Bitcoins

Ark_Welder

dryhat wrote: »

I'm not a gambler...

dryhat wrote: »

I turned £500 into £2k over the past 4 weeks and that is not a bad return in my book and was well worth the punt.

Risky, yes.

But worth it.

And there is no reason not to expect similar moves over the coming months.
But then it could go to zero.

Take out profits as you go and enjoy the ride.

I haven't had this much fun in ages.

dryhat wrote: »

I am almost £2k better off now than I would have been had I not bought bitcoin 4 weeks ago.

And all for a £500 punt.

You can spout all you like about "traditional" forms of investing - balanced portfolios, value investing or whatever, blah blah blah but if you couldn't spot the potential of bitcoin once it started kicking off in cyprus, then you lost out big time.

And I'm not even a gambler or a high risk investor.

I might not be into all the fancy jargon or data analysis when it comes to investing, but I can spot a one off opportunity to make a quick buck. And I went for it.

The worst type of gambler is those that mistake it for something else.

dryhat wrote: »

..but I would bet that it took you ages to get that post formatted just the way you wanted it.

I prepared it earlier

dryhat wrote: »

Was it worth it?

I had time on my hands whilst waiting for dinner to be ready. Wouldn't have bothered otherwise.

The-Joker

DiggerUK wrote: »

Being in to gold I had come across bitcon a long time ago.
I listened to the Gatagoons, Zerobrainers and Max Bullshiysters, and having smelt a rat moved along.

But like most others I have been keeping up with current affairs, and am now realising that being too young to remember Tulipmania, South Sea Bubbles, and Mr. Ponzi, will not deny me a tale to tell the grandkids.

And all this in a week when it seemed we would hear nothing else on the news than how sweet Hilda was.
Couldn't make it up, cudja.
..._

What do you think Digger is this the bottom of this dip? I never thought we would ever go under £1000oz ever again, but this is one last dip just under. But next week will it go even lower?

andy.m_2

I think that Dryhat has used terminology that in many peoples eyes is using the simplistic terms such as punt and risky as it means that people understand there is some risk.
Ark W has taken them literally as gambling terms.

I guess it's just semantics.

Ark_Welder

andy.m wrote: »

I think that Dryhat has used terminology that in many peoples eyes is using the simplistic terms such as punt and risky as it means that people understand there is some risk.
Ark W has taken them literally as gambling terms.

I guess it's just semantics.

I take the whole of this process as being gambling because there is no intrinsic value here and the return is based solely on pushing the price higher and hoping that someone else buys at the higher price.

I have recently bought shares in two companies, both of which have market caps of less than £20m. But in doing so, I am gambling, and not investing.

Acknowledge it as being a gamble, and enjoy the fun of the chase if that is what is wanted. But thinking that buying into Bitcoin is the same as investing is absolutely the wrong approach to have.

dryhat

Ark_Welder wrote: »

I have recently bought shares in two companies, both of which have market caps of less than £20m. But in doing so, I am gambling, and not investing.

Acknowledge it as being a gamble, and enjoy the fun of the chase if that is what is wanted. But thinking that buying into Bitcoin is the same as investing is absolutely the wrong approach to have.

If you had this "gamble" in the last month or so, you picked the wrong "horse".

I hope you have better luck next time.

sabretoothtigger

Theres a couple of points Im looking at for gold. First of all, its tradition for a retest.
any major break or gap should be confirmed by a trade upto or near that point. So if we at first rose back to 1500's (1660 even) and then fell back here, that is where we get properly negative most likely

Then maybe 1352 but before that there is an old downtrend that could provide a bottom price.

Im quite surprised it keeps going down as events appear to favour gold so Cyprus details were nasty but the flip side is they will sell gold so I guess that is a negative for the price.

Gold is short term weak if long term holders/buyers are wealthier then cyprus however we know the #1 holder of gold is in trouble, USA selling gold would nuke the price but then dont we price gold in dollars so its like the chicken and the egg paradox
Its enough to induce a headache:eek:

£1000oz

sterling has recovered a bit recently. Since year start its fall had been supporting gold price

thisisjamie wrote: »

It's the first currency that is not influenced by the action of banks, surely that is a good thing?

Others have influence might be a problem still or even the lack of any influence or dynamic to drive demand
Are hackers attacking sites to scare the market then buying cheap bitcoins or would that be a myth

padington

It's mad that the black market has got it's own global digitisl currency. Who would have seen this coming ?

My gut says that the bit coin might turn out to be the most valuable type of coin ever ... and some.

Where is the best place to buy ? The lottery money could be better spent.

cepheus

Ark_Welder wrote: »

I take the whole of this process as being gambling because there is no intrinsic value here and the return is based solely on pushing the price higher and hoping that someone else buys at the higher price.

I have recently bought shares in two companies, both of which have market caps of less than £20m. But in doing so, I am gambling, and not investing.

I thought that how all stock exchange 'investments' worked, they are worth what someone else is willing to pay. Most companies value are based on potential future revenues which may never materialise and these are usually far in excess of any net asset value. Surely any 'non-certain' investment is respectable gambling.

It seems strange to me that placing a speculative 2k on a company is considered gambling, while placing 200k on a national index isn't. Perhaps it's more of a culture thing, investment is considered more moral than gambling and we like to place a firm dividing line between the two. The risks are different but there is always a finite risk of a large loss. In fact by definition it's only possible to lose more than 2k in the second scenario, yet we rely on our pensions for it.

the_flying_pig

Bitcoins are fascinating, albeit for the wrong reasons.. All the excitement seems to be about speculative holding gains and losses rather than use as a medium of exchange.

On the positive side, use of them is such a tiny speck in the grand scheme of things that the (possible) bubble wont be able to harm the macroeconomy on any meaningful scale, unlike certain other bubbles that I could mention.

Ark_Welder

dryhat wrote: »

If you had this "gamble" in the last month or so, you picked the wrong "horse".

I hope you have better luck next time.

Perhaps you could answer the question raised by MrPriclePants about how buying 20 Bitcoins for £500, selling 15 to make a profit of £922, therefore leaving you with 5, could ever produce a 'return' of £3000 as you have claimed.