Quote from: cypherdoc on October 08, 2014, 07:05:18 PM

Quote from: Melbustus on October 08, 2014, 06:57:28 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on October 08, 2014, 05:51:16 PM

......

Maybe you can merge that theory with my OTC-buy theory?

Quote from: Melbustus on October 07, 2014, 04:00:31 AM

Didn't he first put the wall up at $280, take it down for an hour or two, then put it back at $320? And it was getting nibbled at $320 too. Then it disappeared and came back at $300, where it obviously got eaten until gone. I really don't understand why he moved it from $320 to $300 given that it was getting action at $320...*iff* he was (even poorly) rationally trying to price-maximize.

Obviously tossing up a single 30k wall doesn't make too much sense for someone who's primary objective was rationally selling that stash. But I can maybe buy the theory of an irrational/undisciplined/freaked-out holder *except* for the move from $320 to $300, since there was indeed stable action at $320.

The only fully rational motivation I can see is if he was trying to achieve a low but stable price for a period of hours during which to secure an OTC deal in the other direction. He tried $280, but it was unstably crashing the price, so he tried $320. He got good interest there with a stable price, so he decided to see if he could do better and keep things stable at $300. Price pegged right up against the wall without crashing, so he stuck with it, and priced a bigger buy deal on OTC based on a stable price of $300. ...

Who knows... Not all players are rational, so it could be anything. Whatever; even the big trades are insignificant noise in the long run.

i think you have to back up one step and explain the inexplicable selloff since June in the face of all this good news. and as someone who follows price quite closely using btccharts as well as other tools, much of the selling has seemed unnatural, forced, and timed. it really looked like someone looking to force a capitulation.

the abrupt appearance and now disappearance of the trolls needs explaining as well.

Well, my theory is just pointing out that placing the wall originally at 280 (where it was destabilizing the market), then moving to 320 (where it was getting action), then to 300 isn't rational *unless* you're trying to set up some OTC trade in the other direction and need a "stable" multi-hour average on Bitstamp as a pricing reference for the OTC trade. So to fit that with your theory, you could still argue that it was Pantera executing the final load-up via such an OTC trade, and the 30k wall was theirs and simply necessary for the price-fix. Still fits with your point asking who would trust an unregulated Slovenian exchange with 30kBTC...

Anyway, I honestly don't know what to think. I don't really understand moving the wall from $320 to $300 outside of the price-fix OTC-buy theory which seems a little complicated for my usual liking. But, as I repeatedly say, I'm not a trader, so I have little instinct for how much shenanigans like that actually happen. Maybe it's more common than I think.