Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2016, 02:10:03 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Will GLBSE ever be lowering its prices?  (Read 4642 times)
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890



View Profile WWW
May 08, 2012, 02:27:03 PM
 #21

Am I blind or something?! Where do I find the current fees charged if I'm logged in on GLBSE?

It's not in "Terms", on "Transfer" there's only the fee for transfers and anywhere else I've looked I didn't find anything...

Edit: Ok, right after posting this, I found it...  Lips sealed
The only way to see the fees is if you already intend to buy something and go on an asset page. If you want to check the fees first you can be as lost as me.
Also - 0.4% fees were announced, 0.5% fees implemented. That's a 25% increase(!) - why try to kill the liquidity that anyways is the thing that generates income and is most needed on GLBSE atm in my opinion?

No it's actually 0.5% fee, I've only implemented it and not announced but we've added maker taker.

Those who make orders that goes on the orderbook (i.e. are not taken up by another order) pay 0%, those who take orders (i.e. they make an order which takes up other orders) pay 0.5%
We begged you not to do this. It's broken and doesn't do anything other than create confusion. Please do a symmetric fee of say 0.5% from each side.


PS I think the fees should be increased. GLBSE's profits are nowhere near the value it creates.

1EofoZNBhWQ3kxfKnvWkhtMns4AivZArhr   |   Who am I?   |   bitcoin-otc WoT
Bitcoil - Exchange bitcoins for ILS (thread)   |   Israel Bitcoin community homepage (thread)
Analysis of Bitcoin Pooled Mining Reward Systems (thread, summary)  |   PureMining - Infinite-term, deterministic mining bond
1481465403
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465403

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465403
Reply with quote  #2

1481465403
Report to moderator
1481465403
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465403

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465403
Reply with quote  #2

1481465403
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481465403
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465403

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465403
Reply with quote  #2

1481465403
Report to moderator
1481465403
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481465403

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481465403
Reply with quote  #2

1481465403
Report to moderator
Blitz­
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596


"Cut Your Loose"


View Profile
May 08, 2012, 02:38:02 PM
 #22

@Meni

Why is the maker-taker model broken? I think it is good for liquidity, and lots of exchanges use it (Bitcoin exchanges as well).

"Bitcoin had been transformed from an anarachistic challenge to the financial status quo, to the crypto spawn of Satan, fuelled by cut-throat greed and delusions of avarice." - MatTheCat
"these people don't seem to want to stop till Bitcoin is completely destroyed and left like an old cum rag in the corner of the room." - ShroomsKit
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890



View Profile WWW
May 08, 2012, 02:45:49 PM
 #23

@Meni

Why is the maker-taker model broken? I think it is good for liquidity, and lots of exchanges use it (Bitcoin exchanges as well).
I see there's now a thread for this, I'll continue there.

1EofoZNBhWQ3kxfKnvWkhtMns4AivZArhr   |   Who am I?   |   bitcoin-otc WoT
Bitcoil - Exchange bitcoins for ILS (thread)   |   Israel Bitcoin community homepage (thread)
Analysis of Bitcoin Pooled Mining Reward Systems (thread, summary)  |   PureMining - Infinite-term, deterministic mining bond
rjk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


1ngldh


View Profile
May 08, 2012, 02:51:59 PM
 #24

@Meni

Why is the maker-taker model broken? I think it is good for liquidity, and lots of exchanges use it (Bitcoin exchanges as well).
I see there's now a thread for this, I'll continue there.

link???  thx
Fail, you quoted the link. Click it.

Mining Rig Extraordinaire - the Trenton BPX6806 18-slot PCIe backplane [PICS] Dead project is dead, all hail the coming of the mighty ASIC!
Sukrim
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
May 08, 2012, 02:58:45 PM
 #25

So a strategy to get shares would be to bid 1 Satoshi lower than the lowest ask and hope for someone holding shares to eat up the 0.5% fee?

I would still favor a clear: "0.5% on both sides of every trade or transfer of assets above 20 BTC total volume OR a flat fee of X BTC per 30 days for the 'high rollers' that provide liquidity." - this would have the best of both worlds. Small investors have only 0.5% fees and if you want to go big, you have to have a volume larger than 200 times the monthly fee within that month to be worth it - if the fee is 5 BTC for examplethat would mena, if you plan to move more than 1000 BTC per month on GLBSE, you're better off buying the flat rate, and you will also benefit smaller investors with more liquidity in the market.

https://bitfinex.com <-- leveraged trading of BTCUSD, LTCUSD and LTCBTC (long and short) - 10% discount on fees for the first 30 days with this refcode: x5K9YtL3Zb
Mail me at Bitmessage: BM-BbiHiVv5qh858ULsyRDtpRrG9WjXN3xf
Dalkore
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176


ASIC Miner Hosting: www.bitcoinasichosting.com


View Profile WWW
May 08, 2012, 04:24:22 PM
 #26

$40 for the service is pretty dirt-cheap. Nef does a lot of work on the site (along with others involved) and's willing to spend a fair amount of time fixing any problems which come up.

Though.... if you're really interested in an answer, you could try posting it on http://predict.glbse.com/  Tongue

I feel this is good value for the BTC.  Could it be cheaper, sure but I want them to have resources to do the things an exchange needs to do, security and customer service.

Dalkore

[Winter Fire Sale] Hosting: $60.00 per KW) [6-month contracts] - Link
Transaction List: jayson3 +5 - ColdHardMetal +3 - Nolo +2 - CoinHoarder +1 - Elxiliath +1 - tymm0 +1 - Johnniewalker +1 - Oscer +1 - Davidj411 +1 - BitCoiner2012 +1 - dstruct2k +1 - Philj +1 - camolist +1 - exahash +1 - Littleshop +1 - Severian +1 - DebitMe +1 - lepenguin +1 - StringTheory +1 - amagimetals +1 - jcoin200 +1 - serp +1 - klintay +1 - -droid- +1 - FlutterPie +1
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
May 08, 2012, 04:55:04 PM
 #27

Why is reduced/no fees for those who create liquidity "broken"?  I guess some people are unaware that every major exchange in the world operates under similar model (including the NYSE).

http://individuals.interactivebrokers.com/en/accounts/fees/NYSEstkfee.php?ib_entity=llc

You will notice for share price >1 the "fee" is negative.  Thats right.  The exchange PAYS you for placing the order which adds liquidity.

Ever notice the spread on most highly traded stocks is 1 cent.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=BAC

Wonder why?  Yup.  reduced/no/negative fee for adding liquidity drives the spreads closer.  The reason it isn't closer than 1 cent is simply because NYSE has min tick rules and for stocks valued > $5 the min tick is 1 cent.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
May 08, 2012, 04:59:37 PM
 #28

So a strategy to get shares would be to bid 1 Satoshi lower than the lowest ask and hope for someone holding shares to eat up the 0.5% fee?

That would create a spread of 1 satoshi which is nirvana for a market.  Why would that be a bad thing?
Everyone wins under such a situation.

If GBLSE needs the revenue even cutting the fee when adding liquidity is better than a flat fee on both sides.

Something like:
0.4% taking liquidity
0.2% adding liquidity
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002



View Profile
May 08, 2012, 07:18:21 PM
 #29

That would create a spread of 1 satoshi which is nirvana for a market.  Why would that be a bad thing?
Everyone wins under such a situation.

I notice the same thing with the U.S.-based bitcoin exchanges (Camp BX, BitFloor).  Bids and asks can only be placed at one penny ($0.01) increments at those exchanges.  You'll have tighter spreads than $0.01 on Mt. Gox but never closer than $0.01 on Camp BX and BitFloor as a result (of U.S. regulation, presumably).

Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890



View Profile WWW
May 08, 2012, 07:39:45 PM
 #30

@DaT: Continued in the thread which I think is more relevant.

1EofoZNBhWQ3kxfKnvWkhtMns4AivZArhr   |   Who am I?   |   bitcoin-otc WoT
Bitcoil - Exchange bitcoins for ILS (thread)   |   Israel Bitcoin community homepage (thread)
Analysis of Bitcoin Pooled Mining Reward Systems (thread, summary)  |   PureMining - Infinite-term, deterministic mining bond
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
May 08, 2012, 07:41:34 PM
 #31

That would create a spread of 1 satoshi which is nirvana for a market.  Why would that be a bad thing?
Everyone wins under such a situation.

I notice the same thing with the U.S.-based bitcoin exchanges (Camp BX, BitFloor).  Bids and asks can only be placed at one penny ($0.01) increments at those exchanges.  You'll have tighter spreads than $0.01 on Mt. Gox but never closer than $0.01 on Camp BX and BitFloor as a result (of U.S. regulation, presumably).

There is no regulation that prohibits smaller tick size (or at least none I know).  For lower priced equities (<$5? <$1? something like that) NYSE uses a  tick of $0.001.  

Personally I think 1 cent is a little too restrictive when the asset is trading around $5.00 and really bad if BTC declines to say $2.00.  If they (Camp BX, BitFloor) are continually bumping up on that limit they should look at a smaller tick size.  Maybe to 1/10th of a cent? or 1/100th of a cent? Beyond that there isn't much value.  I mean does anyone really care if they can get a 1 BTC for $5.11000001 vs $5.11000002. You save 1 cent every 1 million BTC traded. Smiley

Still it is all relative.  If someday BTC was in the ballpark of $100 ea then tick size smaller than 1 cent is really just noise.  If someday BTC was >$10,000 you probably wouldn't even need ticks smaller than a dollar (well more likely all trading would be done in mBTC.  1 mBTC = $10.00). 

A good exchange tries to balance divisibility with ease of use.  "Does having a smaller tick size provide any benefit to traders?"
xkrikl
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 159


View Profile
May 08, 2012, 08:55:49 PM
 #32

Am I blind or something?! Where do I find the current fees charged if I'm logged in on GLBSE?

It's not in "Terms", on "Transfer" there's only the fee for transfers and anywhere else I've looked I didn't find anything...

Edit: Ok, right after posting this, I found it...  Lips sealed
The only way to see the fees is if you already intend to buy something and go on an asset page. If you want to check the fees first you can be as lost as me.
Also - 0.4% fees were announced, 0.5% fees implemented. That's a 25% increase(!) - why try to kill the liquidity that anyways is the thing that generates income and is most needed on GLBSE atm in my opinion?

No it's actually 0.5% fee, I've only implemented it and not announced but we've added maker taker.

Those who make orders that goes on the orderbook (i.e. are not taken up by another order) pay 0%, those who take orders (i.e. they make an order which takes up other orders) pay 0.5%

Good. I like it - I guess this can make things better
Especially good news is that we don't have to pay 0,5% both seller and buyer at once.
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002



View Profile
May 09, 2012, 02:24:02 AM
 #33

There is no regulation that prohibits smaller tick size (or at least none I know).  For lower priced equities (<$5? <$1? something like that) NYSE uses a  tick of $0.001.  

It appears there is such a restriction for equity securities:
 - http://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/subpenny612faq.htm

And exchanges such as NASDAQ had to request permission to do sub-penny:
 - http://marketswiki.com/mwiki/Sub-penny_quoting

But that is for equity securities.  Perhaps BitFloor and Camp BX are using a dose of caution, or just chose penny increment so as to not give bots / automated trading the advantage that sub-penny provides?

Personally I think 1 cent is a little too restrictive when the asset is trading around $5.00

I watch the bots on Mt. Gox sit just above my bids or just below my asks and feel frustrated when theirs will trade and mine don't, thanks to decimalization precise to 5 or 8 digits.  On the other hand, I've benefited from trading where I've been able to get in just ahead of the bid wall or ask wall thanks to decimalization where instead with penny increments my order might not get filled if I was among the most recent orders at that price and the wall doesn't get broken through.

So I guess I'ld prefer the exchange to not have any restriction as sub-penny works for me sometimes.

Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!