[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread

[auto2nr1]

Wouldn't it be better if we can just merge all the shares into one exchange? What if we were to move all the shares into BTCT? Or is it better to keep the shares on two different exchanges?

You cant just force people onto an exchange. Some people chose one for specific reasons and thats their choice.  Also that would be a clusterfuck to orchestrate

I had no choice but to go with BitFunder since AMC first IPO'd there at the beginning of May. I ended up taking up a large stake in the company at the IPO price. If the original IPO was through BTCT then i would have everything in there. If we were on one exchange there would be one share price at any given time with more liquidity right?

[Pale Phoenix]

Allow inter-exchange share transfers -> BTCT and BF. What argument is there against this?

lazyness on the part of burnside and whoever runs bitfunder (I think i've heard the name Ukyo(?) or something?)

Keep in mind in order to do it they have to come up with an absolutely fool-proof security system with digital signatures, etc, otherwise all kinds of shenanigans could be played.

Why do you assume it should be the exchanges who create arbitrage mechanisms? They are in competition with each other, not to mention that very few related securities are actually run by the same entity on both exchanges.

In this case, the issuer on Bitfunder is the same as the pass through operator on BTCT, so it should be up to Ken to create this tool should he wish to help even out the pricing.

[Vigil]

Allow inter-exchange share transfers -> BTCT and BF. What argument is there against this?

lazyness on the part of burnside and whoever runs bitfunder (I think i've heard the name Ukyo(?) or something?)

Keep in mind in order to do it they have to come up with an absolutely fool-proof security system with digital signatures, etc, otherwise all kinds of shenanigans could be played.

Why do you assume it should be the exchanges who create arbitrage mechanisms? They are in competition with each other, not to mention that very few related securities are actually run by the same entity on both exchanges.

In this case, the issuer on Bitfunder is the same as the pass through operator on BTCT, so it should be up to Ken to create this tool should he wish to help even out the pricing.

It has to be them because shares actually have to move between exchanges. At least, they would have to agree to it and work with the intermediary to enable interacting with the various coding on the exchanges.

Arbitrage cannot take place if the shares can't move - the entire point of arbitrage is that the "good" is being bought one place for cheap and sold at another for a higher price. Its possible that this could benefit both exchanges.

[zefyr0s]

Wouldn't arbitrage in the long run bring the prices to an equilibrium anyways? (Provided the ease of movement is the same with both securities.)

[drawingthesun]

Wouldn't arbitrage in the long run bring the prices to an equilibrium anyways? (Provided the ease of movement is the same with both securities.)

If it was possible to easily move shares from one exchange to another, then the equilibrium would be reached very quickly.

It really depends on ease of movement, a quick instant transfer would match both prices exactly. A slower movement like having to wait 6 hours would mean the prices would still fluctuate a little.

[Vigil]

Wouldn't arbitrage in the long run bring the prices to an equilibrium anyways? (Provided the ease of movement is the same with both securities.)

If it was possible to easily move shares from one exchange to another, then the equilibrium would be reached very quickly.

It really depends on ease of movement, a quick instant transfer would match both prices exactly. A slower movement like having to wait 6 hours would mean the prices would still fluctuate a little.

There are other factors such as fees and exchange "features" which would make some difference as well.

[kslaughter]

Bitfunder, BTC-TC Dividends paid [0.00000190/share]

[moribana]

I just don't see the point of moving shares unless it happens instantaneously. One can always sell shares on btct, transfer the bitcoins to bitfunder and pick up some cheap shares. And I actually do not understand why this is not happening. For long-term investors this seems to be a good strategy.

[pheaonix]

Allow inter-exchange share transfers -> BTCT and BF. What argument is there against this?

lazyness on the part of burnside and whoever runs bitfunder (I think i've heard the name Ukyo(?) or something?)

Keep in mind in order to do it they have to come up with an absolutely fool-proof security system with digital signatures, etc, otherwise all kinds of shenanigans could be played.

Why do you assume it should be the exchanges who create arbitrage mechanisms? They are in competition with each other, not to mention that very few related securities are actually run by the same entity on both exchanges.

In this case, the issuer on Bitfunder is the same as the pass through operator on BTCT, so it should be up to Ken to create this tool should he wish to help even out the pricing.

It has to be them because shares actually have to move between exchanges. At least, they would have to agree to it and work with the intermediary to enable interacting with the various coding on the exchanges.

Arbitrage cannot take place if the shares can't move - the entire point of arbitrage is that the "good" is being bought one place for cheap and sold at another for a higher price. Its possible that this could benefit both exchanges.

i agree - maybe a small fee could be leveraged and both companies wind up ahead and we wind up ahead.everybody wins.

[drawingthesun]

I just don't see the point of moving shares unless it happens instantaneously. One can always sell shares on btct, transfer the bitcoins to bitfunder and pick up some cheap shares. And I actually do not understand why this is not happening. For long-term investors this seems to be a good strategy.

Why sell out on a market that has more chance of allowing you to fill your large orders quickly?

Think about it, the higher price is there for a reason. Liquidity is one of the most important and overlooked things here. Some of us hold much more than 10 bitcoins worth of shares. I had stock in another company on Bitfunder and lost so much money because there is no liquidity. (This company is often higher ranked on bitfunder for transaction volume that active mining on bitfunder too)

My conclusion is if you have a large amount of shares and you want to be able to flip them on news or whatever, BTCT is the way to go for now.

So the lower price on bitfunder is only a plus if you can one day transfer them. For now the price reflects the situation. That being on bitfunder is a negative for trading your shares.

[thefunkybits]

Allow inter-exchange share transfers -> BTCT and BF. What argument is there against this?

Will this ever be possible??

Im arbing all my shares and picking up a few extra thousand for free

[carpetbagger]

[kleeck]

Awwww... You just met you quota of bullshit posts. Unfortunate.

[LorenzoMoney]

What is a share, really? It is merely some sort of accounting notation in some file on an exchange. The reason why Bitcoin can be transferred is because everyone has access to the very same blockchain. In all probability, the way shares are recorded in BF is different from teh way shares and transactions are recorded on BTCT, unless they are using the exact same software.  There is no common ledger for shares like there is for bitcoin.

For shares to be transferred from one exchange to the other, both exchanges must communicate to each other and use some protocol and that might not be trivial.

Why should the owners of two different exchanges spend their time and money to develop a protocol for transferring shares? How would it benefit either of them?

If they charged a fee for transferring shares, would you complain or would you guys accept that fee as part of the service provided by Ukyo and his BTCT counterpart?

Suppose they chraged a fee of .001%    Would that be acceptable?

 

Allow inter-exchange share transfers -> BTCT and BF. What argument is there against this?

lazyness on the part of burnside and whoever runs bitfunder (I think i've heard the name Ukyo(?) or something?)

Keep in mind in order to do it they have to come up with an absolutely fool-proof security system with digital signatures, etc, otherwise all kinds of shenanigans could be played.

Why do you assume it should be the exchanges who create arbitrage mechanisms? They are in competition with each other, not to mention that very few related securities are actually run by the same entity on both exchanges.

In this case, the issuer on Bitfunder is the same as the pass through operator on BTCT, so it should be up to Ken to create this tool should he wish to help even out the pricing.

[drawingthesun]

Allow inter-exchange share transfers -> BTCT and BF. What argument is there against this?

Will this ever be possible??

Im arbing all my shares and picking up a few extra thousand for free

How?

[ShawnP]

https://i.imgur.com/p0Qm3vG.png

Awwww... You just met you quota of bullshit posts. Unfortunate.

There is 0 BS in his post.
ActiveMining was suppossed to have 6TH online by now.
But since Avalon did not deliver it did not happen.
Also I find it interesting that network is 750TH and not 250TH as predicted in this chart.
But yeah that 6TH would just be temporary measure until Easic would deliver and company starts mining/selling.

[Technologov]

1. Theoretically stocks transfer is possible via Colored BitcoinX protocol. Today no exchange supports it.

2. The easiest way for us is for the company to appoint several arbitrageurs.
Basically I can do the day to day arbitration according to my free time, assuming the company is willing to transfer my shares from one exchange to the next.
The company can do this now, because they can destroy shares on one exchange and create on another.
Basically I will transfer half of my shares to ken on BF, then he would have to destroy them on BF and create on BTCT.

3. The 50% liquidity premium is growing, and without the company (Ken) acting, it may not close.

-Technologov

[Ytterbium]

The ripple protocol would be perfect for moving shares between exchanges.  In fact, you wouldn't even need exchanges, it could all be done over P2P, like with bitcoin.  Ripple works with a "central issuer", unlike bitcoin (I think), but with a stock, you obviously have to have a central issuer (the company).

[Vigil]

Allow inter-exchange share transfers -> BTCT and BF. What argument is there against this?

Will this ever be possible??

Im arbing all my shares and picking up a few extra thousand for free

How?

Exactly... There seems to be some confusion on here about what arbitrage is.

What is arbitrage? The Khan Academy explains.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuCH7fHZsZ4

[moribana]

I just don't see the point of moving shares unless it happens instantaneously. One can always sell shares on btct, transfer the bitcoins to bitfunder and pick up some cheap shares. And I actually do not understand why this is not happening. For long-term investors this seems to be a good strategy.

Why sell out on a market that has more chance of allowing you to fill your large orders quickly?

Think about it, the higher price is there for a reason. Liquidity is one of the most important and overlooked things here. Some of us hold much more than 10 bitcoins worth of shares. I had stock in another company on Bitfunder and lost so much money because there is no liquidity. (This company is often higher ranked on bitfunder for transaction volume that active mining on bitfunder too)

My conclusion is if you have a large amount of shares and you want to be able to flip them on news or whatever, BTCT is the way to go for now.

So the lower price on bitfunder is only a plus if you can one day transfer them. For now the price reflects the situation. That being on bitfunder is a negative for trading your shares.

I was talking about long-term investors, not speculators.