Pages:
Author

Topic: . - page 23. (Read 67479 times)

vip
Activity: 574
Merit: 500
Don't send me a pm unless you gpg encrypt it.
May 11, 2012, 11:26:30 PM
Since the first buyback is coming up here on Friday, is the 0.5% fee paid by the seller on the buyback price of 1.28? This would make the effective face value of 1.2736 for each bond, if I understand correctly.

Fees are rebated to the market makers.  So if you have bidsasks up at 1.28, you shouldn't incur any fees.
hero member
Activity: 520
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 11:25:25 PM
Since the first buyback is coming up here on Friday, is the 0.5% fee paid by the seller on the buyback price of 1.28? This would make the effective face value of 1.2736 for each bond, if I understand correctly.
vip
Activity: 574
Merit: 500
Don't send me a pm unless you gpg encrypt it.
May 11, 2012, 11:23:02 PM
Here's a question to those busy bidding and buying - if you're only prepared to pay 1.10 at auction, why do people pay 1.15 immediately after the auction?  Wouldn't it be better to bid higher with greater certainty of having your order filled versus the regret of not having a high enough price.  

I presume you bid at a level where you become indifferent between winning and losing - despite the problems with the auction today, it sounds like people were not indifferent between the two possible outcomes, and that was a deliberate strategy.

meh
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 10:30:46 PM
Here's a question to those busy bidding and buying - if you're only prepared to pay 1.10 at auction, why do people pay 1.15 immediately after the auction?  Wouldn't it be better to bid higher with greater certainty of having your order filled versus the regret of not having a high enough price.  

I presume you bid at a level where you become indifferent between winning and losing - despite the problems with the auction today, it sounds like people were not indifferent between the two possible outcomes, and that was a deliberate strategy.
REF
hero member
Activity: 529
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 10:25:18 PM
If it had triggered a minute early would you like it if we paid less than 1.28?  I wouldn't think so.
Not the same thing but equally bad
Also, if we paid 1.295 to the bond holders, that would enrich those who did get bonds, but not help people like mousepotato who missed out.
That is a good point too.

Have to hope for things to go smoother next week.  Smiley
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 10:12:42 PM
I got different numbers then patrick mine are somewhat higher. Any chance you guys will come up with some "official" number the average moved by and buy back the bonds at that much more. so if your using patrick's number then buy then back at 1.295?

I was using 2 computers myself to prevent getting any errors. one I used us.glbse.com and the other I used glbse.com incase there would of been any sort of a problem. At least if its automated it can be blamed on PPT's fault.

I'm not sure of the actual movement in average price from 2:00:00 to when the sale went through.  We have used our best endeavours to ensure that, given the limitations of the trading platform, that it takes place correctly.  

If it had triggered a minute early would you like it if we paid less than 1.28?  I wouldn't think so.
Also, if we paid 1.295 to the bond holders, that would enrich those who did get bonds, but not help people like mousepotato who missed out.
REF
hero member
Activity: 529
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 10:00:59 PM
I got different numbers then patrick mine are somewhat higher. Any chance you guys will come up with some "official" number the average moved by and buy back the bonds at that much more. so if your using patrick's number then buy then back at 1.295?

I was using 2 computers myself to prevent getting any errors. one I used us.glbse.com and the other I used glbse.com incase there would of been any sort of a problem. At least if its automated it can be blamed on PPT's fault.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 09:53:08 PM
No, it's probably not going to, but you also know the platform is a bit flaky.  Also, the difference between the highest and lowest bids that cleared is quite small starting at 1.105 and going to 1.0999.  So, the difference between being the highest bid and missing out is just 0.5% over the 28 days.  I understand people wanting to get the lowest price, but complaining that your bid was too low on such a narrow margin doesn't really stack up.

That's not what people are complaining about here.

No, you are complaining that at the time the system was supposed to execute, it didn't.  And at the same time, people were changing their bids as long as the trading platform allowed them to do so - and everybody was in the same situation.  Some chose to take advantage of that, and others did not.
hero member
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
Seal Cub Clubbing Club
May 11, 2012, 09:39:47 PM
No, it's probably not going to, but you also know the platform is a bit flaky.  Also, the difference between the highest and lowest bids that cleared is quite small starting at 1.105 and going to 1.0999.  So, the difference between being the highest bid and missing out is just 0.5% over the 28 days.  I understand people wanting to get the lowest price, but complaining that your bid was too low on such a narrow margin doesn't really stack up.

That's not what people are complaining about here.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 09:32:21 PM

Yeah... You're so, so sorry that you'll just pocket the extra profits in the meantime...  lol

Hi psy, it would have been interesting to see the 1600 bid miss out, along with others that were there for 400 and 600-ish that I saw.  Having a 100 or so people holding bonds would have been good.

In terms of "enhanced" profit, a few minutes before show time the average was 1.104 and it went down slightly, and the 1600 @ 1.095 moving to 1.1 might have changed things a maximum0.015, but it wasn't the only bid moving in the last few minutes.  The notes I took for total bids showed that by 2:01 there were 6950 and another 500 piled in after that. 
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1002
May 11, 2012, 09:25:26 PM
The timing last week was early and this week was late.  The 1600 bid did move (I think twice), and so I expect there will be some annoyed people.

HOWEVER

for context there were bids for over 7400 bonds this week meaning around 5000 (two thirds) were not filled. 

That doesn't exactly make me feel any better Tongue  I had that 1600 outbid fair and square at 22:00 on the dot.

We're disappointed in Nefario for his shitty infrastructure, and I know some people are angry enough that they are coming up with alternatives Wink

In the meantime, I'm very sorry, but there's nothing we can do if Nefario doesn't step up and get his act together.

Yeah... You're so, so sorry that you'll just pocket the extra profits in the meantime...  lol
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 09:24:47 PM
really needs to be on an automatic timer set by GLBSE. okay I lied but it did jump from 1.095 to 1.099(which it went off at) after 10pm. So it was more like .05 which does make a difference

edit: you beat me to it. auto timer is the way to go

What kind of timer is it now?
I believe one of the PPT guys probably just issues a sell order for 2500@ 1BTC as close as possible to the time, but I could be wrong.

That sucks.  When I was playing around with the dev site I thought the issuer could pre-release the set number of securities then when the IPO time occurred they would be released.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 09:22:50 PM
The timing last week was early and this week was late.  The 1600 bid did move (I think twice), and so I expect there will be some annoyed people.

HOWEVER

for context there were bids for over 7400 bonds this week meaning around 5000 (two thirds) were not filled.  

That doesn't exactly make me feel any better Tongue  I had that 1600 outbid fair and square at 22:00 on the dot.

No, it's probably not going to, but you also know the platform is a bit flaky.  Also, the difference between the highest and lowest bids that cleared is quite small starting at 1.105 and going to 1.0999.  So, the difference between being the highest bid and missing out is just 0.5% over the 28 days.  I understand people wanting to get the lowest price, but complaining that your bid was too low on such a narrow margin doesn't really stack up.
sr. member
Activity: 278
Merit: 250
May 11, 2012, 09:20:38 PM
The timing last week was early and this week was late.  The 1600 bid did move (I think twice), and so I expect there will be some annoyed people.

HOWEVER

for context there were bids for over 7400 bonds this week meaning around 5000 (two thirds) were not filled.  

Talk about leaving money on the table!
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 1000
bitcoin hundred-aire
May 11, 2012, 09:18:47 PM
The timing last week was early and this week was late.  The 1600 bid did move (I think twice), and so I expect there will be some annoyed people.

HOWEVER

for context there were bids for over 7400 bonds this week meaning around 5000 (two thirds) were not filled.  

That doesn't exactly make me feel any better Tongue  I had that 1600 outbid fair and square at 22:00 on the dot.

We're disappointed in Nefario for his shitty infrastructure, and I know some people are angry enough that they are coming up with alternatives Wink

In the meantime, I'm very sorry, but there's nothing we can do if Nefario doesn't step up and get his act together.
hero member
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
Seal Cub Clubbing Club
May 11, 2012, 09:17:12 PM
The timing last week was early and this week was late.  The 1600 bid did move (I think twice), and so I expect there will be some annoyed people.

HOWEVER

for context there were bids for over 7400 bonds this week meaning around 5000 (two thirds) were not filled.  

That doesn't exactly make me feel any better Tongue  I had that 1600 outbid fair and square at 22:00 on the dot.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 09:15:28 PM
The timing last week was early and this week was late.  The 1600 bid did move (I think twice), and so I expect there will be some annoyed people.

HOWEVER

for context there were bids for over 7400 bonds this week meaning around 5000 (two thirds) were not filled.  
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1015
May 11, 2012, 09:14:36 PM
really needs to be on an automatic timer set by GLBSE. okay I lied but it did jump from 1.095 to 1.099(which it went off at) after 10pm. So it was more like .05 which does make a difference

edit: you beat me to it. auto timer is the way to go

What kind of timer is it now?
I believe one of the PPT guys probably just issues a sell order for 2500@ 1BTC as close as possible to the time, but I could be wrong.
That's how it is. If Burt gets a 50x server error when he goes to sell, there's not much he can do about it.
hero member
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
Seal Cub Clubbing Club
May 11, 2012, 09:13:23 PM
really needs to be on an automatic timer set by GLBSE. okay I lied but it did jump from 1.095 to 1.099(which it went off at) after 10pm. So it was more like .05 which does make a difference

edit: you beat me to it. auto timer is the way to go

What kind of timer is it now?

I believe it's triggered like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ve4M4UsJQo
REF
hero member
Activity: 529
Merit: 500
May 11, 2012, 09:10:43 PM
really needs to be on an automatic timer set by GLBSE. okay I lied but it did jump from 1.095 to 1.099(which it went off at) after 10pm. So it was more like .05 which does make a difference

edit: you beat me to it. auto timer is the way to go

What kind of timer is it now?

GLBSE needs an option let PPT(or any ipo) set an option to sell 2500 bonds at 22:00 and then the GLBSE server would execute it itself.

I believe one of the PPT guys probably just issues a sell order for 2500@ 1BTC as close as possible to the time, but I could be wrong.
Thats the way I understand it as well. If thats not how it is then my apologies to those who are apart of PPT
Pages:
Jump to: