If the swings are going to be THIS wild from now on, i'd better just stick with trading on the exchanges... Bitcoinica is not fast enough to keep up with this
+1 |
|
|
|
$5.6 now, we're skyrocketing aren't we?  |
|
|
|
Looks like we're moving back to 5.5...
yes we are and we will go thru. |
|
|
|
Are we correcting yet?
shame on you, dear. |
|
|
|
|
The Dow just went positive after being down all morning. UST's selling off.
RISK ON!
|
|
|
|
I am optimistic now simply because the price held at $2.50 for so long. Which means, it's not likely to go lower than that. At $2.50/coin, with 7200 coins generated daily, people believe in Bitcoins enough to inject $18,000/day into the system. That's a significant amount of money, and I don't think it's just one person, or just a few people. Pure speculation on my part, but I don't see a system viewed as failed being propped up for this long by this much money by less than a dozen people, and more likely, it is propped up by hundreds. Then, you look at the future. We are now less than a year away from mining rewards being cut in half. As we get closer to that point in time, we will have more and more assurance that the value of Bitcoin has only one way to move, assuming that same $18,000/day injection. I think $2.50 really was the rock bottom. There are too many people who believe in Bitcoin and want, badly, to see it succeed, for it to fail completely. It might forever be a niche item, but that niche will always be there. And so far, no one has come even close to overturning Bitcoins as the go-to product for the niche. This is all just my opinion, of course.  +1 glad to see you back onboard. so you now see the psychological impact of price alone. its self feeding on the way down and causes all sorts of negative sentiment which break us apart. now on the way back up, we can reunite and make Bitcoin the new alternative. |
|
|
|
|
these are bullish signs; seriously. everyone's trying to access the charts in the buying spree.
|
|
|
|
Quick somebody spike the keck out of the market, make Zhoutong a rich man and burn some shorties  ADDITION: I'm a bit disappointed that Zhoutong hasn't been out recommending a short squeeze like the last time with the long squeeze in the interests of fairness how much in fees do you think they make when they get a Bullseye event? zero or close to. |
|
|
|
You can't have my mining profits for $5.
I don't want them for $5, I want them for quite a bit less actually. The fact that you are making profit from mining at all underlines another fact - that the price is currently overvalued. I'm not you, but if I were, I would take my profits now and buy back later when the euphoria has worn off. c'mon now mj; thats what you advised yourself at 4.3 and now look where they are. trying to play the small waves are just about impossible so why not get in now and ride the longer term wave up? |
|
|
|
i'm glad you turned off the ignore button. now would you please answer my legitimate questions?
Cypher: Every time you ask a question, someone answers it, then you ask new questions and make many more posts saying nobody is answering you. Can you write out your unanswered questions clearly and grammatically, and stop whining about being ignored, so we can actually find your questions and respond to them? 3. if i as a new customer deposits $50K and doesn't open a position, will those USD's get added to the shared pool and get lent out to longs to buy or shorts to cover? as a result, is it possible for a new customer to be prevented from opening a position at all in the case of a Bullseye event?
4. i'm still not clear on a buyer who hits a displayed ask @$4. is he guaranteed to get that price but just after 4 sec or can you refuse to honor it if we get a spike on mtgox?
(Mushoz answered well, but here is my take) 3. Probably. The 50K should be lent to other customers once deposited. If the entire system is skewed long, for example, that user would not be able to buy until it rebalances. 4. What does this mean? That is barely English. What do you mean by "hits"? (Sees?) What is a displayed ask? Do you mean the current market buy price (seen in the "Instant Execution" tab)? If you want to lock in a price, you should use a limit order, not market. If you want to place a market order, you should not be upset if the price moves a bit. The purpose of a market order is to be fast, not precisely priced. if the displayed ask is $4, and i place a limit order @$4, am i guaranteed to get filled @$4? |
|
|
|
Any downward spike will be even worse for all the people who's margin balance is leveraged up from BTC Currency. As BTC price drops the 'margin balance' also drops forcing quicker liquidations for anyone who was leveraged up. I still have a few hundred bucks parked over there for a speculative leveraged up buy at knockdown prices but I don't fancy risking much more than that for now. i agree with this. this is what i was referring to as a derivative tower so to speak. USD's are the base currency, BTC is the speculative asset, and now you add leverage with more BTC on top of this. the leverage contraction would be enormous in a downdraft. |
|
|
|
3. It's probably pooled. This allows people that deposit USD to sell BTC or people who deposit BTC to buy more BTC. It wouldn't make sense for Bitcoinica to use their own funds for every hedge, because that would require insane reserves.
so someone who deposits $50K, doesn't establish a position, gets that $50K added to the pool, might in fact not be able to establish a position in a red flag event. is this fair?
If you don't like it, don't use Bitcoinica. Nobody is forcing you. And remember this pooling is always only temporary. Your funds are never "gone" or anything like that.
why does everyone say this when asked questions?
4. Not sure, you'll have to ask Zhoutong. Still, as I've said again and again, there's no reason to use market orders when you go do the same with limit orders and more. Imaging wanting to click when it's at 4$ and you're too slow to notice a spike, and you click at whatever other price is displays instead.
but a market and limit order are not the same thing. they serve different useful functions. sure a limit order is safer. but if the displayed ask @$4 keep moving up after you've clicked the button, it sounds like it won't fill and you could be stuck chasing it. a market order, will sweep up and thru any asks that are listed until its filled. when i trade stocks, the execution is instantaneous (relatively) so i'm not too exposed to a spike. but a 4 sec delay could spell death to your acct as we saw on the spike to 4.95. you didn't answer my question about whether you had a financial link to Bitcoinica. |
|
|
|
My role there is keeping the forum usable and readable without interfering with peoples right to express themselves. That's why you can post things like you know what? i'm tired of being nice to you just b/c you're a 17 yo kid. f*ck you prick!
And that's also the same reason I can say that, you're kind of a dick sometimes (that's all I'm gonna say on that). asking questions ppl don't want to answer is tough but someone has to do it. this is the free market. ppl like you wonder why i'm all over this. its b/c i see problems that relate to money and if i can exploit them, i will. i've said several times that i trade markets daily. right now, i have 3 diff stock trading programs open with level 2 access. the trading restrictions and problems i've witnessed on Bitcoinica does give me a hard on (panerai?) b/c they represent opportunities unheard of in regular markets. and as i've warned other large players will enter with bad intentions. the updates that continually get written are asymmetric and are meant to protect Zhou, not the customer. not everything just some, like the 4 sec delay rule. but if customers don't care, hey, so be it. Dan the Man just verified my warnings above about stop loss orders.
Free speech thing's gotta work both ways. Honestly you and I agree on a lot of things, you've brought up some good points in this thread. I wouldn't mind seeing those answers either, at least to get any issues resolved. If there is going to be short/long selling allowed order should be allowed to be placed at any time or they could adversely affect the exchange price if it doesn't work well. Things like not allowing shorts to liquidate when they want can cause spikes and cause even more liquidations or give false market data. Or even wipe out some dudes 401k. You're a smart guy, you can figure out how to present an argument better than that.
and you presented that quote out of context. Besides it's the speculation forum, if they started enforcing rules everybody would be banned, including me and you . Should take this into Meta discussion, it's off topic, if you really want to discuss it further. I'm not even a moderator here, not that it matters, has nothing to do with my personal opinion. tell u what. u and i should call a truce. i'll try to stop being a dick if u will too. lotsa this is in the eyes of the beholder. but i still have questions for Zhou which i've never heard him answer. and if he has, i apologize; i can't find them and i still want the answers. isn't this the "How it Works" thread?: 3. if i as a new customer deposits $50K and doesn't open a position, will those USD's get added to the shared pool and get lent out to longs to buy or shorts to cover? as a result, is it possible for a new customer to be prevented from opening a position at all in the case of a Bullseye event?
4. i'm still not clear on a buyer who hits a displayed ask @$4. is he guaranteed to get that price but just after 4 sec or can you refuse to honor it if we get a spike on mtgox? |
|
|
|
I tried making a trailing stop order for the first time and I was not impressed. When the price was around $5.2, I set a trailing stop buy order at $5.5 and promptly it was filled at a market price for $5.25. This of course was immediately before the price fell to 4.7
This was a known issue. Trailing stops are extremely tricky to deal with and I'm rewriting the code. but you already said they were safe  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=55970.msg669617#msg669617 |
|
|
|
2. We don't bet against our clients. We never want them to lose. There's no incentive to do that.
Why would you trade on a platform where you bet against the platform owner?
We're market maker, yes. But we don't bet against our customers. Why should we take the risk when we can comfortably earn the spreads and hedge the customers' orders elsewhere? out of curiosity, do u have a financial relationship with Bitcoinica? |
|
|
|
I would be surprised if anybody who actually understood Bitcoinica would use them.
The basic problem is that he doesn't have the capital to hedge a significantly imbalanced customer position, at which time Bitcoinica becomes a bucket shop where he is your counter party... add a large move to that and he goes bankrupt (and you with him).
A significantly imbalanced unhedged position can be entered directly: by people opening too many new positions, or indirectly: by people closing existing positions, or by people withdrawing funds. That this doesn't happen and wipe you out is left entirely to chance.
Here's my proposition zhoutong: for a 10,000 BTC consulting fee, I will tell you the solution to this that will reduce the chance of Bitcoinica's collapse to 0. (Payable in advance... and that's at a discount because it makes me smile that a 17 y/o is parting these fools of their money.)
They hedge every imbalance. If they don't have enough funds to hedge more, they stop accepting new positions that would cause a further imbalance (The asterisk already discussed in this thread). Bitcoinica does _not_ bet against its customers. If your consulting is as good as your thread reading skills, that would be the ripoff of the century :p how can u say that when Zhou's already made clear that he doesn't hedge every position and that his algo makes judgment calls in this regard? he's already given the definition of reserves and that is 100% of customer deposits and 50% of his profits (aka his own pocket). and now that they're guaranteeing liquidity for the shorts in a red flag situation where do u think those funds are coming from? him. which means they will be trading against their customers. whose reading skills are in question? |
|
|
|
i'm glad you turned off the ignore button. now would you please answer my legitimate questions?
I think he's figured out you won't be happy with any answer to any question. If you would read carefully, you'd notice that not only are these legitimate questions, they're unemotional which you should value highly. You're not contributing anything here except a judgment. You're right, and I do. I'll admit I'm just skimming your posts in the bitcoinica threads lately, assumed it was the same old. A bear can turn bull, and cypherdoc can turn...rational? What kinda crazy world is this? nah, they're actually very good questions which will have a big impact on a customers risk profile. i keep poking holes in the model which leads to an update (acknowledgment of problem) which then leads to another contradiction and another update. for example: Zhou now guarantees liquidity for shorts even in a Bullseye situation which was forced by several customer complaints including my own. that means he needs to dig into Bitcoinicas own pocket and trade against his customers to fulfill that obligation. that leads to a conflict of interest. so solving one problem the way he is, is leading to another problem. another hole which i single handedly exploited was that spike i caused from 3.5 to 3.9 that i talk about here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=55970.msg667447#msg667447for verification of my claim i come onto this thread within minutes of execution and ask "How many": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=49445.msg655781#msg655781henceforth the never ending stream of questions... as a moderator of the busiest Discussion Forum i really don't think you should be rendering judgments on ppls character when you admit you just "skim" like you just did here and here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=49445.msg661906#msg661906these are complex questions which require alot of thought and gaming. to just brush them off as FUD and assume the worst isn't right. |
|
|
|
i'm glad you turned off the ignore button. now would you please answer my legitimate questions?
I think he's figured out you won't be happy with any answer to any question. If you would read carefully, you'd notice that not only are these legitimate questions, they're unemotional which you should value highly. You're not contributing anything here except a judgment. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
