Looks quite accurate as far as I know (I haven't looked much at reddit and other forums.).

I would add "investment fund managers" to the top tier.  And then there are the early adopters who have made or will make outrageous profits at the expense of the lower tiers, even if the price goes down to single digits.

I hate censorship, but I must point out that reading that note as "China is afraid of bitcoin" is just wishful thinking.

That Summit looks like a marketing ploy for the Bitfund.pe investment fund.  If it is a repackaging of investing in bitcoin, like SMBIT and PBP, that fund is a terrible investment, which any country with a functioning SEC should prohibit.  (The Chinese exchanges apparently pulled out of that Summit some days ago.)

Yes, I have the predictions and the actual results.  Will post them later today.  I am afraid, very afraid, of comparing it to the "tomorrow like today" predictor. 

Obviously not, that one is a hybrid between an insect and an arachnid. 

Sorry, what is this about?  The name is not "Romualdas Antonovicius", the address does not match the one on his CV...

The "Colchester St., Coventry" named on Mr. Antonovicius's CV seems to be this pedestrian lane (imaged in Oct/2012):
https://www.google.com.br/maps/@52.411441,-1.499684,3a,75y,83.18h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sFDAAhl42nl3CGhub_FgbLQ!2e0

And as usual Coindesk is totally uncritical.
[/quote]

Right.  According to some rumors, one of the largest accounts in the leaked MtGOX database was Mark's.  Will he get his share of the 200'000 too? (in a liquidation, the owners have the lowest priority.)  According to those rumors, other large accounts belonged to close friends of Mark.

By the way, no one knows who leaked that database and whether it is true.   It may have been doctored with the intent of stealing a large part of the remaining coins.

Suppose for example that the sum of all BTC account balances was actually 400'000, and the database was altered by adding another 400'000 to the accounts of certain clients, bringing the total to 800'000 BTC.  If the remaining 200 000 BTC were distributed according to the true database, each ordinary client would get 50% of his balance.  With the faked database, he will get only 25% of his balance, while those special clients would get to split 100'000 BTC that were never theirs.

The only hope to get the truth is through a police investigation.   If Sunlot takes over, no one will ever know what really happened inside MtGOX, and no one will know whether the payments (if any) were fair.

(I actually don't care about whether the clients will lose those 200'000 BTC too to "MtGOX 2.0", but like any sane person I get very upset when I learn that scammers and thieves got away, free and rich.)

Chinese Slumber Method prediction for Friday May 09

Prediction valid for: Friday 2014-05-09, 19:00--19:59 UTC (not before, not after)
Huobi's predicted price: 2731 CNY
Bitstamp's predicted price: 440 USD





[ Plot legend ]

The data point for today May/08 was good (S = 0.0026, W = 0.870), however it was way off the assumed trend (straight line defined by two previous points).  There is no plausible trend fitting the last three points, so the least unreasonable option is the straight line defined by the last two.  Namely, A + B*(d-d0), where (d-d0) is the number of days since May/07, A = 2755, B = -12.

The Bitstamp prediction, as usual, is the Huobi prediction divided by the currency conversion factor R, taken to be 6.20 CNY/USD.  Its value was 6.21 today (May/07), but 6.16 yesterday, and 6.23, 6.18, 6.16, 6.17 on the previous good sample times.
 
Checking the previous prediction

Prediction was posted on: Wednesday 2014-05-07, 21:51 UTC
Prediction was valid for: Thursday 2014-05-08, 19:00--19:59 UTC (~21 hours later)

Punished again for being bull:

Huobi's predicted price: 2838 CNY
Huobi's actual price (L+H)/2: 2743 CNY
Error: 95 CNY (~15 USD)

Bitstamp's predicted price: 460 USD
Bitstamp's actual price (L+H)/2: 442 USD
Error: 18 USD
 
NOTE: "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."
  -- Voltaire

EDIT: fixed the explanation of the prediction.

They do not intend to assume that 650'000 BTC debt.   Check those threads.

PS. There are two threads, at least, on this forum about the Sunlot plan and people:

  SaveGox.com

  More proof that savegox.com is a sham

Indeed.  And they already said on this forum that they will relieve Gonzague Gay-Bouchery, Mark's second-in-command, from any responsibility -- before even starting the investigation of the "theft".  (They say that Gonzague's "preventive pardon" was needed to get him to support the plan.  But why do they need the suport of the management of a company that failed because of the mysterious disappearance of half a billion dollars?)

And they did not say a word about investigating and/or prosecuting Mark.  They may well end up hiring him to do the investigation and run the site.

But of course Sunlot is not a plot to grab 200'000 BTC for nothing, save Mark's and Gonzague's skins, and allow the thief to keep his stolen 600'000 BTC.  It may look that way, but it is not.

Antonopoulos fully endorsed Neo & Bee.   What credibility does he have now?

(And didn't he do a pseudo-audit of some exchange, too? Or am I confusing him with some other Bitcoin Priest?)

Speaking of priests, I see that Roger Ver is one of the key speakers at that Chinese Bitcoin summit organized by the new Chinese (or Peruvian?) investment fund Bitfund.pe.   Roger Ver posted a video on YouTube vouching for the solvency of his friend Karpelès's  MtGOX. (How many people lost money because they trusted his "audit"?)  A nice way to inspire confidence in that new fund...

Maybe, but they have been buying less than 2000 BTC per week on average.  Does that make them "big players", enough to influence the market price?

Not to mention that it is MUCH easier to program and explain than the alternative of handling small fractions of cents from fees and rounding them only when the factorial of the asymptote is in syzygy with the equinox of the triangular root of all the odd trades.

A simpler theory for the alleged "Thursday dumps" is that the Chinese traders sell off on Thursday so that the cash withdrawal through the banks is complete on Friday so that they can spend the money over the weekend.

In another thread people are arguing that SecondMarket's BIT fund only buys bitcoins on Thursdays.  That could be wrong (perhaps they merely update their accounting weekly on Thursdays).

But, assuming that the conjecture is true, here is a theory for the "Thursday dumps": SMBIT are said to buy opportunistically from various sources, but only if and when some investor buys their shares.  Perhaps miners and other habitual SMBIT sources hold their bitcoins until Thursday waiting for a possible SMBIT call, and when that doesn't materialize they sell them on market instead.

(OK, ok, but it this still not the silliest theory on this thread, is it?)

Could be that some traders see some advantage in having a large BTC balance in the Chinese exchanges after May/10.  E.g. to sell to other addicted traders as in OKCoin's broker mechanism. Or to sell to lazy and ill-informed clients who will end up with yuan trapped inside the exchanges and will need to convert them to BTC to get their money out.

[wikipedantic] Actually the Mandarin Chinese word "yuán" and the Japanese word "yen", as well as the Korean "won", are cognates, the latter two being of Chinese origin, and all three basically meaning "round" or "round object" in the respective languages.  The yuan and the yen have the same "westernized" symbol "¥" but different symbols in their languages, "元" and "円" respectively. [/wikipedantic]

Thanks!    I accept the "pigheaded statist", but neo-luddite?!?! I will have nothing to do with any crazy new fads.

Seriously now: while it was just an experiment, it was great.  But it has already mutated into something else, not so little and not so great...

Yeah, that is what i meant by "through the charting API".

Why do you think so?

I understand that mining for immediate sale was a very lucrative business for some time.  While that lasted, someone might engage in mining even if he did not believe in high future prices, in which case selling right away would be the best policy.

I do not know whether mining-for-sale is profitable at current prices, I see many conflicting statements about that.  If not, then presumably the miners who believe in high future prices are hoarding, those who secured long-term contracts with favorale prices are selling, and all the others have stopped mining.