Coinsetter - New transparent bitcoin forex trading platform intro/feedback

[Jaron @ Coinsetter]

Hey gweedo, we're unfortunately not going to be the trading platform for people who want to trade anonymously. While it's our goal to keep user information as confidential as possible, we will comply with all United States AML practices and uphold KYC standards. Users will need to provide a lot of information (similar to opening a forex or brokerage account), and we'll have to restrict users from certain countries. These provisions will allow us to operate legally in the US, and more importantly to our users, maintain strong relationships with our banks.

ColdHardMetal, eventually we would like to offer additional currency pairs, commodities and options that are highly demanded by our users. For the time being, though, we're just focused on getting BTCUSD right and then quickly adding a few other popular BTC-related currency pairs. Our goal at our launch is to do a small number of things extremely well.

[1714856430]

1714856430

[1714856430]

1714856430

[1714856430]

1714856430

[1714856430]

1714856430

[1714856430]

1714856430

[1714856430]

1714856430

[MJGrae]

MJGrae, good luck on your investment banking path. Where are you located?

Thanks Jaron, I'm actually in Chicago. Where were you working out of?

[runeks]

I just want to chime in to say good luck, and that I'm very happy that a proper trading platform for Bitcoin seems to be coming soon. I'm not really interested in trading myself, but I think a market that allows leveraged trading (both short and long) will have a positive impact on bitcoin price stability, so I fully support this. Good luck guys!

[Jaron @ Coinsetter]

Thanks Jaron, I'm actually in Chicago. Where were you working out of?

I was based out of Houston. Chicago's a great city, love Giordano's.

Runeks, thanks for your support.

[Bit_Happy]

Looks great.

[davout]

Good to see that !

Couple questions :
 - what are the implications in terms of US regulation of having a leveraged trading platform that trades an asset that's hardly legally defined ?
 - Will you guys need a blessing from the securities exchange commission ?

[Jaron @ Coinsetter]

Couple questions :
 - what are the implications in terms of US regulation of having a leveraged trading platform that trades an asset that's hardly legally defined ?
 - Will you guys need a blessing from the securities exchange commission ?

Hey Davout, these are important questions. We're still in the process of figuring that out ourselves. The first question I don't think we be answered for a few years. On the second question, I believe there are other regulatory bodies besides the SEC that we'd more likely be tied to. When you look at traditional forex brokers, they are governed by the NFA and the CFTC. However, that doesn't necessarily mean they are applicable to us. We're currently discussing this issue with our legal advisors.

[davout]

Hey Davout, these are important questions. We're still in the process of figuring that out ourselves. The first question I don't think we be answered for a few years. On the second question, I believe there are other regulatory bodies besides the SEC that we'd more likely be tied to. When you look at traditional forex brokers, they are governed by the NFA and the CFTC. However, that doesn't necessarily mean they are applicable to us. We're currently discussing this issue with our legal advisors.

You'd act more like an exchange than a broker if I understand correctly.

Also if you want to offer leveraged trading that means that you'll have to issue credit lines, right? Which in turn means, from my understanding, a massive regulatory framework ? Thinking about it it would fall into the broker category. So I guess you'd be a broker AND an exchange. Even though I'm not familiar with the US financial regulatory framework it does sound like a lot to handle.

Well then, good luck!

[justusranvier]

Are you going to be able to offer customers an account that can accept ACH deposits?

[Jaron @ Coinsetter]

Are you going to be able to offer customers an account that can accept ACH deposits?

Yes, we will be offering ACH transfers, and my goal is to make that extremely user-friendly. Note, though, that we will only accept bitcoin transfers while we're in beta (and will be implementing development of transfer methods in the meantime).

On that line of thought, what cash transfer methods would people like to see us offer?

[justusranvier]

Yes, we will be offering ACH transfers, and my goal is to make that extremely user-friendly.

Just to be clear, I don't mean the ACH transfers that Coinbase offers, where they initiate a withdrawal from the user's bank account. By "ACH deposits" I mean the ability for a user to initiate the transfer from their end, from their bank to your service, or conceivably via direct deposit.

[Jaron @ Coinsetter]

Ok thanks. Is the thought that you would rather not link an account on our site, and could just initiate a transfer from your own bank account?

[hazek]

Ok thanks. Is the thought that you would rather not link an account on our site, and could just initiate a transfer from your own bank account?

I don't think you'll get a big enough sample of request with regards to options on this forum so if you ask me it's best to just figure this out for yourself, a find a couple of good options for fiat deposits and stick with your decision

[justusranvier]

Ok thanks. Is the thought that you would rather not link an account on our site, and could just initiate a transfer from your own bank account?

More like I'd rather have my paychecks skip my bank account entirely and get deposited directly into a trading account.

I know it's possible with combination brokerage/banks like Etrade.

[runeks]

Are you going to be able to offer customers an account that can accept ACH deposits?

Yes, we will be offering ACH transfers, and my goal is to make that extremely user-friendly. Note, though, that we will only accept bitcoin transfers while we're in beta (and will be implementing development of transfer methods in the meantime).

On that line of thought, what cash transfer methods would people like to see us offer?

I'm interested in the highlighted part above. Why is this the case? The biggest hurdle for me when trading via US brokers is the huge free it costs to transfer funds to my account. I've thought about suggesting bitcoin transfers to them since this is virtually cost-less. Why won't you be taking advantage of this?

[Jaron @ Coinsetter]

Why is this the case?
Why won't you be taking advantage of this?

Hey runeks, I'm not quite sure I follow your question – could you clarify it a bit for me? It seemed that you were suggesting we offer cost-free bitcoin transfers to fund an account, which we will be doing.

[dust]

Why is this the case?
Why won't you be taking advantage of this?

Hey runeks, I'm not quite sure I follow your question – could you clarify it a bit for me? It seemed that you were suggesting we offer cost-free bitcoin transfers to fund an account, which we will be doing.

I think runeks misunderstood your statement "that we will only accept bitcoin transfers while we're in beta" to mean that bitcoin transfers would only be available in beta, and would be unavailable once the site is out of beta and traditional transfer methods are added.

[001sonkit]

What I see for CoinSetter is that a clone of Bitcoinica, plain CFD trading for BTCUSD. Are there any more catch for your service? How would the security of your service be any better than Bitcoinica or MTGOX? If yes, please prove it.

Next, we see that you are a just a Jr. Member of Bitcoin Forum. Can anything of you (identity information?) be shown to everyone to prove the trustworthyness of you? And do you have anyway to show that you have the capital for users do to leverage trading, for the transparency sake of the business.

You also mentioned that your company is US based. How and in what way you could prevent things like GLBSE's shut down happening to you again, by the accuse of money laundering etc.

And one more suspicious point, how do you managed to have like 500 Likes on Facebook, when you got only a few replies on here, with business to be opened yet. You bought them? Or were you just trying to fake your popularity and gain some trust with them?

By the way, in what perspective you are more advance than  1Broker.com, you don't have commodities trading, no stocks etc.. In what perspective Bitcoiners should go for you instead of 1Broker?

[Jaron @ Coinsetter]

Hey 001sonkit, I can see you are understandably leery of a group starting a bitcoin trading platform. We definitely want to work with our users and the community to demonstrate that we are capable of handling the big responsibility of operating the levered trading platform we are building, which will become an important part of the bitcoin ecosystem. However, I feel that the attitude in your post is more along the lines of "accuse first, never admit a job well done," which I don't feel is very productive. Instead, maybe you could give me realistic ways to help demonstrate that we are the right company for this task. Also, many of the subjects you've brought up I have already answered in some of my other responses, but I'm going to go ahead and reanswer them here.

First of all, as I mentioned early on, we have used absolutely no source code from Bitcoinica. Zero. This is an especially personal point for me, given the tens of thousands of dollars I am spending personally right now to build our platform from scratch, building it the right way with a big focus on quality and security, instead of taking the easy path of just building off of Bitcoinica's source code. The hackers that know their source code inside and out will quickly tell you that ours is unrelated once we launch.

Second, you ask if there is any more catch for our service. However, we have received a large and growing number of emails from active traders who are excited to move their trades over to our platform if we deliver on what we are promising. It appears that you don't see the value in a margin trading platform that offers the ability to lever your trades, short the market, use a stellar API and trade on a user-friendly interface.

On the note of security, we will have an independent security audit conducted on our platform to review our code and validate its security after our seed capital raise. Until then, we are working hard to simply build a very secure platform that we personally have confidence in. As I mentioned before, I will personally be providing the first portion of capital used for leverage from my own savings that I earned through working in investment banking and private equity, so I would personally lose a substantial amount of money if we are hacked. Also, as long as premiums stay in the affordable range we have been quoted, we plan on taking out insurance in the case of hacks. So we will be paying thousands of dollars a year on that as well, and not passing the cost along to our customers.

The whole identity topic shows that you probably didn't read my first post in this thread at all. I provided my background, as well as a link to my LinkedIn profile. You'll notice that I have a history of strong roles with reputable financial companies. While this isn't everything, it should at least hint that I work hard and am a credible person.

I could speculate on what will happen to the regulatory environment regarding bitcoin but will not. We're working hard to run our company the right way and prevent money laundering on our platform and exchange.

Let's stop using the word "catch". Coinsetter doesn't have a catch. We're building the best platform we can, and we believe it's a great one. We are also taking multiple steps to give people comfort in using our platform and provide them protections that no other company has even thought of (has any other company even mentioned spending money on insurance and security audits?) It doesn't have to happen immediately, but over time I believe we are the platform people will trust and prefer to use over any other.

[runeks]

Why is this the case?
Why won't you be taking advantage of this?

Hey runeks, I'm not quite sure I follow your question – could you clarify it a bit for me? It seemed that you were suggesting we offer cost-free bitcoin transfers to fund an account, which we will be doing.

As dust has clarified, I took your statement to mean that you will only be offering bitcoin transfers while you're in beta (and will stop accepting bitcoin transfers when you go out of beta). But I get it now. I think placing the "only" before "bitcoin" instead of "accept" would clarify, eg.

"Note, though, that we will accept only bitcoin transfers while we're in beta [...]"

But it might just have been me who misunderstood that .