"Bitcoinica Code" -- seems new, anyone try this yet?

[Crypt_Current]

I noticed Bitcoinica now provides an option for deposit / withdrawals as "Bitcoinica code" coupon.  This would be handy for people who keep more than one Bitcoinica account (at this point anyway), so I tried to move some funds from one account to another... AND the operation is still in "pending" ... 

Anybody else having issues with this?

[Crypt_Current]

I noticed Bitcoinica now provides an option for deposit / withdrawals as "Bitcoinica code" coupon.  This would be handy for people who keep more than one Bitcoinica account (at this point anyway), so I tried to move some funds from one account to another... AND the operation is still in "pending" ... 

Anybody else having issues with this?

Well it went through and worked as I thought it would; a lesson in patience on my part.

[M4v3R]

I've tried it just a moment ago and the code was available in 10-15 seconds after the request was sent. Nice to see that, but what I REALLY would be happy to see is multiple positions per account, so I don't have to open separate accounts for separate positions.

[waspoza]

I've tried it just a moment ago and the code was available in 10-15 seconds after the request was sent. Nice to see that, but what I REALLY would be happy to see is multiple positions per account, so I don't have to open separate accounts for separate positions.

+1

[M4v3R]

By the way, the trick to use two accounts simultaneusly without using a separate browser is to log in to one account using bitcoinica.com and to another using www.bitcoinica.com. I've checked that and it works fine .

[Crypt_Current]

By the way, the trick to use two accounts simultaneusly without using a separate browser is to log in to one account using bitcoinica.com and to another using www.bitcoinica.com. I've checked that and it works fine .

I purposely avoided doing that because I remember a while back the Zhou's security certificate wouldn't verify correctly if you left the "www" off.  So as to help avoid any phishing possibility, I just went with the two-browser method.

[Mushoz]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

[Crypt_Current]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

Why?

[Mushoz]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

Why?

Because they (partially) cancel each other out? You're just paying spreads for no good reason.

[Crypt_Current]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

Why?

Because they (partially) cancel each other out? You're just paying spreads for no good reason.

I like to think I have good reason to pay what I (choose to) pay 
Personally, my strategy is not to hold two opposing positions together, at equal amounts anyway...  That WOULD be kinda silly.

[Mushoz]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

Why?

Because they (partially) cancel each other out? You're just paying spreads for no good reason.

I like to think I have good reason to pay what I (choose to) pay 
Personally, my strategy is not to hold two opposing positions together, at equal amounts anyway...  That WOULD be kinda silly.

Yeah, but it doesn't matter if they aren't equal. If you short for 100BTC on one account and go long for 20BTC on another, you might as well pick just one position and go short for 80BTC. That way you are only paying fees over a 80BTC trade opposed to 2 trades equaling 120BTC. Price movements would effect both options the same way.

[Crypt_Current]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

Why?

Because they (partially) cancel each other out? You're just paying spreads for no good reason.

I like to think I have good reason to pay what I (choose to) pay 
Personally, my strategy is not to hold two opposing positions together, at equal amounts anyway...  That WOULD be kinda silly.

Yeah, but it doesn't matter if they aren't equal. If you short for 100BTC on one account and go long for 20BTC on another, you might as well pick just one position and go short for 80BTC. That way you are only paying fees over a 80BTC trade opposed to 2 trades equaling 120BTC. Price movements would effect both options the same way.

If fees were an issue at Bitcoinica, I would understand this logic.  Zhou makes his money from the spread, which because of its size, it is difficult to jump into a position and immediately start profiting.

[Mushoz]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

Why?

Because they (partially) cancel each other out? You're just paying spreads for no good reason.

I like to think I have good reason to pay what I (choose to) pay 
Personally, my strategy is not to hold two opposing positions together, at equal amounts anyway...  That WOULD be kinda silly.

Yeah, but it doesn't matter if they aren't equal. If you short for 100BTC on one account and go long for 20BTC on another, you might as well pick just one position and go short for 80BTC. That way you are only paying fees over a 80BTC trade opposed to 2 trades equaling 120BTC. Price movements would effect both options the same way.

If fees were an issue at Bitcoinica, I would understand this logic.  Zhou makes his money from the spread, which because of its size, it is difficult to jump into a position and immediately start profiting.

Those spreads work the exact same way for the customer, except that they are dynamic in the sense that they are constantly recalculated by the algorithm whereas fees are a set percentage of the price. Either way, as a customer you're not getting as many BTC/USD when making the trade as you would without those fees/spreads. You are paying those fees (spreads in this case) over a lot more BTC if you take multiple opposing positions.

But even if you look at it _without_ those spreads, why would anyone take opposing positions? I can't find _any_ advantage that it might bring. Am I missing something?

[notme]

You could take a short position for the sole purposes of swinging it long for twice your normal volume .

This might be a valid thing to do in certain instances when you already have a long position.

[cypherdoc]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

Why?

Because they (partially) cancel each other out? You're just paying spreads for no good reason.

I like to think I have good reason to pay what I (choose to) pay 
Personally, my strategy is not to hold two opposing positions together, at equal amounts anyway...  That WOULD be kinda silly.

Yeah, but it doesn't matter if they aren't equal. If you short for 100BTC on one account and go long for 20BTC on another, you might as well pick just one position and go short for 80BTC. That way you are only paying fees over a 80BTC trade opposed to 2 trades equaling 120BTC. Price movements would effect both options the same way.

If fees were an issue at Bitcoinica, I would understand this logic.  Zhou makes his money from the spread, which because of its size, it is difficult to jump into a position and immediately start profiting.

Those spreads work the exact same way for the customer, except that they are dynamic in the sense that they are constantly recalculated by the algorithm whereas fees are a set percentage of the price. Either way, as a customer you're not getting as many BTC/USD when making the trade as you would without those fees/spreads. You are paying those fees (spreads in this case) over a lot more BTC if you take multiple opposing positions.

But even if you look at it _without_ those spreads, why would anyone take opposing positions? I can't find _any_ advantage that it might bring. Am I missing something?

no, you're not.

Crypt has some interesting ideas, thats for sure.  i still don't understand his holding that 1 BTC short even tho he thinks the price is going up.  his base price is just going to drop as that position loses money.

[Crypt_Current]

I hope people don't mean they are short and long at the same time? 

Why?

Because they (partially) cancel each other out? You're just paying spreads for no good reason.

I like to think I have good reason to pay what I (choose to) pay 
Personally, my strategy is not to hold two opposing positions together, at equal amounts anyway...  That WOULD be kinda silly.

Yeah, but it doesn't matter if they aren't equal. If you short for 100BTC on one account and go long for 20BTC on another, you might as well pick just one position and go short for 80BTC. That way you are only paying fees over a 80BTC trade opposed to 2 trades equaling 120BTC. Price movements would effect both options the same way.

If fees were an issue at Bitcoinica, I would understand this logic.  Zhou makes his money from the spread, which because of its size, it is difficult to jump into a position and immediately start profiting.

Those spreads work the exact same way for the customer, except that they are dynamic in the sense that they are constantly recalculated by the algorithm whereas fees are a set percentage of the price. Either way, as a customer you're not getting as many BTC/USD when making the trade as you would without those fees/spreads. You are paying those fees (spreads in this case) over a lot more BTC if you take multiple opposing positions.

But even if you look at it _without_ those spreads, why would anyone take opposing positions? I can't find _any_ advantage that it might bring. Am I missing something?

The reason I keep another account for opening an opposing position is because on Bitcoinica, I can manipulate my base price.  This, combined with the nature of this market (large, fairly unpredictable spikes) and the fact that I am no good at tech analysis makes the strategy utilitarian to me.  I can use an arbitrarily small amount of BTC to get the base price where I want, then have the position ready to deposit funds and go all in and begin profiting immediately.  As long as I keep my base price somewhere close to where I think the tip of the spike is, it will much easier than seeing on the real-time chart "OH CRAP, A SPIKE!!", then hurrying to open a position, after Bitcoinica's spread has already widened and made my initial losses even sharper.

I think it's just my personal situation that makes this a good strategy for me -- maybe not for most.