20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m.

[Rampion]

Big money finally waking up little by little. Now it is time to buy as fast as possible.

It's always been the time to buy as fast as possible

Sure, but what I meant was that if you wait any longer train might have already left the station.

Train for freedom is here to stay. Train for storing value is also here to stay.

One train leaves for each digit of the exchange rate tough

[Adrian-x]

Financial Times is reporting:

"Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b4be7d8e-9c73-11e2-9a4b-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz2PRJpnZqI

Hope mtgox solves its ddos attacks first.

Bitcoin as a store of value would make it quite unique - thinking about the consequences we would have a P2P managed violently wealth fund - free market social security for investors.

This could be viable, better than the Canadian CPP investing Billions in Malls in the US during a down turn in the economy.

[Gordonium]

The hedge funds want to invest, I'm sure, but they need the market cap of bitcoin to be at least 10x what it is now. First, they're not going to want to take more than a 5% stake of the entire net worth of bitcoins. 5% at this point is $75 million or so last I checked. That's reasonable for maybe 1 or 2 hedge funds, but remember, they'd need the liquidity to match. Right now, mtgox does about $20 million in transactions per day. That's way too illiquid for a hedge fund. They like to be able to shift positions really quickly and that's not there right now.

The good news is, there's a natural accelerator once we get to a certain market cap. The bad news is, once they come in, it'll be wilder than it is now.

All it takes is that one big hedge fund manager understand first-mover advantage. After that it will be a wild ride.

[Manticore]

It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:

"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."

If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes.....

[SgtSpike]

20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!

$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B

At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.

Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months.  And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC.  $2,376 is just the bottom end.  O.O

Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does.

Hey, I can dream, can't I?   

It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:

"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."

If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes.....

Tradehill dark pools...

[Gordonium]

If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes.....

What the other money managers will see is that the first-mover makes enormous amount of money. And after that everyone wants to jump to the train and that first mover will make even more money. Just like most of us here.

[Adrian-x]

It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:

"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."

If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes.....

Makes good sense, owning a big chunk of the total BTC will hamper distribution and hinder growth, the BTC economy needs to grow it's user base before it is a target for big money.

[JackH]

what did you expect?

I kind of expected this, because I know that even skeptics will come to appreciate how brilliant Bitcoin is when they bother to learn in detail about it.

personally I'm starting to doubt bitcoin abit because it requires someone to pay for Energy forever and in increasing amounts to keep it alive

A civilizations capabilities, is according to Kardashev scale, based upon power consumption/production. To reach a lvl 2 civilization we need to pull all the energy from our sun. I doubt Bitcoin is the "expensive" part

[samurai1200]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHGFWWOylJM

/energydiscussion

[Gordonium]

personally I'm starting to doubt bitcoin abit because it requires someone to pay for Energy forever and in increasing amounts to keep it alive

A civilizations capabilities, is according to Kardashev scale, based upon power consumption/production. To reach a lvl 2 civilization we need to pull all the energy from our sun. I doubt Bitcoin is the "expensive" part

This. From all the stupid arguments against Bitcoin, this is probably the most stupid. Bitcoin is highly economical currency.

[Manticore]

20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!

$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B

At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.

Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months.  And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC.  $2,376 is just the bottom end.  O.O

Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does.

Hey, I can dream, can't I?   

It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:

"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."

If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes.....

Tradehill dark pools...

Yes, as I've previously discussed on here....Tradehill is trying to address this issue (I'm glad someone is), but this would be difficult to accomplish even with dark pools.

[mgio]

This article ALSO says: "“We are just one scandal away from Bitcoin collapsing entirely.”

[thebaron]

Heading to $150.

Please. It will be $1000 by the 15th.

[ECore]

It only needs just a bit more energy than that which would be able to attack it.

My comment has nothing to do with attacking it

I'm saying is that Energy must be input into the Bitcoin system at all times (and in ever-increasing as it grows because people can make a profit mining).

Because of this, someone must pay (Energy, or USD to pay for Energy) this somehow, just to keep Bitcoin blockchain viable

I'm just wondering who's gonna pay for it

Online USD banking doesn't have an Energy sink like Bitcoin does (neither does as any other form of centralized online currency based on whatever)

I'm trying to wrap my head around how someone would think that the USD system doesn't use as much electricity as the bitcoin network..........I mean, HOW DO PEOPLE COME UP WITH THIS?  Do you have to baste your brain in acid first?

[Adrian-x]

It only needs just a bit more energy than that which would be able to attack it.

My comment has nothing to do with attacking it

I'm saying is that Energy must be input into the Bitcoin system at all times (and in ever-increasing as it grows because people can make a profit mining).

Because of this, someone must pay (Energy, or USD to pay for Energy) this somehow, just to keep Bitcoin blockchain viable

I'm just wondering who's gonna pay for it

Online USD banking doesn't have an Energy sink like Bitcoin does (neither does as any other form of centralized online currency based on whatever)

I'm trying to wrap my head around how someone would think that the USD system doesn't use as much electricity as the bitcoin network..........I mean, HOW DO PEOPLE COME UP WITH THIS?  Do you have to baste your brain in acid first?

I just watched the video above it give a good outlines on where to improve efficiency.
It looks like Paper Money consumes just less than 1% of total GDP energy consumption. (coins obviously more) and HFT's data centers even more.

Bitcoin is less efficient that paper money when:
1) You need to scale the BTC network transactions at its current energy efficiency to that of a big states current transactions to make the claim.
2) You need to assume Moore's law doesn't apply to Bitcoin hashing (Asics won't replace GPU's and Asics won't become more efficient in the future)
3) you have to not account for the future number of transaction per block increasing. (we will always be limited to 250K or whatever it is)
4) you have to amortise your E-waist every year - (my mining rigs only lose fans so my e-waist is a lot less than the example given.)
5) you also need to assume the latent wasted heat is not used by the miners, ( this winter my heating bill was $0 as my rigs kept me warm - I have seen setups where Bitcoin rigs are used to power under flour heating.) so 50% of excess energy is not wasted just repurposed.

[solex]

I just watched the video above it give a good outlines on where to improve efficiency.
It looks like Paper Money consumes just less than 1% of total GDP energy consumption. (coins obviously more) and HFT's data centers even more.

Bitcoin is less efficient that paper money when:
1) You need to scale the BTC network transactions at its current energy efficiency to that of a big states current transactions to make the claim.
2) You need to assume Moore's law doesn't apply to Bitcoin hashing (Asics won't replace GPU's and Asics won't become more efficient in the future)
3) you have to not account for the future number of transaction per block increasing. (we will always be limited to 250K or whatever it is)
4) you have to amortise your E-waist every year - (my mining rigs only lose fans so my e-waist is a lot less than the example given.)
5) you also need to assume the latent wasted heat is not used by the miners, ( this winter my heating bill was $0 as my rigs kept me warm - I have seen setups where Bitcoin rigs are used to power under flour heating.) so 50% of excess energy is not wasted just repurposed.

ASICs are already working, from at least 3 different manufacturers!
Want to consider the basis for a future generation ASIC which will have extremely low heat loss and low power usage?

Check out Reversible Logic Gates
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5715155&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5715155

or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_computing

[DoomDumas]

It only needs just a bit more energy than that which would be able to attack it.

My comment has nothing to do with attacking it

I'm saying is that Energy must be input into the Bitcoin system at all times (and in ever-increasing as it grows because people can make a profit mining).

Because of this, someone must pay (Energy, or USD to pay for Energy) this somehow, just to keep Bitcoin blockchain viable

I'm just wondering who's gonna pay for it

Online USD banking doesn't have an Energy sink like Bitcoin does (neither does as any other form of centralized online currency based on whatever)

1-
ASICs are comming, when most mining will be acheived by ASICs and most GPU shutdown, the ammount of energy consumed will be much lower, and as the total mining power will grow, more advanced ASICs will become the norm, so on the long run, I dont think energy is an issue ! 

Also, more an more peoples like me, plan to have a solar/wind powered ASIC farm in the future !

2- On a global point of view, there is no energy crisis at all, there is a common sense crisis..  Solar/wind/thermal and other clean energy represents a lot more capacity than the fossile energy.

We are on a finite planet, and must stop consuming it.. Transition from "burning the planet" to "using radiation from the space" will bring us to the first real civilisation.  Solar, wind, tidal are caused by externals, sun, moon..

[oakpacific]

20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!

$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B

At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.

Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months.  And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC.  $2,376 is just the bottom end.  O.O

Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does.

Hey, I can dream, can't I?   

It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:

"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."

If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes.....

Tradehill dark pools...

Not just Tradehill dark pool, there are many ways to buy offline, actually the "dark" market of bitcoin maybe larger than the "bright" one.

[Manticore]

20 x $5M (nice sounding average?) x 22 (working days in a month) = $2.2 BILLION looking to make its way into the BTC market per MONTH!

$2.2B x 12 = $26.4B

At $90 (ish), we're at a $1B market cap.

Prepare for 1 BTC = $2,376.00 within 12 months.  And this is just with current demand - as the price continues to rise, more and more asset managers with even larger balances will be calling and requesting to invest in BTC.  $2,376 is just the bottom end.  O.O

Talk to your kids about extrapolation, before someone else does.

Hey, I can dream, can't I?   

It appears that it is Exante that is dealing with the large loads:

"Exante, a Malta-based asset manager, set up a Bitcoin fund last year that was largely intended as a fun punt. Wealthy investors each put in $1,000 when Bitcoins were trading at $13 on the understanding they could lose the original investment. Exante predicted that public and media interest would take off when Bitcoins were trading at $100. Managing partner Gatis Eglitis claims they are now getting 20 calls a day from large asset managers looking to invest up to $100m."

If anyone here truly believes that a $100MM inflow into BTC is forthcoming, then you have clearly never been involved in the due diligence process that would precede that type of investment. The liquidity issue is a real problem as is the systematic risk. In theory there are probably several money managers that would consider BTC. But if one scratches the surface, most will quickly see that the logistics would be next to impossible. This market moves erratically at low volumes.....

Tradehill dark pools...

Not just Tradehill dark pool, there are many ways to buy offline, actually the "dark" market of bitcoin maybe larger than the "bright" one.

Good luck finding the millions of coins needed for institutional and large hedge fund investments without driving the price to absurd heights.

[lophie]

Facepalm  , Greedy people will KILL Bitcoin adoption rate. Everyone is investing in the currency and no one is investing in adopting the system  .

We needs shops and more development in the Tech..... sigh.....