It still doesn't seem like a very good move on Coinbase's part. Where is (was) the logic in not supporting BTC? It just seems way lame now & not a good way to keep customers
Im going to assume you mean BCH not BTC. The logic in it is that Coinbase and many other exchanges stated their positions on it. They do not support it as in they don't not believe in values or goal BCH is trying to achieve, and they voice their opinions by not putting it their exchanges.
The situation would be completely different if it were just another Altcoin or ICO, but it isnt. It's a direct fork off of the Bitcoin chain in an attempt to become the new BTC.
yes you are right I meant BCH !
I do understand there is a philosophical divide here (for lack of a better way to phrase it..) -- and that makes sense up to the fork. I wonder though, now that it clearly exists & is being traded-- will exchanges be forced by the market--not a class action suit per se, just to be competitive-- to support it?
I don't think they need to be competitive in this case. Coinbase is one of the most (if not the most) popular exchange around right now. I feel as if they'd be looked down on if they compromised their beliefs for a few angry people.
I wouldn't be surprised though and I think it might be likely that this class action lawsuit is the plan of a few people with malicious intent, supported and backed by other people who are not knowledgeable enough and were told that they are entitled to money.
But regardless, I can see smaller exchanges adding BCH later simply so they can cash in on the trade fees if they haven't done so already, but Coinbase will be fine without it.
I see what you are saying. But my point is this-- for every customer of Coinbases who holds Bitcoin & didn't get it moved before 8/1-- the value of their wallet just went down (since value was split in the creation of BCH) from what it was before.
AND, they continue to miss out on the BCH portion of those original bitcoin they didn't get.
To a more experienced trader, of course, this would have been a conscious choice in supporting/not supporting the hard fork, so they aren't going to hold that against coinbase, and may even support/admire them for their stance.
But to the new trader--which i think is probably a fair portion of coinbase's customers (and why Coinbase has become such a popular exchange)-- it's much more likely not to be the case, and while those new investors may have supported Coinbase's conservative stance before the split (appreciating safety and the impulse toward stability--which, at least now, is how Coinbase is characterizing things)--- post 8/1, what those investors are seeing is just a devalued digital wallet and a missed opportunity at ongoing wealth creation.
While a class action suit seems unlikely at best, I can't imagine that reality wouldn't lose Coinbase some percentage of users, and (perhaps more importantly) leave a lingering impression for future new investors (which, practically speaking, is going to be many more than there are now--so that is the true market for Coinbase's, or any other exchange's, growth).
So-- to support or not support?
The news now seems to be that Coinbase will support BCH. Which I guess also suggests that consensus/shared principles are not the only means for initiating a whole new hard fork. This is more like a blitzkrieg style coup for seizing power and forcing change in a certain direction. And it seems to have worked?
or do i have something wrong in the above?