Another thing I just realized - this feature will have the side-effect of making the GLBSE safer from hacking ( actually "cracking" is the correct term, but the stupid media ruined the word "hacker"...). Even if a fund owner's account was compromised, the cracker would not be able to directly withdraw from the fund.

They could still, of course, withdraw from the fund owner's account or trade into a "dummy" fund, but that would be much harder to do.

A bunch of updates:

I've been spending today (and plan to spend tomorrow and the next day) reviewing code and resolving bugs. Today I found a minor bug in one of my calculations which I fixed; it did not have a large effect however. Specifically, while constructing price bars of various frequencies from the trade data, one of the frequencies had corrupt data.

Another detail I want to mention is that the "database" is really just a collection of text files at the moment. I update them every day, so over time it will grow as more trades occur, but eventually I will use a real database. Right now, however, there is so little data that text files are sufficient.

Finally, I got a GLBSE contract together that Nefario agrees is good for the fund, here is a copy:

(0) Each IPO share represents a 1 BTC investment in the fund.
(1) The fund trades and invests solely in securities on the GLBSE.
(2) The maximum concentration in any given security is 20%.
(3) Dividends are paid out monthly, on the first of the month.
(4) 40% of earnings are paid out as dividends, 40% are reinvested for
fund growth, and 20% are paid out as fees to the fund operator.
(5) The fund operator will buy-back shares once per month upon request ( after dividends are paid ) to ensure liquidity for exiting MOVETO.FUND. Each
share is valued at (1 / # shares) * fund_portfolio_value minus 1% to
cover redemption expenses.
(6) New shares may be issued at any time at (1 / # shares) *
fund_portfolio_value price to ensure liquidity for entering MOVETO.FUND
--> Contract updated prior to IPO, please see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82869.msg931614#msg931614

I've been coding away all day today, and am proud to announce that the database and analysis code are completed, so in terms of execution, we are ready to rock and roll right after the IPO!

Update:

I removed the MOVETO.BOND offering (and modified the OP to exclude it) for the following reasons:

(1) There's not enough interest in low-rate/low-risk bonds at the present time
(2) There's not enough capacity on the GLBSE to absorb the extra capital ATM, so aggressive reinvestment makes more sense than paying out margin rates
(3) It's easier / less headache
(4) I can achieve higher returns by modifying the desired risk level inherent in the investment strategy rather than utilizing leverage

Thanks,
-cyto

Thanks for the feedback; this is very useful information.

• Yes, leverage is 100% optional. If I can sell bonds to boost returns, great; if not, that's OK too. The main point of having the split between the fund and bonds is to give investors more options: use the fund if you like risk, or use the bonds if you want a lower return while offloading a portion of direct equity ownership risk onto others.
• I have upped the interest rate on margin bonds to 1%/week per your suggestion in order to be competitive with other similar offerings.
• Regarding short-term buying and selling - right now after looking at the trade logs, I can quickly see that there is virtually no liquidity on the GLBSE, so we're going to have to stick to long-term plays.
• Regarding bootstrapping the fund - I already have a good chunk of BTC that I am personally investing to get me started when I am finished with the backend code.

Thanks,
-cyto

In the near future I do not plan to release the source code, since it gives competitors an edge in the very thin market right now for GLBSE funds. However, in the more distant future I probably will release some of the code (it's very simple code anyway) since an open source platform for GLBSE-based trading and backtesting would certainly be something that would benefit everyone.

Progress update

Here is the debug output:

Debug> updating GLBSE_TICKERS.lst

Debug> no dividends found for BTC
Debug> no dividends found for JLP
Debug> updating JLP-BMD.gdv
Debug> updating BITCOINTORRENTZ.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for ENJAN16
Debug> no dividends found for BM
Debug> updating BMMO.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for EN
Debug> updating BIT.INC.gdv
Debug> updating TYGRR.BOND-B.gdv
Debug> updating TYGRR.TECH.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for UBTC
Debug> no dividends found for CRYPTOL
Debug> no dividends found for CC
Debug> no dividends found for CIB-SOLUTIONS
Debug> updating MU.gdv
Debug> updating COGNITIVE.gdv
Debug> updating IBB.gdv
Debug> updating M.ETF.gdv
Debug> updating MPOE.ETF.gdv
Debug> updating BTCSYN.gdv
Debug> updating RSM.gdv
Debug> updating MERGEDMINING.gdv
Debug> updating FPGA.CONTRACT.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for SATOSHISDAEMON.HORSE
Debug> no dividends found for CHEAPERINBITCOINS-STOCKS
Debug> updating PUREMINING.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for BST
Debug> updating BTCWEB.gdv
Debug> updating SS.gdv
Debug> updating TYGRR.BOT.gdv
Debug> updating FPGA-EU.gdv
Debug> updating AA.gdv
Debug> updating BITBOND.gdv
Debug> updating BFLS.gdv
Debug> updating GIGAMINING.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for BTCMC
Debug> updating YABMC.gdv
Debug> updating TCC.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for BFLS.FUTURES
Debug> no dividends found for CANMINE
Debug> updating PPT.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for PPT.A
Debug> updating BTC-MINING.gdv
Debug> updating ABM.gdv
Debug> updating MATH.gdv
Debug> updating FPGA-IPCORE-DEV.gdv
Debug> updating JAH.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for RUGATU
Debug> updating BDK.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for PPT.B
Debug> no dividends found for ANTI-PIRATE
Debug> no dividends found for PPT.C
Debug> updating ZIP.A.gdv
Debug> updating ZETA-MINING.gdv
Debug> updating TEEK.A.gdv
Debug> updating TEEK.B.gdv
Debug> updating BDK.BND.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for GOLD
Debug> no dividends found for SILVER
Debug> no dividends found for PPT.D
Debug> updating TICKER.gdv
Debug> updating PLATINUM.gdv
Debug> updating RAREEARTH.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for DMC
Debug> no dividends found for REBATE
Debug> updating TYGRR.BOND-A.gdv
Debug> updating BIOETHANOL.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for GREEN
Debug> updating PPT.DIV.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for JTGB
Debug> no dividends found for IMPACT
Debug> no dividends found for PPT.E
Debug> no dividends found for HEDGE
Debug> no dividends found for BMF
Debug> updating 007.gdv
Debug> no dividends found for MINING
Debug> no dividends found for NONVERBA
Debug> no dividends found for MOORE
Debug> no dividends found for TYGRR.BOND-P
Debug> no dividends found for ABSORB.1.4-6.LONG
Debug> no dividends found for ABSORB.1.4-6.SHORT
Debug> no dividends found for HEDGE.TYGRR.BOND-B.LONG
Debug> no dividends found for HEDGE.TYGRR.BOND-B.SHORT
Debug> no dividends found for FZB.A
Debug> no dividends found for FOO.PPPPT
Debug> no dividends found for BIB.PIRATE
Debug> no dividends found for HEDGE.TEEK.B.LONG
Debug> no dividends found for HEDGE.TEEK.B.SHORT
Debug> no dividends found for HEDGE.GIGAMINING.LONG
Debug> no dividends found for HEDGE.GIGAMINING.SHORT

Debug> updating GLBSE_TRADES.lst
Debug> recent_id: 206852516879679488
Debug> No new trades found.

So I ended up downgrading to Python 2.x, and bam everything just works.

Thanks

Wow, I will have to check this out! The cover looks awesome.

Good point, I didn't think of that; I'm not sure how that potential can be eliminated.

Groovy! Yeah, I like "transparent fund" better as well.

I updated the OP to reflect the new name.

True, and I think registered funds should have their positions completely open to the public - however, I'm opposed to showing positions in *real-time*, because for those like me with a proprietary approach to investing, I would not wish to have others able to emulate my trades.

I think the one-month time-lag on releasing information publicly would be perfect to provide transparency without sacrificing the fund manager's investment edge.

The concept of a "registered fund" certainly wouldn't 100% eliminate abuse - nothing can. However, I can definitely see it helping, and if I were to invest with someone else I would want it to be such a fund.

That said, the main problem you mentioned (market manipulation) will eventually resolve itself as GLBSE market cap and liquidity improves.

Hi BTC community, and in particular the GLBSE creator Nefario!

I have a few ideas/suggestions for the GLBSE that I would like to share publicly to spark conversation. I love the GLBSE and want to see it grow and become more professional so that hedge funds like mine have a chance to really shine.

One problem the GLBSE faces is the fact that it isn't possible to prove the legitimacy of companies on the GLBSE; however, it IS possible prove the 100% legitimacy of funds with some small changes. Specifically, I am proposing a new category of asset to be created: "registered transparent fund".

A registered transparent fund has the following characteristics:

• The fund manager DOES NOT have the ability to withdraw from the fund.
• All assets in the fund must be GLBSE securities (as a side effect of the fact that the manager cannot withdraw), and the fund's holding are posted publicly on the GLBSE with a one-month lag time (to prevent competitors from simply copying your investment strategy).
• The only way a fund manager profits is by receiving a specific % of earnings. This can be hard-coded into the fund when the shares are created, and cannot be modified unless 50%+ of shareholders agree to an increase.

What say you? I think it's a great idea because then investors don't have to blindly trust fund managers - trust can be 100% assured. The only trust necessary is to the integrity of the GLBSE.

I would also be willing to put equity into the GLBSE to help develop these new features. I believe in it strongly; the potential is truly unbelievable.

Very interesting!

One day I hope to be as successful as you.

Makes sense, just need to figure out how to do that ( cannot seem to find this documented )

Thanks for the help!

I'm using python 3.2.3, that could be the problem

I think python 2.x urllib does not verify certs by default on SSL

What am I doing wrong?
 
    import json, urllib.request, os
    url = 'https://www.glbse.com/api/market/assets'
    if not os.path.exists( 'local' ): os.mkdir( 'local' )
    filename = 'local/assets.glb'
    print( 'Debug> updating %s' % filename )
    response = urllib.request.urlopen( url )
    --> crash

  File "C:\Python32\lib\ssl.py", line 268, in __init__
    raise x
  File "C:\Python32\lib\ssl.py", line 264, in __init__
    self.do_handshake()
  File "C:\Python32\lib\ssl.py", line 443, in do_handshake
    self._sslobj.do_handshake()
ssl.SSLError: [Errno 1] _ssl.c:392: error:1411809D:SSL routines:SSL_CHECK_SERVER
HELLO_TLSEXT:tls invalid ecpointformat list

If that is the case, then I completely retract that part of my statement - but the larger point I'm trying to make is still valid: it's probably a good idea to periodically take profits from any successful yet inherently risky investment endeavour, no matter what it is. It is true for all forms of investing in my opinion. I do not wish to spread FUD here so I appreciate the above correction.