Absolutely! I didn't mean sheep to sound derogatory, I just meant that the herd moves. Obviously smart people can also take advantage of that rather than just being swept along with their sudden optimism.
These two thought processes seem contradictory to me. If adding volume and liquidity is what decreases volatility then that's exactly what margin trading does.
People who previously could not 'sell' the fomo panic can now stop it from getting out of control by empowering the market to find the correct price through the added supply. With the ability to borrow coins the market can be fuelled by less restricted optimism than just holders represent. Likewise, when sellers are panicking and dump the price people can leverage even more than their pockets allow to take advantage of the oversell. All this extra activity is a good thing. That's how markets find their prices, through people trying to skim the difference until there is none left to skim.
Not sure I understand your point here. You might need to clarify for me. Anyone can short sell if they have any asset collateral in their margin account and I can't think of a margin market that didn't always have plenty of coins available to short with? Shorters have and always will hold back the booms, that's why bulls hate bears and are always praying for the short-squeeze in a boom - the short squeeze is the one blip of additional volatility that comes from margin trading imo.
I think it depends how it is done. There are so many strategies from scalping for minutes at a time to day trading or following long trends. I'm not very active in trading really, but I do short-sell bits of my own stuff when I think we're well over retrace points. As long as you are selling well in profit and happy not to rebuy if it doesn't drop then it's a win-win. Obviously, trading margins and with leverage changes things a lot.
Yes agreed, that's why enabling traders with margin short options and additional clout with leverage helps the market stabilise while people grapple to take advantage of market mispricing.
Well yes and no. I think there is one hugely important distinction. SAFEcoin is consumable, where gold is not. We've not had a resource-based economy based on a consumable resource since salt was currency. This is quite different to gold in many ways. Gold's utility demand is also very low. It is used in jewellery because it is precious, not the other way around. There is in fact, more than enough gold above ground for over 5000 years of industrial demand at current levels, so really, gold ought to be cheap. The utility demand for storing and serving data is a whole other scale. It is almost ubiquitously useful and everyone can appreciate that value and make use of it directly themselves in their day-to-day lives. Actually, they will HAVE to use it and burn it if they want to store or serve data on the network, which makes the churning demand a whole different ball game to PMs really imo. If you then consider how unique access to SAFE is then the demand for it should be really high since there are no other properly comparable options to SAFE for the functionality it offers. It has lots of USPs basically.
Absolutely, but SAFEcoin is a lot more useful than gold or silver is.
Me too, it's really fascinating because I really don't think it compares very well to any other asset or situation in history. I don't have any idea what will happen of course, but it is super interesting to mull over. I change my perspective on how it might play out on a weekly basis I think, but it just tends to get more positive and extreme