It's nothing really interesting. Gemini experienced a fairly large volume peak yesterday, which directly resulted in its volume to be highly inflated. Look back when that volume peak moves out of the 24H time frame, and you'll see that Gemini will still be the same old Gemini.  In order to conclude legit growth of an exchange, it has to grow consistently over a longer period of time. Volume peaks should always be ignored. |
|
|
|
As much as I would like to see the $2000 level this year, I don't think it will become reality without a proper scaling solution. Most people don't spend much time thinking about everything related to BU and the potential hard fork, as the only thing they look at is the increasing price. It makes people blind where they completely ignore all potential dangers that might come towards us. Don't forget; as easy as the price goes up, it may come down as well. |
|
|
|
I think that soon it will stop, because bitcoin will be much more expensive than gold
It won't stop until Bitcoin's BTC unit price surpasses Gold's KG unit price. In that regard, we'll have to wait plenty of more years to see this become reality. In the meantime as Bitcoin continues to grow in value, we'll keep seeing articles such as "Half a Bitcoin surpasses Gold's ounce price!" "One tenth of a Bitcoin officially equals the price of one ounce of Gold!" "1mBTC is now worth more than 1 gram of Gold!" bla bla bla. They have to do something to generate ad revenue.  |
|
|
|
It's pretty surprising that it's so damn easy to hack all these exchanges.
Why do they always hold so much money in hot wallets? It's stupid! ....
also, this one mentions FOUR hot wallets.... LOL? It's not that uncommon for exchanges to use several hot wallets. It largely depends on the frequency of people cashing out their coins. If people aren't cashing out their coins frequently, it means that less coins need to sit in their hot wallet. But if the opposite is the case, where people constantly withdraw large numbers of coins, they need to stack their hot wallets in order to process everything without any delays - for people's convenience. Main reason for exchanges to operate several hot wallets is to avoid putting everything into one basket. It has all to do with security, which in this case didn't stand a chance as the hacker gained access to all four wallets. |
|
|
|
Has anything changed since the last time it was rejected?
Absolutely nothing. People just like to grab something to hold on to in the hope that the price will increase further than it has done already. It's pure greed. It's funny how people after the rejection say that Bitcoin doesn't need an ETF, that it didn't have any impact on the price, etc, while they now think it will give the price a massive boost. People here are nothing more than a bunch of sheeps. They are just following each other because they don't know what to do or think themselves. |
|
|
|
Actually $100 USD premium is not that huge amount. However, as long as people is making money then its worth a try.  Actually, it is a significant amount for those that are interested in arbitrage trading. People already jump on board when it comes to differences of $30-$40, as has been the case with BTC-E since this exchange quite often lags behind the rest of the exchanges. In normal situations, it's basically free money that people make, but this isn't a normal situation. Well, this gets me going. Will it be possible from some of Bitfinex customer, say customer A want to file a lawsuit against them because customer A
cannot withdraw his fiat money from Bitfinex? I'm just finding it filing a lawsuit against Bitfinex is the only way to get your money because they still haven't any resolution yet on the ongoing issue they are facing. No?
At this point people will focus on that one time withdrawal opportunity, but if that doesn't come through, then people will have to step up their game. I am more worried about Bitfinex that might halt withdrawals of digital currencies as well. People should just stop wasting time and convert their US Dollars to BTC and cash it out immediately, before that opportunity is gone. What is worse, losing all your funds, or just 8%? Not a difficult choice... Eventually the price that has gone up will compensate the loss. |
|
|
|
I think it's very fair bitcoin transactions cost, compared to other conventional payment system such as paypal or bank transfer, the transaction costs very small bitcoin is nothing more than 1/10.
It depends on the sort of usage. If you transact from your PayPal balance, you won't be charged any fees when you're buying stuff, sending money to friends, family, etc. In that regard, it's free and instant. Regarding bank transfer, it depends to where you send your money to. It doesn't cost me single cent to send money from my bank, to any bank within Europe (SEPA zone). In my case, if I want to transfer money from my bank to a bank outside Europe, the costs will be significant, ranging from €5-€25 depending on factors as the conversion fee, total amount of the transaction, internal bank costs from the other side, etc. |
|
|
|
Yeah very few people prefer to go for cashless world as some of them are even scared of using credit cards for making purchases
Credit cards are pure trash. They allow people to spend money they don't actually have, plus you're subject to insane fees. Nowadays banks are pushing with their apps that will allow people to pay with their smartphone or bank card through NFC. Best of all, it's instant and free. we cannot expect them to start using bitcoins as they will always prefer to use fiat for their shopping purposes.
Of course, Bitcoin at this point doesn't offer people a viable payment option in local situations. It makes no sense to ditch fiat for something that doesn't lend itself to be used in the same manner, with the same level of convenience. Ask yourself, why would you go through the hassle of obtaining Bitcoin, hoping that the value doesn't drop in the meanwhile, where you then spend it, while you can skip all of this directly by using fiat? |
|
|
|
I wonder how many people are sending coins from other exchanges to Bitfinex in order to "benefit" from the $100 premium. From Bitfinex's site; Bitfinex is not alone in the bitcoin community in confronting challenges presented by correspondent banks; other exchanges in the digital currency ecosystem are also being affected. However, we are no longer in a position where we can wait for our existing banking partners to provide viable solutions. Accordingly, we are taking steps to work with our attorneys to ensure they are able to satisfy any requests and claims from customers. We are confident that this short-term solution will allow us to meet our fiat obligations to customers. However, it will likely be a one-time option per customer for USD withdrawals. It is not an ongoing solution to the correspondent banking problem and customers should be advised that they will be required to provide an appropriate acknowledgment of payment for claims in order to receive their fiat funds. Nonetheless, we believe it is important to build this solution for the immediate needs of our customers. This is also taking some time, and we will report back on our progress as soon as we are able. It's not certain yet. It will be pure gambling since there isn't anything that will guarantee Bitfinex to come with a proper (temporary) solution within a reasonable amount of time. Either way, instead of people getting blinded by their greed and take the risk, they should stay far, far away from that exchange. It's not worth the risk. |
|
|
|
Karpeles is alot of things, but being incompetent is not one of them.
If you can't run an exchange in a professional manner, where you take care of people's funds properly (without getting tempted to run off), then you're exactly that, incompetent. This dude didn't need to run off with people's funds as he had like 100,000BTC (fully belonging to him) in reserves already. If he kept running his exchange properly, it would still be the major exchange, which as result would have gained him a good number of coins throughout the years. People are extremely short term minded as they are willing to take any risk to achieve something, that they in potential could have reached after a certain number of years. |
|
|
|
BTC doesn't care about ETF's anymore...
It never did. Every price increase that we went through was accomplished by a growing demand, and that will not change. However, an ETF would be a perfect tool that will allow institutional capital to be invested in Bitcoin through official channels. Institutional investors don't care that they don't actually own any coins if they happen to allocate 1 or 2 percent of their portfolio for this Bitcoin ETF. It's just the massive potential that they are after. OP; There won't be an approval. It wouldn't make any sense so close after their rejection. It would make the SEC look bad. |
|
|
|
|
I will not get approved. See it as this; your ETF has been disapproved, and you don't agree with it - you'll have an option to ask for a review. From there it's up to the SEC to grant you a review or not, and in this case, they did. If you look at the reasons for the SEC to not allow their ETF to come through, it is pretty obvious that they don't stand a single chance. I personally find the SEC to be a non entity, but according to them, they look to protect investors. Due to Bitcoin's free market nature, they can't 'guarantee' a decent level of protection, and thus it's basically a no go. In order to raise their chances, the Winklevoss twins have to properly insure all their fund holdings - otherwise it will be a wasted attempt.
|
|
|
|
I do wonder where the upper limit of willingness is though. I think it can only stretch so far.
It depends on how each person makes use of Bitcoin. If I purely look at myself, then Bitcoin for me is like Gold 2.0. I don't often send and receive transactions as I am more concentrated at trading, and using Bitcoin as store of value. If needed, I'll stretch it to a few bucks as fee per transaction. I don't care - I want confirmations to come through ASAP, at any cost. What seems to have been often forgotten is that a large part of the reason for the high fees is, well, the high price.
If pools were caring about the community and Bitcoin itself, then they would be happy to somewhat tie the fees to the value in USD (e.g. high price, lower fee in BTC, lower price, higher fee in BTC. But obviously, they won't do so as they are generating more fee income than ever before. Financial gains have more priority than everything else. |
|
|
|
Currently is stands at $1377.3 and still going up. It's just a matter of days before touching $1400. Personally, If I have bitcoin, and seeing the price at $1400 I will try to hold it more and wait till its reaches $1800 at the end of the year to sell. But for those we want to sell at $1400, you can do it and its up to you to make the decision.
Looking at Bitfinex's inflated exchange rate isn't adding any value due to their withdrawal difficulties. Bitstamp is a much better exchange for benchmark purposes. In that regard, we're about to break through the $1300 level today. Please note that I am always guided by the prices at BTC-E exchange.
BTC-E is mostly a conservative exchange, but at least, it's better than all the people that just look at Bitfinex and get excited as the price is on the brink of smashing through $1400 there. |
|
|
|
‘Rectification’ and perhaps re-education sounds promising, doesn’t it? They never change, it’s all about CONTROL.
Of course. After all, it's China that we're talking about. Everything that gives the ordinary person too much power and freedom will get smashed back to the ground again. I must however state that I am actually happy that they went nuts on Chinese exchanges. People were sick and tired of all the manipulation and fud coming from China. Chinese exchanges are insignificant now, and that's something filling me with great joy. |
|
|
|
Long term hodlers should obviously target offline means, while traders may want to keep some funds on the exchange. I fall into the latter - risky!
I am a trader as well, and indeed, there is no way to avoid having funds in your exchange account, but as soon as my trading session is done, I withdraw all my coins. Fiat on the other hand remains on exchange as it is very time consuming to move it back and forth. First priority for me are my coins, and as long as they go back to cold storage after every trading session, I am a happy Bitcoiner.  |
|
|
|
I'm keeping my bitcoin right now through a web wallet but I don't store it on a single place.
I'm splitting my funds from many web wallets so if ever one of them is going to collapse or does have a plan to runaway.
Then I won't be losing all of my funds.
Instead of having a third party that controls your precious coins, why don't you just split your coins into several paper wallets? If you do it properly, then you'll be the sole owner of everything. Right now you expose yourself to unnecessary risks that can easily be avoided by storing your coins offline. Ok, you lose the convenience that online wallet services may offer you, but you gain a total form of security over your coins. |
|
|
|
Does this move means another positive news for bitcoin ecosystem? Any impact on the market price?
I believed that SEC decision regarding the ETF is final. I don't know why are they making another review. They just granted a review nothing more. They will not suddenly make a U-turn and change the decision they handled last March.
It is final and will have zero impact on the price. I see this as a completely nonsense move as it is nothing more than a waste of time for all parties involved. In order to see the chances of getting the Winklevoss ETF approved increase, they need to properly insure their entire fund holdings. It's something that the SolidX ETF did somewhat take care of as their fund holdings were insured up to an amount of $125 million, while their ETF offering value was just a poor $1 million. Major negative aspect to their insurance was that they couldn't properly explain how they planned to insure everything. If you don't know what you're talking about, how do you expect the SEC to take you seriously? Especially with such an insignificant amount (in comparison to the ETF from the twins) of money. They must have thought that it was an early April fools joke. |
|
|
|
I get good service from PayPal. I have never had any conflicts with the administration of this service. But I did not make big payments through this system. Can they only block large amounts?
Any amount can be blocked/frozen for whatever reason. Thing with larger amounts is that they may raise a certain form of suspicion, in which PayPal will force you to submit proof of source in order to unluck the funds. In most cases things get sorted pretty quickly, but there are examples of things taking weeks to get solved. Especially in case PayPal deems your proof insufficient. But it's all in their TOS. If you make use of their service, you directly agree to all their terms, and thus these actions should be expected in one way or another. It may be annoying, but there is no point in complaining. You signed up there. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
