Quote from: NightTrader0 on August 21, 2019, 12:19:26 PM

I tend to agree. Retail investors who got burned will probably only buy back when FOMO sets in above 20k. I think it's safe to say there's a pretty rocky path ahead for ICOs and altcoins as institutions focus on Bitcoin.

It's already become apparent with the amount of ICO's and IEO's occuring nowadays, compared to a year back. What saddens me, is that there are probably investors who became exposed to crypto via ICO's, lost money from the ICO's and likely exited crypto with a sour taste.

Quote from: Lucius on August 21, 2019, 02:17:29 PM

It's not true that Bitcoin is drop from $20k to $5k in a month as you say, first time price is go so low was in November 2018, and from December 17 when we have ATH it is hold above $15k until January 7, 2018 so anyone who know anything about the crypto market had enough time to make a safe exit.

I agree that big money was probably the cause of Bitcoin jump from $3000 to $14 000 in just few months, but it was some kind of test since they stop at one point. Even if they buying with help of OTC, when buying large quantities of something that has a limited supply, it must have an impact on the price. Maybe they change strategy, buying smaller quantities ensures a stable /lower price, and they have it now.

Ah, gross exaggeration from my part, sorry. I think OTC has been even harder for people to execute over recent months (look at the recent case of localbitcoins deleting cash trades), but institutional investments have definitely been a big part of the price climb over recent months.

Quote from: d5000 on August 21, 2019, 06:52:13 PM

Quote from: timerland on August 21, 2019, 01:57:02 AM

Great article

At the contrary, I consider this article a bad one. Almost "Bitcoin.com" level Grin

It parts from a Google Trends observation as an indicator for "retail interest", which is highly speculative. First, Google searches for Bitcoin are often related to speculation by Average Joes, not to cryptocurrency usage in the retail sector. They may however use the word "retail" in the sense of "small investors".

But not even the Google Trends observation is really correct. As we can see in the chart displayed in the article, the interest in Bitcoin is growing, and at a pretty good pace (it has aproximately doubled in comparison to late 2018). In 2017, Bitcoin's bubble (and the subsequent crash) was in all the media, and that explains the very short (1-2 months) spike in the Google Trends chart. Most people probably didn't search for it because of genuine interest in investing or using it but instead simply because everybody was talking about it and they wanted to know what it was about.

Then we have tweets about "institutional investors" as an indication for interest in Bitcoin. Well. Specialized Bitcoin "institutional" investors (like Grayscale) have existed since at least 2013. And their nice numbers, measured in US dollars, are mostly growing because the BTC prices are rising. The only item supporting their theory is the Bitcoin engagement by Fidelity, which was ... last year (as they also write, but it doesn't support their theory at all).

As a conclusion, I think the connection they draw between "retail" and "institutional" investors is extremely speculative.

I understand the point your making here, and I don't think using google trends is the best basis for a factual article, but taking it with a grain of salt, I'd still speculate that institutional investments have been crucial for BTC's recent price growth.

It'll be way better if the article clarified "retail", and "institutional" investments, but it's still possible to draw a conclusion from blurry facts.