I just sold a call option to a forum member. Deal was by private negotiation. It is not that hard.
Curious as to how you all priced the option? What sort of assumptions etc. I am assuming given the unknowns using something like Black-Sholes would not be useful. Thanks, Jack If you are intersted in pricing BTC options, this thread could be a good read for you! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557743.0I just accepted a bid. I did use Black-Sholes to check that the bid was reasonable, the problem is working out what kind of volatility to use. Current volatility is lower than historical volatility. So it depends on what you believe about the future volatility of bitcoin. My view is that past volatility is more to do with Gox than bitcoin and Gox is gone thankfully. Also the trade was purely trust based (offered escrow but for the amounts involved the buyer was unconcerned). In the long term this is the only way any business can be sustained. Look at services like "spendbitcoins" he has been going since very early days and never ripped anyone off. I would be confident to make a million dollar trade with him because of his record. I would be willing to take the risk of a small trade with someone new to see where it goes and in that fashion one can build trust over time. Any scam involving options can only last until someone tries to exercise. So as long as people are trading relatively short dated contracts a scam would not be able to be sustained. The main issue is the risk that an option writer dies or goes broke and that is where collateral and escrow will become important. I would be very surprised that the buyer would decline escrow for this kind of transaction unless the call option was for well under 1 BTC. The buyer would not only need to trust that you would honor your agreement, but also trust that you would not just keep his $1,100 or however much money (per BTC) when he sends it to you when he exercises his option. |
|
|
|
|
It would only be worth it if the company buying it would have a bigger advertising budget over several years. Instead of using advertising dollars to advertise their website the company could use the money instead on the domain.
I personally don't have a bitcoin related business that I could really use this domain for so I would likely sell it if I were to somehow come into possession of it, however I think domains are a very bad investment to speculate with so I really would not ever buy one or register one.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoins in my opinion is really not the right currency to be able to allow loans. I personally feel that trying anything like this with bitcoins could lead to a lot more ways to end up being scammed.
This is very true because it is impossible to force someone to repay a loan using bitcoin. The closest thing you can do to forcefully recover your loaned bitcoin would be to get a judgment on the borrower (if you know his real identity) and have the courts seize his fiat assets and convert that fiat back into btc. I think this is a very big problem that will prevent the BTC lending economy from ever taking off. The fact that a lender essentially cannot force a borrower to repay his debt when he has the ability to do so will prevent the lender from wanting to lend in the first place and will cause interest rates to be higher then other potential sources of credit. |
|
|
|
Should it stay or should it go? It is little more than thinly disguised corporate welfare.
It should go. Its just another market distorting corporate subsidy at taxpayer expense. If it were to go wouldn't it put American companies (and the US economy) at a competitive disadvantage? Hint: the answer is yes because most other industrialized countries have similar subsidies. The result of shutting the ex-im bank would be that the US economy would grow less then it otherwise would and jobs would be relocated overseas that would otherwise be competitive in the US. |
|
|
|
You are right indeed. But we are choosing not between the good and the bad, but rather between the lesser of the two evils. The worse being a default, so what would the US choose? Actually, we already know the answer, since the debt ceiling was already raised in the conditions when the US government had been no longer able to pay out interest.
Ok, fair enough. If we have to choose between printing and default, then yes, printing is preferable. Ironically, however, if we print too much, we'll probably be forced into default anyway because no one wants to hold on to bonds issued by a country that's massively devaluing their currency. This would be true if other countries wouldn't actually fdo the same, i.e. devaluate their currencies all along with the US printing money. This is called competitive devaluation. When all the countries (or most countries) use QE then the exchange rates stay roughly the same while global inflation rises (or deflation is less) Exactly and the inflation can be seen in the increase in the money supply (which is inflation) and the consequence is rising prices in the supermarket and stock market The official US CPI is underestimating inflation Rising money supply does not necessarily mean inflation. If the additional money supply is not lent and/or spent then it would just be more money sitting in the "bank" (aka the federal reserve). This is one reason why inflation has been so low (apart from the negative inflation prior to QE) as banks have a lot of excess reserves at the federal reserve because there is not enough demand for loans from borrowers that meet an acceptable credit risk. |
|
|
|
Bitpay has make the process easy for any web store to accept bitcoin with no fee.
The day of paypal and credit card domination are over.
Companies still need to understand the regulatory risks associated with accepting bitcoin as well as the counter-party risk with bitpay. These are both very important things for any merchant to take into consideration. |
|
|
|
The exchanges profits from fees (deposit,witdraw and trading)
I don't think the deposit/withdraw fees add up to very much and these fees are likely close to the actual costs of doing these functions. The main source of revenues and profits that exchanges have are the trading fees. These can easily add up and many traders will trade into and out of positions several times per day, allowing an exchange to earn their fee on every trade. |
|
|
|
Altcoin exchanges are very very profitable for the people running it, because after 4-8 months, they get "hacked" and shut down. No questions asked :p
I don't think this so much has to do with the profitability of the exchanges but rather the amount of coins stored on these types of exchanges. I think a lot of people like to trade altcoins in a "day trading" fashion and as a result keep their coins on the exchanges. This results there being more coins on the exchange then there really should be. Still, even if only a 1/3 or so of the coins normally stored on an exchange would be there, they still would be "hacked" and it would still be profitable enough for those guys to run the "Long-cons". Do you think the altcoin exchanges failing is merely the operators running away with the coins? I would doubt this as the exchange itself would likely have some level of value and could likely be sold for amounts greater then what would be stolen (less what it would take to disassociate the stolen coins - the mixer fees). Yes, because most exchanges that get "hacked" are experiencing falling levels of trading activity right before. Conspiracy: Mintpal was hacked, they got the BTC + were able to sell it and the buyer covered the losses. Nice job, eh? ^^ IDK. I do not usually wear tinfoil hats so I am one to believe it was not an inside job. The buyer obviously though the price they paid was worth it, otherwise they would not have purchased the exchange. If the exchange had not been hacked and the buyer didn't have to cover the losses then the exchange could likely have asked for a higher price. |
|
|
|
I support neither inflation or deflation, because both have harmful effects. Both redistribute wealth and lead to market distortion. A stable currency is preferable in my book.
Most currencies are generally stable by most economists' standards. Countries also generally try to keep their currency as stable as possible (expect when they run into money problems - Argentina). I don't this it is really very realistic to be able to make a country's currency have neither inflation nor deflation (and keep the value exactly the same) as there are too many market factors affecting the value of a currency. Stability reduce the risk and ease the long term project economic calculation. A volatile currency is the sign of un-healthy economic system. This is true, but no currency is 100% stable in that it experiences zero inflation nor deflation. A currency that is "stable" usually has very mild inflation in the 2-3 percent range. |
|
|
|
QE as at today is the only measure curtailing inflation to a large extent not only in America but the world at large.
Que? QE is 'designed' to create inflation. It is a measure to stop deflation. I think the actual goal of QE was to stimulate the economy by getting people and institutions to take more risk with their money. Higher inflation (or lower deflation) was merely a byproduct of QE. Lending money to companies that went bust is not encourage them to take more risk. It is a way to inflate their debt away at everyone else expense. But the debt was paid back to the government. The government actually earned a lot of interest on the bailouts to the banks. If the banks were lending money to consumers at similar rates they would likely be charged with predatory lending. |
|
|
|
they've been saying this for ages now  Yeah, well... It's primed for a collapse. This isn't your standard fear mongering, this is legitimate. The entire economy believes it, and countries are preparing for a collapse of the USD. yeah but when? thats the thing, we going on liket his for ages. That's the real question I don't think anyone would be able to predict the end of USD and I don't think it's going to be for many many years. The dollar will not come to an end until long after the US empire comes to an end. Look at England for example; their empire collapsed hundreds of years ago and the British Pound is still very strong and widely used, in fact it is still a major currency. |
|
|
|
USD and EURO will probably continue to lose value over time as the population is still attached to entitlement mentality.
Almost every country has some kind of entitlement programs. The entitlement mentality will likely fade over time as people realize that the rewards are much greater if you work hard then follow the liberal ideals. All fiat currencies will likely have inflation over time, I would think that the USD and the EUR would likely be the currencies that has the least amount of inflation, however the EUR does have some change of going away. |
|
|
|
So is every other fiat currency in the world.....
/Topic
Cash fiat is a target for criminals, however it generally will have a smaller percentage of total transaction volume of criminal transactions then what I would estimate that BTC has.  I disagree. Fiat cash has and will be the most preferred way for transacting in the criminal world. Cash is more anonymous than bitcoin. Look at the numbers involved here. http://www.globalresearch.ca/money-laundering-and-the-drug-trade-the-role-of-the-banks/5334205The identified problems included a once massive backlog of over 17,000 alertsidentifying possible suspicious activity that had yet to be reviewed; ineffective methods foridentifying suspicious activity; a failure to file timely Suspicious Activity Reports with U.S. law enforcement;
a 3-year failure by HBUS [a HSBC affiliate] , from mid-2006 to mid-2009, to conduct any AML monitoring of $15 billion in bulk cash transactions
a failure to monitor $60 trillion in annual wire transfer activity by customers
And this is just one bank.  All of these transactions were not from illegal activity, they are just transactions that should have been reported by the bank. It is likely IMO that over 99% of the transactions involved legal transactions (likely immigrants sending money home to their families) but the bank was fined because they did not report them so they could be looked at by the government. |
|
|
|
So as everyone keeps coming up with these new coins and new algorithms, how do they decide how many total coins to offer? I know LTC is exactly 4X as many BTC. Can anyone shed any light on this, or is it completely random and up to each individual coin maker? What are the possible positive and negative impacts on a somewhat random, finiate amount of coins?
You already had many good answers to you question. I also think it is important to mention that the "coin makers" (called devs) can chose to add a "premine" to the genesis block (the first block). The word premine is a bit misleading, since nothing is being mined, they have simply started with giving themselves x millions coins as a rewards for making a new revolutionary coins that everyone should invest in. I don't know if "revolutionary" is really the proper term to use. Most alt coins provide no value that bitcoin cannot provide and their network is much less secure then the bitcoin network. Even 1 or 2 of these altcoins has a brilliant idea/feature implemented, it will be worth it. And which is why speculators keep throwing money at altcoins. If one of these altcoins has such a brilliant idea then what would stop it from being implemented into bitcoin? We have the testnet that allows people to test new features or anything they want so there is no real reason to have to use an altcoin to develop these new ideas. IMP people throw money at altcoins because they want to speculate on the price. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin will have inflation as well up until all the coins have been mined (when the block subsidies are 0 BTC). It is a misconception that BTC is deflationary today because additional coins are added to the total number of BTC in existence via block subsidies.
This is true and it is also very true that a whole lot of people love to spread the myth that BTC is a deflationary currency. It is clearly NOT. BTC has inflation and PLENTY of it: Right now the inflation rate of BTC is 10% annually. This is much more than most fiat currencies according to "official story" numbers and it is about the same as the true inflation rate for the dollar. One little detail regarding the inflation rate of BTC is very different from the inflation rate of the USD and other fiat currencies, though: BTC has a predicable rate of inflation. There is no central bank that can decided to do QE, QE2, QE3 and just keep on doing "QE" permanently and pretend they've stopped. The rate of BTC inflation is also set to decrease over time and BTC will have a lower rate of inflation than fiat currencies after some years few years (lower than true inflation in 2017, lower than official numbers in 2021, so not sometime "soon"). I know some will want to argue that "but BTC will become deflationary eventually so it's true that it is a deflationary currency". That's just hogwash. BTC isn't set to become deflationary until 2050 or so. I think the reason why the MSM often reports that BTC is deflationary is because many people think that the price of bitcoin will rise in the future, causing the same effects that deflation has on a currency. |
|
|
|
Credit score has little value if you don't plan on borrowing money from bank.
This is technically true, however most people do not have the resources to never have to borrow from the bank, especially during their earlier years (prior to turning 45ish). When people get older they will have to rely less on bank loans, but they still may need one in case of an emergency (unemployment, medical expenses among other things). yep older....had a student loan i paid off ..so when I got my house around 2000 after the dot com crash of stock market then pres Bush the jr...got us into IRAQ...EVERYONE was telling me to get into stocks at that point...sorry ....so I looked around and figured screw it pay the house off from 2000...who is gonna give me the equiv of a 650/m raise (NET) would be closer to 1K raise in the next few years....paid if off in 7 years months before the stock crash /great recession good thing I did or I'd of had to keep a 2nd job for the house payments...now no debt ..just house utils ...no cc debt (amex have to pay it off each month) so that $650 house payment is gone ...of course some of that goes into the house but I can use 'denial' on that heh  Searing If you now have no debt, and no housing payment (expect for taxes and insurance) it would be advisable to invest more money into investments (be it stocks, bonds, traditional savings accounts, or other types of investments) so you can save for a "rainy day" and for retirement. You likely do not want to be working up until you die and when you do stop working you want to be able to live comfortably. This is likely the same advice that you would receive if you were to speak to any financial adviser or financial planner. |
|
|
|
Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?  The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening. Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further. I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption. We just have to hope that the government stops at 'mild' regulation. Since the government is run by "the people" and for "the people" it is up to the citizens of the country to ensure this happens. If government starts to enact too much regulation then the citizens need to elect new politicians who support less regulation. |
|
|
|
faucest is the biggest waste of time
it is, better invest your time with advertisements with your sign, less tiem consuming and reward much higher By using your signature on here to advertise (aka joining a signature campaign) you will also reap non-financial rewards as you will be able to learn about bitcoin by reading the posts that others post on here. |
|
|
|
Lets assume that BTC doesn't gain in "value". Only rises because of inflation. Today 580 Year XXXX = 1,000,000 Inflation = 4% 580*1,04^x = 1,000,000 1,04^x=1724 x= ~190 years So in 190 years we will see a price of 1,000,000 USD even if BTC doesn't gain in purchasing power  So BTC will hit $1,000,000 USD but none of us will be alive to see it happen.  I wouldn't be so sure about that. Medicine is so innovative and innovations coming in big heaps! Who knows, maybe in 30 years with stemcells you will be able to heal nearly every injury and every aspect of getting older. Scientists are predicting that the first human to reach 200 years old, is already born. Spooky! If history is any guide this is not the case. Medicine has been able to increase the average lifespan of the population by not by this large of a percentage. Additionally as people get older they start to develop more advanced problems that cannot be fixed with medicine/medical technology. |
|
|
|
I think it has value because of the fact that it is a peer to peer currency. This is very similar to why paypal has been so successful. The difference between PP and BTC is that users need to trust PP to hold their money while users of BTC do not need to trust anyone to store their funds.
called decentralisation. The system is built up based on mathematical method easily. Any one can trust it because of its transparency without corruption, printing fiat randomly etc. That was my point exactly. People like sending payments directly to one another, and the piece of mind that a 3rd party is not going to run away with their money gives them the confidence to keep their money in bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
