Bitstamp status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Bitstamp reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Bitstamp Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported 14 minutes ago

  fair. missed the broader wld signal on that contract query. bitstamp/robinhood listed it 15h ago. pantera led a 52.5m token sale at 0.24 with 12mo lockup. sao paulo hit them with a 47m lawsuit over biometric data practices. price sitting at 0.307, down 97% from ath but listings showing some access expansion

• 
  CrypNews TV (@cryp_news) reported 17 minutes ago

  🟢 The MiCA transition deadline hit on July 1 — and these are the exchanges that made the cut. Coinbase (Luxembourg), Kraken (Ireland), OKX/Crypto.com/Gate (Malta), Bitstamp (Luxembourg), Bitvavo/Bybit EU/WhiteBIT EU, Trade Republic (Germany). ~230 CASP licenses issued across the EU so far. Full authorization = access to all 30 EEA countries under one passport. #MiCA #Crypto #EU

• 
  Steve K. Loucks (@MetGlobal) reported 17 minutes ago

  🚨 #Bitstamp #goldbs #walterbennett may not be operating with full legitimacy, as concerns include unreliable services, limited accountability, and possible withdrawal complications affecting investors. If impacted, seek support promptly via DM.

• 
  CCN - Crypto Citizens Network (@CCNCitizens) reported 18 minutes ago

  🚨 🇪🇺 The EU’s MiCA deadline is just 2 weeks away. • Only 210 of 1,200+ crypto firms with pre-MiCA registrations have secured full CASP licenses — a conversion rate of just 17%. • Kraken, Coinbase, Bitstamp, OKX, Crypto. com & Bitpanda are licensed. • $USDC & EURC are MiCA-compliant. ❌ $USDT remains outside EU-regulated markets. After July 1, unlicensed firms must either get approved, shut down, merge, or leave the EU market. 🚨

• 
  ＣＯＣＯ Ｗ ❄️ (@phy_nhu) reported 22 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp this feels like a generic canned ad not a real support reply, especially with all the frozen accounts piling up on the thread lol

• 
  Patrick (@TemptInvest) reported 24 minutes ago

  I was early on $HOOD. Sold too early. One of those trades I’ll think about for a while. But I’ve been quietly adding back under $100 and here’s why. Q2 earnings drop July 29th, six days away. Wall Street is expecting $1.28 billion in revenue, up 45.5% year over year. Now, that’s not a trading platform having a good quarter. That’s a business that has systematically built new revenue streams that compound on top of each other, and most people haven’t caught up to what those streams actually are. Start with crypto. $160 million in Q1, up 98% year over year. But the revenue number isn’t the interesting part. The interesting part is what’s sitting behind it. Staking. Crypto wallets. Crypto transfers. The full Bitstamp institutional infrastructure. Robinhood isn’t offering a button to buy Bitcoin anymore. They’re building the entire crypto financial stack for retail and increasingly for professional investors. That’s a different business with a different ceiling. Then there’s the number that genuinely changed how I think about this company. Bernstein projects Robinhood’s prediction market revenue could reach $1.7 billion by 2028. Piper ******* and Bernstein both flagged this week that prediction market revenue could actually overtake crypto revenue as soon as Q2. A $1.7 billion revenue stream from a product that barely existed eighteen months ago. If that projection is even half right it’s a completely new business inside Robinhood that isn’t in the current multiple. Recently, Robinhood announced a partnership with WHOOP. Embedding financial wellness tools inside a wearable worn by serious athletes and high income health conscious consumers. That’s a distribution play into a demographic with real money and real financial goals, exactly the kind of customer Robinhood needs to evolve from a trading app into a genuine wealth platform. The CLARITY Act is the regulatory catalyst sitting in the background that nobody is fully pricing. Proposed legislation creating clearer frameworks for both cryptocurrency and prediction markets, Robinhood’s two fastest growing segments. KeyBanc specifically cited CLARITY Act potential when raising their target to $125. Regulatory clarity in these spaces doesn’t just remove risk. It expands the addressable market by bringing in institutional players who’ve been waiting on the sidelines. Going into July 29th I want to see two things specifically. Whether prediction market revenue has actually started displacing crypto in the mix, that’s the revenue diversification story that changes the multiple conversation entirely. And what management says about the second half of 2026 margin trajectory, because EPS is expected to dip this year before rebounding 37.6% in 2027. The business has crypto infrastructure, prediction markets, wealth management, retirement accounts, and now health and financial wellness through WHOOP. (Also there expansion into Canada, I’ll write about in a separate post). Each stream largely uncorrelated. Each growing. The gap between what this company is and what most people think it is, is the whole trade.

• 
  ICO Marketer (@IcoMarketer) reported 25 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp If $MEGA gets real liquidity + retail access via Bitstamp by Robinhood, that’s a meaningful step for visibility—now it’s on the project to deliver beyond the hype.

• 
  SyAz (@SyAzCrypto1) reported 26 minutes ago

  Every exchange collapse gets called "the bottom is in." But data says only the last one in the chain ever is, and knowing the difference is the whole edge. A crypto bear isn't one single event. It's a chain of blow-ups that fires over months, and the bottom only prints on the final one, when the last leveraged player dies and there's nothing left to force-sell. The collapse everyone remembers is almost always the first domino & not the last. 2014–15: The Gox cycle → Nov 2013: ATH $1,163 → Feb 7 2014: Mt. Gox halts withdrawals → Feb 28 2014: Mt. Gox files bankruptcy, 850k BTC gone. Everyone said "bottom is in" BTC $550 → Then eleven months of grind → Jan 4 2015: Bitstamp hacked, 19k BTC, ,arked the actual capitulation → Jan 14 2015: bottom with $BTC low at $152 Gox to bottom: another −72%. the famous collapse was the opener. Bitstamp closed it. 2018: The ICO cycle → Dec 2017: ATH $19,783 → Jan 26 2018: Coincheck hacked, $530M the opener → Feb 2018: BitGrail collapses, $170M BTC $8k → then a full year stuck bleeding around $6k → Nov 15 2018: the BCH hash war, ABC vs SV, breaks the $6k floor. the closer → Dec 15 2018: bottom with $BTC low at $3,150 BitGrail to bottom was another −61%, over ten months. 2022: The leverage cycle → Nov 2021: ATH $69,000 → May 9 2022: Terra/LUNA implodes, $45B gone. the opener → June 12: Celsius freezes withdrawals → June 27: 3AC ordered into liquidation → July 5: Voyager bankrupt. July 13: Celsius bankrupt → Nov 8–11: FTX collapses. the closer → Nov 21 2022: bottom with $BTC at $15,480 FTX to bottom was just −26%, in 10 days. This is the one case where the famous name was the last domino, which is exactly why it marked the low. So the tell was never the size of the name. It's where it sits in the chain. Terra was bigger than FTX and it marked the top of the crash, not the bottom. Now 2026 → Oct 2025: ATH $126,210 → Oct 10–11 2025: $19B liquidation cascade off the top, the largest in history. this is the opener → Nov 2025: down to $80k now $64k, off by 49% → July 1 2026: AscendEX closes → July 23: BitMEX announces closure → July 26: BitMart winds down Here's what "bottom is in" wrong here. AscendEX, BitMEX and BitMart aren't blow-ups. They're wind downs which are still solvent, withdrawals are open, & nobody's force selling a single coin. They're closing because the mid-tier exchange model stopped making money, not because they detonated or went insolvent. A business shutting on bad math is not a domino here. For until now we've had the opener, the Oct 10 Binance cascade but we haven't had the closer yet. No major leveraged entity has detonated into a forced selling panic the way Gox, BitGrail and FTX did. So exchange announcing a shutdown isn't a bottom signal. But an exchange or a fund detonating definitely will be. The last domino is waiting to happen soon.

• 
  MrBates🐂 (@Mr____Bates) reported 27 minutes ago

  @sminston_with I liked this video. One pointer, though. You said that the bottom in 2015 was because of the block size war. That is an error. The blocksize war culminated in Aug 2017. The final dip in Jan 2015 was partly due to a hack at Bitstamp

• 
  Lorenzo Valente (@LorenzoARK) reported 29 minutes ago

  Why @HyperliquidX Should Acquire Gemini: The Regulated HIP-3/4 Deployer in the US Hyperliquid is engaging with the CFTC/SEC to enable U.S.-regulated companies to offer perpetual futures that trade and settle on its public blockchain. I think Hyperliquid should take that ambition one step further: Acquire a regulated U.S. platform like Gemini and turn it into the de facto regulated HIP-3 and HIP-4 venue in the U.S. Gemini went public in September 2025 at a $3.3B valuation. Today, it trades at roughly $450M, down more than 85% from its IPO valuation. The core business is clearly struggling. Gemini is too small to compete effectively with the major U.S. exchanges for spot or derivatives flow. It has no meaningful liquidity moat and limited crypto-native distribution. The company has already started diversifying toward its credit card and prediction markets businesses. More telling is that Gemini is in outright shrinking mode. It has wound down its UK, EU, and Australia operations, cut headcount roughly 40% from peak to about 402 employees, and guided to lower compensation and technology spend for the year. Assets on platform fell from $18.2B to $8.4B year over year and spot volume dropped 66%. This is a company retreating to its core and cutting burn. But what looks like a challenged standalone business could be a strategic asset at a fire-sale price. For roughly $450M, Hyperliquid could acquire Gemini's entire U.S. regulatory stack, which I think could be worth ~$200M on its own: - NYDFS Trust Charter: custody + New York exchange authority (2015) - DCM: Gemini Titan, CFTC-regulated derivatives venue (Dec. 2025) - DCO: Gemini Olympus, CFTC clearing license (Apr. 2026) - FCM: in progress, completing the CFTC derivatives stack - MTLs: money-transmitter licenses across nearly all U.S. states - Broker-dealer: rails for regulated equities For context, @krakenfx's parent paid up to $550M for Bitnomial, effectively acquiring a regulatory and derivatives infrastructure asset with little operating business attached. Gemini's entire market cap is now below that. Yes, Hyperliquid would inherit a business currently losing roughly $30–40M per quarter operationally. But it would also acquire a meaningful operating footprint: - 580K monthly transacting users (Q2'26) - 1.72M lifetime transacting users - $8.4B of assets on platform - $3.8B quarterly spot volume - $3.1B institutional / -= $0.7B retail - $45.5M quarterly revenue, or ~$180M annualized - 106K active card users - ~$485M quarterly card spend and ~$220M of receivables - A regulated prediction-markets business with 27K+ traders and 225M+ contracts since launch At a $450M valuation, that's roughly $290 per funded customer. For comparison, @Robinhoodapp paid roughly $400 per funded customer for Bitstamp, despite acquiring about half the revenue and no comparable U.S. federal license stack. Kraken paid roughly $790 per funded user for NinjaTrader. And Gemini's users already hold an average of roughly $14.5K of assets on platform. In other words, you could argue that the regulatory stack alone goes a long way toward underwriting the purchase price, while the users, assets, revenue, card business, and prediction markets come on top. The most interesting part is that Hyperliquid could potentially finance the acquisition without touching a single burned HYPE token. The community reserve holds roughly 389M HYPE. Spending ~7.9M HYPE at $70 would represent approximately $550M — just 2.0% of the reserve, under 1% of max supply, and roughly 3% of HYPE's ~$18.5B circulating market cap — enough to acquire Gemini outright at a ~20% premium to its current market cap. Hyperliquid could then redirect a portion of protocol buybacks toward rebuilding the reserve. At the current fee run rate, the reserve could potentially be replenished within 12–18 months. The strategic logic is bigger than simply buying an exchange. Hyperliquid would be buying the regulatory bridge between HIP-3/4 and the U.S. market. Gemini could become one of Hyperliquid's HIP-3 and HIP-4 markets, the regulated U.S. deployer, handling KYC, custody, fiat rails, brokerage, clearing, and compliance while the L1 provides the underlying market infrastructure, liquidity, and onchain settlement. Mechanically, this transaction is far simpler than most public-company M&A. Gemini's dual-class structure gives Class B shares ten votes each, and the Winklevoss twins hold all of them, roughly 94.7% of total voting power. It is a Nasdaq-designated controlled company. There is no proxy fight, no activist interloper, no drawn-out process. Board approval and a majority of voting power both run through two people. The entire negotiation is whether Cameron and Tyler want to convert a controlling stake in a declining exchange into a meaningful HYPE position and the distinction of bringing Hyperliquid onshore. On structure, the buyer wouldn't be the protocol or the foundation directly. NYDFS probabl wants a US entity with named officers, not an offshore foundation. The path is a Delaware HoldCo, funded by the Hyper Foundation but legally distinct, that acquires Gemini and keeps the regulated subsidiaries intact. The L1 stays a separate permissionless layer that never touches a US customer. Polymarket already ran this playbook. Offshore, non-KYC, with a CFTC settlement on its record, it bought QCEX (a licensed DCM/DCO) for $112M in July 2025, ring-fenced it as a US entity, and relaunched onshore in December. Hyperliquid starts from a better position: no enforcement history, US users geofenced, and active dialogue with both agencies. Hyperliquid generates substantial cash flow and sits on an enormous treasury. It should be much more aggressive about deploying both strategically. let's stop the buy back and burns and play offense.

• 
  Ignas | DeFi (@DefiIgnas) reported 29 minutes ago

  Ironically, the more 'compliant' the exchange, the more I worry about the problems they'll cause me. Bitstamp bombarded me with extra SoF documents and wallet address verifications. Want to switch to Coinbase but worried it'll be the same or worse. How common are proof-of-wealth / source-of-funds requests on Coinbase these days? Coinbase already closed my account once. Since creating a new one I worry to actually use it. Btw Binance, Bybit, and OKX (before it moved to OKX EU).... not a single issue since 2017. CS is great, no extra documentation requests, just KYC doc updates. But Binance has been shady with their listings, pumps & dumps etc. Not really a fan anymore. Also for fiat in/out, banks probably prefer Coinbase... Is Kraken any better? Their fiat deposit limits are relatively low and they won't raise them for me. Not a great sign. Thoughts?

• 
  ~Rex (@Rex_Ogjy) reported 38 minutes ago

  sol is trading within a $0.19 range across 16 pairs and 12 different exchanges right now, binance, coinbase, kraken, bitstamp, barely any gap between them. that's not random, that's what deep liquidity looks like, arbitrage traders close gap like that in secs. this is actually funny though, some exchanges match that price exactly but still score 'bb' on reliability, price isn't issue here, rather the liquidity behind each exchange.

• 
  Alexander Pierce (@Kaique0819) reported 40 minutes ago

  Don’t Get Fooled by This Bounce — The Real Risk for BTC May Be Just Starting Don’t rush to call this green candle a reversal. Looking at the Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC is now trading around $77,300. Yes, it bounced from the $76K area, but the real problem is: It still has not reclaimed the key resistance zone. Previously, BTC dumped from above $82K and broke below: $80K $79K $78K That means the short-term structure has shifted from strong upside momentum into weak recovery mode. Right now, there is only one key zone to watch: $77.5K–$78K. If BTC can reclaim this area, the bounce may continue toward $78.8K–$79.5K. But if BTC fails here and gets rejected again, this move is likely just a technical bounce — or even a bull trap. The most dangerous signal is this: $78K used to be support. Now it has become resistance. That is one of the clearest signs of a weak structure. My view is direct: BTC is not in a safe reversal yet. It is bouncing inside a danger zone. There are only two scenarios from here: Reclaim $78K: The bounce can continue, with targets around $79K–$79.5K. Fail below $78K: The bounce may fail, and price could retest $76.5K–$76K. If $76K breaks again, the next stop could be $75K–$75.5K. So don’t get fooled by one green candle. The real signal is not that BTC bounced. The real signal is: Can it reclaim the key levels it just lost? My view is simple: $77.5K–$78K is the short-term life-or-death zone. Fail to reclaim it, and this bounce is a trap. Reclaim it, and BTC may finally start repairing the structure. Do you think BTC reclaims $78K first, or retests $76K? Follow me if you want my next breakdown on the confirmation signals above $78K. I’ll keep tracking this 4H chart. Not financial advice. This is only my personal opinion.

• 
  Mysterious Doctor 📉📈📉. (@MysteriousDoct3) reported 40 minutes ago

  Buy the Exchange vs Build the Chain and decentralisation 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 Buy the Exchange vs Build the Chain $Robinhood with Bitstamp Bought 14 years of compliance. 50+ licenses. Instant UK access. Frontend = Robinhood. Backend = Bitstamp. Accounts still separate. Crypto comes to 20M users through regulation. $QUBIC Built Outsourced Computation. Roadmap → Mainnet. 1,455 invocations live. 451/676 Computors sign every action. Smart Contracts = Brain Oracles = Senses OC = Hands ← now acting No middleman. Just math. The difference: One bought infrastructure to fit the old system $Robinhood One built infrastructure for a new system. $Qubic Robinhood says " Distribution first". $QUBIC says Computation first. Most people will see Robinhood first. The agents will run on $QUBIC first. Which side are you on? Or are you on both sides ?

• 
  Louround 🥂 (@Louround_) reported 44 minutes ago

  Could Lighter overtake Hyperliquid if all the stars align? Let's say clarity act passes, Robinhood keeps Lighter as its perp engine, 28m users (Americans and EU++) start trading perps on crypto and stocks, what does $lit actually earn from that? After writing this article, debunking a few takes and getting quite deep into the situation, it's more complex than it seems. Best case I could build is $500m - 1b a year vs ~$90M today with assumptions of: - $10b/day volume × 365 = $3.65t/year × 0.5-1bp = $180 - 365M. - $25b/day × 365 = $9.1t/year × 0.5-1bp = $455 - 910m. Hence "$500m-1b best case" (everything is forecast and assumptions so very rough). So it indeed looks juicy, but let's get back to reality. Lighter doesn't charge retail anything, that's their model, they earn from premium accounts (the pros and MMs), around 1bp (DefiLlama fees ÷ volume), while Hyperliquid takes 2-3bps in fees on the same volume. Lighter is the club with free entry for the mass, but the bar makes its money from the VIP tables. Packed club, but the bill only rings on one table, ~1bp realized take vs 2-3bps for hyperliquid that charges everyone at the door. Second problem, and honestly the one that keeps me up on this trade, why would Robinhood let $1B a year walk out the door to another company? They already own Bitstamp, they already own a CFTC-licensed derivatives entity, spent a decade proving they'd rather internalize order flow economics than share them, PFOF is literally their invention, they have the distribution and users. The moment US perps get legal and the prize becomes real, the build vs buy question will be properly analyzed. Vlad advising Lighter and the Ventures stake are nice, but nice wont stop a broker from vertical integration when 9 to 10 figs are on the table. Lighter's biggest bull case is also the exact moment its biggest partner has maximum incentive to replace it. And before the .hl crew celebrate, clarity cuts both ways. Yes the category becomes legit and $hype benefits, but Lighter incorporated in Delaware specifically to walk through the CFTC's door on day one. Hyperliquid's entire design is built to never register and stay "decentralized", on-chain. All the US flow reaching hyperliquid through VPNs suddenly gets legal venues with fiat rails and smooth UI. Will people use it and switch platform? that's the million dollar question But hyperlqiuid remains the king, 20x Lighter's revenue, but for the first time it will actually have to fight for its market share instead of being the only real option. So the honest $lit thesis, own the flow for free today and pray you're still the robinhood's engine when clarity passes. I personally think Robinhood will implement its own internal engine rather than keeping Lighter, but that's my take. It's a patience trade with a betrayal risk attached, but could be one of the most asymmetric there is 🥂

• 
  Cpa (@Aspenalps1) reported 44 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp All customers need to look at Reddits complaints about withdrawals. Bitstamp needs to be sued for jerking people around. WORST CUSTOMER SERVICE OF ANY EXCHANGE. Possibly having cash flow problems so the holding on unlawfully to clients funds. IS THIS ANOTHER FTX COMING DOWN PIKE!!! Don’t use Bitstamp!!!

• 
  Cathy Breeden -🪝🛠️ @Xaman® + XRPL + Xahau (@c_abreeden2016) reported 46 minutes ago

  @GoldLoverXo Buy XRP: Uphold, Bitstamp, Kraken. Store securely: Xaman, Ledger, Tangem Need more help? Just ask me

• 
  Cryptorbix (@Cryptorbix) reported 48 minutes ago

  Robinhood opens crypto to eligible UK customers — access to 50+ assets via Bitstamp inside its main investing app, rollout starts this week. Expect more retail flow into BTC/ETH and alt orderbooks. 🇬🇧 #Crypto #CryptoNews

• 
  UZ | DeFi (@UzOnChain) reported 48 minutes ago

  Robinhood Chain since the past week I have been looking into the chain matrices and I was disappointed. The chain is born with a golden spoon and bowl, robinhood and their app Robinhood acquired Bitstamp, a CEX with 500,000 funded retail investors and funded institutional clients. This allowed the company to enter the EU, UK, and US crypto market. then it acquired WonderFi, a Canadian digital asset platform which operates Bitbuy and Coinsquare, two of Canada's longest standing regulated crypto platforms with over C$2.1 billion in assets under management. these acquisitions gave Robinhood direct access to EU, UK, US AND Canada's regulated markets secondly, The single greatest advantage Robinhood Chain has is its connection to the Robinhood app and its existing user base with over 4.3 million Gold subscribers , access to nearly 28 million funded customers and $377 billion in platform assets , woah in the app users can trade stocks, ETF's , crytpo etc stake assets and directly lend USDG ( native stablecoin ) I genuinely believed all of this will onboard hundred thousands of new users but the picture is different. 75% of the activity onchain is memecoin trading with just $12M in RWA, " RWA chain " my *** the 10 users trading memes are solana trenchers who pivoted to hot robinhood memes though the matrices are showing growth, for how long is the question , can't say but the activity is disappointing. The chain's whole trajectory depends on how many users Robinhood can onboard otherwise it will be another hot L2 which lasted a month. lets see what happens

• 
  Pinky (@PinkyndTheGainz) reported 48 minutes ago

  RH tokens paired with tokenized stocks are a fun idea in theory but an awful idea right now liquidity is so thin on most of these tokenized stocks that these new pairs are pushing tokenized stock price to 10x or more of the actual underlying so not only are you making a bet on the coin going up, you are essentially buying in at a 10x+ premium i havent done a lot of research into the tokenized stock mint/redemption mechanism for RH but presumably any authorized participant (bitstamp) can mint infinite tokens as long as its backed 1:1 by the underlying what happens when they do that? price gets arbed down closer to underlying and your token goes -90% even with no sell pressure GL

• 
  Dan G. (@dg1001) reported 49 minutes ago

  @blknoiz06 @0xMerp Bitstamp is working at least

• 
  aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported 50 minutes ago

  @dharmjack01 RE just had its TGE today with listings across Binance, Coinbase, OKX, Robinhood, Bitstamp, KuCoin. CB Ventures took a strategic position. price hit 53 cents earlier. the setup: onchain reinsurance is a $1T market that hasn't been touched. they're offering reUSD at 7% native APR plus 10% in RE rewards. Season 2 incentives running through December distributing 3.5% of FDV. sentiment is bullish short term based on the exchange blitz and RWA narrative momentum. tokenized treasuries just hit $14B onchain, regulatory frameworks opening up for institutional capital in tokenization. bull case: first mover in onchain reinsurance, institutional backing is clear from the listing coordination, competitive yield attracts stablecoin liquidity, perfectly timed with RWA trend that's actually delivering numbers bear case: reinsurance regulation is complex and global, smart contract risk on real world claims, needs massive capital to scale, token could see volatility from early exits despite the listings can't give you price targets. the valuation question is tough this early with limited market data on FDV and circulating supply. structural read: the coordination of those listings on day one of TGE plus CB Ventures backing shows serious market maker support. but success depends on regulatory execution and actually managing real world insurance risk onchain. the yield mechanism needs to prove sustainable under claims pressure.

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 52 minutes ago

  @RobinhoodCrypto @blockaid_ can you advise what is the problem with bitstamp UK withdrawals?

• 
  Langford (@StockLangford) reported 55 minutes ago

  Bitcoin is showing a dangerous signal! If 80K fails to hold, the short term may see a sharp drop first. From today’s Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC is now hovering around the $80,400–$80,800 range. On the surface, it looks like high-level sideways movement, but the structure on the right side is already very clear: the previous two attempts to break through 82K–82.5K both failed to hold, followed by consecutive pullbacks. This shows one thing: selling pressure above is heavy, and the bulls are starting to lose momentum on the push higher. My current judgment is very direct: in the short term, I’m looking for a pullback first, not chasing longs. Next, focus only on two levels: First, $80,000. This is the most important defense line for the bulls right now. As long as 80K can still hold, Bitcoin still has a chance to continue building strength and attack 81.5K–82K again. Second, $79,500–$78,800. If 80K breaks, the short term will likely continue to wash downward and test this support zone. This is the real area that decides whether the bulls can continue to stay in control. The most dangerous thing right now is not that it has dropped, but that it keeps failing to break higher at a high level. Many people see BTC still above 80K and think it will definitely continue to push toward 85K. But people who truly read the market do not only look at where price is standing. They look at: Is there continuation after the breakout attempt? Is there support on the pullback? Right now, the answer is very clear: selling pressure above 82K is obvious, and 80K is getting closer to being tested again. So my prediction is: short-term bearish, first watch the risk of 80K breaking. If 80K breaks, I will look toward 79.5K, even 78.8K. If 80K holds strongly and BTC reclaims 81.5K with volume, then it will have a chance to challenge 82K–82.5K again. One-sentence summary: now is not the position to blindly chase higher, but to watch whether the 80K defense line can hold. If it holds, there is still a chance to rebound; if it breaks, the short term will likely first wash down to 79.5K–78.8K. What do you think about this move? Do you think Bitcoin is washing and accumulating above 80K, or preparing to drop back to 78K to find support again? Type your direction in the comments: bullish, type 1; bearish, type 2. In my next post, I will directly break down: can 80K be entered near here? Where are the real entry and stop-loss levels? Follow me if you want to see the next key levels. Don’t wait until the market has already moved, only to realize you were one step too late again. （Personal opinion only, not investment advice.）

• 
  Global Smart (@GlobalSmart_T) reported 57 minutes ago

  @solidintel_x Luxembourg again. Coinbase, Bitstamp, now Ripple. EU’s Delaware is working overtime.

• 
  Alexander Pierce (@Kaique0819) reported 59 minutes ago

  Bitcoin is stuck at 77.3K. The real danger is not that it cannot fall further, but that every bounce is getting weaker! Looking at the Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC has fallen all the way from the 82.5K high. 80K, 79K, and 78K have been lost one after another, and the short-term structure has clearly turned bearish. Right now, the price is consolidating around 77.3K. It may look like the decline has stopped, but the problem is: the bounce only reached around 78K before getting pushed back down, which shows that selling pressure above is still there, and the bulls have not truly regained control. Next, there are only two key levels to watch: 77K–76.5K: The current defense zone. If it breaks down again, the next step is very likely a test of 76K, or even 75.5K. 78K–78.5K: The threshold for a short-term reversal. Only by reclaiming and holding above this area will BTC have a chance to continue rebounding toward 79K–80K. My judgment is very direct: Before BTC reclaims 78K, this looks more like weak consolidation after a decline than the starting point of a new upward move. The most dangerous market condition is not a sharp drop. It is when every bounce is weaker than the last one. Do you think BTC will reclaim 78K first, or break directly below 76.5K? Follow me. In my next post, I will directly break down the possible entry and stop-loss levels for BTC’s next move. （This is only my personal opinion and does not constitute investment advice.）

• 
  Watchingthis2☮️♥️🌎🍀🔺 (@Watchingthis21) reported 59 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Wen can we get access these on Robinhood? I want the lend feature on RH too.

• 
  SalamAndr (@FX1000ren) reported 1 hour ago

  @BitstampSupport 2/9 2017 I opened a Bitstamp account as an EU customer. My account was fully verified. It was a regular retail account with a relatively small balance.

• 
  Alen B (@AlenBarb) reported 1 hour ago

  @KyTosta @TheBTCTherapist Bitstamp is this true? Help a guy here? Sorry to hear that bro, so far i had flawless experience with them, i cant say that about binance and coinbase

• 
  Iso Ledger (@JamesDula82) reported 1 hour ago

  Dark Defender posted "The Chart That Did Not Move." The claim: a Fibonacci structure drawn in September 2023, never redrawn, that called every major XRP level years ahead, including the exact bottom of the correction that just ended. Clean. Orderly. Floor held, surge followed, three confirmed closes, leverage "flushed out within a day." Here's what actually happened inside that window. On August 22, XRP printed a 37% wick on Bitstamp, from $1.697 down to $1.067 and back to $1.448, all inside one minute. Other venues like Kraken and OKX showed far smaller moves. It happened days after a 60%+ weekly rally that briefly topped $1.69. Market-wide liquidations hit roughly $1.35 billion in 24 hours, with about $500 million in longs cleared in the acute phase. XRP's own long liquidations that day were the largest since October 2025, per CryptoQuant, yet open interest still sat at $3.66 billion afterward, so calling it "flushed out" overstates how much leverage actually left. That entire event gets one line in the article. No 37%. No scale. The most violent single-venue move of the whole eight week "test" window gets reduced to a quiet cleanup. That's the surface problem. The deeper one is the method itself. Elliott Wave counts are built to be adjusted after the fact. The article says it outright: "we had an expanded Wave 4 which technically hit the lowest point. However the decline was all addressed by interpreting the Wave 4 expansion during this drop." The count didn't predict the drop. It got reshaped once the drop had already happened. Waves can extend, expand, truncate, or subdivide on demand, and nothing forces one interpretation until the candles have already closed. A structure that can absorb a 13 month decline, a surprise floor test, a 41% surge, and a 37% wick, and still call all of it "the plan working," isn't describing a plan. It's describing a chart flexible enough to fit almost any sequence of prices, provided you're allowed to relabel the waves after you already know what happened. The levels themselves roughly track real history. What's being sold is the certainty that "the map never changed." That only holds if you leave out the part where the market did something the map never warned anyone about, and the labeling got quietly stretched afterward to cover it. Verify the levels if you want. Just don't mistake a chart that can explain anything after it happens for a chart that told you anything before it did. We audit the plumbing 🛡 Link to his post 🤝 👇