have you transferred to 2.0 MM ?
Yes. |
|
|
|
Whats the search term you use to find these pics in Google?
That information is strictly classified. |
|
|
|
A dividend of 6.22 BTC has been paid.  |
|
|
|
At the time of the trade, the 1% would be determined and split between both parties. Trade at 1 BTC, fee is 0.01 BTC and 0.005 is charged to each party. Buyer buys 1 share for 1 BTC & 1.005 BTC is removed from their trading account. Seller sells 1 share for 1 BTC and 0.995 BTC is added to their account. That would be a 1% fee split between buyer and seller. EDIT: I would imagine you would round any remainders down to the nearest 0.00001 BTC. My personal opinion on how trading fees should be handled: The fee should only be charged to 1 party, but not limited to 1 side of the trade. The person providing the liquidity should be able to make their trade for free. For example, if I put up a buy order at .15 and a sell order at .16, but the stock is actively trading at .155, I should not have to pay fees when my orders are eventually filled. The person who chooses to fill the order (buy at .16 or sell at .15) would pay the fee. This would encourage more open orders and improve liquidity. Just placing the fee on one side or the other seems to encourage holding or discourage trading, while free trades for providing liquidity would encourage more people to list orders, thereby encouraging more trading. It would also allow companies to list their IPO without being victim to double dipping (charging to create the asset and then charging to sell the asset).
|
|
|
|
Coola boola, could you explain to this chap why split fees wont really work on a stock exchange (or explain to me why they will). I don't want to get too far off the topic of MergedMining, but my personal opinion on this (I really don't care much either way) is that the fee should only be charged to 1 party, but not limited to 1 side of the trade. The person providing the liquidity should be able to make their trade for free. For example, if I put up a buy order at .15 and a sell order at .16, but the stock is actively trading at .155, I should not have to pay fees when my orders are filled. The person who chooses to fill the order (buy at .16 or sell at .15) should pay the fee. This would encourage more open orders and improve liquidity. Just placing the fee on one side or the other seems to encourage holding or discourage trading, while free trades for providing liquidity would encourage more people to list orders, thereby encouraging more trading. It would also allow companies to list their IPO without being victim to double dipping (charging to create the asset and then charging to sell the asset). |
|
|
|
Feels like you're ganging up on me, anyway I'll drop the dividend fee for the time being, if at a later time I want to reintroduce it we'll have a discussion first. I apologize. I was merely acting to protect the income I have promised my shareholders. Thank you Nefario, for your continued efforts. We all appreciate it. |
|
|
|
I'm a total newb about stock markets other than bitcoin, how are the fees distributed usually ?
Typically, trading fees are all that would apply. Since the GLBSE acts as an exchange and a brokerage, an asset creation fee is also acceptable, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
For those of you who have been following the GLBSE, you are aware that GLBSE 2.0 is set to launch on Monday. In addition to many great improvements, there is also the potential introduction of a few new fees. GLBSE 2.0 Proposed Fees:- 1% Trade Fee (paid by seller)
- 8 BTC Asset Creation Fee
- 0.5% Dividend Fee
I understand the need for fees to keep the site alive and hopefully they will one day provide nefario with great wealth for what he has created. However, implementing a dividend fee doesn't sit well with me. I do not feel that my shareholders should have to pay what is effectively a brokerage, for allowing them to collect income from their investments. No brokerage has a fee like this in place and it will directly effect the earnings of your investment in MergedMining. Granted it is only 0.5%, but I feel like we still have time to influence nefario's decision to implement this type of fee. I have posted my opinion here, on the GLBSE 2.0 Development Thread. Please take the time to make your opinion on the subject known, whether you support the proposed fees or not. |
|
|
|
A major item is the inclusion of fees, as in trading fees.
Trade fees will be paid for by the seller, 1%
Default asset creation fee is 8btc.
There will also be dividend fees, when a dividend is paid out, planning 0.5%
Nefario.
I wanted to give my 2 satoshis on this. I do not agree with the decision to charge a dividend fee. It is not in the best interests of my shareholders or the users of your site. It is also not a standard practice for brokerages and I feel it should not be put in place. |
|
|
|
|
How about links in the OP to the board threads.
|
|
|
|
Sold gc to OgNasty.
Thanks!
Code worked. Payment sent. Thanks. |
|
|
|
And what about the guys who were able to easily mine tons of bitcoins in the early days? They own a considerable fraction of all existing bitcoins. If bitcoins become the new world currency, they will literally own half the world - or rather one quarter? Do you think that's fair, acceptable at all? For me it isn't.
I am assuming you don't support any currency for the same reason, correct? OR Do you feel this situation is in some way different than our current fiat currencies? |
|
|
|
|
I grabbed one.
I'm willing to buy these for $7 in BTC or MtGox USD if anyone out there wants to make a quick $2 or get some cheap BTC.
|
|
|
|
I think it would be hard to reverse this momentum
I think it would be hard to maintain this momentum. |
|
|
|
|
This correction filled all my buy orders at $4.61. I am hoping we see $5 again before tomorrow evening.
|
|
|
|
|
Take your time. Get some sleep.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
