[OFFICIAL]Bitfinex.com first Bitcoin P2P lending platform for leverage trading

[chsados]

Me so confused on this fee stuff  

So say in the margin section, I have a limit order to go long if price were to reach say $400. After a few weeks I realize this will never happen and I cancel it - am I charged a fee?

[1715357827]

1715357827

[1715357827]

1715357827

[Valky]

Please give us Notify button back. I use it all the time =( There's no other option to be notified on time for ppl not sitting on bitfinex all the time.

[billotronic]

It seems apparent that the majority of people here used the Notify feature and want it back.

I never used it for exchange/margin trade orders myself but I always used it on active swaps. Always.

It sure looks like most people want it back. Perhaps we should start a separate thread here with one of those vote things to see how many want it back?

2nd that!

And while we are being all democratic, how a vote on the swap rate going up? I never insured nor do I want to be forced to pay a higher fee for insurance. wtf?

[gog1]

In addition, the lending fee is now up to 15%, which is a huge increase.  I highly recommend removing the flash return rate to allow for more efficient rate discovery instead of having rate artificially manipulated (I know Ente has other opinion on this), as borrower always have option to return fund early but lenders can never recall.  Margin loan outstanding approach $16 million yet interest yet the FRR keeps declining.

lastly, there's no more mention of lender insurance, so I suppose that is gone completely, or are all lender funds now 'insured'?

Announcement story is that:

"Another reason for removing swap insurance is that we have decided to effectively insure all swaps on the platform."

I take this to mean that all swaps are now ensured by BFX and that the enormous total scandal fee hike for lenders is meant to cover this. I'm not sure why the word "effectively" is there, though. It's really binary, either swaps a) are insured OR b) swaps are not insured.

As for the Flash Return Rate: My personal experience is that if you place offers above it and wait then your offer is taken eventually. Many people like to place fixed rate offers below it and that moves the average rate of all loans and therefore FRR down. There was 20,575,746.50 USD of outstanding swaps on February 6th 2014. That means that there could be quite a few million USD that's either withdrawn or spent to buy BTC or waiting in the shadows right now. A low rate is better than nothing and perhaps people with millions of USD and no girlfriend to spend it on figure that FRR is better than nothing.

Me so confused on this fee stuff  

Such confusion. Wow.

I can put up with a 5% fee increase if everything is insured.  But who's the provider and how do we know they can cover for the $15 million out there?  Is there a cap?  Does it keep up with the loan book's growth.  The loan book more than double in a few months.  If BTC flash crashed to $100 and stay there for a few weeks, can the platform stay solvent?

[wilfried]

It seems apparent that the majority of people here used the Notify feature and want it back.

I never used it for exchange/margin trade orders myself but I always used it on active swaps. Always.

It sure looks like most people want it back. Perhaps we should start a separate thread here with one of those vote things to see how many want it back?

full ack +
please repair the website for android browser
+ websocket api
+route to stamp feature
+dogecoin
+no more timeout on the website session /no redirect to garbage-screen after re-login

[ledmaniak]

Please give us Notify button back. I use it all the time =( There's no other option to be notified on time for ppl not sitting on bitfinex all the time.

Yep, used it a lot too..

[Ente]

The changes come with a quite short notice time (announced after in effect), but I like that you sent mails about it.
It's not *that* revolutionary changes, so I'm all fine with the short notice.

I would prefer lower liquidity fees than 15%, obviously.

Can you confirm you have enough funds to stay in business after a huge flashcrash with avanalche liquidations? Almost 16M$ are lent out at the moment. If yes, I'm fine with even a 15% fee.

Also, it doesn't make any difference if I provide to the *liquidity* book, or take from the liquidity book, right?

Ente

[DoubleSwapper]

I've read the announcement and have to admit that these are potentially very dangerous changes in my opinion. I even start to feel uneasy trusting Bitfinex with the sums I have deposited there.
Let me explain in detail why I feel these changes are not positive at all in my opinion.

1. The fee structure for trading seems fine. It's a popular model although I think offering something like the Vault of Satoshi "flatrate" would have been even more attractive.

2. Previously unannounced percentage fees for fiat withdrawals. Bitfinex, are you kidding me? With this changed you have just stated that our money is basically trapped at Bitfinex. I chose BFX because it had NO percentage withdrawal fees with a reasonable fixed fee which was just doubled as well. What if you suddenly announce tomorrow that the withdrawal fee is one percent? Considering the already obscure international wire transfer system this makes fiat withdrawals extremely unattracitve closely to obsolete.

3. Change in the swap fee structure and insurance: This is by far the biggest and most dangerous change. You have just increased the fees by 50 % for the removal of a feature that was basically never available and not thought out at all. If you had provided completely transparent insurance I would have gladly taken it for 30 % but insurance was always a mirage.

"Another reason for removing swap insurance is that we have decided to effectively insure all swaps on the platform."

I take this to mean that all swaps are now ensured by BFX and that the enormous total scandal fee hike for lenders is meant to cover this. I'm not sure why the word "effectively" is there, though. It's really binary, either swaps a) are insured OR b) swaps are not insured.

I can tell you what that means. It means that BFX tries to make lenders believe that their swaps are insured when there are actually no sufficient funds to insure the swaps in case of a serious crash. They just assume they will be able to halt (manipulate) trading fast enough for nobody to be able to close their shorts in time.

This is extremely dangerous as it basically takes the "indifferent for BFX p2p lending" away from the platform making it BFX the liquidityp provider who borrows the money to lend it out. We have seen how BTCe has handled the flash crash and why this change adds serious counterparty risk.

On top of that the illusion of insured loans will lead people to offer more swaps hereby increasing the supply of swaps and mutually decreasing the lending rate. The decreased lending rate will encourage people to more reckless margin trading and actually increase the risk for flash crashes.

"effectively insured" is a really dangerous term and I just can repeate that these changes have made BFX a whole lot more untrustworthy for me.

[CambioBTC]

So many Lender questions,

Does anyone here actually Trade,

Any Traders here at all ?,

Feel like I'm in the middle of a Banker's Session.

[Sukrim]

So many Lender questions,

Does anyone here actually Trade,

Any Traders here at all ?,

Feel like I'm in the middle of a Banker's Session.

Well, lenders just got a 50% fee increase, fewer features and virtually no compensation.

[wilfried]

"effectively insured" is a really dangerous term and I just can repeate that these changes have made BFX a whole lot more untrustworthy for me.

full ack. "effectively insured" can only mean: no insurance, but never mind, it´s safe.

well i think it´s bitfinex trying to reposition itself. now that gox is away and the toal sum of lended $ approaches 17 Mio again, maybe they think: no more need for the geek-hangout-style site, now we are big bussines..
imho the market is going to crash hard soon and face a very long bottom-time until it goes up again, maybe more than a year, maybe the higher fees are there to accumulate some reserves.. or to cash out as long as it works..
anyway, my guess is, that they´re not gonna discuss tha changes

i wonder, are they actually reinvesting profit? and if yes, in which features? i got the impression service doesnt get better. do you remember the discussion when the guy left bitfinex and claimed that he´s not an employee but a share-holder? there were stories about investors that greatly helped to fund the site and this one chinese guy who provides the insurance and so on. could it be that those guys made such good deals, that nearly all the profit goes to them? btw, is the bitfinex forum open again to new users?

[uberfractal]

Regarding this new "maker/taker" model, aren't those who provide the liquidity (i.e. those whose orders end up on the books) supposed to get a portion of the fee paid by those who take from the book?  This is the first time I've seen a "maker/taker" model described as both parties pay a fee with one just paying a lower fee.  This would seem to benefit Bitfinex a lot more than it would benefit traders, and I think it's going to end up creating a price divergence on this platform from other exchanges.   

A true maker/taker model (I think, and I'm no expert) should look like this:

Market makers receive 1/2 the fee paid by maker takers.
Market takers pay .3% fee (so Bitfinex receives .15%, and the market maker receives .15%).

This is how you "incentivize" being a market maker. 

[CambioBTC]

Does anyone here actually Trade,

Any Traders here at all ?,

Feel like I'm in the middle of a Banker's Session.

Volume on the last 24 hours: 1382.76 BTC. It appears that the answer is NO.

This may have to do with the fact that we've been in the shadow of that tall green boner-bar on the daily for more than a week now...

Make that two weeks  now
of pure consolidation, yet add more fees,
now there's an idea, geez !


Bitcoin last price: $632.5000
Daily Change: -2.95 (-0.466%)

[medicine]

Giancarlo, please clarify the "effectively insured" term regarding the swaps.   What does this mean?  You have secured 3rd party insurance on all funds lent out at Bitfinex? Which company is providing the insurance and where can we find a link to the agreement?
Peace.

[richmke]

I would like to see what happens when Bitfinex has a loss they try to pass on to the "lender". Which lender gets the loss? Do they spread it out over all the lenders? If they stick it to one lender, then how do I know that it is my counterparty that did not pay since I have no idea who is the counterparty is to my trade?

Now, if in the liquidity book they put user names and ratings, and I could decide if I wanted to lend to XYZ or ABC, that would be a different story.

[aragalie]

BFX team, i'm sorry for having to criticize but you guys are making some very brusque moves with apparent nonchalance.

1- Introduction of a "0.10% fee on all withdrawals and deposits" is a major milking of the Lenders, as i'm basically paying you 0.2% for a round-trip of deposit+withdrawal, for basically the exact same service? There's no risk for you, just paying the salary of a person who reconciles bank accounts. Don't you find this new fee a bit excessive?

2- 50% increase of the fees for Swap Liquidity providers....i understand that you might want to take a bigger part of the cake, but seriously, 50% hike with one simple email?

3- "Effective insurance of swaps" is a term that sounds very fishy, like the banks telling us they are using the best "risk assessment tools" and then going bankrupt when the first big crash happens. Please be so kind and explain to us how are you "effectively" insuring the swaps? It's like being pregnant: you either are or you aren't...you can't be "effectively" pregnant....

And i would like to stress on this point. If you have indeed found a financial institution willing to insure 16+ million dollars, please share with us the good news. Otherwise, if you are just relying on your ability to halt trading fast enough, or if you have a rich investor who "promised" to bear some of the losses, then we should know. That's a beaten path to getting a Black Swan event and wiping us all out. And the reasoning you are using to justify this increase is a Straw-man argument; what's the connection between your "reserves" (which for an un-audited company can mean anything) and the insurance you say you're providing?

You're a private company and can do whatever you like in this unregulated market, especially now with Mt. Gox gone. I can appreciate that, and the fact that you're just telling us about the changes and not consulting us at all (which is your right). Even so, i find this latest email a bit offensive in terms of the rate of fee hikes.

Should we expect another email in May with a 100% increase in the fees due to "effective" changes?

[superbit]

I think it would have made sense to make these changes and announcements with a solution showing all the BTC.  There have been some great suggestions by people in this forum that would still keep everyone totally anonymous.

[MustMan]

I can put up with a 5% fee increase if everything is insured.  But who's the provider and how do we know they can cover for the $15 million out there?  Is there a cap?  Does it keep up with the loan book's growth.  The loan book more than double in a few months.  If BTC flash crashed to $100 and stay there for a few weeks, can the platform stay solvent?

I've read the announcement and have to admit that these are potentially very dangerous changes in my opinion. I even start to feel uneasy trusting Bitfinex with the sums I have deposited there.

BFX team, i'm sorry for having to criticize but you guys are making some very brusque moves with apparent nonchalance.
------
You're a private company and can do whatever you like in this unregulated market, especially now with Mt. Gox gone. I can appreciate that, and the fact that you're just telling us about the changes and not consulting us at all (which is your right). Even so, i find this latest email a bit offensive in terms of the rate of fee hikes.

Should we expect another email in May with a 100% increase in the fees due to "effective" changes?

Seems like most of the people here enraged by the "changes and enhancements" policy.

But what can we do except making some insignificant noises to them??

That's the point: In this unregulated market, they can do whatever they want, despite any reason or reasoning they may add on it.

Maybe before long, you will hear the very familiar voice saying something like this:

If somebody is not happy with the above points he can always withdraw his funds and seek for a better option.
Nothing and nobody obliges you to stay.


Have a good day everybody !

If somebody is not happy with the above points he can always withdraw his funds and seek for a better option.
Nothing and nobody obliges you to stay.

Have a good day

Giancarlo
Bitfinex Team

[moxl]

The Bitfinex testing done? How long will it takes

[glavmey]

I would like to see what happens when Bitfinex has a loss they try to pass on to the "lender". Which lender gets the loss? Do they spread it out over all the lenders? If they stick it to one lender, then how do I know that it is my counterparty that did not pay since I have no idea who is the counterparty is to my trade?

Now, if in the liquidity book they put user names and ratings, and I could decide if I wanted to lend to XYZ or ABC, that would be a different story.

Last year Raphael said that losses "will be shared equally among all non insured loans, proportionally to the amount of the loans".
Source: https://community.bitfinex.com/showthread.php/438-clarification-on-not-insured-loans?p=2249&viewfull=1#post2249