I believe that the demand that caused the Nov/2013 bubble is nearly gone by now. 

Another bubble that may have deflated completely was the one of Apr--Jun/2011, that lifted the price from ~0.8$ to ~12$.  The segment of the market that created that demand, I suspect, had all but vanished by early 2012.  Its demise was however masked after Nov/2011, when the price was still ~2.3$.  On that date, some other market opened, and the resulting demand lifted the price to ~5$.

It is not certain that each bubble is always bigger than the previous one.

For one thing, the price is not proportional to the demand; the same absolute increase in demand will cause a much larger % rise in price, if the supply is already limited because of previous demand.  That means that the bubbles may not be increasing in terms of extra demand, even of they have increasing effect on price.  It also means that, for example, a market segment that lifted the price by +5$ when it opened in 2011 could cause a drop of -150$ if it closed today.

Moreover, a small surge in price, that would be very significant if it has occurred years ago, may not even be visible if it happened today.  Thus, it may be that bubbles come in all sizes, randomly -- but we only notice a bubble when it is comparable to all the previous bubbles together.  Hence the impression that bubbles are steadily increasing.

Finally, the bubbles of Nov/2011 and May/2014 were smaller than the previous ones.  By the way, both were noticed only because they happened after a substantial deflation of those previous bubbles.  If the Nov/2011 surge (+2.7$) had occurred with the price at 12$, rather than at 2.3$, it would have been ignored as mere "noise".  Ditto for the May/2014 bubble:  a jump from $450 to $600 was quite dramatic, but a jump from 800$ to 950$ would have been just noise.