20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!
$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B
At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.
Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months. And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC. $2,376 is just the bottom end. O.O
Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does. Hey, I can dream, can't I?  It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:
"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."
If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes..... Tradehill dark pools... |
|
|
|
Good grief. 20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH! $2.2B x 12 = $26.4B At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap. Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months. And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC. $2,376 is just the bottom end. O.O |
|
|
|
Although... I'd have expected a competent judge to contact me and ask my opinion on whether the device is capable of the 27 Gh/s required, in case my current results were the result of software issues. But it's immaterial, since as best as I can tell so far, I'm getting the most performance out of it that it can handle.
75% of 40 GH/s is 30 GH/s. The device didn't come close to the required speed for the bet. The bet was clearly won. It was a 30GH unit (Little SC),not the 40 or 60GH unit.............................. Does this make this any better? Was the little SC even included in the bet? Common opinion is that this is not the case?! Well, I'm not sure anyone confirmed how many chips were in it either. If they were running a full 8 chips @ 25GH/s, then it doesn't come close to 75%. |
|
|
|
|
I've thought about going crazy on the comments on every news article that is posted, and debating anyone and everyone who has a negative viewpoint of Bitcoin. Including the author, of course, if they said something like that.
Then I realized that this would be nearly a full-time job.
|
|
|
|
I'd say not. I have 1 BTC that I will never sell. So... that's 1 BTC they couldn't buy. Crisis averted.  |
|
|
|
Assuming one does pay taxes when buying USD with BTC, would EACH conversion of BTC -> USD incur capital gains? That is, if BTC are modeled after forex or securities in tax terms.. don't you have to set aside something for taxes each time you realize a gain?
The reason I ask is because I see a lot of people mentioning market day trading, "selling high buying low" every day. Similarly, I hear about people having bots that perform arbitrage between exchanges where the "profit" is larger than the fees incurred.
However, usually I do the math, and if short-term capital gains are considered, most of the above transactions that happen in regular volatility and not BIG volatility actually lose money or barely break even. As an example:
Spend $10,000 on BTC at $100, get 99.4 coins after mtgox fees.
Later that day, sell 99.4 coins at $120, get $11856 after mtgox fees.
This is a capital gain of $1856, set aside a third for taxes. You now have $11237 in fiat.
Later that day, buy back in at $112. You get... 99.4 coins back.
All you have accomplished is a) making some money for the IRS and none for yourself b) resetting the timer for long-term capital gains tax rates.
Am I missing something, or is the above interpretation accurate? Is the takeaway just that a lot of US-based traders don't plan on paying taxes or haven't looked into them enough?
You are assuming that the trader falls into a high tax bracket (where their ordinary tax rate would be 33%). It is a good habit to set aside taxes though. And keep in mind, even though in your example you don't show any personal benefit, you actually DID have a benefit, because you now have $11,237 worth of coins + USD in after-tax cash, vs the $10,000 that you used to have. |
|
|
|
Does anyone here actually consult with lawyer, and where do you go looking for one? Most regular lawyers have no idea of FinCEN regulations. The one that my accountant told me to talk to said she doesn't know anything and she can research for me for $250/hr.
Funny, that when I said the word "bitcoin" to her she immediately replied: "Oh, money laundering!!!"
That sounds a bit shady. They aren't supposed to charge you for "self education". That's why they specialize, so they don't have to spend time learning new stuff when they could be billing people for things they already know. Yeah, but they may not wish to specialize in a particular area, but are still willing to do it for you if you're willing to pony up the cash for them to do so. Also, regarding lawyers, Nolo (username on this forum) is a good one to consult. |
|
|
|
Because most transactions in bitcoin are USD transactions and most bitcoins are owned by americans and US companies will benefit most from its success, like the internet, so they should try not to attack it but rather let it thrive because that is what is best for America.
That's a valid point. Also, not everyone in government is evil. Most of them are just regular people working a day job to get by. They might listen to what you have to say and seriously consider it. |
|
|
|
They are under the same company, they are all not because client's fault, and they are same bitcoin liabilities to the company. I think in any lawland this different treatment should not prevail
Technically, I believe you are correct if the company was to go into bankruptcy. But they are not declaring bankruptcy at this point - they are simply defaulting on a portion of their larger liabilities. If someone with a large balance on instawallet was to take them to court over whatever remainder of their balance was not repaid, and if the company was unable to pay up on the full amount owed, they could be forced into bankruptcy. The preference to repay some creditors at a different rate than other creditors at the point they realized insolvency would then be reviewed, and criminal (I think) charges could be filed by, say, the local district attorney. A whole bunch of if's in that. It is yet to be seen how much of a haircut the larger account balance holders will be forced to take. If it's only 5%, because most of their coins were in cold storage, then maybe no one will bother to sue them. |
|
|
|
this doesn't sound good at all.
Literally shitting myself You ain't the only one! I didn't even know this was going on. I visited the site yesterday and saw it was down, but paid it no mind thinking it will be back up soon. I was in the process of storing my coins elsewhere, but didn't think I had to do it anytime soon since being assured by many on this forum that all is well. I've even gotten others to use InstaWallet recently, sending them coins to show how easy it is. My stomach is totally in knots right now, and I've only begun to read this thread. Madness!!! ~Bruno K~ Wait, YOU were storing your BTC on instawallet?? |
|
|
|
Won the bitbet bet for those who bet on that, sorry for those who bet on bestofbitcoin  Am I reading this correctly? Two different sites with the same bet, but one awards and the other declares a draw? The betsofbitco.in bet seems to have been TOO specific. |
|
|
|
This video recently came out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C4bgho5JSIand it's basically getting laughed at for the power consumption (i mean, the lights literally flicker at :17 as iCEBREAKER noticed 1st) and all my bets state 350 Mh/J. So in short yes, I expect to win all bets. For the record, I still expect to win my bet against Micon. (Though the deadline of June 30 is currently my biggest uncertainty - I did expect BFL to be late, but not that late.) The reason is simple: ASICMINER achieves 167 Mh/J at 130nm. Therefore merely scaling down their design to 65nm (which is BFL's process) should lead to 670 Mh/J, and my bet stipulates 350+ Mh/J. The BFL video shows a device doing 140 Mh/J, but that includes the inefficiency of the AC/DC power adapter (which is excluded from the bet), and it is affected by the believable explanation of the crappy DC/DC converter (which will be fixed per BFL), and this does not take into account the Jalapeno (which will likely be undervolted to increase power efficiency to fit under the 500mA limit per USB link - remember my bet specifies that only one of BFL's product lines has to beat 350 Mhash/J, not all of them.) If anybody disagree with me, feel free to bet on http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=665 where I also have 50 BTC on BFL's side  WOW Didn't you pay them over 230BTCs for two singles nine months ago? You realize that if they ship on 6/30/2013 and the power consumption is anywhere near 10w/Gh you'll never even get your money back right? 450 BTC. And I'm not expecting to recover that much BTC through mining. Maybe half, maybe a bit more. Hindsight is 20/20! As far as power usage, that was just the terms of the bet. At this point, I expect them to be 1/5 the power usage of an Avalon (120w for a Single), but that's just a guess. I really don't expect them to be anywhere near Avalon, that was just what we agreed upon so that I wouldn't have to worry about that aspect of the bet (and Micon wouldn't have to worry about them shipping out a cluster of FPGA's to win the bet on a technicality). |
|
|
|
Willing to put some money on that statement?
That quote is taken slightly out of context. I really do hope that someone can give me a better answer - why do they spend so much money on advertising something that they don't have? The amount of preorders they have should take them ages to fulfil anyway once/if they start shipping. At best, it seems like irresponsible business behaviour. The product may or may not ship soon - all I'm saying is put the ads on hold until we've got proof and some realistic time frame on time of purchase to time of delivery. Therefore I think it is the forum's responsibility to keep an eye on the ads that they show, especially when talking about tens of thousands of dollars worth of items, to see if the ads are at all realistic and trustworthy, regardless of it the forum is being paid or not. Frankly, I think this is something that should have already been done months ago. Why do they spend so much money on advertising? Why not? If they can generate sales now, why wouldn't they do so? The goal of a company is to turn a profit, and spending money on advertising to generate sales helps them do so. Also, you have to keep in mind their perspective. From their perspective, back in June 2012, they were fully intending to have a working product shipping out in late October or early November. Then, unexpected problems turned up. With each successive push-back of the ship date, they were expecting to be able to ship on that ship date. More unexpected problems kept getting in the way of them doing so. Now, you could argue that they should have foreseen these problems, which is a reasonable argument, but it doesn't change the fact that they didn't foresee them and they were intending to ship at each of these given time periods. |
|
|
|
I would try downclocking your card too to something like 500 mhz core and 800 mhz memory and seeing if it runs too, like I said it may be a hardware issue. Barring this and passing the OCCT mem test I would reinstall windows.
Alright, thanks for the help. I'll keep experimenting as I have time. Not sure that another reinstall of Windows is worth it at this point, but we'll see. |
|
|
|
How much RAM you have on the rig?
8GB. Not much running on it either... |
|
|
|
Something might be wrong with the card. Try mining bitcoin, as well as checking for RAM errors with OCCT's GPU test.
Bitcoin mining works with 13.3, not with any prior drivers that I've tried though. I think I was on 11.xx when I recently reformatted and reinstalled Windows 7 though. |
|
|
|
guiminer-scrypt lets you make reaper miners as well as cgminer miners
Does it even crash with -I 10?
Yes, crashing with -I 10. Though for full disclosure, I am currently on 13.3 beta drivers when I tried making that change. EDIT: Interestingly, I don't appear to be able to mine Bitcoins with BitMinter on 12.6, 12.8, or 13.1. Only on 13.3. I uninstall, restart, and reinstall the drivers, but maybe there is some things from 13.3 that are not fully uninstalling and causing the crash? What's a good removal tool to be sure everything from a driver uninstall is properly removed? |
|
|
|
5850, Windows 7 64 bit, I just tried the following for cgminer on 12.8 drivers and it crashed too ("cgminer.exe has stopped working..."): cgminer --scrypt -o http://coinotron.com -u SgtSpike.1 -p qwerty --thread-concurrency 5600 -I 18 -g 1 -w 256 Not sure what you mean by miner type. |
|
|
|
|
I've tried the scrypt guiminer and EasyLTC, and both crash either as soon as I attempt to mine, or as soon as I start the application.
On 13.3 (beta), guiminer crashed when I attempted to mine.
On 12.8, guiminer crashed before it even started.
On 12.8, EasyLTC crashes when I attempt to mine.
Any ideas here? What's the best combination of drivers and miner for me to use? Nothing is working, and I have no idea why...
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
