After the fork. Continued (part 2)

A small update to ETCBTC is needed, as the author underestimated a bit the madness of the crowd:ETCBTCThe wave 5 extended higher than mentioned in our post from earlier today. Now this (to-be-discussed in the next update) phenomena (ETC) should be in a deep correction mode.

But back to ETHBTC.

We stopped in our last conversation with the “…Bottom line: be cautious, there is a pretty high risk of a reversal.”

And this is exactly what we’ve got for ETH. Reversal down. Unpleasant and unexpected for the crowd. Expected but may be still unpleasant for the subscribers of this blog. The author can’t unfortunately change the possibly unpleasant emotions (and has somehow similar feelings too).

Yet, what author can and is constantly trying to do is to protect the readers from the “following the crowd”.

The author believes that we are on these pages are a rare group of people who are ahead of the crowd.

It is very likely that when you read you have a somehow not-easy feeling. This is the way how it should be. The effort to disconnect from the crowd emotion/sentiment is uneasy but highly needed.

Ok, let us leave these kind of talks for the next and final part of “… after fork”. Now back to charts.

ETHBTCMidTerm

Though it’s clearly visible that we have quite strong support, coming from the rising red line. Yet, this structure is still not bullish at all.

Once we break this support, the visit to 0.014 is very likely.

Basically, the author has little doubts that ETH is more than fine in the mid to long-term. However, we should consider the chance of yet another drop.

Is there any Elliott Waves pattern which allows continued rise from around the current level? Yes, there are even two. But one of them is quite rare beast (expanding leading diagonal). And another one is too complicated form of correction. We will only talk about any of them in details if we see another 5 waves up on smaller scale.

For now the author wants to refrain from “bottom lines”. Let us talk more about it in the next update, where we finally connect ETH (the good), ETC (the weird) and BTC (the old-man and somehow “ugly”) together.

The author will make its best to make an interesting read. Finally, what we witness now in the cryptoland is going to be remembered..

Enjoy your time.

The Elliott Wave Principle describes the behaviour of the financial markets. This Principle is build on the mass psychology swings from pessimism to optimism and back in a natural sequence. When these swings happen, the specific Elliott wave patterns in price movements are created and become visible. Each pattern has implications regarding the position of the market within its overall progression, past, present and future.
The purpose of our blog posts is to outline the progress of markets in terms of the Elliott Wave Principle.
While a course of conduct regarding investments can be formulated from such application of the Wave Principle, at no time will my posts make specific recommendations for any specific person, and at no time may a reader or viewer be justified in inferring that any such advice is intended.
Very important. Investing carries risk of losses. You should be aware of all the risks associated with investing/trading financial instruments. Information provided in this blog is expressed in good faith, but it is not guaranteed.
The market service that never makes mistakes does not exist. Long-term success trading or investing in the markets demands recognition of the fact that error and uncertainty are part of any effort to assess future probabilities.
This blog and the information provided here should not be relied upon as a substitute for extensive independent research before making your investment decisions.
In no event will we be liable for any loss or damage on your account in connection with the use of our publications.
Advertisements

Author: Ravno_108

Sentiment wave rider. Product creator. Yogi

22 thoughts on “After the fork. Continued (part 2)”

  1. I don’t understand the ETHBTC wave numbering. Didn’t we come from a clear 1-2-3-4-5 motive with a 5th-wave extension, followed by a subsequent a-b-c corrective wave, and now we’re ready for a motive wave up again, shooting past 0.0225? I’d call this a bottom.

    Like

    1. Yes, possible. This is what I mentioned in the post as “the rare beast – expanding leading diagonal”.

      Good eye !

      If you can do a better quality picture (make a separate *.png), I will attach it to the next ETH update, mentioning your name.
      I like community work..

      Edit: if you decide to create a picture for this count, please adjust it a bit. Waves 1 (consists of a-b-c, “c” equals “a”) and 2 are ok, wave 3, however, should be moved to where (3) is now. Then it will become correct wave, consisting from yet again “a-b-c”, where “c” is again 100 % of “a”. Besides, what is the most important, the wave 3 in your picture is the shortest one, it can not happen..

      Like

      1. By all means mention the community effort, although my name is irrelevant here. I don’t have a high-res version of the picture and I’m pretty new to interpreting charts. I’ve found your track record to be pretty impressive until now, that’s why I had to challenge you on this one.

        You’re mentioning that in my picture, wave 3 is the shortest one, which in turn renders the structure unviable. I don’t believe that to be true. Wave 1 is the shortest one, then wave 3, then the extended wave 5. Within the extended wave 5, wave (1) is the shortest one, then wave (3), then wave (5). So the extended 5h wave is also a viable structure. Or am I missing something here?

        You’re indicating that instead of an extension of wave 5, it could be really be wave 3 that is extended. But I find it much harder to construct a viable extended sub-wave in that case where the middle wave (3) is not the shortest one. So I stand by my original interpretation.

        According to my picture, we should now see a new bullish motive wave beginning. It seems like that is what’s happening. According to this interpretation, we’re currently in wave 1 of a new 1-2-3-4-5 structure. This wave 1 should again subdivide into a (1)-(2)-(3)-(4)-(5) structure. And once we see wave (5) of that structure forming, we should finally know whether this picture is correct or not.

        Excited! 🙂

        Thanks for all your great input!

        Like

          1. I believe that in your picture, wave 3 ought to be subdivided into a (1)-(2)-(3)-(4)-(5) motive wave as well. And it doesn’t look like it is. In the only subdivision I can see, wave (3) would be the smallest – which doesn’t work.

            Take a look at this illustration, for instance: http://my.elliottwave.com/images/tutorial/fig1-5.gif

            You’ll see that for a correct 3rd-wave extension, you’ll need a motive wave with a sub-wave (3) that is not the shortest wave within the extension. That’s why I believe we’re dealing with a 5th-wave extension instead.

            Makes sense?

            Like

            1. Ah, Elliott Waves international 🙂 I like them and learned initially quite a lot from their materials.

              What I mean with our current “potential” pattern is described under “2.6 Leading Diagonals”. You will see that in diagonals normally waves 1,3,5 aren’t consinsting of 5
              but instead of 3 waves. It’s a special motive waves pattern.
              But in our case it’s even more special as we have 3-3-3-3-5.
              So, to answer your initial concern. It means the wave 3 is a combination of two zigzags (notice, wave “c” is a perfect 100 % extension of the wave “a”).

              Basically, the leading diagonals are quite rare beasts. So additional cautios is needed.

              Like

  2. Hello,

    Thank you for sharing. Really enjoy your posts. From my understanding, the fork has served it’s purpose (refund DAO). Once DAO contract is withdrawn (and potentially converted to BTC) – the fork is no longer serving any extra utility. Participants may then be preferring ETC after DAO withdrawls are completed. This would lead to significant opportunity should etc absorb eth as the winning chain. (in which case ETC would then be rebranded as ETH.)

    Sorry if this question is inappropriate here.
    -Thomas

    Like

    1. Hi, Thomas,

      Any question is welcomed here!

      Correct me of I’m wrong, your question sound like : “Isn’t a logical that ETH will slowly die out and move into ETC”?

      Also, if I read your comment right, you base it on two assumptions:
      1) The Etherum is only about “immutable” blockchain with some programming engine, attached to it
      2) As ETH now is trying to move away from it (or introduce some kind of social component into “immutability”), the community will leave it and will come back to “original” version -> ETC

      Do i understood you correctly?

      Like

      1. My main assumption is that eth holders will see no value in ETH hardfork after the DAO tokens are refunded. The main purpose of fork was to make DAO token holders “whole” again by allowing them a refend into ETH, which would then be freed up for trading (into BTC).

        So when the “refund fork” is complete, it may no longer have value. So less about “immutability” – just don’t think fork chain is needed anymore. The value of hardfork is relative to size of remaining unwithdrawn DAO tokens and original DAO->ETH holders. As more DAO holders withdraw (DAO->ETH) and trade the value of hardfork becomes less over time.

        Like

        1. But isn’t the forked chain needed because people have been doing transactions on it since the fork was done? What i mean is, those transactions would be important to the people who executed them (some transactions more important than other obviously). Transaction have also been been done on the ETC chain or course, but far fewer.

          Like

          1. I guess from your point, only transactions that contain ETH from DTH conversion will always have interests in fork chain. As trades occur these DTH holders become less clear. The loss of DTH become dispersed to all ETH holders as transactions occur. Each individual has less incentive to protect hardfork as DTH losses spread across many ETH holders.

            Like

        2. Ah, I see.

          Well, I can only say that for me the value of Ethereum was and still is its ability to bring this innovative technologies to the masses.

          After we had gone through the current transformation (the process is still going on to some extent) this value is actually, IMO, has only increased.

          Why?

          I will talk more about it in the next update. But if said shortly, we’ve just made very important step away from pure wild-west cryptoland.
          That was needed to allow normal people to start using the technology.

          Like

          1. @tanzam ETH that is not converted from DTH is valid on both chains. That’s why I mention the context of the DTH. Hardfork is only valueable to ETH holders who converted from DTH. And as time goes on and the forks diverge, this DTH->ETH conversion coin spreads across the entire ETH community (so the losses are shared by all). My question is when this happends, the hardfork serves less utility. The two chains could come together again, minus the DTH->ETH coins, that have been sufficiently dispersed across the whole community. No single person feels the loss or remembers what the hardfork was for in the first place because the DTH->ETH conversion coins are so spread out.

            ETH would still be a community in favor of practical forks over ideology. And it absorbed the hack by sharing the loss with everyone.

            @ravno I look forward to your next update. It’s an interesting story.

            Like

          2. @thomasChiantia i was not talking about value of ethers. Probably good idea to re-read my original comments and interpret it literally. So nothing more than what I said.

            Like

          3. Most transactions on both chains are trades on exchanges because most use case for ETH/ETC is speculatory. The forked chain isn’t really needed because major dapps are not really running now to protect the hardfork. So the forked chain is only as important as ETH value since there is no dapp dependancies yet. The DAO protects hardfork but this leverage will sort of diffuse throughout all of ETH holders as trades occur. There loyality would be significantly tested should ETC approach ETH. ETH holders incentive to hold is decreased as DTH is absorbed throughtout all of ETH. Should ETC never approach ETH than this would never happen.

            Like

  3. Sometimes I feel that future generations will be learning at schools what we are witnessing now. History of cryptocurrency 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s