Just what is a FAIR fee to send a Bitcoin transaction?

[solex]

Simple poll to find out just what most people think is a fair fee for sending a transaction on the Bitcoin network, long-term.

Paying a bill; buying a car, computer or coffee; making a donation, or whatever...
In 2014 US dollars please choose the amount that you think is closest to what the BTC equivalent mining fee should be for a standard transaction.

Assuming also that a standard transaction is on-chain, not a micro-transaction,  it is for something that is usually paid for with fiat.

What is the fairest fee?

[1714904203]

1714904203

[1714904203]

1714904203

[1714904203]

1714904203

[1714904203]

1714904203

[1714904203]

1714904203

[1714904203]

1714904203

[Velkro]

For me fair fee is lowest possible fee, that satisfies bitcoin users AND miners.
So i won't tell in FIAT, it must be small like 0.0001 BTC, but with millions transactions everyday it will still be good money for miners

[BTCevo]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05 is pretty low, but then again I think it should be relative to the amount being sent. 1% or less would be perfect, and if you allow microtransactions to take place there will be a lot of them, so why not group them together or give them their own special blocks?

Edit: that's actually a good idea, why not fork smaller transactions below 0.001 BTC and allow people to mine the transactions on a different blockchain with their CPU's? that way when the price of bitcoin is much higher it'll make things a lot easier for everyone. Not to mention the newly added interest that it would bring, people being able to mine with their regular computers again?

[cbeast]

Whatever the market will allow.

[Q7]

Past transactions that i have done usually cost 0.1mbtc which is the standard fee in btc and if convert to dollar it is about 5 cents. For me that is considered fair fee. Couldn't be much happier 

[turvarya]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05

Seriously?
In my country most bank transfers don't cost anything.
So, I stick with that also in Bitcoin. Miners get block reward, so I don't see why they should get transaction fees.

[lilin321]

The transaction cost should  be more better more  less be !

[TheButterZone]

Whatever the market will allow.

This. Don't want to have others determine how much your fee is? Don't mine, or modify your shit so you don't mine TXes below what you think you should be paid.

[hromobiti]

Maximum 50 cents, I preffer much lower, but the fee should never be higher than 50 cents

[solex]

Whatever the market will allow.

This. Don't want to have others determine how much your fee is? Don't mine, or modify your shit so you don't mine TXes below what you think you should be paid.

Absolutely. I'm a fan of market-driven pricing too, but it is still reasonable to try and find out what the market is thinking, especially as most users just let the default fee get applied by their wallet software. There is not yet an efficient fees market.

[BTCevo]

My idea works well when all coins are mined, people with big rigs can mine the larger transactions and get 1% and people with regular pcs can mine the smaller transactions for fun, those who wudnt mind smaller rewards eh?

[zetaray]

I don't think the current fee 0.0001 is unfair. I have read that the standard fee used to be 0.001, ten times of what we have now. Because of the way transactions are recorded in the blockchain, fee as a percentage of coins sent is not feasible. Think about the satoshi spams.

[Soros Shorts]

Whatever the market will allow.

Yes, whatever the market will bear is the fairest, assuming that there is no cartel of miners artificially keeping fees high.

[hibr3d]

20 cents is perfect in my opinion. I always send transactions with this fee.

[1Referee]

I think the 0.0001BTC fee is very reasonable at this price point, I don't mind paying this as fee for the upcomming years.

The market decides, and I will just follow.

[LiteCoinGuy]

Whatever the market will allow.

guess thats it. iam comfortable with 1-3 cents because then we have a very cheap payment-rail that will rule the world 

[Divinespark]

I think something like 10k satoshis per tx at 10x the overall transaction volume we have now may be sustainable

[Victoo]

Current fee of 0.0001 is good enough in current market.

I think Lower transaction fee was one of the main concept of cryptocurrencies so it is as it should be.

[chennan]

At the moment it doesn't matter how much the fee is. At least the block reward is enough to incentivize the miners to keep the mining rigs on. After it reaches the limits of 21 million, all the accumulated transaction fees left is rewarding to miners. Apart from the transaction volume, the amount of fees is important factor to determine the amount of reward in on block. If the reward is less than miners expected, they might turn off rigs.

[turvarya]

Have you guys ever looked in how much the transaction fees is in relation to the block reward?
e.g. https://blockchain.info/block-index/464811

Transaction Fees   0.03933258 BTC
...
Block Reward   25 BTC

I don't think transaction fees are really a concern of miners, since the block reward is just much higher, than that and will be for a long time

[catecoco]

I 'd like to choose the last ,but i click a 5 cent instead,what a fool i am 

[catecoco]

Most of people voted for 1 cent or less I agree with that

of course we will, the less the better for the future of Bitcoin,isn't it?

[OmegaStarScream]

Most of people voted for 1 cent or less I agree with that

of course we will, the less the better for the future of Bitcoin,isn't it?

Exactly , True. 

[Kluge]

Impossible question. It depends on all sorts of things since the cost isn't determined entirely by mining now, but also the cost of data transmission in the future and how blocks and the blockchain are compressed. How do these millions of transactions affect data drive and RAM MTBF and what's the cost to replace damaged components? What's the price of CPU cycles in the future? Each transaction today is a burden on our kids, our kids' kids, and our kids' kids' kids' kids, and those burdens would have to be accounted for in determining what's fair, which is impossible (or at least very time-consuming to estimate). -And unless the protocol changes radically, there's no way to pay them this theoretical fair price, anyway, since it all goes to miners.

... maybe $.08-25.

[HeroCat]

Current fee 0.0001 BTC is too high price, especially if transfer amount is low

[philiveyjr]

Well whatever it is now is fine..pretty happy with it! Dont mind it getting any cheaper though!

[philiveyjr]

I 'd like to choose the last ,but i click a 5 cent instead,what a fool i am 

LOL..! I did the same.! currently it is around 5 cents i guess..! Its alright..i guess!

[mnmShadyBTC]

Whatever the market will allow.

This is really the only correct answer. If you pay less then what the market will "allow" then you are essentially cheating the service provider (the miners) (you are actually probably taking advantage of the fact that they are in need of money) and if you pay more then you are paying an inflated price.

[arnuschky]

It's hard to say. I am not one of the free-for-all fraction, and miners need to cover their costs.

However, we've got to compete with the traditional banking system that can fund their activities via other, non transaction-based fees (i.e., bank account fees). For example, wire transfers in all of Europe are for free (and take only 1-2 days, so bitcoin's advantage in Europe is relatively low when compared to the US).

So I guess the answer is "as low as possible", which would incur that the mining sector shrinks in size.

[frankenmint]

I chose 50 cents - this is of course under the idea that btc is worth 2K or more 

[zarton]

I voted five cents there is thousands of transactions so it's ok, it's cheap but also an incentive to the miners.

[sandykho47]

I think the should 5 cents / less (5k satoshi / less)
And all tx must have fee

Most of people voted for 1 cent or less I agree with that

I disagree with your opinion, who will mine if the diff. very high & tx fee is very low

[Stedsm]

I think the should 5 cents / less (5k satoshi / less)
And all tx must have fee

Most of people voted for 1 cent or less I agree with that

I disagree with your opinion, who will mine if the diff. very high & tx fee is very low

Satoshi said that no tx needs a fee unless the amount you are sending out is equal to or above 200x the largest transaction you have received.

[Window2Wall]

I think this is a very complex question, mainly because the majority of the income for miners is from block subsidies. The miners need to be able to pay their electric costs at the very minimum and the total TX fees + the block subsidies need to cover this. If the market is not able to support high enough transaction fees then the difficulty will decrease and if it decreases enough then the network will not be secure.

I would say that some amount that will allow the miners to continue to pay for electricity + some profit at a difficulty that keeps the network sufficiently secure.

[pitham1]

The total transaction fees has been on a declining trend.

https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees

I guess once the block reward halves, transaction fees will become more important.

[jonald_fyookball]

if very small fixed fees won't support the network in the future, maybe percentage based fees will, such as 0.1%.  Today the network gives about 1.4 million dollars daily in rewards . If the network grew to the point where 1.4 billion dollars worth was changing hands daily, a 0.1% fee would provide that same 1.4 million dollars for security.

[Kluge]

 Today the network gives about 1.4 million dollars daily in rewards .

3600*385=$138.6k

[jonald_fyookball]

 Today the network gives about 1.4 million dollars daily in rewards .

3600*385=$138.6k

you're off by a decimal place bro

[Kluge]

 Today the network gives about 1.4 million dollars daily in rewards .

3600*385=$138.6k

you're off by a decimal place bro

Herp a derp. My bad. Really? It's that much?

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05

Seriously?
In my country most bank transfers don't cost anything.
So, I stick with that also in Bitcoin. Miners get block reward, so I don't see why they should get transaction fees.

Pool operators share their reward with everybody that helped solve the block, they may charge a slight fee off of that block. TX fees, generally, also go to pool operators.

[Window2Wall]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05

Seriously?
In my country most bank transfers don't cost anything.
So, I stick with that also in Bitcoin. Miners get block reward, so I don't see why they should get transaction fees.

Pool operators share their reward with everybody that helped solve the block, they may charge a slight fee off of that block. TX fees, generally, also go to pool operators.

Generally speaking the TX fees have gone to the miners since the block reward was halved from 50 BTC to 25 BTC. The only real exception to this rule are the PPS pool operators however the miners are getting a huge advantage of not having to deal with pool variance (the attractiveness of running a miner on a PPS - pay per share - pool/payout system will decrease over time as block subsidies make up a less percentage of total block rewards and TX fees make up larger parts of block reward)

[pawel7777]

Something between $0.01 - $0.05 is perfect imho (in current conditions). If fees are too high, that would kill the small tx (low value purchases, donations, tips etc) and would make BTC less competitive and less appealing comparing to cc, paypal and others.

Then again, fees need to be high enough to compensate for mining costs (when block rewards become insignificant). So it's all about balance.

Flexible fees may also be a good idea, i.e. equivalent of $0.005 for micro tx (up to $5?), $0.05 for tx of $5-$500 and $0.50 for >$500. Don't think that's possible to implement tho.

[frankenmint]

I think the should 5 cents / less (5k satoshi / less)
And all tx must have fee

Most of people voted for 1 cent or less I agree with that

I disagree with your opinion, who will mine if the diff. very high & tx fee is very low

Satoshi said that no tx needs a fee unless the amount you are sending out is equal to or above 200x the largest transaction you have received.

1 cent for every 2 dollars, that's reasonable - fyi 40K requires a 200 dollar fee.

[pitham1]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05

Seriously?
In my country most bank transfers don't cost anything.
So, I stick with that also in Bitcoin. Miners get block reward, so I don't see why they should get transaction fees.

Banks have a lot of other avenues for earning income, apart from transaction fees.
As the block reward reduces over the years, transaction fees will become the main source of income for miners.

[Kluge]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05

Seriously?
In my country most bank transfers don't cost anything.
So, I stick with that also in Bitcoin. Miners get block reward, so I don't see why they should get transaction fees.

Banks have a lot of other avenues for earning income, apart from transaction fees.
As the block reward reduces over the years, transaction fees will become the main source of income for miners.

... o.O You know, advertising fees could be an answer to offsetting the cost burden of transmitting blocks and transactions in queue. Some kind of score system could be come up with... maybe each transaction transmitted adds a score of 1, where each block transmitted adds a score of 250, and the transmitting node can include some kind of standardized referral or CPM protocol, where Core or similar client software automatically generates an address specifically for this (or the user could manually assign which address they want their coins).

The receiving client keeps track of this and uses the scores for a raffled ad rotation system. The receivers' local client uses the user's unique ID for use in any compliant ad server. The receiver, then, can use this list and use the ad server to dedicate an ad slot on their platform (website, app, whatever) to paying back people sending him data.

It adds a lot of overhead and sounds like a real pain in the ass to implement, and it relies on people being nice, but I never even thought it was possible to pay transmitters, before. Sounds really complicated (and would probably need to be partially centralized so it isn't BFL/Pirateat40/BitcoinTrader spam 24/7), but clients could handle this all with default settings and downloading a kind of add-on which transmits the extra data. The rest'd be on the major service providers.

[briantree]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05

Seriously?
In my country most bank transfers don't cost anything.
So, I stick with that also in Bitcoin. Miners get block reward, so I don't see why they should get transaction fees.

Banks have a lot of other avenues for earning income, apart from transaction fees.
As the block reward reduces over the years, transaction fees will become the main source of income for miners.

@pitham1 What country do you live in? Did you make the transfer to another user in the same banking system, e.g. from POSB Singapore to another POSB Singapore? Otherwise I highly doubt that it's free.

Meanwhile in US:
[wiki]In the United States, domestic wire transfers are governed by Federal Regulation J[5] and by Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code.[6] US wire transfers are costly, for example, as of November 2011 the Bank Of America charged $25 to send a wire and $12 to receive one within the U.S. For international transfer, it charged $35–$45 outgoing, $16 incoming[/wiki]

I don't think miners will be necessary after we've mined enough coins (2040 something..). There needs to be dedicated servers for TX verification. How do we fund those servers, that's the next question. Again. the core concept of Bitcoin/Altcoin is about de-centralization, but the network needs to be funded somehow.

More at: http://bitcoinfees.com/ "The fee, when it is required, is usually worth less than 40 US cents.". "If you can wait for 10 hours, there will be no transaction fee".

IMHO 10 mBTC for TX fee is still considered super cheap as compared to other service providers.

[jonald_fyookball]

You are correct about the bank fees....but Incorrect about bitcoin.

We will ALWAYS need miners, it is the basis.  Please learn more about Bitcoin.  

[ytr8]

3 cents is  appropriate

[ScreamnShout]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05

Seriously?
In my country most bank transfers don't cost anything.
So, I stick with that also in Bitcoin. Miners get block reward, so I don't see why they should get transaction fees.

Banks have a lot of other avenues for earning income, apart from transaction fees.
As the block reward reduces over the years, transaction fees will become the main source of income for miners.

... o.O You know, advertising fees could be an answer to offsetting the cost burden of transmitting blocks and transactions in queue. Some kind of score system could be come up with... maybe each transaction transmitted adds a score of 1, where each block transmitted adds a score of 250, and the transmitting node can include some kind of standardized referral or CPM protocol, where Core or similar client software automatically generates an address specifically for this (or the user could manually assign which address they want their coins).

The receiving client keeps track of this and uses the scores for a raffled ad rotation system. The receivers' local client uses the user's unique ID for use in any compliant ad server. The receiver, then, can use this list and use the ad server to dedicate an ad slot on their platform (website, app, whatever) to paying back people sending him data.

It adds a lot of overhead and sounds like a real pain in the ass to implement, and it relies on people being nice, but I never even thought it was possible to pay transmitters, before. Sounds really complicated (and would probably need to be partially centralized so it isn't BFL/Pirateat40/BitcoinTrader spam 24/7), but clients could handle this all with default settings and downloading a kind of add-on which transmits the extra data. The rest'd be on the major service providers.

This would require either proof of full node or proof of transmission when giving out the "raffle" tickets. The only mining protocol that Bitcoin will be able to support in order to still be considered Bitcoin is Proof of Work.

[1echo]

0,0001 is cool

[Kluge]

considering most bank transfers cost roughly €0.09, $0.05

Seriously?
In my country most bank transfers don't cost anything.
So, I stick with that also in Bitcoin. Miners get block reward, so I don't see why they should get transaction fees.

Banks have a lot of other avenues for earning income, apart from transaction fees.
As the block reward reduces over the years, transaction fees will become the main source of income for miners.

... o.O You know, advertising fees could be an answer to offsetting the cost burden of transmitting blocks and transactions in queue. Some kind of score system could be come up with... maybe each transaction transmitted adds a score of 1, where each block transmitted adds a score of 250, and the transmitting node can include some kind of standardized referral or CPM protocol, where Core or similar client software automatically generates an address specifically for this (or the user could manually assign which address they want their coins).

The receiving client keeps track of this and uses the scores for a raffled ad rotation system. The receivers' local client uses the user's unique ID for use in any compliant ad server. The receiver, then, can use this list and use the ad server to dedicate an ad slot on their platform (website, app, whatever) to paying back people sending him data.

It adds a lot of overhead and sounds like a real pain in the ass to implement, and it relies on people being nice, but I never even thought it was possible to pay transmitters, before. Sounds really complicated (and would probably need to be partially centralized so it isn't BFL/Pirateat40/BitcoinTrader spam 24/7), but clients could handle this all with default settings and downloading a kind of add-on which transmits the extra data. The rest'd be on the major service providers.

This would require either proof of full node or proof of transmission when giving out the "raffle" tickets. The only mining protocol that Bitcoin will be able to support in order to still be considered Bitcoin is Proof of Work.

This is totally separate from mining. I don't see any reason why you'd want to verify. The misbehavior mechanism should prevent clients from spamming illegitimate transactions to try bumping up their raffle ticket count. Wallet client software could also automatically prune transactions which are dumped from queue rather than eventually being included in a block to help prevent that.

[novacn]

Enough to keep all miners pleased...
Don't mess with them, because they are the endorsement of the whole network.
More transactions in a block means lower tx fee, but generally higher award for miners.

[tvbcof]

From another thread:

It would be quite easy to get a 'cash back' for using Bitcoin.  The intel value coming off of the solution probably exceeds the value of being able to scan people's 'private' e-mail and spy on their surfing habits.  I don't doubt for a minute that a majority of people would 'jump eeen it.'  Especially now in the late 2014 makeup of the community.

Next time you do one of these polls, it would be more complete to have an option to find out how many people would like to simply have a handful of the large players operating Bitcoin and providing various perks for using Bitcoin on their platform.  My guess is that it would be a wildly popular option and that only a sliver of the worldwide population would see any potential issues with it.

As a bonus, the transaction rate cap could be lifted entirely making micro-transactions practicable.  This because the top tier infrastructure providers have the ability to scale almost indefinitely, and they also could meet the BitLicence requirements in terms of personal identification and probably would love an excuse to do so.

Yet another bonus would be that with only a handful of infrastructure providers they can optimize between their facilities and could easily solve the 10-minute block latency related issues and make Bitcoin a real-time solution.  Particularly if they had high-reliability personal identification of their users.

[briantree]

You are correct about the bank fees....but Incorrect about bitcoin.

We will ALWAYS need miners, it is the basis.  Please learn more about Bitcoin.  

I don't mean we don't need miners. I mean for the process to be automated. Think about big data-centers running on renewable energy. A Netherland windmill with a Bitcoin logo on it..
As I'm literally looking at my colleagues counting his(her) coin he(she) is mining at home; I disagree with the efficiency of home-based miners. Miners will grow weary soon. Or at least up until 2040. By that time who knows what the picture is like.
For now let's keep them happy. I like my colleague when he(she) is happy.

[jonald_fyookball]

i get your point.  i think Gavin said something like that once.  Like toasters and everyday appliances will just
have mining built in, etc.  Or we can use SHA-256 mining to produce heat, stuff like that.  I agree
it could go that direction.

[pequelore]

Miners will be happy with 0.0001

[vipgelsi]

.0001

[jennifer21]

Anything bigger will make bitcoiners angry.

[solex]

Now that sequences of blocks are relatively close to the maximum, and a lot of spamming is going on, is there an opinion that fees are too low?
8 months ago 55% selected 1 cent or less, 81% selected 5 cents. Are higher fees the best defense against spammers?

[jbrnt]

What are fees for? Fees are subsidy to miners and fees are only at 2% of total revenue for mining a block. Miners want more fees, but they don't need it now in 2015. Higher fees increase the costs of spam. It does not stop spam. Higher fees could reduce spam but also price-out low income users. Bitcoin is a global currency. There are parts of the world where $1 can buy food for the whole family. We cannot set fee to be too high. We need to have low fees to promote bitcoin for these worse-off countries.

[brituspol]

tx fees should be % based with a minimum fees
like 0.10% with minimum of 0.0001btc for each tx

[afriezalie]

Current transaction fee 0.0001BTC below 0.01BTC transaction is good enough. The best value is 0.0005BTC for transaction under 0.01BTC for miners and prevent spammers. Also we can use the range of value to determine transaction fee.

[Hollingsworth]

I can only just admire the discussion in this thread.

We are talking about a transaction fee, in the pennies, to send a financial transaction to the other side of the world.

Not taking bitcoin for granted, its a beautiful thing.  

H.

[pooya87]

i think we have to consider a couple of things here.
first is that right now miners will get 25BTC as the block reward and with current price (and rising price) it is enough for them to make it profitable. so they are not relying only on transaction fees so it can be low.
second is that the amount of bitcoin you send can be different for every use, for example if you want to do a micro transaction with small amount then 0.0001BTC can be huge for you. but if you want to send a large sum of money like 100BTC then it is nothing in comparison.

[OROBTC]

...

I am OK with about $0.05 (or BTC0.0002).  At this point with the attacks hitting the blockchain, it seems perfectly reasonable to me to disallow tiny payments.

I am sympathetic to the idea of micropayments, but perhaps they can be handled on sidechains or by other measures as mentioned above.

IIUC, the spammers are close to filling up the 1MB blocks at times.

A nickel payment is just fine if it ensures that these guys (spammers) are dispensed with...

[Amph]

can we speak in bitcoin please? i cannot recognize cent when i deal with mbtc ubtc everyday

i think that at best 100k satoshi should suffice for any TX, i'll not pay more unleas i want to move a very large amount

[randy8777]

0.0001 btc is enough if you ask me. currently the miners don't really need the fees as they still get 25btc per block. that might change after the halving. pools will get more picky regarding including transactions then.

[Amitabh S]

It should depend on the tx size. I'd say about 50 cents per kilobyte might be what we are looking at soon.

[EternalWingsofGod]

I voted for a nickel, which in Bitcoin terms is adjusted to the closest approximate value.
Dynamic fees and a standard fee of course are different if Min txt is a nickel people can always pay more to priortize their transactions.

[Herbert2020]

i think the amount of fees that we are paying per transaction is fair enough that there is no need to change that. i mean the 0.0001 is like 2 cents which is a great positive point about bitcoin, and this is one of the things that is making bitcoin different, and better that any other money transferring methods.

[manselr]

The fees will need always to be substantially smaller than anything we've ever seen before in money transactions, otherwise people will think "well.. another less reason to use this over traditional banking". The small fees of Bitcoin are one of its big selling points and main attractions, so do not ruin it.

[gkv9]

I feel 0.0001 is currently, and will always be the best and FAIR fee compared to if you are too much interested in paying more...
Anyways, I even had transactions with fees between just 600-1k satoshis, and even those transactions got confirmed, but the only problem is, it takes time and unless these transactions get confirmed, we need to wait to spend our coins...

[ShamrockHannah]

As low as possible. That's always been one of the appalling things about bitcoin - low transaction fees. They shouldn't go making it to high. I would personally find it very off putting.

It should be done in percentages anyway. What if you only wanted to send a small amount but end up getting charged more than your are sending?

[ticoti]

I use electrum and I send tx with the fee it proposes

[philipma1957]

I think the 0.0001BTC fee is very reasonable at this price point, I don't mind paying this as fee for the upcomming years.

The market decides, and I will just follow.

I tend to agree  with you 0.0001 or 0.0002 seem low enough.

[QuestionAuthority]

If it's anything more than free I'm sure not going to use it for something like paying a bill or getting coffee. My banks debit card doesn't charge me to do that.

[mallard]

I use a fee of 0.00026809 BTC/kB. Bitcoin-Qt says it will confirm within 6 blocks, but it's usually in the next block.

[HI-TEC99]

If it's anything more than free I'm sure not going to use it for something like paying a bill or getting coffee. My banks debit card doesn't charge me to do that.

If it's a negligible amount like 1 cent then people will think of it as free. Once it rises above a few cents people will choose to use free methods of payment like debit cars. The only case where people might be prepared to pay high fees is sending money abroad when the fees are less than the fees for wiring money between bank accounts.

[QuestionAuthority]

If it's anything more than free I'm sure not going to use it for something like paying a bill or getting coffee. My banks debit card doesn't charge me to do that.

If it's a negligible amount like 1 cent then people will think of it as free. Once it rises above a few cents people will choose to use free methods of payment like debit cars. The only case where people might be prepared to pay high fees is sending money abroad when the fees are less than the fees for wiring money between bank accounts.

For transactions where you normally pay a fee to send the money then Bitcoin should be a little below that but where there is no cost to send the transaction there should be no cost for Bitcoin either. If there's a cost no one will use it. You would have to be a fool to stop what you're currently using for free to move to something that will cost you to use.

[NorrisK]

If it's anything more than free I'm sure not going to use it for something like paying a bill or getting coffee. My banks debit card doesn't charge me to do that.

If it's a negligible amount like 1 cent then people will think of it as free. Once it rises above a few cents people will choose to use free methods of payment like debit cars. The only case where people might be prepared to pay high fees is sending money abroad when the fees are less than the fees for wiring money between bank accounts.

For transactions where you normally pay a fee to send the money then Bitcoin should be a little below that but where there is no cost to send the transaction there should be no cost for Bitcoin either. If there's a cost no one will use it. You would have to be a fool to stop what you're currently using for free to move to something that will cost you to use.

Currently, the shop often covers the payment fee.. The fee, atleast in the Netherlands can be up to a euro per transaction (depending on your volume ofcourse). As a costumer, you don't see this because the shop takes care of this. Maybe an option like this, where the receiver pays the fee, could be an option?

[QuestionAuthority]

If it's anything more than free I'm sure not going to use it for something like paying a bill or getting coffee. My banks debit card doesn't charge me to do that.

If it's a negligible amount like 1 cent then people will think of it as free. Once it rises above a few cents people will choose to use free methods of payment like debit cars. The only case where people might be prepared to pay high fees is sending money abroad when the fees are less than the fees for wiring money between bank accounts.

For transactions where you normally pay a fee to send the money then Bitcoin should be a little below that but where there is no cost to send the transaction there should be no cost for Bitcoin either. If there's a cost no one will use it. You would have to be a fool to stop what you're currently using for free to move to something that will cost you to use.

Currently, the shop often covers the payment fee.. The fee, atleast in the Netherlands can be up to a euro per transaction (depending on your volume ofcourse). As a costumer, you don't see this because the shop takes care of this. Maybe an option like this, where the receiver pays the fee, could be an option?

That's how Visa/MasterCard does it. They charge their percentage to the receiver. Of course, that's passed along to the customer in higher prices. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about transactions that currently do not cost either party anything. I walk into a store and see a flat screen TV that I want to buy for $3k. I don't carry that kind of money around with me so I use a checking debit card that automatically taps my saving account to buy it. There is no fee whatsoever. Why would you routinely pay more for your utility bills (even a penny) month after month when you don't have to? Makes no sense.

If I want to send money quickly to the Russian mafia half way around the world for some reason. That's where Bitcoin shines.

[Keyser Soze]

Currently, the shop often covers the payment fee.. The fee, atleast in the Netherlands can be up to a euro per transaction (depending on your volume ofcourse). As a costumer, you don't see this because the shop takes care of this. Maybe an option like this, where the receiver pays the fee, could be an option?

That's how Visa/MasterCard does it. They charge their percentage to the receiver. Of course, that's passed along to the customer in higher prices. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about transactions that currently do not cost either party anything. I walk into a store and see a flat screen TV that I want to buy for $3k. I don't carry that kind of money around with me so I use a checking debit card that automatically taps my saving account to buy it. There is no fee whatsoever. Why would you routinely pay more for your utility bills (even a penny) month after month when you don't have to? Makes no sense.

If I want to send money quickly to the Russian mafia half way around the world for some reason. That's where Bitcoin shines.

Using a debit card is pretty much the same as using a credit card, the merchant still has a cost.

All forms of payment have a cost, even cash, however in today's society generally the costs are not visible to the consumer as they are already priced into the goods or services.

[ammy009]

If your block size is 1KB or less then the transaction fee will be 0.0001 BTC

So, the fee in fiat @ current BTC/USD price is $0.02

[philipma1957]

Currently, the shop often covers the payment fee.. The fee, atleast in the Netherlands can be up to a euro per transaction (depending on your volume ofcourse). As a costumer, you don't see this because the shop takes care of this. Maybe an option like this, where the receiver pays the fee, could be an option?

That's how Visa/MasterCard does it. They charge their percentage to the receiver. Of course, that's passed along to the customer in higher prices. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about transactions that currently do not cost either party anything. I walk into a store and see a flat screen TV that I want to buy for $3k. I don't carry that kind of money around with me so I use a checking debit card that automatically taps my saving account to buy it. There is no fee whatsoever. Why would you routinely pay more for your utility bills (even a penny) month after month when you don't have to? Makes no sense.

If I want to send money quickly to the Russian mafia half way around the world for some reason. That's where Bitcoin shines.

Using a debit card is pretty much the same as using a credit card, the merchant still has a cost.

All forms of payment have a cost, even cash, however in today's society generally the costs are not visible to the consumer as they are already priced into the goods or services.

  You got that right.  A debit card is very costly.  Let me give a long but  easy to do  example.  

  I have great credit so I never use a debit card. I always use credit cards. Why? I get paid to use them.
I charge 2 k to 4 k a month on my credit cards.  The cashback bonus is 1 to 5% depending on what I am buying. So  a debit card user loses 20 dollars a month at best. That would be  1% of 2k = 20 bucks.  And if the purchases qualify they may lose 200 usd   as 5% of 4k is about 200usd.

I find my credit cards earn me around 60 bucks a month in bonus money.  So if I use a 'free' debit card I spend about  720 a year in lost earnings.

  I won't go much deeper but that 720  I earn allows me to buy gift cards direct from Discover  card and they sell some good cards at a 20% discount.  I can buy 36 $25 dollar gift cards with that 720  .   Some cards are staples and bed bath and beyond.   So A 'free' debit card now loses me 900 usd a year.
  I am also not taking into account that I need to keep a minimum balance with the bank.

I read all the responses here and I find many people don't understand the BTC system and why fees are needed.
Very simple reason no fees make for an endless spamming of the BTC blockchain very cheap and easy to do.
So I pay 0.0001 or 0.0002 as a giveback to the community> I also run a node as a giveback to BTC.
What do I spend to do this under  5 bucks a month.  The node cost me 3.60 and as for transactions maybe 50 x  0.0001 = 0.005 = 1.30  total of 4.90 per month

[QuestionAuthority]

Currently, the shop often covers the payment fee.. The fee, atleast in the Netherlands can be up to a euro per transaction (depending on your volume ofcourse). As a costumer, you don't see this because the shop takes care of this. Maybe an option like this, where the receiver pays the fee, could be an option?

That's how Visa/MasterCard does it. They charge their percentage to the receiver. Of course, that's passed along to the customer in higher prices. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about transactions that currently do not cost either party anything. I walk into a store and see a flat screen TV that I want to buy for $3k. I don't carry that kind of money around with me so I use a checking debit card that automatically taps my saving account to buy it. There is no fee whatsoever. Why would you routinely pay more for your utility bills (even a penny) month after month when you don't have to? Makes no sense.

If I want to send money quickly to the Russian mafia half way around the world for some reason. That's where Bitcoin shines.

Using a debit card is pretty much the same as using a credit card, the merchant still has a cost.

All forms of payment have a cost, even cash, however in today's society generally the costs are not visible to the consumer as they are already priced into the goods or services.

I have a checking account with $100 in it. I go to a Starbucks and charge a $6 cup of coffee. I now have $94 in my checking account and Starbucks has $6. There is no fee for either. I don't care if that cup of coffee costs the bank a million fucking dollars. The customer doesn't pay and the business doesn't pay. That's all the public will see or care about. If that cup of coffee costs one penny more they will keep using their debit card. Remember I'm not talking about credit. Credit is another story and something Bitcoin isn't currently competing with on a large scale.

Edit: I'm talking about Pin Debit using qualified large merchants.

[sana9821]

why the fees should be really high? i dont think that would be a good idea as people wouldnt use it that much

[Xialla]

this should be somehow designed and recognized by users itself, anyway, we should keep fees on some level, that spamming network will cost lot of money, which majority can't effort but in other hand so low, that we will not loose small transactions.

actually 0.0001 BTC fee perfectly fits those needs..

why the fees should be really high? i dont think that would be a good idea as people wouldnt use it that much

because, only with fees you can avoid spam of network by some stupids, which want harm bitcoin..

I have a checking account with $100 in it. I go to a Starbucks and charge a $6 cup of coffee. I now have $94 in my checking account and Starbucks has $6. There is no fee for either. I don't care if that cup of coffee costs the bank a million fucking dollars. The customer doesn't pay and the business doesn't pay. That's all the public will see or care about.

this. same as public care, how long takes first confirmation, they will care about those fees. and you can explain them 200x that cc confirmation takes half a year and bla bla bitcoin arguments..

[BitcoinNewbie15]

I believe that Bitcoin's current fee per transaction is fair. But, if Bitcoin's price rises exponentially, the current transaction fee will seem like a lot for every day purchases. I personally believe 1 - 3 cents is a fair price for instant transactions.

[philipma1957]

I believe that Bitcoin's current fee per transaction is fair. But, if Bitcoin's price rises exponentially, the current transaction fee will seem like a lot for every day purchases. I personally believe 1 - 3 cents is a fair price for instant transactions.

yes and when the fee was 0.001 in 2012 coins were under 10 bucks. Then when coins jumped in price in 2013 many complained fees were too high so they lowered the fee  to 0.0001 maybe in Sept 2014  IIRC.

So I am guessing if coins ever go nuts the fees will move down to 0.00005

[Keyser Soze]

I have a checking account with $100 in it. I go to a Starbucks and charge a $6 cup of coffee. I now have $94 in my checking account and Starbucks has $6. There is no fee for either. I don't care if that cup of coffee costs the bank a million fucking dollars. The customer doesn't pay and the business doesn't pay. That's all the public will see or care about. If that cup of coffee costs one penny more they will keep using their debit card. Remember I'm not talking about credit. Credit is another story and something Bitcoin isn't currently competing with on a large scale.

Edit: I'm talking about Pin Debit using qualified large merchants.

Hmm.. I wasn't aware that there are merchant service providers who have zero fees for pin based debit card transactions. According to the FRB, fees for debit card transactions averaged $0.31 in 2014.

[Cryptopher]

I think around 20 cents is pretty reasonable, maybe even more.

I mean in many cases with discounts for purchasing using Bitcoin then this cost would easily be offset.

[bananas]

No fee is fair, it is not part of the original implementation and was created to prevent spam which is not working very well. An actual solution must take place to prevent spam and fees removed, all kinds of systems manage to prevent spam/DoS without charging its users any money - fees are just a lazy solution.

[Soros Shorts]

No fee is fair, it is not part of the original implementation and was created to prevent spam which is not working very well. An actual solution must take place to prevent spam and fees removed, all kinds of systems manage to prevent spam/DoS without charging its users any money - fees are just a lazy solution.

So when the block rewards wither down to nothing what would be the incentive for miners to continue to mine and secure the network?

The fee should be high enough to keep the miners happy and confirm our transactions.

[d4n13]

I use a fee of 0.00026809 BTC/kB. Bitcoin-Qt says it will confirm within 6 blocks, but it's usually in the next block.

Exactly... Just a reminder to the wallet makers out there... Bitcoin-Qt has a "volume bar" for fees.  You can set the fee low for looooonnnggg conf times, or you can set the fee high for single block confirmations.

Just pay the fee that you want... then suffer the consequences of your decision.

To the broader point (perhaps) of "What fees should wallet makers code?".  I think the best answer is in the reference client.  Make a sliding scale of fees.  If someone wants to save a penny they can afford to wait another hour for the confirmation.

The crux of the issue is people running old clients.  So users, update your clients, devs, reevaluate the fees on each release (as you have done so far).

[QuestionAuthority]

I have a checking account with $100 in it. I go to a Starbucks and charge a $6 cup of coffee. I now have $94 in my checking account and Starbucks has $6. There is no fee for either. I don't care if that cup of coffee costs the bank a million fucking dollars. The customer doesn't pay and the business doesn't pay. That's all the public will see or care about. If that cup of coffee costs one penny more they will keep using their debit card. Remember I'm not talking about credit. Credit is another story and something Bitcoin isn't currently competing with on a large scale.

Edit: I'm talking about Pin Debit using qualified large merchants.

Hmm.. I wasn't aware that there are merchant service providers who have zero fees for pin based debit card transactions. According to the FRB, fees for debit card transactions averaged $0.31 in 2014.

Large merchants like Starbucks bank where the tiered pricing is negligible or free. In the case of tiered pricing a business does not pay interchange fees. Instead, a business pays qualified, mid-qualified and non-qualified rates to a processor. Smaller merchants pay larger fees. Different types of businesses pay different rates also. The point remains that consumers won't pay anything because they don't currently have to. I am such a cheap bastard that I buy gas at ARCO with only cash because they charge more for any card. I refuse to give those blood sucking leeches one penny more than I have to for gas.

Bitcoin has a strong ability to compete with the international money transfer business even if the fee was two dollars. I see no reason why it should be used for everyday purchases where the competition will win. I can pay cash for little stuff under $20. Sending $10k to another country I would want to use Bitcoin and so would anyone else.

[bananas]

No fee is fair, it is not part of the original implementation and was created to prevent spam which is not working very well. An actual solution must take place to prevent spam and fees removed, all kinds of systems manage to prevent spam/DoS without charging its users any money - fees are just a lazy solution.

So when the block rewards wither down to nothing what would be the incentive for miners to continue to mine and secure the network?

The fee should be high enough to keep the miners happy and confirm our transactions.

You are trying to advance a theory problem that may only happen hundreds of years from now.
The difficulty will adjust if "industrial" miners leave because it is not worth to mine anymore, voluntary non profit mining should be enough if it happens.

[Brewins]

for me is the fee that miners accept. If they agree to include the transaction in a block for 0.0001 or for free, then it is the right price

[PenguinFire]

I am seen this becoming a more common question in the past 2,3 weeks.  I just let my online wallet give whatever they do at their own accord. 

[Argwai96]

So i have been doing manual fees since the network could go on stress test at anytime so before sending i make sure too look at the volume in transactions to see if i pay a little more to get confirmations faster.

[josephno1]

I feel that it largely depends on the amount sent. For example for microtransactions such as .001 BTC, it would be unreasonable to charge a large fee. On the other hand with the larger transactions, it doesn't make much sense to charge a .0001BTC fee

[pooya87]

So i have been doing manual fees since the network could go on stress test at anytime so before sending i make sure too look at the volume in transactions to see if i pay a little more to get confirmations faster.

nowadays sending bitcoin fast (getting confirmation faster) is becomming a competitive scene. which means if you want your transaction to go through faster and gets confirmed you have to include even more fee (more than what is the standard amount of fee) in other words you have to "bribe" miners in order to include your transaction in the block!

a part of this is because of these stupid stress tests, i find the test interesting at first and i though the results would be useful but it is getting really annoying and it is hurting bitcoin more than helping it.

[jaberwock]

I feel that it largely depends on the amount sent. For example for microtransactions such as .001 BTC, it would be unreasonable to charge a large fee. On the other hand with the larger transactions, it doesn't make much sense to charge a .0001BTC fee

0.001 BTC should have bigger fee requirements, because it is dust. Bitcoin was not made for such small transactions, they only clutter the network and there should be no incentive for them

[turvarya]

I have a checking account with $100 in it. I go to a Starbucks and charge a $6 cup of coffee. I now have $94 in my checking account and Starbucks has $6. There is no fee for either. I don't care if that cup of coffee costs the bank a million fucking dollars. The customer doesn't pay and the business doesn't pay. That's all the public will see or care about. If that cup of coffee costs one penny more they will keep using their debit card. Remember I'm not talking about credit. Credit is another story and something Bitcoin isn't currently competing with on a large scale.

Edit: I'm talking about Pin Debit using qualified large merchants.

Hmm.. I wasn't aware that there are merchant service providers who have zero fees for pin based debit card transactions. According to the FRB, fees for debit card transactions averaged $0.31 in 2014.

Large merchants like Starbucks bank where the tiered pricing is negligible or free. In the case of tiered pricing a business does not pay interchange fees. Instead, a business pays qualified, mid-qualified and non-qualified rates to a processor. Smaller merchants pay larger fees. Different types of businesses pay different rates also. The point remains that consumers won't pay anything because they don't currently have to. I am such a cheap bastard that I buy gas at ARCO with only cash because they charge more for any card. I refuse to give those blood sucking leeches one penny more than I have to for gas.

Bitcoin has a strong ability to compete with the international money transfer business even if the fee was two dollars. I see no reason why it should be used for everyday purchases where the competition will win. I can pay cash for little stuff under $20. Sending $10k to another country I would want to use Bitcoin and so would anyone else.

Sorry, I am a bit tired, so I am not sure, if I really got that. So, Starbucks is paying a fee, the customer doesn't see?
If so, there is really a simple solution to that: A discount.
When the merchants saves fees, when you use Bitcoin, he can give you part of it back as a discount and if you get a discount, that is bigger than the fee you are paying for sending Bitcoin, you have enough incentive to do so.

[tuvok007]

One exchange sent me 0.9 btc
with a fee of 1114 satoshi but after 40 hours still no first confirmation. What shoul i do,help?
This is the transaction
https://blockchain.info/address/1BnvHarta94JvXrY7oT272qTBEvgMdRk2S

[pooya87]

One exchange sent me 0.9 btc
with a fee of 1114 satoshi but after 40 hours still no first confirmation. What shoul i do,help?
This is the transaction
https://blockchain.info/address/1BnvHarta94JvXrY7oT272qTBEvgMdRk2S

the only thing you can do is wait...

i say you wait for at least 24 hours and then contact the exchanger that sent you that amount and ask them to include bigger fee.

but i am sure it is going to be confirmed in a couple of hours since it is medium priority, so don't worry so much.

[Stn]

I have a checking account with $100 in it. I go to a Starbucks and charge a $6 cup of coffee. I now have $94 in my checking account and Starbucks has $6. There is no fee for either.

I believe fees took place on initial $100 check issuance. That why there is no fees on check spending.

[tuvok007]

One exchange sent me 0.9 btc
with a fee of 1114 satoshi but after 40 hours still no first confirmation. What shoul i do,help?
This is the transaction
https://blockchain.info/address/1BnvHarta94JvXrY7oT272qTBEvgMdRk2S

the only thing you can do is wait...

i say you wait for at least 24 hours and then contact the exchanger that sent you that amount and ask them to include bigger fee.

but i am sure it is going to be confirmed in a couple of hours since it is medium priority, so don't worry so much.

 Yes but i already wait 42 hours and still nothing,not even one confirmation

[QuestionAuthority]

I have a checking account with $100 in it. I go to a Starbucks and charge a $6 cup of coffee. I now have $94 in my checking account and Starbucks has $6. There is no fee for either. I don't care if that cup of coffee costs the bank a million fucking dollars. The customer doesn't pay and the business doesn't pay. That's all the public will see or care about. If that cup of coffee costs one penny more they will keep using their debit card. Remember I'm not talking about credit. Credit is another story and something Bitcoin isn't currently competing with on a large scale.

Edit: I'm talking about Pin Debit using qualified large merchants.

Hmm.. I wasn't aware that there are merchant service providers who have zero fees for pin based debit card transactions. According to the FRB, fees for debit card transactions averaged $0.31 in 2014.

Large merchants like Starbucks bank where the tiered pricing is negligible or free. In the case of tiered pricing a business does not pay interchange fees. Instead, a business pays qualified, mid-qualified and non-qualified rates to a processor. Smaller merchants pay larger fees. Different types of businesses pay different rates also. The point remains that consumers won't pay anything because they don't currently have to. I am such a cheap bastard that I buy gas at ARCO with only cash because they charge more for any card. I refuse to give those blood sucking leeches one penny more than I have to for gas.

Bitcoin has a strong ability to compete with the international money transfer business even if the fee was two dollars. I see no reason why it should be used for everyday purchases where the competition will win. I can pay cash for little stuff under $20. Sending $10k to another country I would want to use Bitcoin and so would anyone else.

Sorry, I am a bit tired, so I am not sure, if I really got that. So, Starbucks is paying a fee, the customer doesn't see?
If so, there is really a simple solution to that: A discount.
When the merchants saves fees, when you use Bitcoin, he can give you part of it back as a discount and if you get a discount, that is bigger than the fee you are paying for sending Bitcoin, you have enough incentive to do so.

You could use Dharma Merchant Services even as a small business and pay almost nothing for debit and credit card processing. That's not my point.

If Bitcoin is going to succeed in all markets, and I don't think it should even try, it needs to have different fee schedules for different markets. Invariably, depending on the market sector, Bitcoin will be too expensive or too cheap.

Take Amazon Payments as an example: With Amazon Payments, users can send and receive up to $1,000 each calendar month using a credit card without being charged any fees, creating the opportunity to earn credit card points for expenses that might otherwise be paid in cash or by check. How in the fuck is Bitcoin ever supposed to compete with that unless it's also free to use?

However, it costs between $15 and $50 to send money internationally. Why should Bitcoin only be a penny or a nickel. That's too cheap. Why can't Bitcoin cost $.50 or $1 for that transfer?

The only solution is to have a reasonably cheap transaction fee to pay miners or have large Bitcoin corporations do all of the mining for free because it supports their Bitcoin business. I know that will cause all the centralization arguments but it really wouldn't be any more centralized than a half dozen Chinese mining farms doing it.

Edit: Remember, we're talking about normal people using it, not a bunch of libertarian nut jobbers that would use Bitcoin if it cost $50 to send $1.

[aakashsangwan]

there should not be any fee as the fee is for pool owners and they charge 1 to 3 percent of our earnings . So according to me, there is no need of transaction fee.

[Herbert2020]

there should not be any fee as the fee is for pool owners and they charge 1 to 3 percent of our earnings . So according to me, there is no need of transaction fee.

do you remember what happened during stress test.
if not search the forum for people complaining about transactions not being confirmed for hours.
now imagine there were no transaction fees necessary for sending bitcoin. there would be ten times more spam in the network.

[Amph]

there should not be any fee as the fee is for pool owners and they charge 1 to 3 percent of our earnings . So according to me, there is no need of transaction fee.

it's possible if people don't abuse it, but it's not always the case, the problem with fee is that they don't always speed up you transaction, because there are numerous other factor in play

but you know, the beauty of bitcoin is not only that there are low fee, but that you can actually choose the amount, if you want you can set zero

[aakashsangwan]

there should not be any fee as the fee is for pool owners and they charge 1 to 3 percent of our earnings . So according to me, there is no need of transaction fee.

it's possible if people don't abuse it, but it's not always the case, the problem with fee is that they don't always speed up you transaction, because there are numerous other factor in play

but you know, the beauty of bitcoin is not only that there are low fee, but that you can actually choose the amount, if you want you can set zero

Yes, i can set the transaction fee to zero but many of the pools donot add the transaction without a transaction fee in their blocks.

So if i make my transaction fee to zero then the transaction can take from days to months to reach the target wallet.

[tuvok007]

Yeah,like me. I am waiting for two days now for first confirmation. and the fee is not even zero,its 1100 satoshi... Man thats frustrating

[Amph]

there should not be any fee as the fee is for pool owners and they charge 1 to 3 percent of our earnings . So according to me, there is no need of transaction fee.

it's possible if people don't abuse it, but it's not always the case, the problem with fee is that they don't always speed up you transaction, because there are numerous other factor in play

but you know, the beauty of bitcoin is not only that there are low fee, but that you can actually choose the amount, if you want you can set zero

Yes, i can set the transaction fee to zero but many of the pools donot add the transaction without a transaction fee in their blocks.

So if i make my transaction fee to zero then the transaction can take from days to months to reach the target wallet.

my maximum without fee was only two hours(and i've done it numerous times), or i was really lucky, or it is because of this stress stess only, because months, seems very excessive...

[SISAR]

What is the fairest fee?

Just add 0.001 BTC free to your transaction and you'll be fine.

[solex]

What is the fairest fee?

Just add 0.001 BTC free to your transaction and you'll be fine.

Which is about 27 cents today, far higher than the few cents which most Bitcoiners want to pay (according to the poll)

[gentlemand]

The folks who are hell bent on their multiple dollar fees because it's 'market forces' will soon find it returns to bargaindom when all the normal people abandon BTC and find something that isn't going to rape them.

[unamis76]

I haven't been following this thread, but this might be relevant to the discussion... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1114653.0

A fair fee, at the moment, is a fee that includes your transaction in the next block

[Hopalong]

I feel that it largely depends on the amount sent. For example for microtransactions such as .001 BTC, it would be unreasonable to charge a large fee. On the other hand with the larger transactions, it doesn't make much sense to charge a .0001BTC fee

0.001 BTC should have bigger fee requirements, because it is dust. Bitcoin was not made for such small transactions, they only clutter the network and there should be no incentive for them

If Bitcoin is not made to handle 0.001 transactions we must make sure BTC never rise to high and keep the masses out. A low value coin only for geeks is the way to go...

[junglemouse]

5 cents would help eliminate micro payments in the block chain and I mean really if you want to send bitcoin to someone that transaction is worth 5 cents..

[BADecker]

Is this a fee fair where we figure out a fair fee?   

[chennan]

I feel that it largely depends on the amount sent. For example for microtransactions such as .001 BTC, it would be unreasonable to charge a large fee. On the other hand with the larger transactions, it doesn't make much sense to charge a .0001BTC fee

0.001 BTC should have bigger fee requirements, because it is dust. Bitcoin was not made for such small transactions, they only clutter the network and there should be no incentive for them

50k in the block are set aside for the highest-priority transactions, regardless of transaction fee. So ppl may take the advantage of this rule and avoid paying transaction fee. It is not fair for the ppl who are paying transactions fee to get their transactions included in the block quickly! And why should we pay the fee based on the transaction size? IMHO We should pay the transactions fee based on the amount we sent. The higher amount we send, the more fee we should pay. Besides that, the dust amount should be avoided as well.

Is this a fee fair where we figure out a fair fee?   

What are you trying to say?

[mezmerizer9]

What is the fairest fee?

Just add 0.001 BTC free to your transaction and you'll be fine.

0.001 BTC is too high for a small amount! I think we include 0.0001 BTC/K is fine with the transaction.

Yeah,like me. I am waiting for two days now for first confirmation. and the fee is not even zero,its 1100 satoshi... Man thats frustrating

At least the fee should be 20000 satoshi for the transaction to get confirmed quickly! Its prioirty is very low, the inputs are just small amount!
You could have a look here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees#Sending

[Argwai96]

What is the fairest fee?

Just add 0.001 BTC free to your transaction and you'll be fine.

Which is about 27 cents today, far higher than the few cents which most Bitcoiners want to pay (according to the poll)

Yea .001 it a bit too high, i have been using manual fees with .0001 all the way to .0007 which i think is a bit fair looking at the volume of bitcoin your sending of course.

[Adrian-x]

What is the fairest fee?

Just add 0.001 BTC free to your transaction and you'll be fine.

Which is about 27 cents today, far higher than the few cents which most Bitcoiners want to pay (according to the poll)

Yea .001 it a bit too high, i have been using manual fees with .0001 all the way to .0007 which i think is a bit fair looking at the volume of bitcoin your sending of course.

just commenting to bump.
fees should be minimal, however there will alleyways be a need to pay a significant fee for priority service.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I've paid $0.08 using Mycelium, and I was OK with that--but the amount I was sending was much more than that.  For very small transactions obviously I'd prefer smaller miners' fee.  But I voted $0.12.

[pawel7777]

I'd say ~$0.05 is quite optimal and anything below $0.1 is tolerable for average BTC transaction.

I guess all those who voted 1 cent or less don't realise that in future fees will play crucial part in providing reward for miners.

Adrian-x - thanks for digging up this thread.

[Adrian-x]

Adrian-x - thanks for digging up this thread.

credit goes to solex, I just wanted to see if there was a significant shift given recent events.

[OROBTC]

...

I have had pretty good luck (even when the blockchain was under spamming attacks / stress tests) with BTC0.0003 (12 cents).  Even for small transactions (say US$10 or even less).

Were it to be important (sending over $100 worth of BTC or making a purchase) I would send (and have sent) up to BTC0.0006.

0.0003 - 0.0006 seems to be a nice little plum for almost any miner to harvest...   

[n0ne]

Almost 80 cents can be provided as a transaction fee. Every time while doing transactions I prefer it. Will be getting quick confirmations.

[bob123]

A fair fee in this case for me is about a few cent (3-5).
Of course this is influenced by a lot of factors. But in this current stage thats my awnser.

[Hirose UK]

For me fair fee is lowest possible fee, that satisfies bitcoin users AND miners.
So i won't tell in FIAT, it must be small like 0.0001 BTC, but with millions transactions everyday it will still be good money for miners

I think so, but sometimes it depends on the price of bitcoin or how long will we wait for the transaction because we know the miners will process the highest fee first.

[honeyhtet]

I think a fair fee would be something at the range of 0,5-1 cent. Everything more than that is extremely expensive, I understand that miners need to make profit but extreme fees would decrease the overall use of the network and indirectly reduce there profit.

[sachung]

between 1 to 3 cents, I am not sure it will be good for miners with the halving with a fee reduction but it is very high right now, it was around 10 cents before when BTC was worth $1000 and this 10 cents is very high for small transactions.

[exstasie]

Cannot be calculated in fiat costs. The protocol cannot control the market, and should not attempt to simulate the market as that is impossible. If bitcoin can, in time achieve its own economy that is not completely dependent on btc/fiat gateways, then this will make more sense to users.

Anyway a "fair" fee depends on validation costs. That's how the code is currently written. As block size increases, so do validation costs. Bitcoin is a broadcast network, meaning every node needs to process every piece of information on the blockchain. If you know anything about telecommunications, this is known not to be scalable. The way engineers can achieve scalability is to (like IPv4 protocol) build additional layers to accommodate capacity and new functionality.

[richardsNY]

Nowadays I add around 15K satoshi for every transaction as 10K don't always seem to make my transaction confirm within 3 blocks. If I add 15K satoshi then my transaction mostly gets confirmed directly.

[n691309]

Simple poll to find out just what most people think is a fair fee for sending a transaction on the Bitcoin network, long-term.

Paying a bill; buying a car, computer or coffee; making a donation, or whatever...
In 2014 US dollars please choose the amount that you think is closest to what the BTC equivalent mining fee should be for a standard transaction.

Assuming also that a standard transaction is on-chain, not a micro-transaction,  it is for something that is usually paid for with fiat.

What is the fairest fee?

It's unfair to have the same fee when sending 10 dollars and sending 1 million of dollars worth in bitcoin, i think a fair fee would be 5 cents per little transactions.

[romero121]

I would prefer 5 cents. When we provide low transaction fee, the confirmation gets delayed. Just to avoid the delay giving a bit more gives confirmation in a very short time.

[lolgato1]

I would say it would depend on the size of the transaction usually when I'm sending my btc usually over 0.5 btc I does use 0.0002 btc fee so that there's no delay on me.

[TastyChillySauce00]

Almost 80 cents can be provided as a transaction fee. Every time while doing transactions I prefer it. Will be getting quick confirmations.

as i experienced, higher fee won't affect the confirmation speed if compared to another transaction with enough fee,it's just a waste of money even a bit, i didn't mean to be stingy but i spend as low as i can for thing which is negotiable

[bitbaby]

I think 20k Sats/Kb is fair although I have set my client to calculate and spend 50K Sats/Kb dynamically and my Transactions go through just fine. But to answer the poll, I think 10-20 cents fee normal transactions should be fine, slightly higher for larger ones.

[vdramaline]

I think it would be easier and better for micro-transactions if the fee is less than 1 cent or 1 cent but the most fees that I think reasonable is 5 cents "which is close to the current fees".

[exstasie]

It's funny but no one in this thread seems to think that fees should be tied to the costs to validate and relay a tx such that it is recorded in the blockchain. It seems like everyone thinks they should be able to pay some fee and get tx confirmed with no regard for costs.

That's not gonna work so well when block reward dwindles down. Fees need to make a tx worthy to mine.

[honeyhtet]

No more than 5 cents is the fee that I consider fair for the user, Not sure about the ones conducting micro-transactions or the miners though.

[exstasie]

"Hey network, you guys better relay this transaction for me -- and I ain't payin a lick more than 5 cents. Ever. You hear me?!?!"

[winspiral]

A fair fee is a fee where you get a transaction within the time you need to get the transaction...
if i pay 1 satoshi fee and the transaction lasts 1 week...it is a fair transaction...

if I pay $1 fee for a transaction and it lasts 1 hour it is not fair...

[richmcrich]

I think a fair fee would be between 1-2 cents "maybe around 0.00005 BTC"... The block reward is given in additional to fees so I think that fee is sufficient.