The ups and downs on bitcoin have progressively scene smaller swings over the past couple months.
After topping out in late June price has made lower highs at the peak of moves while holding support at the 9400 or 9800 level.
This has created a descending triangle pattern.
As you can see looking at the chart we are getting closer and closer to the apex of that triangle, meaning price action is getting tighter and tighter.
It’s just a matter of time until we get a move breaking out of breaking down from this pattern.
Who knows, it could be the catalyst to some volume coming in for some real price movement.
I’m not going to speculate on which way it will resolve. I just know if we break 9400 I will be buying at 8500, assuming it gets there.
If price breaks higher than I will look for a buying opportunity most likely on a break of 11,000. Though I prefer to wait for a pullback after any push. Sometimes you don’t get it though.
S&P 500 Smart Money Sentiment 9/12/19 – Is The Silver Breakout A Fakeout???
The Commitments of Traders (COT) is a weekly market report issued by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) listing the positions held by commercial traders and the “Smart Money”, the hedge funds and bank institutions in various futures markets in the United States. Since the COT measures the net long and short positions held by speculative traders and commercial traders, it is a great resource to gauge sentiment in the Markets.
Since breaking out of the long term down trendline in July, Silver has climbed more than 30%. However, last week, Silver formed an inverted hammer candle on the weekly chart. A hanging man is a bearish reversal candlestick pattern that occurs after a price advance and hints at the reversal of an uptrend.
So is Silver’s breakout a fakeout?
Well, for the Silver Bulls out there, what we see is as price is increasing, so is the open interests, meaning the Smart Money is buying long futures contracts.
The buying frenzy is also being supported by the bullish sentiment, which has increased from 10% in June to almost 70% today.
But the raw data to put the Silver Bulls at ease. There was selling back in May, but since then, the Smart Money net positions continue to increase. Thus, the Smart Money has confirmed, this isn’t a fakeout, but a pullback before the continuation higher.
This post is my personal opinion. I’m not a financial advisor, this isn’t financial advise. Do your own research before making investment decisions.
A House of Commons committee has advised that loot boxes should be regulatedas gamblingand banned for children.
The recommendation features as part of the DCMSreport on immersive and addictive technologies and states that games featuring loot boxes that are paid for with real money (as opposed to earned as in-game rewards) should be marked as containing gambling and age-rated accordingly.
The report also touched on the concerning rise of deepfake videos, urging the government to include them as part of the duty of care principles for social media firms laid out in the online harms white paper.
Analysis and Comments
The most obviously impacted franchise would be EA’s FIFA, as Ultimate Team would presumably be captured by this proposal.
While not a helpful line for the broader industry, the regulatory overhang regarding loot boxes is not really news. Loot boxes are already banned in Belgium, which has resulted in several games being pulled from the market (as the only alternative would have been to obtain a gambling license).
In this case, the effectiveness of the measures will presumably be determined by their enforcement, as the rules could be easily flouted if parents or other adults allow their bank details to be used for under 18 year olds to purchase these type of features.
The country’s gaming trade body (UK Interactive Entertainment) said they would review the recommendations and “consult with the industry on how we demonstrate further our commitment to player safety – especially concerning minors and vulnerable people”. The government said it “will consider the committee’s report carefully before responding”.
After entering a deal in April 2018, Activision Blizzard and Nielsen have now released viewership figures (average-minute-audience) on the Overwatch League (OWL) for the first time.
The data compares digital streams last year vs. digital streams and linear broadcast this year, showing that the OWL averaged 313k viewers globally and 95k in the US, an annual increase of 18% and 34% increase, respectively.
Notably, the median age of OWL is 24, which according to Nielsen data is far younger than the other leagues (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, MLS, the PGA Tour, and college football and basketball) which underscores the reach/impact esports have with younger demographics.
Analysis and Comments
The viewership figures are the most important metric when assessing an esport’s success; however, because companies and the media often provide different types of viewership figures with poor context, it is often unclear what thesenumbers actually mean.
As a result, streaming viewership is still often difficult to compare with traditional TV ratings, and previous attempts to do so have inflated the success of esports in problematic ways.
Activision Blizzard’s partnership with Nielsen is a big step in the right direction in establishing more usable and consistent metrics that will help better inform investors’ decisions (and will give them more confidence in the data).
Nielsen has been steadily growing its presence in the space and signed a deal with Riot Games earlier this year to measure League of Legends’ esports viewership – something we view as an exciting development as League is the world’s largest esport and has recently started introducing the franchise model to its national leagues as well.
In my last update we discussed a likely bounce around $9,950 to confirm a falling wedge on smaller time frames. Today, we’re seeing that bounce. If you took the trade, congratulations!
In this update we’ll discuss where price may be heading next, key areas to watch and so much more. I hope you find it helpful.
I hope this has been helpful. I’d be happy to answer any questions in the comment section below. Until next time, wishing you safe and profitable trading.
Workin
If you found this post informative, please:
Spread the word about Bitcoin and help change the world. Support this channel by getting your Bitcoin shirts, hats and apparel here:https://www.bitcoin-gear.com?aff=42
Get paid for viewing ads or block them all together with Brave Browser. Free download here: https://brave.com/wor485
In Elliott Wave terms, MAN began a wave one advance on August 10. The red wave one (blue sub-waves i-ii-iii-iv-v) finished on August 24, and the red wave two (blue sub-waves a-b-c) correction ended on September 7. If this wave count is correct, MAN should be heading next towards the August 24 peak in the red wave three.
Matrix AI Network is an open-source, distributed computing platform and operating system that melds artificial intelligence and blockchain. You can watch their intro video below.
In Elliott Wave terms, Thunder Token began a wave one advance on August 21. The red wave one finished on August 25, and the red wave two correction ended on August 29. The red wave three (blue sub-waves i-ii-iii-iv-v) finished on September 4, and the red wave four (blue sub-waves a-b-c) correction ended on September 10. If this wave count is correct, Thunder Token should be heading next towards the September 4 peak in the red wave five.
Thunder Token is EVM-compatible with throughput of 1,200+ TPS, sub-second confirmation times, and low gas costs. Boxmining reviewed the token back in April this year.
I have been observing for a while how the new HF21/22 is affecting my Voting Power at steemworld… Actually, I have seen some weird numbers regarding the worth of the very same percentage of Voting Power produces depending on which post I am upvoting on…
For instance, a couple of hours ago I saw that one follower (@kokoliso) decided to upvote with the very same VOTING POWER on two of my posts written yesterday.
According to steemworld, the two actions were done at the same moment or at the same minute… @kokoliso upvoted me with the same voting weight, first on a post that was earning 1.01$ and then on a post that was earning $4.94
What is weird here is that seems that the effect on the post rewards was different. As you can see in the previous image, same Voting Power seems that produced $0.01 on the first and less rewarded post and $0.02 on the second that was more rewarded…
So, I have done the same action myself upvoting 2 posts of equal earned amounts applying the same voting weight:
As expected here, 35% of my maximum Voting weight produced the same effect on two posts of equal earned value…The value of my upvote on both of them is worth $0.02 (Curation: 0.048 SP)
But what happens in case I use the same voting weight on an already high rewarded post?
Simply my upvote impact on the post is double in this case, $0.04 for the same 35% Weight Upvote !!! (Curation: 0.058 SP)
And why is it possible?
It is possible because the famous new rewarding curve which has a chart similar to the following:
If you use STEEMNOW from @penguinpablo you can find another useful tool to understand this point. There you can get the following chart:
Essentially, in that tool you can play with the MIN and MAX SP values, by default it shows the rewarding curve depending on the accumulated shares produced by the upvoters , so, for instance, if your post is voted 100% weight by one only account with 80000 SP, or the equivalem sum of upvotes with smaller SP, the chart will be the following:
In grey is drafted the old rewarding curve, in blue the new rewarding curve…
As you can see 80000 SP voting at 100% would worth $1.061 in the old curve and $0.955 in the current rewarding curve… 80K SP vote is still losing rewards…
How much should worth the post to be upvoted in order to be profitable for the upvoter without losing or, even better, getting further more than the expected linear rewarding voting system?
The post starts to be “profitable” starting if the sum of SP of the upvoters reaches 150K SP or, at the current STEEM internal price around $1.98 as you can see below…
From that value of $1.99, your UPVOTE IS WORTH HIGHER and so, it also multiplies the author and curation rewards of upvoters…
I think this example demonstrates who is winning now, Big Stakers, some shy Bid-Bot users and a few succeed authors…
Now the question is… How do we solve the problem of becoming visible in order to be considered a good author to support?
Should they buy 150000 STEEM and power up?
Should they buy Bid-Bot upvotes?
I frankly do not know… I am happy with the downvote effect over abusers and also glad with the Steem Proposal System and 50/50 author and curators rewards… But this rewarding curve is really too aggressive…
I hope this has been helpful. I’d be happy to answer any questions in the comment section below. Until next time, wishing you safe and profitable trading.
Workin
If you found this post informative, please:
Spread the word about Bitcoin and help change the world. Support this channel by getting your Bitcoin shirts, hats and apparel here:https://www.bitcoin-gear.com?aff=42
Get paid for viewing ads or block them all together with Brave Browser. Free download here: https://brave.com/wor485
The financial theme in 2019
has been the inverted yield curve. Why
is it so important…it’s only predicted the 5 or 6 recessions, meaning it has
given no false signals going back 50 years.
Another signal of a pending recession came last week when the US purchasing-managers
index contracted to 49.9 in August from 50.4 in July, the first such shrinkage
in almost 10 years.
The discussion of inverted yield curves is so important that I decided to repost my post on the topic from more than a year ago…withouth further ado.
A bond is like an IOU given to you by a bank. When you lend the bank money, they’ll give you back that same amount at a later time along with a fixed amount of interest. For example, if you bought a two-year bond for $100 with a 2% annual return on it, you get $104.04 back after two years. Bonds have a number of benefits that justify the small rate of return. Government bonds are stable investments and bonds issued by the US government have never defaulted…YET.
The term yield curve refers to the relationship between the short- and long-term interest rates of fixed-income securities issued by the U.S. Treasury. Typically, short-term interest rates are lower than long-term rates reflecting higher yields for longer-term investments due to the higher risks associated with long dated maturities. Also, in a growing economy, investors demand higher yields at the long end of the curve to compensate for the opportunity cost of investing in bonds versus other asset classes.
As the economic cycle begins to slow, the upward slope of the yield curve tends to flatten as short-term rates increase and longer yields stay stable or decline slightly. As concerns of an impending recession increase, investors tend to buy long Treasury bonds as a safe harbor from falling equities markets. As more and more investors begin to buy long-term bonds, the Federal Reserve lowers the yield rates. Since investors aren’t buying a lot of short-term U.S. Treasury bonds, the Fed will make those yields higher to attract them. Eventually, the yield on short-term bills rises higher than the yield on long-term bonds, and the yield curve inverts.
The inverted yield curve is the single greatest indicator of a coming bear market. The inverted yield curve has predicted the past 5 recessions going back to the late 1970’s. Every time the yield curve turns negative, a recession has occurred in the near future. Since 1956, equities have peaked six times after the start of an inversion in the yield curve and the economy has fallen into recession within seven to 24 months.
The most recent inverted yield curve first appeared in August 2006, as the Fed raised short-term interest rates in response to overheating equity, real estate and mortgage markets. The inversion of the yield curve preceded the peak of the S& P 500 in October 2007 by 14 months and the official start of the recession in December 2007 by 16 months, eventually leading to the Great Recession in which the S&P 500 dropped 50%.
This next inversion is upon us right now. Based on history, I’m predicting the yield curve will invert by the end of the year, the Markets will peak in 2019 and we will be in a recession in 2020 (a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters).
However, this time around balance sheets of the Fed and Treasury extremely over leveraged right from the start. Our national debt over $20 trillion dollars and the Fed’s balance sheet at $4.5 trillion. Thus, when the yield curve inverts for the third time this century, you can expect unprecedented chaos in markets and the economy to follow shortly after because the yield curve will not only invert at a much lower starting point than at any other time in history. This represents a huge opportunity for those that can identify these inflection points and know where to invest. Be sure I will be here to tell you those opportunities and how to protect your capital.
In Elliott Wave terms, Cosmo Coin began a wave one advance on September 3. The red wave one (blue sub-waves i-ii-iii-iv-v) finished on September 6, and the red wave two (blue sub-waves a-b-c) correction ended on September 9. If this wave count is correct, Cosmo Coin should be heading next towards the September 6 peak in the red wave three.
Cosmochain is designing a blockchain-based beauty ecosystem that connects beauty industry players with customers willing to share their thoughts on cosmetics. You can watch their intro video below.
