Intersango Exchange

[RaggedMonk]

Another suggestion for intersango...

Offer a liquidity discount for people using limit orders. I believe some forex brokers do this. It would kill two birds with one stone... fix your high fees and boost the orderbook.

I would move to your platform if you offered this.

[1713950183]

1713950183

[1713950183]

1713950183

[1713950183]

1713950183

[1713950183]

1713950183

[sethsethseth]

I believe Intersango is the best kept secret in Bitcoin!

Did you know:

USA customers can send a direct deposit ACH transfer into Intersango, without going through Dwolla!
SEPA transfers to the Eurozone are fully operational and reliable!

what other gems am i missing?

I use these guys regularly and they are good.  Their US order book needs to fill up though!

How would I go about initiating an ACH transfer to them?  I thought the merchant was the one who did this.  Also, I see that Intersango has an account with Chase.  How much cheaper does this make the wire costs for Americans over wiring to mtgox in Hong Kong?

[BitPay Business Solutions]

I believe Intersango is the best kept secret in Bitcoin!

Did you know:

USA customers can send a direct deposit ACH transfer into Intersango, without going through Dwolla!
SEPA transfers to the Eurozone are fully operational and reliable!

what other gems am i missing?

I use these guys regularly and they are good.  Their US order book needs to fill up though!

How would I go about initiating an ACH transfer to them?  I thought the merchant was the one who did this.  Also, I see that Intersango has an account with Chase.  How much cheaper does this make the wire costs for Americans over wiring to mtgox in Hong Kong?

check with your bank on how to initiate a push ACH to another US bank account.  I can do it very easily from our business accounts, in fact we do it every day to all of our merchants.  ACH is free to receive, and costs from $0.00 to $0.50 to send.  That's alot cheaper than an international wire, $40.00.

[realnowhereman]

Another suggestion for intersango...

Offer a liquidity discount for people using limit orders. I believe some forex brokers do this. It would kill two birds with one stone... fix your high fees and boost the orderbook.

Looks like Intersango have taken my idea.  (Although they've done it in a way that makes the uncomfortably high fees even more uncomfortable)

Current site-wide fees are a flat 0.65%. The Taker fee will be an extra 0.30% which is given directly to Makers.

Example:

John places an order to sell 10 BTC @ 1.0 USD. His order is not immediately matched.
Beth places an order to buy  10 BTC @ 1.0 USD. Her order is immediately matched against John's order.

John pays a fee of 10 BTC * (0.65% - 0.30%) = 10 USD * 0.35% = 0.035 USD
Beth pays a fee of 10 BTC * (0.65% + 0.30%) = 10 BTC * 0.95% = 0.095 BTC

Beth's Taker-fee of is given to John as a Market Maker Bonus.

Still; this is a move in the right direction... A USP for Intersango versus Mt.Gox.

[Liam W]

I'm using this, and it works well

[joeyjoe]

Never had a security compromise??

On 09/23/11 22:24, Patrick Strateman wrote:
Hey,

Sorry if i didn't thank you, I honestly thought I had, I was kind on the
verge of just falling asleep (think pass out from exhaustion on my desk
heh).

So since I didn't say it before, thank you. Really thank you ALOT.

As for the flaw, I fixed it so that others cant do it, but since you
already had the orders were processed normally.

If you're interested I can explain to you exactly what went wrong on IRC.

Patrick

This is from when they had some silly problem where it allowed your balance to go into negatives while putting multiple bitcoin buy orders on. It would of been possible for someone to do this hundreds of times until the entire balance of bitcoins were depleted and moved else where. And that would be the bitcoins belonging to the customers. Whats more is he couldnt even understand what was going on, and i had to set up team veiwer to show him.

I wouldnt be supprised if there were more problems elsewhere.

[Seal]

First off, I have to add my +1 for Intersango as an exchange. Their trade execution is flawless and I find them both reliable and trustworthy even in the face of the banking problems they've been having recently. GBP transfers are free too!

I totally recommend them to anyone who hasn't yet signed up.

Another suggestion for intersango...

Offer a liquidity discount for people using limit orders. I believe some forex brokers do this. It would kill two birds with one stone... fix your high fees and boost the orderbook.

Looks like Intersango have taken my idea.  (Although they've done it in a way that makes the uncomfortably high fees even more uncomfortable)

Current site-wide fees are a flat 0.65%. The Taker fee will be an extra 0.30% which is given directly to Makers.

Example:

John places an order to sell 10 BTC @ 1.0 USD. His order is not immediately matched.
Beth places an order to buy  10 BTC @ 1.0 USD. Her order is immediately matched against John's order.

John pays a fee of 10 BTC * (0.65% - 0.30%) = 10 USD * 0.35% = 0.035 USD
Beth pays a fee of 10 BTC * (0.65% + 0.30%) = 10 BTC * 0.95% = 0.095 BTC

Beth's Taker-fee of is given to John as a Market Maker Bonus.

Still; this is a move in the right direction... A USP for Intersango versus Mt.Gox.

+1 on being uncomfortable with the new fee structure. Agreed, its a step in the right direction however but trading bitcoins off the orderbook which is what a lot of people normally tend to do (myself included) is gonna get very expensive!

Interesting structure though, very imaginative. I speculate that it will lead to tighter spreads but a lower trade volume. I'm keen on seeing how this'll affect their orderbook after the new fee structure is in place.

[realnowhereman]

Another suggestion:

In place price editing.  When you see that the market has moved away from a price you've put as a limit it's a pain to go through the cancel-enter-execute cycle again when all you want is the same order placed at a new price.

Why not offer an interface to let me do that cycle with a single click... if I click "edit" on an outstanding order it is cancelled and I'm sent to the order entry page, already filled in just like the previous order.

[muyuu]

Not sure this extra complexity is actually worth it. I usually place lowish orders and wait until someone takes them, so this effectively lowers my fees, but now I think it will take longer to get orders matched and it will only happen when mtgox is far ahead anyway...

[realnowhereman]

Not sure this extra complexity is actually worth it. I usually place lowish orders and wait until someone takes them, so this effectively lowers my fees, but now I think it will take longer to get orders matched and it will only happen when mtgox is far ahead anyway...

My argument would be that Intersango's problem is lack of liquidity.  The order book is too small, making it look like it's not worth trading there.  With this discount system, there is an incentive for capital holders to supply that liquidity... and with it an incentive to keep their price current meaning both liquidity and accuracy.  Have a think about what that means: the spread will be smaller, and the discount allows traders to move closer to "the current" price -- so much so that in theory the amount you lose from the liquidity bonus is exactly what you gain from having a better price available.

(What does "far ahead" mean?  There are two sides to an order book.)

[EuSouBitcoin]

Intersango is trying, but BitFloor has the right formula.
At Intersango liquidity takers PAY 0.95% and liquidity providers PAY 0.35%.
At BitFloor liquidity takers PAY 0.4% and liquidity providers RECEIVE 0.1%
I trade BTC/USD at Mt Gox, Crypto X Change, Intersango, CampBX and BitFloor. Each one has their advantages, but when it comes to commission structure, BitFloor has shown the way.

[muyuu]

Intersango is trying, but BitFloor has the right formula.
At Intersango liquidity takers PAY 0.95% and liquidity providers PAY 0.35%.
At BitFloor liquidity takers PAY 0.4% and liquidity providers RECEIVE 0.1%
I trade BTC/USD at Mt Gox, Crypto X Change, Intersango, CampBX and BitFloor. Each one has their advantages, but when it comes to commission structure, BitFloor has shown the way.

Heh. Sure, we all want lower fees. BitFloor makes substantially less per transaction. It's their choice.

[EuSouBitcoin]

Since Mt Gox currently has over 95% of all BTC/USD volume, they don't need to change anything. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. But all the other BTC/USD exchanges need to try some way to capture some of the volume from Mt Gox. I think trading rebates for orders that add liquidity are the way to go.

[realnowhereman]

Intersango is trying, but BitFloor has the right formula.
At Intersango liquidity takers PAY 0.95% and liquidity providers PAY 0.35%.
At BitFloor liquidity takers PAY 0.4% and liquidity providers RECEIVE 0.1%
I trade BTC/USD at Mt Gox, Crypto X Change, Intersango, CampBX and BitFloor. Each one has their advantages, but when it comes to commission structure, BitFloor has shown the way.

This would be great.  It's the beginnings of a bitcoin bank: a way for holders to make money simply by constantly offering their capital for sale.

Heh. Sure, we all want lower fees. BitFloor makes substantially less per transaction. It's their choice.

The amount made per transaction is independent of the principle of paying the liquidity provider.  Mt.Gox make 0.65% * 2 per transaction.  That can be split anywhere they like, and the percentage to provider can be anything they like.  For example if the liquidity provider is paid 0.5%, then the liquidity taker has to pay that 0.5% plus the 1.3% trade fee = 1.8%.  I'm not saying that would be good; but it's to demonstrate that paying the provider is a separate issue.

Personally, I'd like to see 0.2% to the provider, and 0.8% to Intersango; making the taker fee 1%.  That would leave them comparable with Mt.Gox (when we consider a round trip with one provision, one take), but with a profit incentive to attract customers.  Let's remember that it is the liquidity providers that matter; the liquidity takers will follow them.  People are already talking about leaving capital at Bitcoinica now that it's paying interest.  Intersango could achieve the same.

I really would like Intersango to succeed; but they don't seem to realise that being more expensive that the market leader with no unique selling point (other than some hand waving about trustworthiness) is not the way to entice customers.

[muyuu]

Heh. Sure, we all want lower fees. BitFloor makes substantially less per transaction. It's their choice.

The amount made per transaction is independent of the principle of paying the liquidity provider.  Mt.Gox make 0.65% * 2 per transaction.  That can be split anywhere they like, and the percentage to provider can be anything they like.  For example if the liquidity provider is paid 0.5%, then the liquidity taker has to pay that 0.5% plus the 1.3% trade fee = 1.8%.  I'm not saying that would be good; but it's to demonstrate that paying the provider is a separate issue.

I know. But I'm talking about the numbers quoted above, not about the principle. The principle is basically the same between Bitfloor and Intersango now, but Bitfloor takes a much lesser fee and balances it more towards the liquidity provider.

[realnowhereman]

Heh. Sure, we all want lower fees. BitFloor makes substantially less per transaction. It's their choice.

The amount made per transaction is independent of the principle of paying the liquidity provider.  Mt.Gox make 0.65% * 2 per transaction.  That can be split anywhere they like, and the percentage to provider can be anything they like.  For example if the liquidity provider is paid 0.5%, then the liquidity taker has to pay that 0.5% plus the 1.3% trade fee = 1.8%.  I'm not saying that would be good; but it's to demonstrate that paying the provider is a separate issue.

I know. But I'm talking about the numbers quoted above, not about the principle. The principle is basically the same between Bitfloor and Intersango now, but Bitfloor takes a much lesser fee and balances it more towards the liquidity provider.

The only thing I'd say is that they aren't the same because of that key threshold: zero.  There is a huge difference between a trade earning you a fee and a trade costing you a fee.

I'd not heard of Bitfloor before your comment, but I will investigate them now.

[muyuu]

Heh. Sure, we all want lower fees. BitFloor makes substantially less per transaction. It's their choice.

The amount made per transaction is independent of the principle of paying the liquidity provider.  Mt.Gox make 0.65% * 2 per transaction.  That can be split anywhere they like, and the percentage to provider can be anything they like.  For example if the liquidity provider is paid 0.5%, then the liquidity taker has to pay that 0.5% plus the 1.3% trade fee = 1.8%.  I'm not saying that would be good; but it's to demonstrate that paying the provider is a separate issue.

I know. But I'm talking about the numbers quoted above, not about the principle. The principle is basically the same between Bitfloor and Intersango now, but Bitfloor takes a much lesser fee and balances it more towards the liquidity provider.

The only thing I'd say is that they aren't the same because of that key threshold: zero.  There is a huge difference between a trade earning you a fee and a trade costing you a fee.

I'd not heard of Bitfloor before your comment, but I will investigate them now.

Depending on the spread, the fee being in your favour might not mean much.

Many local currency exchanges work on "0% commission" but then give you horrible valuation and spreads, being A LOT more expensive in practice than a good exchange with competitive spreads and a 1% fee.

In fact Intersango worked without any fees for some time and often mtGox was the better deal to both buy and sell. However Intersango is very convenient for me having a British bank account and being able to trade in GBP. If I have to deal in dollars that involves some friction and some loses to currency swings. I might hedge that but I don't trade anywhere near enough to justify all this complexity.

[Seal]

Heh. Sure, we all want lower fees. BitFloor makes substantially less per transaction. It's their choice.

The amount made per transaction is independent of the principle of paying the liquidity provider.  Mt.Gox make 0.65% * 2 per transaction.  That can be split anywhere they like, and the percentage to provider can be anything they like.  For example if the liquidity provider is paid 0.5%, then the liquidity taker has to pay that 0.5% plus the 1.3% trade fee = 1.8%.  I'm not saying that would be good; but it's to demonstrate that paying the provider is a separate issue.

I know. But I'm talking about the numbers quoted above, not about the principle. The principle is basically the same between Bitfloor and Intersango now, but Bitfloor takes a much lesser fee and balances it more towards the liquidity provider.

The only thing I'd say is that they aren't the same because of that key threshold: zero.  There is a huge difference between a trade earning you a fee and a trade costing you a fee.

I'd not heard of Bitfloor before your comment, but I will investigate them now.

In fact Intersango worked without any fees for some time and often mtGox was the better deal to both buy and sell. However Intersango is very convenient for me having a British bank account and being able to trade in GBP. If I have to deal in dollars that involves some friction and some loses to currency swings. I might hedge that but I don't trade anywhere near enough to justify all this complexity.

Intersango had no fees to attract enough trade volume to turn it into the second largest bitcoin broker out there. Its worked well to attract liquidity however it hasnt exceeded MtGox and I doubt ever will if the fees charged serve to lower trade volume*edit* raise the cost of orderbook purchasing resulting in lowered trade volume. I'm just waiting to see the impact.

muyuu: You can trade GBP with direct GBP bank funding in MtGox. Currently Intersango's GBP trade volume usually matches and exceeds MtGox's however the actual bitcoin prices are a lot better on MtGox, especially with discounts applied. How do you deal in dollars? I've been looking into it but haven't found a cost effective way of converting and transferring my currency.

[muyuu]

muyuu: You can trade GBP with direct GBP bank funding in MtGox. Currently Intersango's GBP trade volume usually matches and exceeds MtGox's however the actual bitcoin prices are a lot better on MtGox, especially with discounts applied. How do you deal in dollars? I've been looking into it but haven't found a cost effective way of converting and transferring my currency.

That's the problem, it's not cost effective. I have an account in dollars and another one (abroad) in Euros, however my salary comes to my British account in GBP and that's what I prefer to use. Transfers and currency conversion usually cost a lot more than fees from either MtGox or Intersango and also trounce the spread difference. Beating costs associated to deposits and withdrawals is basically a matter of volume, for trading small amounts making a free UK deposit to my Intersango account can't be beaten. MtGox and its £5/£15 fees would make sense for £10k+ and I'm not trading that much. However, if you don't plan to move funds much you can still justify trading in several currencies and with some arbitrage you'd come at an advantage after a bunch of trades. Again, I'm not speculating that much.

I'm looking into forex trying to find a way to get funds converted and moved into exchanges more effectively, in a few months I will be trading about £5k which is not much, but it's enough to look more into this.

[QuantumFoam]

Since this is the Intersango thread, I was wondering if anyone has been able to use the ACH bank option for USD withdrawal and how to go about initiating it. It says it is free on the fees page, but there doesn't seem to be any option to choose it when withdrawing USD.