gaz5

I've been answering points about trading and market operations. The post you have quoted was in response to the bold claim that an all time market high was "fake". Local highs (that this would be for an investment outlook) are irrelevant for investment outlook, so the question was a trading one. You can't have a pop at someone, well not to be taken seriously, for answering a question about short term trading outlooks by saying "that's not investing". I know it's not, neither was the question being answered. If you can't separate the two in your mind and realise I'm talking about one and not the other based on the conversation, I can't help you. Your argument here is basically "those are not oranges and you're an idiot for saying they are" when the entire time I've been talking about apples. I've already told you, several times, my long term investments are DCA monthly in ETF's through my ISA and the time outlook for those is such I don't need to worry about them. My trading account is separate to my overall portfolio and (after tax) what I essentially fund most of my £20k annual allowance from. I'm sure none of those other traders care what you think of them as a person any more than I do. [emoji846] That's an odd comment, to say the least. Not that I care what type of person anyone thinks I am outside of those closest to me, I'm not a social butterfly. I do find it funny though that you've assigned me a label that I know nothing about "investing" or what is represents. That's a chortle. I've been an investor for 20 years, worked in financial services (currently an investment bank) for my entire adult life and I've done rather well out of the long term investing. Trading is a more recent thing for me, having never had the time previously. I've only been doing it about 2 years, 18 months seriously, having found 40 hours in my week when I gave up being involved in football.

It 100% is. But feel free to explain why it's not true that markets exist to allow large institutions to grab liquidity from other institutions or smaller retail traders, rather than just say "trust me". Saying something is so, offering zero detail behind it, is not a valid argument in any context. Given I've gone into great detail to explain how and why it is, that's the least you can do. So go ahead, let's debate the finer details of how and why markets operate, I'm game.....

Said it before, there's a player in Scott Wright. Excellent finish and been Rangers best player other than Shirley since coming on

The most entertaining thing about this game so far has been Michael Stewart trying to tell McCoist how to be a goalscorer. [emoji1787]

I've seen a few projects attempting similar things (a lot of the fan token projects have similar ideas). It's one of the ideas for NFT's that longer term (once the solutions mature sufficiently) I could actually see some merit in: unique ticketing for events that can't be counterfeit or scalped. I could see why that would be an improvement on current ticketing systems, but if it did find adoption it'll probably take a decade or more, at least. There are (a huge minority) of projects that do offer at least some kind of utility like this, but I agree with you. They're essentially all theoretical solutions to problems people didn't really know (or still don't) they had and outside of the crypto sphere itself there's only a few companies dipping their toe in the water (like BMW I mentioned above using VeChain for supply chain/asset management). And a lot of them are Blockchain based solutions that dont actually add any value over and above the same non Blockchain version so make little sense. It's the main reason I never argue that crypto is anything other than a speculative market, even if a very small number of the projects in it have some potential longer term merit.

[emoji1787][emoji1787] I have no answer to points raised, again, so better deflect as usual It's fun (and fairly easy) running rings round you, what can I say.

It's funny watching you post stuff like this, when everyone knows you're the biggest troll on P&B whose entire MO is to deliberately misrepresent peoples views. Couldn't mark your brass neck with a blowtorch. [emoji1787]. But you'll forgive me or anyone else in here not taking advice on trading, on any market, from a guy who made an arse of himself the other day when he made it clear he didn't even know where the ticker was on a stock chart. Kinda 101 shit that. [emoji1787] You do make me laugh with your "putting food on the table" rhetoric though, another one of your straw men, trying to paint someone who demonstrably knows more than you on this topic as some sort of degenerate who is going to lose it all for no other reason than a. you can't read to know why that won't happen and b. you have no intelligent answer to the actual content of anything they post. You clearly suffer from rage filled insecurity at even the thought that someone, anyone, could conceivably know more than you about a specific topic based on actual experience. I actually pity you a little. "I can't do it so clearly no one can and I won't even listen or respond to any actual content they post because it's lies, must be because I can't do it". But if that's what you need to tell yourself to make yourself feel better, you carry on old chap. Happy to take it on the chin to keep you level. My contribution to care in the community. [emoji106] Right, just closed my last trade of the week so off to do my weekly cap gains taxes. [emoji6]

If you're talking about me, for the nine millionth time IM NOT A CRYPTO MAXI, I'M A MARKETS GUY WHO HAPPENS TO ALSO TRADE CRYPTO. Trade being the operative word. I hold very, very little for longer than a day. I'm answering market questions, from people who think markets operate differently because it's an asset class they don't like. It's fine not to like it, I just said to ICTChris that 95% of Crypto is complete trash. I don't like a lot of it either.

OK, fair enough. Full disclosure, I don't really hold for long term in Crypto (my long term portfolio is all in equities), but I do hold a couple of small positions in projects that I think have real world utility. They aren't the most popular projects in the world, for many reasons, but I can use them to give you a couple of examples: VeChain: Technically, they are a BaaS (Blockchain as a Service) provider, which allows them to help large enterprises build their solutions on Blockchain. They have various offerings in supply chain management that I think is where their utility is. For example, they're now partnered with BMW where details of every car are stored on blockchain and then managed there throughout the life of the vehicle (from maintenance, to parts, to shipping, to service records etc.) so none of it can be faked. They've provided other solutions (like in Cyprus they managed the Covid Vaccine rollout from factory to patient using VeChain blockchain). XRP: On Demand Liquidity / Liquidity Hub. My background is in Financial Services and I've dealt with Swift as a result for years. Also the crazy Nostro/Vostro setup where banks have huge amounts of liquidity sitting around payment corridors just in case it needs to be used to settle. XRP and ODL takes away that Nostro/Vostro requirement by allowing you to send payment that settles in seconds, anywhere in the world (even the places that don't have banks with established payment corridors), for pennies. There are loads of other benefits of XRP and the XPR Ledger over Swift (which is just a messaging system), but dont want to bore you. There's two examples. Quant would be another one to look into. There are over 11,000 projects in Crypto these days and probably 10,800 of those are complete trash. Utter nonsense that provides no benefit or solves any real world problem and they really all should die (hopefully many will when BTC goes to 20k or lower). But at the same time there are at least a few interesting projects, with real world value propositions, despite the naysayers and their "INTANGIBLE!!!!!" outlook.

Do you really want to know or are you just baiting like everyone else?

I can see your question was disingenuous, you weren't actually interested in the answer, not that you can in any way dispute it. Taking liquidity from retail is the entire point of ALL markets. ALL markets are speculative. Honestly, I really don't get what you guys don't understand about this. The underlying asset itself is completely irrelevant. I've shown examples of this multiple times. I couldn't give a flying f*ck if its Bitcoin or, as above, the S&P futures, or Chevron, or GBPUSD. Markets are markets. Detach your hatred for Crypto from how markets operate, you might actually learn something.

Sure. Your initial comment was: Firstly, you seem to be confusing yourself by saying it was both "Fake" and "Achieved", which in itself is an oxymoron. But I know what you were trying to say. From a technical perspective: "Spoof" orders can only be Limit orders (orders that are placed on the order book waiting for price to reach a particular level that entice buyers/sellers in but are then cancelled) Limit orders are "Market Maker" orders, in that those who place them are not taking instantly from the market, they are "making" the market Limit orders are "Passive" and sit on the on the BID side of the BID/ASK In order for price to move upwards, you need aggressive buyers (buyers who wont wait and want their order to fill now at any price, they will just smash the "Market buy" button) Market orders are "Market Taker" orders They sit on the ASK side of the BID/ASK So, in summary, passive Limit buy orders don't move a market, whether they are executed or not, because they're on the wrong side of the BID/ASK. They can't "achieve" any sort of high, "fake" in your view or otherwise, their only intent is to entice unaware retail liquidity into the ASK. Order block manipulation happens in EVERY market, not just Crypto. You see block orders added by Algo's all the time and then disappear before they get filled, it's how HFT bots essentially work. Order Block manipulation is only illegal in traditional markets if you have multiple smaller orders hidden on the other side of the book and you're baiting other people to push the price up (or down) in order to fill your real positions. In this instance, you'd have buy blocks on the book to entice retail to FOMO in when they see the orders only for you to get a higher fill on your short orders on the other side of the spread. You're essentially baiting them to sell to you for a better price. This is very easy to do playing both sides in Crypto because there's no regulation, agreed, but it in no way makes the high "Fake". Price still went there, its just a liquidity grab. Furthermore, the exact same tactic is used in traditional markets (liquidity grab), they just don't use orders on both sides of the book at the same time to do it, because this is barred. But the Algo's have other ways to achieve the same outcome (and I can show you charts from both Forex and Equities that show you it in action if you want, because this is the exact scenario I trade in all markets - I'll drop one in below from yesterday). * Essentially they will create price action during the day that entices retail into a direction and creates a liquidity pool using either buy or sell stops as their grab. In a long scenario, they will, for example, create a daily high then a daily low (setting the range), then bring price slowly up to that daily high again without breaching it, creating a "Double Top", which retail will jump on to short. They place their stop losses above the first high within a 10 to 20 pip range and price pulls away and they think they're golden. This is just one example (and why drawing patterns on a chart is a nonsense that gets retail rekt). Then later in the day the Algo, having built long positions beneath equilibrium of the range, will push price up to take trailing stops out and use them as fuel to take all that buy side liquidity in the zone they created above. So: Is spoof trading/order blocking rife in Crypto: Yes Does it create "Fake" highs: No, the highs absolutely happen Does it only create tops and bottoms: No, its used (along with other techniques) on every high and low on every timeframe, the purpose is to take liquidity from retail, same as it is on every market Is it overly important: No (less than 15% of the volume in Crypto, like Forex and Equities, is retail traders, the rest is institutional, its just markets) Does this price manipulation to grab retail liquidity happen in every market: Yes Is price manipulation illegal: No (though spoof trading as a method specifically is in traditionals). I've added an example from yesterday (as I happened to trade this yesterday on the S&P Mini Futures). Have annotated it with the manipulation just to show how its done. This happens over and over and over and over again across markets. Its all done by bots. * Note to add that its hugely unusual for an Institution to use Limit orders in the first place to move price aggressively. They use Market order for that as it takes a tiny fraction of the capital to just start price going their way. Generally limit orders are used to build positions slowly and quietly, rather than explosively off a high. You generally find them more often at midpoints of trending moves, during a re-accumulation (or re-distribution for shorts).

"Crypto Bad". Is what it is, those with a closed mind wont have that mind changed. It's just a shame that their influence will have others believing some of the nonsense. TBH it does their valid concerns, of which their are actually many, no favours. Just as something of an aside on the LUNA debacle: A top 10 Crypto Market asset with a market cap of around $50 Billion dropped to essentially zero in a day due to a technical flaw in the project that left them open to a death spiral attack. Bitcoin dropped about 30% (because that death spiral involved the LUNA algorithm selling BTC, their asset that backed the $ peg, to try to maintain the peg) in a spell where traditional markets are already going down on inflation prints, the rest of the market crashed between 30%-50% to account for it, but its still going, no outside contamination, no bailouts, nothing else required. In 2008 Lehman had a market cap of $60 Billion and its demise over a day or two on the cross contamination of a flaw in sub prime lending practice led to the near collapse of the entire financial system, had Governments around the world bailing out their banking competitors at the cost of the public in order to avoid Armageddon and led to a huge selloff in traditional markets. Which asset class held up better and impacted both those involved but, more importantly, those not involved more? I dont like Bitcoin, personally. I dont think it (or any other Crypto) will EVER be a currency, for many, many reasons. And the BoE thinks the same (I was at their Digital Pound Foundation event talking about CBDC's and integration with Blockchain). But in terms of a test of the network, Bitcoin held up better than the traditional financial network did during their respective "events" with similar sums from a similar sized player wiped in a short space of time.

[emoji1787] Tell us you don't know how markets work without telling us you don't know how markets work. This made me near shit laughing. [emoji1787]

Thought he was the best player on the park, either side, personally. He'll not be with you for long, has EPL centre back written all over him with maybe another year. But TBH I thought only he, Lundstrum, Wright and Davis turned up for Rangers. The rest were well below previous levels. They were the same, only a handful of them turned up. Was a pretty poor game I thought. Rangers bossed extra time and only a good save took it to pens. But they were better over the 90. Rangers scored from their only real chance from a mistake. They could have had a few in the 90.

Dry yer eyes.

Ramsey worked out well for you. Big Game player indeed. Can't even take a decent penalty after being injured pretty much since he arrived. Better team over the 90 won.

"bait and switch". Yeah, ok. I've been nothing but consistent as you and your cabal jump from one ignorant misconception to the next. Even when there's common ground, points of yours that I agree with (and there are many) and I acknowledge them you all just dismiss those and jump to the next thing on your list that has you rage filled about a market you've never placed a trade in. There's no point in discussing anything with you guys, it's pretty clear that your all pretty happy in your ignorance and not willing to listen to or debate the actual talking points with someone "time served". Even when you ask for examples from other markets (that I know well as I'm equally as active in them) that you say "never happen" and I give them to you, you just dismiss them and jump in a new direction. So I'm done trying to give you some insight from someone with actual experience across all the markets, rather than anecdotal hearsay and bias about one from people who have clearly never set foot in it (or maybe you all did and got rekt and that's where your anger comes from, I dunno). So carry on, you and the rest of your group can continue to think what you want. In the meantime, while your so desperate to be right, I'll carry on not caring whether I'm right or wrong, just that I'm able to make money until all the bubbles pop. Ultimately, that's my only basis for involvement in equities, crypto and Forex. I don't care about the tech in crypto any more than I care about Chevrons commitment to green energy or the future of the AUS dollar. I only care that they are instruments on which I can make money. And they are. That none of you can see that is baffling to me, but hey ho.

I dont understand your point? Are you saying Crypto tanked this equities value 9 years BEFORE Bitcoin was invented? I know I humourously quoted Doc Brown earlier in the thread, but I'm sure you don't mean Crypto jumped in the Delorean and fired it up to 88 miles per hour to tank a company stock before it was even born?

You guys really like to tell people who do this day in, day out, while you don't, what they can and can't do and how they can and can't do it, dont you. [emoji1787] I'm fairly sure you don't fully understand what backtesting is, how you do it or why you do it. Or that you know what comes after backtesting. But it's neither here nor there. Here's an idea though, why don't we just leave this. You can go on with your life, having spent zero time doing this, thinking it's all pointless, it could never work and that I'm a moron for doing it. I'll go on with mine knowing how well it actually works, for me at least, through thousands of hours of experience and continue making money by applying it, we can both be happy. How's that sound? As much as I like being told by random forumites things that I know to be wrong as if they are fact, it serves little purpose. I'm not trying to convince you to take up trading. TBH you shouldn't, it's definitely not for everyone. And you're never going to convince me that the sky is green.

Of course its a speculative bubble. Who has ever claimed otherwise? All bubbles are speculative. Including this one, which took me 30 seconds to find. A Blue Chip stock losing 95% of its value in 77 days, 90% of that in the first 13 days. It actually fell as low as 99.8% in the end. Did LUNA happen faster than that? Of course. Do we know the reasons for that? Yes we do. Is it likely to happen again in both Crypto and the Stock market? Absolutely yes, which is what my Netflix example was intended to show. That this isn't a problem limited to Crypto. Thats all. My point is not that Crypto is great, "champ", as I keep repeating. There's plenty I don't like about it. Am I aware that its a bubble? yes, 100%. Am I aware that it's more volatile than equites? Yes, also 100%. Is that what makes it appealing to trade? 100%. You and I are not so different in many of our views. I also (and have said many times) view the "inflation proof" narrative is bullshit. A maxi argument that has no credence whatsoever and you only need to look at the correlation between Bitcoin in particular and the major indexes (SPX and the QQQ's) and the DXY to know that its a risk on asset and it acts like every other risk on asset during inflationary pressure and a rising $. Poorly. People who say its an inflation hedge are either being wilfully misled, or haven't actually looked at it. While I appreciate your sentiment: no-one wants to see people die in poverty, the countries that have adopted Bitcoin as a currency (which by the way, I also agree with you is bonkers, its not a currency and never will be, its a speculative asset, just like stocks) were already well in the shitter as far as inflation was concerned prior to taking it on. People were already dying in poverty, which is obviously terrible. I agree with you that Bitcoin is not their answer, but equally it wasn't their initial problem either, that runs much deeper. With Bitcoin they are just jumping from one problem to another. In terms of the impact on the 99% of people not involved, I'm not sure I follow where you're going with that other than to agree that bubbles popping tend to have far wider reaching impacts than just the investors. On that we both agree. Take 2008 or 2001 as examples of that. I guess the bit we disagree on is that Crypto is its own bubble. I don't believe that it is, I believe its a bolt on to the existing speculative asset market which includes Housing, Equities and Crypto (and to an extent commodities) and that the entire bubble there is going to crash due in part to rampant Capitalism and in part to crazy monetary policy by every Western ruling government in our lifetimes (I'm assuming we are around the same vintage just from a few previous comments). Crypto will contribute to that, I completely agree, but it wont be the only reason. You just have to look at the SPX, DOW and NASDAQ to see the bubble that's been building in those since 2008, where we appear (as a civilisation) to have learned nothing. Those bubbles are just as big as Bitcoins. FWIW I think in the next 18 months there is the potential for the largest worldwide financial catastrophe since the 1920's, but that's a different discussion. Anyway, to sign off, I don't think you and I have particularly differing opinions (based on what I've read from you), we just have slightly different takes on the nuances. I know crypto is a speculative, bubble building, problem ridden, rug pulling, scam ridden, volatile asset class and I accept that because I can trade it the same way I can other markets which suffer many of the same issues. You know crypto is a speculative, bubble building, problem ridden, rug pulling, scam ridden, volatile asset class and choose not to be involved in it for those reasons. And thats absolutely fine. The bit I don't get is why you guys cant accept that those of us in it (for the most part) know all this and dont (or certainly I dont) try to deny it. All I'm doing is embracing it to make money and have fun with my (incredibly boring) hobby. And I don't get the reluctance to accept that speculative assets, whatever class they reside in, can be traded the same way. I get the fundamentals are different, but as I said in my last post, I'm not a fundamentals guy so that makes no ends to me.

Oh, you changed this one after I replied. I see this is quite a habit to make it look like the conversation went your way. Good job I got the quotes in before you changed them all. Anyway, you know the answer to this. I don't do fundamentals checks on any asset I trade, because I'm a technical trader, not a fundamentals trader, so I dont need to. I don't hold for the long term, I'm just in and out at the levels the chart tells me to be, either through successful profit take or stop loss because my idea was wrong. All my long term investing, done via my ISA, is in ETF's and I have no control over how they balance those. I just pick a ratio that works for me over time and DCA in (during S&P and NASDAQ uptrends). My ETF's (currently 2, a Vanguard one and an HSBC one) were selected based on the asset split I want in my long term holds (70/30) and the geographic diversification that I wanted. In this regard I treat Crypto in exactly the same way as Stocks and ForEx, short term PnL based on Technicals. Anyway, you're the one that said you needed to do all those checks before deciding on an investment, then confirmed you hadn't done any of them before deciding on an investment. Seems you only need to do those checks in asset classes you've not already decided on. which is fine.

Have to hand it to you, that made me laugh. I honestly wish I had this sort of outlook, life would be so much simpler. Enjoy your evening.

Repeating the same nonsense over and over again isn't a point, its still just nonsense. You can, of course, do all of that legwork with LUNA, you just dont want to and have realised you've twisted yourself in knots again with your own argument. I think its probably best to leave this here, as fun as its been. There are plenty of things I dont like about Crypto as an asset class (and LUNA is actually and has always been one of them, incidentally, along with NFT's, high leverage availability and lack of regulation to name but another few of my many irks). I'm no crypto maxi, I moved most of my profit out in December to fill up my ISA for the year and only have around 10% of my overall portfolio in now as a trading account (same as I do 10% in ForEx). I find it hilarious that there are so many people who are not and have never been involved in crypto in any way, or even bothered to do a modicum of investigation into the market, are so rage filled about its very existence, or the possibility that other people can actually have the brass neck (in their eyes) to make money from it. As has been said to you many times before though, no-one is forcing you to get involved in Crypto or this thread. Kinda reminds me of this billboard I saw in San Francisco when California was having its marriage equality vote and its the advice I would leave you with here: If you dont like Gay Marriage, dont get Gay married.

Have you done all that legwork with LUNA? You seemed quite happy to discuss that asset above, the post I replied to. Or was that just because you hate Crypto and cant see past your own bias, so you're happy to have that discussion without doing any of that work? [note: this is a rhetorical question, we all know the answer already, your hypocrisy is now confirmed in black and white]