Check out www.gpumax.com

A dividend of 6.233 BTC has been paid.

Perhaps the GLBSE could allow companies to put up money to be bonded, similar to how companies are "bonded and insured" to protect against losses.  In the event the company disappears, the money in the bond would be distributed to shareholders.  

The bond could be rated as a % of total funds raised, to keep the massive companies from raising 1,000 BTC and appearing "bonded" by putting up 1 BTC.

My offline business is required to carry a very large bond, and it tends to discourage 'fly by night' companies from getting licensed and bonded to provide bad work.

Assets should be rated by the GLBSE community, whether they are shareholders of the asset or not (some sort of controls could be put in place, must be an active member for 90 days and have a certain number of assets, etc).  That should assist in pointing out the Ponzi schemes.  A third party rating system didn't work for Madoff, and they had a lot more educated and wealthy people behind that 3rd party.

Thank you.

You mean something might not be right about goat raising funds with 4 separate listings on the GLBSE? No, not goat. He knows fat people.

I would also like to see this page sorted by some sort of volume: https://glbse.com/asset

 

Orders don't seem to be sorting correctly by per share amount.  Below is how MergedMining sales orders are currently displayed.

Sell orders
QUANTITY@PRICE
100@0.155
100@0.16
100@0.165
100@0.175
61@0.17
309@0.15125
78@0.154

Yes.

That information is strictly classified.

A dividend of 6.22 BTC has been paid.

I'm also in need...

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:

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).

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.

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.

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.

Code worked.  Payment sent.  Thanks.