|
People are talking about futures trading. I really hate the existing futures at 796 / OKCoin / etc., not because of the counter-party risk, but that it is settled in BTC - if it's like real commodities futures, where it's settled by 'physical delivery', or paying the difference in fiat - I'm all for it. Imagine you went short BTC, BTC fell which is great, but then you get paid by having more BTC in your account - o crap, now you have more of the thing that you wanted to short in the first place!
|
|
|
|
Here's an idea for replacing the FRR while still catering to lazy lenders. When choosing variable rate autolending, lenders will have two parameters to set: - Allow no more than $x of competing offers to be priced lower than or equal to mine
- Do not reduce my offer below y%
Do not provide default values.The system should place the lenders offer as high as it can without violating the specified parameters. If two competing offers would end up in a race to the bottom (for example, x=0, y=0), just match them with the highest available swap demands. This would break up the massive FRR wall while still allowing autolenders to benefit from increases in swap demand. An alternative that might be simpler to implement: - Place new swap offers at x%
- Reduce swap offer rate by y% for each hour(or minute?) that it remains unfilled
- Do not reduce swap offer rate below z%
This one also has the advantage that default values can be provided, since it will still create a range of offers even if everyone uses the same parameters. 2586, much appreciate people giving thoughts to the issue - but I see this as a "big" change. The (x=0, y=0) => lend at highest available swap demands will kill all the swap demand; I wouldn't be shocked if a lot of people leave it or make it x=0 , y =0. I believe my idea of creating an 'effective FRR' by charging a markup over FRR (do not change the way FRR is calculated) involves less disruption to the way people react to it right now, it somewhat solves the wall issue as lending offers that are taken slightly below FRR will still result in FRR increasing. |
|
|
|
|
very well said by DoubleSwapper!
I really hope they seriously consider my simple adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
The biggest problem with FRR is the distortion and the huge wall it puts up. I think the FRR right now is just weight average rate of all fixed rate swap. The easiest way to solve it with minimal disruption to existing system is simply to put a markup of min (2.5%, 0.1 * FRR); the 2.5% is the rate / year which is a small markup and let's call this effective FRR. This way, people can put a fixed rate lend offer slight below the effective FRR - ie. the fake wall, and if taken, it'll still push up the FRR.
Lastly, make the lending fee for FRR 20% and make it 12.5% for fixed rate lender to discourage FRR offers.
|
|
|
|
|
sellers are desperately trying to keep it under 400.
|
|
|
|
Some of the people who oppose the FRR are trying to create a barrier to entry (and reduce competition) by requiring that people either 1) spend a lot of time manually entering offers, or 2) learn how to program a bot.
Excuse me, by your logic - your discount brokerage is creating barrier to entry by requiring that people to 1) enter their order from a computer or 2) enter their order via a mobile app or 3) call them to enter an ordrer come on, something is just so fundamental - ie. entering your order, that you can actually complain about! |
|
|
|
|
2586 & freakbits says it pretty well. FRR is just completely broken. When the LTC lending was first introduced - the variable rate was 0% and people were still lending at it!!!! I sent an email to Ralphy on Jun 20, 2013 on that issue and suggested putting a floor or minimum markup!
I am quite disappointed, when I see mjr says backtesting on FRR, I am expecting change. But BFX just dig in on their FRR is not broken position. Again, as I stated from my cynical perspective, it's even in BFX interest to keep the rate up - they get a bigger cut of fees, forces more action, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
I actually believe BFX has a vested interest in ensuring the interest rate is high - they get a cut of it. In theory, the high interest will cause more trading as "buy-and-hold", if they are any of those holders left after the fall to $280, get prohibitively expensive. Trading also generate more fees & volume!!!
I have actually stated that in the past.
|
|
|
|
|
It is one of those Chinese driven buying - I am still not convinced the downtrend is over.
|
|
|
|
|
Haven't been back for a while. Finally nice to see someone who believes FRR is broken.
|
|
|
|
|
My BTC withdraw is stuck in processing state, I've 2FA enabled.
|
|
|
|
|
the dead cat bounce is over and the prevailing down trend continues.
|
|
|
|
That was kind of interesting. Market going crazy and bitcoin just trading away like an average day. In the past it has kind of traded with the market, so I was kind of expecting that. But then I thought all the talk of more QE during the day would decouple bitcoin from the market and send it higher. But really it just bumped along without a care in the world today.
When is BTC coupled with action in FIAT market?! |
|
|
|
|
Whatever the real story behind the order, it is the past and history. How high can we go before it comes down again is the question.
|
|
|
|
There is little in terms of profit forecast / business plan, etc.
Could you elaborate on that? No Prospectus yet. If you go to the group's website, they talk vaguely about stuff like 'arbitrage', 'exchange platform' (site  ), 'investment', 'mining', there's little elaboration on the site on any of that. What am I really buying? What's really in that business? Where's the revenue? cost? profit?! I see none of that stuff. |
|
|
|
|
this is old news. Btw, I thought btc-e is based in Bulgaria, not Russia.
|
|
|
|
|
well, mining is just another way of acquiring bitcoins!
|
|
|
|
|
There is little in terms of profit forecast / business plan, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Please update the payment address to
1ME4GpB7eeW52DQRzQwuqfRjGxHXzWPevm
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
sorry to hear the loss, but why would anyone with so much in BTC not learn to secure their only wallet?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
