Fractal of '14 is 11.5k and '11 13k. I wouldn't want to short in a bullish environment that has huge momentum, you'll get rekt.

Yes, 6 feb was new cycle and we finish ew 5th leg to around 13k, which coincides with 50% retracement on the entire structure since bullrun. I'd consider this a full out bull trap and a good place to short starting from 12.85k.
Correlates to fractals of '11 and '14. The crash will be consolidated with spring cycle with sharp move downward.

You got some balls to not have closed your short here if you ain't scalping, it's obvious the bull run is not about to end, but gaining momentum and strength for the last few days. They gonna squeeze the shorts, just like they gonna catch joe fomo at the top again.
If we look at fractals from '11 and '14 (blow off top), the bull trap happens around 13k, not before. This is "normal" phase before the crash to 8k -> 4.6k -> 3k -> 2k and I wouldn't be surprised 3 digits to $1k in accumulation phase and I wouldn't be even surprised if we continue the bubble to 50k before crashing, although the latter possibility is < 10% (given the emotional state of a hurt pleb (and yes, everyone in the world already knows about bitcoin, you're late and a pleb if you don't know, because you're one of them), lack of volume conviction and the major bad news that still is en route).
Nevertheless, the cycles get faster after each bubble, so end of 2018 we can already be at 10k or even 20k. A bear market for 1-2 year ain't bad.

Nevertheless, your fractals are on spot, around same trajectory as me, but this short at mid level can cost you some $$.

It's halted, but 1 minute after it's back up again, the price slipped and position was still open. Had to close with a loss to avoid further damages. I'm glad it didn't toke this long, I'm not glad position was not rolled back. It's better than to have a liquidated account...

Kraken down when you just have open short position around the bottom. Reminds me of 6 months ago when a flash crash happened again when Kraken went offline where a lot of people lost everything due to account liquidation.
If this happens again, I'm going to join the law suit as well. You better have disabled all trading and positions. Totally unacceptable.

Kraken up again, trading halted during the period, although first minute of open, little price slippage. Position was still open though, had to close it manually with a loss to avoid further losses.
Great it's back up again, but positions should be disabled during downtime to follow European regulations. I've got mixed feelings, but I'm glad I closed it...

Yes, that's awesome. My apologies if came over as an asshole  

I like Kraken a lot and the issues seems to be resolved. I've traded there today without any issues and it's a lot faster now (like in May '17). I still wish margin, leverage and stop orders were back though, hopefully within a month.

Seriously, you need to reread all my posts. First of all, I gave the possibilities what might have happened if Bitstamp is insolvent. I gave the reasons for a) being hacked/theft; b) committing fraud; c) on the technical side of finances, not having enough liquidity to pay out all withdrawals due to a and/or b. You need to learn to read that my latest theory is based on issues, got it? I'm not accusing Bitstamp of anything, I'm worried about the amount of withdrawal complaints from users all over the place and as adults, can we have an open discussion here or not? That being said, due to theory c, the current situation could be exponentially worse, which might be related to what's going on.

It's amazing how many people are cherry picking posts without taking the entire context in consideration and then base their arguments on a house of cards, just like the MSM does, it's unprofessional.

If they're having issues and cannot handle the load, they should hire more employees, especially if their profits exponentially grew and disclose their clients about issues. Communication is key, especially in a 24/7 environment where big money is at stake. They can learn a lot from Kraken. It's simple as that.

I've never had issues with fiat or crypto deposits or withdrawals, always within 1 business day processed. Using sepa for fiat (euros).

We're talking about a regulated exchange, which needs to have their AUDITS in order. This means, they need to have RESERVES in both crypto (bitcoin) and fiat. The theorem I gave is just as it is, theory to proof an argument. With a backlog as they have, I imagine it will take a lot of time, hence money. So if liabilities > assets without having enough in reserves, they are in trouble.

Do you really think Bitstamp can in infinity swap bitcoins for fiat? Where do they sell their bitcoins to fiat to without having it on their own (worst case, let's say)? You imagine buyers always pay in fiat, you're wrong. A lot of active people have bitcoins for free or for sub $10 that are bailing out for some now. If there are no more new people depositing fiat, how are you suppose to pay out all the withdrawals. Let's say Bitstamp has $100 million in reserves and $1000 is requested to withdraw. You get my point?

EDIT:
I see you pointed out their income is for fees. Okay, what are their expenses? And with the trouble they're in right now without having the volume other exchanges have, the costs might exceed their income or will be lower in relative terms vs a few months back, now scale that to an unknown timeframe until it's solved, let's say.

Again, you think they can operate forever and assume everyone to buy fiat for bitcoin, while many have seen their btc holdings increase a 1000x. As I've said, many people who got in earlier have rarely more than 20% in crypto and 80% in fiat on exchanges. Now that many of them are pulling out since December 2017, suddenly Bistamp has problems. Go figure. I gave you the theory that proofs my argument.  I can't see how your argument holds up when people have already been in fiat on exchanges for a long time. You assume everyone is 100% in crypto, maybe you're.

TL;DR;
Your assumption that everyone is 100% in crypto on exchanges is wrong. Many people are underexposed in crypto since end December 2017, that means, most of their holdings are in fiat. You were right if everyone is/was 100% in crypto, but obviously, you're wrong on that.

Elaborate. You know how basic accounting works? If yes, explain in technical detail how an audit works and how this is sustainable, especially when one can short.
Oh wait, you can't, otherwise you would have commented back with a constructive argument, which you have none of.

EDIT:
I only agree that my example is confusing, as it did lack information (thought you would figure that out yourself if you could critically think). With shorting, you are on margin. With leverage, the situation can be much worse.
If one could think, one could see the reason why USD Tether was created (you get my point of central banking, i.e. creation out of thin air, yes?). Don't assume everyone is 100% in crypto. Basic and essential questions like disclosure of financial statements in times of withdrawal problems are 100% valid. Not hard at all, is it?

I only heard from one of them and he doesn't want to be on a public list due to privacy reasons.
He said small deposits and withdrawals work, only large ones not.

Maybe this is a government KYC related issue, although speaking from experiences having dealt with KYC with other banking financial institutions, if the stories are true what they want to know, it's plainly insane and very hard to believe the rationalization of KYC other than to cover up something worse. You normally get a few simple questions on telephone or in person at your residential address or one of their offices or have some paperwork to fill in with the worst case a financial statement (I don't see anything worse case in this) and that's it. Funds always have been released within 2 business days. That's why red flags are all over the place.

Yep, indeed it is. I've found the rules, obligations and regulations for the CSSF and its clients to the CSSF @ https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-007-9691?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1
In the worst case scenario, you could also try to contact the ECB, but I think they will refer you to CSSF. ECB authorisatian @ https://www.bankingsupervision.europa.eu/banking/tasks/authorisation/html/index.en.html

Holding money for months without any or useless communication and/or help is not done and shouldn't be allowed. It ruins people's lives.

Keep us informed, thanks!

Thank you for getting back so quickly, this is excellent news. Congratulations on your successful upgrade, I'm looking forward to resume trading on your platform again tomorrow!

@Kraken-Septimus Thanks a lot buddy and the great work you're doing, much respect!
So is the trading engine fully upgraded now? Thanks in advance.

That surprised me a lot. Did they change that without notice? Bitstamp Ltd. definitely was under CSSF. I would rewrite your case against S.A. and I assume you probably already did.

There are no crypto exchanges registered with FSCS, that's the problem. Only top forex brokers located in the UK, but you need to check that to be sure and have it black on white in paper.

I don't think Bistamp is liquid to handle huge amounts of withdrawals and probably not even solvent to do so. That's my opinion based on what has and still is going on and basic math + common sense.
Let's say, in theorem, that Bitstamp or any other crypto exchange has users that have 50% of Bitcoins mined and 50% - 1 are bought for $1. Now the last guy buys the bitcoin for $20k. The market cap of bitcoin rises to supply * last traded price. Let's say, supply of 17 million bitcoins and let's assume Bitstamp had a monopoly where all users will go to buy/sell bitcoin and have their entire account equity (deposits) used.
To use some simple arithmetic:
Bitstamp client deposits: 17m * 0.5 * $1 + 1 * $20k = $8.5 million + $20k = $8,520,000 ($8.52m)
Market cap from: 17m * $1 = $17m, to: 17m * $20k = $340,000,000,000 ($340b)

As you can see, the only way this is sustainable is that more people get in and buy around the same last price to maintain that market cap. Problem is, if price rises too fast vs their earnings from fees + third party capital investments + own equity AND people withdraw huge amounts at the same time(period), crypto exchanges cannot pay you out (i.e. a bank run). Unfortunately, most things rely on a ponzi scheme/pyramid structure in life. The only one who can 100% guarantee it to pay out is the central bank. If they don't have enough fiat, they just print or put more digits in.
Things will really go south when theft occurred (i.e. a hack). Not implying this has happened, just having an open mind and mature discussion here.

As the top forex brokers offering you an insurance in case things go wrong, I don't think they will for cryptos if this continues without new big money coming in, while people cashing out. Therefore, there are only 3 crypto money licensed transmitter exchanges, where there could have been many more crypto fiat exchanges, ask yourself why this didn't happen. I know coinbase and kraken have huge reserves and bistamp had a lot of liquidity as well in the past, that's why everything went so smooth for years. But, when suddenly withdrawals and deposits don't go smooth and it's still not solved within a week, I'm worried and that's my argument. The same thing happens in the business world, hence the stalling of time.

If you're asking me, yes, I trust Kraken the most out of all crypto exchanges.

@kiss moon

You're welcome!

It's not only Russia guys. I got friends in Germany, Netherlands and France and they're having the same problems as you guys have mentioned started from early December 2017, but for smaller amounts around €5k - €10k.

I did some more digging and indeed Bitstamp is regulated by Luxembourg Financial Industry Supervisory Commission CSSF. That does not mean you will receive compensation in case they go bankrupt or are hacked, they can decide if they want to do that out of goodwill, they are not obligated to do so. You did the right thing by writing CSSF if Bitstamp does not want to work this out with you. I'm over 90% sure the UK's ombudsman (FOS) cannot help you at all, as I wrote earlier. That leaves you with CSSF, ECC (private/consumer only) and law firms.

I don't think the other two licensed crypto exchanges offer you any compensation insurance as well, hence most professional traders trade on wall street or in the uk as being part of uk's FSCS (50K GBP insurance).

Good luck!

Located in the USA, they can freeze accounts for up to 365 days when they are a bank licensed company. Paypal does it all the time, because of draconian US law to supposedly fight terrorism and criminals that are hiding in every bush on every corner in that nation, right? However, Bitstamp is headquartered in London, no? If so, they cannot freeze/lock accounts regarding CURRENCY units within them without prior notice in the EU as far as I know. Such decisions need to be ruled by a judge in court with an order, hence all the consumer protection laws from the EU. There is a logical and ethical proven proverb: who claims proves. What is happening now is that they're turning the tables around (as the usa did with the patriot act), where everybody is a suspect (read: criminal) until proven innocent. Black is white and white is black, it's totally criminal in my view.

However, they're in their full right to terminate the contract/service with you at any time according to their own ToS, BUT, we're talking about accounts that hold money and they must deposit it within a certain time frame by law (I think within 2 weeks for consumers/private clients).

As I've said, I think Bitstamp is insolvent, that's why they keep stalling time. As you know, the more time passes, the more likely it is to never get your money back, because the little man (you) is at the bottom of the pyramid, that's why you need to act NOW. And I know this, because I've lost several times money on companies who filed bankruptcy (the bank always is the first one to get money back, then share holders up to the consumer/client - you'll know when you've dealt with this before with a curator) and the little man will get little and most of the time nothing back. The deposits can be used to recoup losses or a withdrawal for somebody else, until it all collapses, that's why you need to act now to get in queue before a potential bankruptcy can be pulled. Hence I urgently ask if anybody knows when Bitstamp is audited the last time.

It's absolutely clear they are stalling time (whether it's legit or not, it doesn't matter) and without compensation for your losses due to instant closure of your account up to the time you received your money minus permitted time (days) by law, you could sue them if you're from Europe and most likely international. I think it's wasted time to speculate or wait, imho.

Good luck and keep us informed, thank you.

EDIT:
You know what to do, right? I've pointed it out plus gave a reference to a post what another one on reddit did. If I were in your shoes, I would have contacted friends and family who know more about the subject and a law firm who deals with this particular issue, financial ombudsman in Luxembourg, ECC and other institutions in Europe, as it's very clear Bitstamp is not willing or able to resolve this in a 1-to-1 fashion (in an untimely matter is also seen as unwilling, as both result in a resolution not being solved by just means). I would ask the lawyer to prepare to make the paperwork in order with a debt collection agency where Bitstamp is located. If they don't handle it with them, you can eventually take them to court by summoning them as a 2nd major suing option. This would have been the recommended way if you were using Bitstamp as a corporate entity anyway. The institutional way (Europe - voluntary way - I should have noted, you'll be only helped if you are a private entity) will take many months initially, that's why your 2nd option is the lawyer/court (by force) way. It's your choice, but I don't think you have more than a year to wait in such cases as this via the voluntary way, as I've seen this several times before as I've said.