I've got BTC for sale at the market price (no markup). Just tell me how many you want. I've got lots of references (see below) so I will need you to send first. Here's my references: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=26907.0PM me if interested. Thanks, Trader Steve |
|
|
|
|
They seem like very similar services - any comments or opinions? I've been away from this board for a while.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Here is what I find interesting about this article:
All currencies are "opt in" with the exception of those that are mandated (forced) by the State. Where currencies are forced by the State, black markets emerge. Fortunately, bitcoin has not (yet) been pushed into the black market. Bitcoin is an "opt in" currency much like Linden Dollars or Ithaca Hours. They are all accepted in specific communities. Some communities are bigger than others. The community for US Dollars is, of course, one of the largest communities.
To what extent the bitcoin community grows or shrinks we can only speculate. Proponents can only sell the benefits and work to make it easier to use. One way to promote bitcoin is to readily accept it for your goods and services.
Since every commodity is also a currency (each can be traded - some more efficiently than others), I see a world where we will continue to see multiple, parallel currencies. Exchange services will continue to exist in order to help people move between communities.
Creating value and trading it for the created value of others improves the standard of living of everyone. Money lubricates the process. I love commerce - it gives flavor to life. Bitcoin makes it even more interesting.
|
|
|
|
The point is you've made no value gain by choosing to accept BTC in lieu of USD. In both cases, you've obtained $10 in assets and if this is on a $5 cost basis you made 100% profit rate no matter if you accept BTC or USD to pay for it.
Stated differently, choosing to sell in BTC gives you no special benefit in profitability. It's equally profitable to sell for BTC or USD (ignoring the fees issue, for the sake of argument). Actually, you have made a value gain because you've opened your trading opportunities to a new market - the bitcoin community - where you are likely to have less competition for your goods and services. Your goods and services may have remained unsold had you not exposed them to this new market. You were partaking in arbitrage - the essence of entrepreneurship. |
|
|
|
If I were nitpicking, I would point out that "sowing" would be clearer word than "sown" but I'm not. I understand your message perfectly.  The question was, "what have I done" not "what am I doing." I used the proper conjugation in response to the question. /nitpick a nitpick I stand corrected.  |
|
|
|
Yes, it is incorrect to say that by selling goods for bitcoin one is getting bitcoin at 50% off. A vendor sells his trinket either for $10 or $10 worth of Bitcoins, and in both cases he's obtained assets equal to $10.
There are many reasons to sell things for Bitcoin, but "obtaining Bitcoin at half price" is a fallacious one.
If your cost of goods is 50% of your retail price then the cost of the item you trade for is your cost of goods. Seems pretty simple to me. I see no fallacious argument here. Leave out the "dollar price" terminology and you simply have a situation where one good is exchanged for another. In the candy bar example, the candy bar is a medium of exchange which the person uses to acquire bitcoin instead of paying cash directly. Sorry to beat a dead horse but here it is put another way: The holder of cash used the candy bar as a medium of exchange to acquire the bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Here is a brain teaser, just for fun: Who is the buyer and who is the seller in this (or any) transaction?
Everyone is both. +1 |
|
|
|
|
Here is a brain teaser, just for fun: Who is the buyer and who is the seller in this (or any) transaction?
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is incorrect to say that by selling goods for bitcoin one is getting bitcoin at 50% off. A vendor sells his trinket either for $10 or $10 worth of Bitcoins, and in both cases he's obtained assets equal to $10.
There are many reasons to sell things for Bitcoin, but "obtaining Bitcoin at half price" is a fallacious one.
If your cost of goods is 50% of your retail price then the cost of the item you trade for is your cost of goods. Seems pretty simple to me. I see no fallacious argument here. Leave out the "dollar price" terminology and you simply have a situation where one good is exchanged for another. In the candy bar example, the candy bar is a medium of exchange which the person uses to acquire bitcoin instead of paying cash directly. |
|
|
|
Sown the seeds of dissent, of course.
If I were nitpicking, I would point out that "sowing" would be clearer word than "sown" but I'm not. I understand your message perfectly. |
|
|
|
Article: Bitcoin is an "opt in" community currency, here's how to get it at a discounthttp://wp.me/p1adwa-3WBitcoin is a currency used by a community of individuals and businesses. It is used to facilitate the trade of goods and services. It is private, irreversible and transfers are virtually instantaneous – whether they are across the room or across the globe. Bitcoin has all of the characteristics of a quality medium of exchange. It is accepted on a voluntary basis and there are over 45 million dollars worth already in circulation. Bitcoin is basically an “opt in” currency. You have to “opt in” if you wish to accept it. How do you opt in? Simply let it be known that you will accept it as payment. When you offer your goods and services in exchange for bitcoin you are essentially acquiring bitcoin at your “cost of goods”. For example: if the cost of your goods or services is half of your retail price, then you are essentially acquiring bitcoin at a 50% discount. Are you interested in more business? If you decide to accept bitcoin as another payment option for your products and services you will open up your business to a whole new market of potential customers. By listing your products and services in the bitcoin wiki you will get free advertising that is yours for the taking. To summarize, if you would like more business why not “opt in” and join us in the bitcoin community? |
|
|
|
Here's what I need: I need a script of some sort that I can put on my website pages that will do the following: 1. Allow me to assign a unique URL for each of my affiliates such as: www.mywebsite.com/?id=[affiliate ID] 2. When a visitor clicks on the Affiliate Link the Affiliate ID gets passed through to my Order Form and a cookie is placed in their browser to keep the Referral Code in place for future visits. Other info: I will generate the Affiliate ID's for my Affiliates. The script simply needs to read the URL Affiliate ID and place it in the Order Form and create a cookie. I am using a hosted WordPress site. My Order Form can be a PHP page. Please PM me with your proposal and bid price. |
|
|
|
Great show! Amazed at how much they addressed many of the issues - ie., "digital commodity vs. currency". Although I think most of the Occupy Wall Street are clueless to bitcoin (contrary to what was said in the episode), but many of them will now know about it. And then there was Kramer...shocking that an establishment insider like him called it a "commodity" vs. a "currency" (of course this is only an acting role). Perhaps the banksters don't fear bitcoin and I'm not sure if that's good.  |
|
|
|
There seems to be an unspoken assumption on this thread that banks won't be failing left and right themselves and therefore struggling to retain customer confidence.
Who is to say the reverse won't happen. A collapse in the fiat currency banking system that precipitates a flight of wealth into the relative safety and stability of the bitcoin network?
Yes, good point. good to see u back, Steve! Hello Cypherdoc! |
|
|
|
There seems to be an unspoken assumption on this thread that banks won't be failing left and right themselves and therefore struggling to retain customer confidence.
Who is to say the reverse won't happen. A collapse in the fiat currency banking system that precipitates a flight of wealth into the relative safety and stability of the bitcoin network?
Yes, good point. |
|
|
|
I think the banks are the biggest danger to Bitcoin in the near future. If they all started to decide that they don't want anything to do with bitcoins, the exchanges would be totally frozen out.
It's hard for me to believe that all financial institutions would abandon service of Bitcoin related enterprises absent some legislative action (whereupon I have no doubt that they would do so in a heartbeat.) It's a really interesting question in my mind about what would happen with the value of BTC in that scenario. I could see it going several different ways. Among them: If demand is there it could get fairly pent up and explosive. After all, banks (mostly) don't want anything to do with drugs which has contributed to them absurdly valuable. Even though drugs are a physical commodity and thus cumbersome to supply, they are still plenty available and the demand ensures a thriving market. On the other hand, I sense that a good bit of the demand is by day-trader types who have no real interest in holding BTC and see no value in doing so other than to flip them. That demand would evaporate without convenient exchanges which could depress the value of BTC considerable. Tonight on the news "Underground currency bitcoin used for Drugs &... [name some other hot button issues]. Citi and Chase identified as facilitating ... bla bla bla" Exchanges shut out quickly from all major banking outlets. No law needed. Just bad press. Find a rouge bank that will be willing to work with the exchange, and that bank will have some serious issues getting wire transfers from established banks. Much of the value of bitcoin would vanish the day of, and traders scramble to get their money out of the exchanges (converting btc to usd and wiring money). New modes of exchange would need to be found (otc and in person). In essence, bitcoin would lose the big time speculators, and exchanges would be reduced to mini transactions, or some other less bank oriented system. The irony is that if the press was really out there and everyone suddenly had knowledge of bitcoin, more people would want it. But it doesn't need to go to frontline news to have banks shut exchanges down. If they get a whiff of bad press, it would happen. I wonder what happened to the value of gold when it was deemed illegal to own. I think that might be a good historical lesson to look at in trying to predict the future of bitcoin (though gold and bitcoin are quite different). Yes, this is the key issue that I've often thought about myself. I think a shut-out by the banks would relegate bitcoin back to a small, "community barter currency" - smaller than it already is. I think only a severe and totalitarian clamp down on voluntary exchange (much more than we have now) could reverse the resulting slowdown and drive faster bitcoin adoption. At what exact point I don't know. The current restrictions on cash transactions that are now being implemented in some parts of Europe may give us some clues. See The Coming Attack On Bitcoin And How To Survive It http://tinyurl.com/3b6d823 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
