |  0.15 | EUR                 
  Bitcoin.DE |   0.20 |   0.39 |   0.41 |   0.37 |   0.35 |   0.20 |   0.12 |  0.12 | EUR                 
  CaVirtEx   |   0.15 |   0.13 |   0.18 |   0.13 |   0.13 |   0.11 |   0.06 |  0.06 | CAD                 
  CampBX     |   0.02 |   0.05 |   0.06 |   0.04 |   0.03 |   0.06 |   0.03 |  0.02 | USD                 

  SUBTOTAL   |  24.94 |  33.30 |  18.99 |  29.05 |  18.38 |  18.82 |   7.04 |  8.17 |                     

  OKCoin     | 136.24 | 119.00 |  68.50 |  90.60 |  60.70 |  97.80 |  55.40 | 40.00 | CNY                 
  Huobi      | 103.51 |  95.10 |  55.00 |  77.90 |  65.40 |  78.40 |  36.50 | 27.00 | CNY                 
  BTC-China  |   4.24 |   3.34 |   3.11 |   3.16 |   2.89 |   2.97 |   1.13 |  1.51 | CNY                 
  Bter       |   0.21 |   0.27 |   0.34 |   0.49 |   0.26 |   0.19 |   0.35 |  0.28 | CNY                 

  SUBTOTAL   | 244.20 | 217.71 | 126.95 | 172.15 | 129.25 | 179.36 |  93.38 | 68.79 |                     

  TOTAL      | 269.14 | 251.01 | 145.94 | 201.20 | 147.63 | 198.18 | 100.42 | 76.96 |                     

All numbers were collected by hand from the site http://bitcoinwisdom.com. Beware of possible errors.

For each exchange, the numbers include only the trade volume to/from the currencies listed in the rightmost column. Trade between BTC and other cryptocoins, such as LiteCoin, is NOT included.

Dates on the header line are UTC. Specifically, "01/15" means "from 01/15 00:00:00 UTC to 01/15 23:59:59 UTC". (Beware that Bitcoinwisdom uses your local time, so the date may appear to be off by 1 day.  For example, if you are 2 hours west of Greenwich, it may show "01/14 22:00" when the UTC time is "01/15 00:00".)

Along the same lines, for the same reason: make the Left and Right arrow keys and/or buttons move the cross cursor by one candle. 

Even with a mouse it is sometimes difficult to select one specific candle. (Is it my impression, or is the mouse scale set so that when the mouse moves by 1 step, the cursor moves by 1 candle?)