[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread - page 60.

Pale Phoenix

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Quote from: Ytterbium on September 06, 2013, 07:01:07 PM

Quote from: Vigil on September 06, 2013, 06:58:07 PM

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

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

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

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

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

auto2nr1

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: matuszed on September 06, 2013, 06:22:31 PM

Quote from: auto2nr1 on September 06, 2013, 06:19:42 PM

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

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

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

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Vigil on September 06, 2013, 06:58:07 PM

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

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

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

Vigil

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

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

kingcrimson

legendary

Activity: 1025

Merit: 1000

I don't think anyone cares about a lower price in the short term. I think they've got to open the flood gates now while the stakes are lower.

matuszed

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

Quote from: auto2nr1 on September 06, 2013, 06:19:42 PM

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

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

auto2nr1

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

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

Pale Phoenix

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Quote from: ffssixtynine on September 06, 2013, 05:29:04 PM

re: Share price - Due to the lack of dividends in the immediate future I would guess. There are still Klondikes waiting for their Avalon chips of course. Surprised at where we're at on Bitfunder given that 0.0025 is a guaranteed return and eASIC are (finally) confirmed but that's how it goes. At least the press have recognised VMC's offering now.

This is somewhat surprising, but each of these exchanges have quirks that affect supply and demand. For instance, many of the shares on Bitfunder were purchased in the early tranches, so they have much more flexibility to sell at a profit. The market is really behaving as if there were two classes of stock at this point.

I'm happy for the opportunity to pick up sub .0025 shares on BF, even though BTCT is my preferred exchange, but I'd like to see a transfer method (even with a small fee) put in place even if it pushed the price down a bit in the short term.

matuszed

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

Quote from: ffssixtynine on September 06, 2013, 06:07:04 PM

Quote from: matuszed on September 06, 2013, 05:53:20 PM

I just think for proper price discovery the shares should be easily fungible between the exchanges. I think once divs start rolling this will all become a moot point but we will get deeper books and more liquidity if people can play the arb. It just seems like theres more btc chasing a smaller float on btct which causes actm to trade at a premium the market should move shares from bf to btct to make up for this imbalance but it lacks the mechanism currently

Very true but I don't think this will change.

Going back to my post, should Ken try to facilitate a small amount of arb and under what guidelines (to prevent people doing a quick buy/sell - or should that even be a worry)?

I don't think it should be a worry if people do the quick buy and sell. If you give people that option youre going to see more bids on bitfunder and less people coming into this thread to complain about sharp price declines on bf. Also it will provide more offers on btct where there seems to be excess demand at times.

Obviously ken cant do this all day so i say people can put in an order to switch anytime they want and they clear on like friday before the divs. i bet the anticipation of a transfer mechanism alone will bring prices in line.

ffssixtynine

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: matuszed on September 06, 2013, 05:53:20 PM

I just think for proper price discovery the shares should be easily fungible between the exchanges. I think once divs start rolling this will all become a moot point but we will get deeper books and more liquidity if people can play the arb. It just seems like theres more btc chasing a smaller float on btct which causes actm to trade at a premium the market should move shares from bf to btct to make up for this imbalance but it lacks the mechanism currently

Very true but I don't think this will change.

Going back to my post, should Ken try to facilitate a small amount of arb and under what guidelines (to prevent people doing a quick buy/sell - or should that even be a worry)?

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: ffssixtynine on September 06, 2013, 05:29:04 PM

Quote from: auto2nr1 on September 06, 2013, 04:55:37 PM

When do you think we can get some communication for the shareholders? It would be nice if Ken or PR would jump in and chat with us to answer any questions we have.

re: Delivery - KnC, HashFast and VMC are all now due to start delivering in November now as far as I know (VMC late November). KnC maybe slightly earlier?

Ytterbium - now you're posting more sensible stuff

If you order a KnC now, it'll come in November. The first orders in the queue are supposed to be shipped out before the end of this month.

matuszed

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

Quote from: ffssixtynine on September 06, 2013, 05:42:09 PM

Quote from: matuszed on September 06, 2013, 05:36:05 PM

The difference between btct and bf is now almost 100%. Id really like to see a clearing mechanism from ACTM for shares between the two exchanges to arb out the price difference and also as a failsafe if we lost one of the exchanges for unforseen reasons. Id be willing to help with any aspects of it

I actually raised this with both Ken and the board today. The issue is that even allowing a small limited amount of transfers could cause the BTCT price to fall both before and after, annoying BTCT users.

It could be tried with a small amount of shares at first (how much? min amount? random selection of people or first come first served?). Feedback from you and other shareholders?

I just think for proper price discovery the shares should be easily fungible between the exchanges. I think once divs start rolling this will all become a moot point but we will get deeper books and more liquidity if people can play the arb. It just seems like theres more btc chasing a smaller float on btct which causes actm to trade at a premium the market should move shares from bf to btct to make up for this imbalance but it lacks the mechanism currently

ffssixtynine

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: matuszed on September 06, 2013, 05:36:05 PM

The difference between btct and bf is now almost 100%. Id really like to see a clearing mechanism from ACTM for shares between the two exchanges to arb out the price difference and also as a failsafe if we lost one of the exchanges for unforseen reasons. Id be willing to help with any aspects of it

I actually raised this with both Ken and the board today. The issue is that even allowing a small limited amount of transfers could cause the BTCT price to fall both before and after, annoying BTCT users.

It could be tried with a small amount of shares at first (how much? min amount? random selection of people or first come first served?). Feedback from you and other shareholders?

matuszed

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

Quote from: ffssixtynine on September 06, 2013, 05:29:04 PM

Quote from: auto2nr1 on September 06, 2013, 04:55:37 PM

When do you think we can get some communication for the shareholders? It would be nice if Ken or PR would jump in and chat with us to answer any questions we have.

PR is just a volunteer account Streets set up, all Q/A has to be Ken. He has a big list of questions from us/you to answer which can then be posted by him or PR.

re: Fab - VMC are dealing with eASIC here. You can be sure that's all part of the deal (not in the NRE fee though, obviously).

re: Delivery - KnC, HashFast and VMC are all now due to start delivering in November now as far as I know (VMC late November). KnC maybe slightly earlier?

re: Store, prices, and related stuff - this was all raised with Ken some time ago and he's gradually dealing with some aspects. The prices have changed quite a bit already. We'd like more changes overall. PM him privately to give your feedback but please per respectful. Posts on here are unlikely to be seen.

re: Share price - Due to the lack of dividends in the immediate future I would guess. There are still Klondikes waiting for their Avalon chips of course. Surprised at where we're at on Bitfunder given that 0.0025 is a guaranteed return and eASIC are (finally) confirmed but that's how it goes. At least the press have recognised VMC's offering now.

Ytterbium - now you're posting more sensible stuff

The difference between btct and bf is now almost 100%. Id really like to see a clearing mechanism from ACTM for shares between the two exchanges to arb out the price difference and also as a failsafe if we lost one of the exchanges for unforseen reasons. Id be willing to help with any aspects of it

ffssixtynine

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: auto2nr1 on September 06, 2013, 04:55:37 PM

When do you think we can get some communication for the shareholders? It would be nice if Ken or PR would jump in and chat with us to answer any questions we have.

PR is just a volunteer account Streets set up, all Q/A has to be Ken. He has a big list of questions from us/you to answer which can then be posted by him or PR.

re: Fab - VMC are dealing with eASIC here. You can be sure that's all part of the deal (not in the NRE fee though, obviously).

re: Delivery - KnC, HashFast and VMC are all now due to start delivering in November now as far as I know (VMC late November). KnC maybe slightly earlier?

re: Store, prices, and related stuff - this was all raised with Ken some time ago and he's gradually dealing with some aspects. The prices have changed quite a bit already. We'd like more changes overall. PM him privately to give your feedback but please per respectful. Posts on here are unlikely to be seen.

re: Share price - Due to the lack of dividends in the immediate future I would guess. There are still Klondikes waiting for their Avalon chips of course. Surprised at where we're at on Bitfunder given that 0.0025 is a guaranteed return and eASIC are (finally) confirmed but that's how it goes. At least the press have recognised VMC's offering now.

Ytterbium - now you're posting more sensible stuff

zumzero

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

myBitcoin.Garden

Quote from: auto2nr1 on September 06, 2013, 04:55:37 PM

When do you think we can get some communication for the shareholders? It would be nice if Ken or PR would jump in and chat with us to answer any questions we have.

I'd certainly welcome an updated version of Vbs's spreadsheet.

zumzero

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

myBitcoin.Garden

Done. Again!

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: zumzero on September 06, 2013, 05:02:27 PM

Crumbs, what a weirdo. Huh

Click ignore - he feeds off attention.

zumzero

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

myBitcoin.Garden

Crumbs, what a weirdo. Huh

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: dexX7 on September 06, 2013, 02:36:17 PM

They deal with eASIC. This does provide much more confidence than "an IC producer who uses TMSC", at least for me. Lame analogy: a meal baked a perfect oven is not to be guaranteed more delicious than a meal cooked by a professional chef cook. Grin

That's actually a pretty good analogy,

eASIC is going to get preference from Global Foundries as well for being a large customer (Sorry this is how it works in the real world)

I hope Ken's a professional chef, 'coz he sure never cooked this sort of chips before Cheesy

ASICs don't cook well in Easy-Bake Ovens Shocked

Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread - page 60. (Read 479475 times)