I can see the appeal but I would be terrified of abrogating control of my coins to a centralised system
What kind of security practices will they have in place?
Topic: Delta Financial Offers Interest-Bearing Bitcoin Accounts (Read 4964 times)
I put a small amount of BTC to try out btcdelta´s interest earning feature. I have received the interest on my deposit as promised, every day, since june 18. Also I have been able to move some BTC from interest to primary account and withdraw from there to one of my personal Bitcoin addresses outside of btcdelta, without any problem or delay. I have made several suggestion to customer support and they have been very prompt responding to my input. They already fixed a minor problem with their interest reporting I had pointed out to them. So far I am happy with this service, but of course only time will tell if this actually can work in the long run and I am not going to put a lot of my funds into this right now.
ANY company which pays INTEREST on bitcoin deposits is a FRAUD
Pure and simple!
Pure and simple!
Is this true? I could see a bitcoin "bank" offering a standard low rate and being fine. If it loaned the BTC out at a higher rate then the bank could make profit and pay interest. I'm talking like 1 percent in the current environment.
To test the water, I put a small amount into BTC Interest account on June 19. Daily interests have been paid as promised. A few days ago, I moved the fund from BTC Interest account to BTC Primary account, and tried to withdraw. Then I got "incorrectly credentials" error. I have two-factor enabled on the account. I am sure I have entered the two-factor code correctly. I have send support an email and waiting for their reply. I will update here as things unfold.
I never said we need a regulatory framework, I implied that there will be more MAJOR BROKERAGES accepting bitcoin as collateral when the regulatory framework improves. This is common sense, matter of fact stuff.
There will always be a parallel bitcoin infrastructure but it will not involve MAJOR BROKERAGES, who will probably not accept bitcoin until there is more clarity re. regulations and so on.
We don't need "regulatory framework." Why does everyone think bit coin needs permission? If you mess with fiat you have to follow regulations from the government that issues it, no government issues bit coin so no government regulations need to be applied.
There will always be a parallel bitcoin infrastructure but it will not involve MAJOR BROKERAGES, who will probably not accept bitcoin until there is more clarity re. regulations and so on.
5% does not seem like an outlandish figure. The fact that they are paying out 5% in and of itself does not raise my suspicion.
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
We don't need "regulatory framework." Why does everyone think bit coin needs permission? If you mess with fiat you have to follow regulations from the government that issues it, no government issues bit coin so no government regulations need to be applied.
I'm not necessarily out to defend these guys but the 5% they are paying is from margin loans others take to borrow bitcoin, "they" are not paying it like a bank would, so that comparison is not apt.
5% does not seem like an outlandish figure. The fact that they are paying out 5% in and of itself does not raise my suspicion.
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
If they are paying 5% then at a minimum they will need to earn 5% on the bitcoin you give (lend) them plus their expenses. With current interest rates that is simply too much to earn on investments that must be liquid enough to satisfy demands for payment from investors. That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
5% is requiring that they find for instance a sell price of bitcoins of $610, and a buy price of bitcoins of ~ $578 once a day. and that there is enough volume to sell to not cause a tank before its sold. and enough volume to buy to not cause a rise before its bought.
because 5% is a $31.20 price difference once you account for trade fees (based on 60c buy 60c (0.15% per trade))
even if we broke it down to not just 1 buy and sell per day, but lets say 1% profit per trade 5 times a day ($6 profit + same $1.20 fees) means movements of atleast $7.20 need to be held with enough volume to support the price for all investments to transact before it tanks. then buying back in with enough volume to support the buys to ensure they get that $7.20 cheaper price before it rises.
i have personally done this before on a few exchanges. once you start handling more then 10bitcoins prices move, i have played around with 500 coins and seen the price move alot. so saying it is possible and in someways guaranteed... is a lie.
just 20 coins would make the price on either bitstamp or btc-e move $2 in the wrong direction as there is no price support. meaning the 1st coin thy want to sell will b sold at $2 cheaper then the first coin. meaning if they were playing with just 300 bitcoins (not thousands just 300) by the time they have sold all 300 the price would have tanked and would then need to then wait for a further price drop to then have an oppertunity to buy in for their 5% profit.. its unsustainable
and going back to why i think not only the financials are fishy, but the website itself.. i thought i recognized the cheap template they used..
http://bit.coin.je/ use the same cheap template too..
too many things have put the hairs on the back of my neck up, about this website.. i wont shout scam,.. but fishy is definitely a good word for it
because 5% is a $31.20 price difference once you account for trade fees (based on 60c buy 60c (0.15% per trade))
even if we broke it down to not just 1 buy and sell per day, but lets say 1% profit per trade 5 times a day ($6 profit + same $1.20 fees) means movements of atleast $7.20 need to be held with enough volume to support the price for all investments to transact before it tanks. then buying back in with enough volume to support the buys to ensure they get that $7.20 cheaper price before it rises.
i have personally done this before on a few exchanges. once you start handling more then 10bitcoins prices move, i have played around with 500 coins and seen the price move alot. so saying it is possible and in someways guaranteed... is a lie.
just 20 coins would make the price on either bitstamp or btc-e move $2 in the wrong direction as there is no price support. meaning the 1st coin thy want to sell will b sold at $2 cheaper then the first coin. meaning if they were playing with just 300 bitcoins (not thousands just 300) by the time they have sold all 300 the price would have tanked and would then need to then wait for a further price drop to then have an oppertunity to buy in for their 5% profit.. its unsustainable
and going back to why i think not only the financials are fishy, but the website itself.. i thought i recognized the cheap template they used..
http://bit.coin.je/ use the same cheap template too..
too many things have put the hairs on the back of my neck up, about this website.. i wont shout scam,.. but fishy is definitely a good word for it
5% does not seem like an outlandish figure. The fact that they are paying out 5% in and of itself does not raise my suspicion.
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
If they are paying 5% then at a minimum they will need to earn 5% on the bitcoin you give (lend) them plus their expenses. With current interest rates that is simply too much to earn on investments that must be liquid enough to satisfy demands for payment from investors. That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
My comment had nothing to do
with BtcDelta's integrity, competence,
or anything else.
with BtcDelta's integrity, competence,
or anything else.
but this topic is about a financial company that i presume to smell fishy..
Fair enough and apologies if it seemed like I'm trying to pick a fight but
I wanted to make my point that 2 of your 4 original reasons for the company
seeming fishy didn't hold water, at least for me...and i admit I felt a bit
irked when you didn't concede my points and wanted to change the subject.
Anyway, whatever... My points have been made. Have a nice weekend.
i understood your point you were trying to make that amazon is a legit and respected company around the world. but so is mcdonalds.
my point is financial holding companies of potentially hundreds of millions of dollars should set a higher security standard (not amazon, not comodo). just like id never use a fitness centre that had a mcdonalds in it.
the other point i did not get to is that by not bothering to hav their own data centre with security guards and top notch infrustructure, it smells fishy that they subscribed to cheaper ssl and cheap webhosting services, which to me shows lack of security knowledge themselves by using outsourced services, and also shows they do not have much collateral.. meaning when the penny drops they only have a domain name and a couple subscriptions as their collateral (true company value) when they claim bankruptcy (in a mtgox scenario).
it just smells fishy i did not say the word scam... just fishy
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
My comment had nothing to do
with BtcDelta's integrity, competence,
or anything else.
with BtcDelta's integrity, competence,
or anything else.
but this topic is about a financial company that i presume to smell fishy..
Fair enough and apologies if it seemed like I'm trying to pick a fight but
I wanted to make my point that 2 of your 4 original reasons for the company
seeming fishy didn't hold water, at least for me...and i admit I felt a bit
irked when you didn't concede my points and wanted to change the subject.
Anyway, whatever... My points have been made. Have a nice weekend.
Sounds pretty interesting for sure, but its something that I wont even think about until they have proven themselves.
Pirate proved himself by running a true ponzi. He used new investor money to pay dividends. I started a thread long ago arguing with Clipse, Goat and pirate@40 about his obvious con and no one listened. This will most likely fall on deaf ears too. If you feel compelled to start earning interest on your Bitcoins, convert them to fiat and get a financial advisor from Vanguard to build you a diversified portfolio. The concept just doesn't work well in Bitcoinland.
Sounds pretty interesting for sure, but its something that I wont even think about until they have proven themselves.
Pirate proved himself by running a true ponzi. He used new investor money to pay dividends. I started a thread long ago arguing with Clipse, Goat and pirate@40 about his obvious con and no one listened. This will most likely fall on deaf ears too. If you feel compelled to start earning interest on your Bitcoins, convert them to fiat and get a financial advisor from Vanguard to build you a diversified portfolio. The concept just doesn't work well in Bitcoinland.
5% does not seem like an outlandish figure. The fact that they are paying out 5% in and of itself does not raise my suspicion.
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
We don't need "regulatory framework." Why does everyone think bit coin needs permission? If you mess with fiat you have to follow regulations from the government that issues it, no government issues bit coin so no government regulations need to be applied.
5% does not seem like an outlandish figure. The fact that they are paying out 5% in and of itself does not raise my suspicion.
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
Sounds pretty interesting for sure, but its something that I wont even think about until they have proven themselves.
My comment had nothing to do
with BtcDelta's integrity, competence,
or anything else.
with BtcDelta's integrity, competence,
or anything else.
i dont always have to be right. i have in the past apologized to people when im wrong. but this topic is about a financial company that i presume to smell fishy..
.. instead of you investigating the company, looking to see if they even have legitimate business credentials, check if they had legitimate financial approval (licences).. or checking that their security was upto a 'banking standard'
you decide to knit pick the fact that i do not feel that using amazon to be involved in something that should be as, or more secure than a institutional bank as being a good idea...
kinda weird....care so much about my opinion but not care about a businesses validity that will at some point potentially hold thousands of bitcoins.. it amazes me where peoples priorities are..
its like if i said get on with your life, the world is round, and will still be around forever, calm down and live life.. you would reply.
but its not round, theres hills and mountains and deep valleys that make it uneven. theres roads, salt-flats, and building foundations that make places flat.
missing the point of the sentence to knitpick a word
but atleast i have another reason to facepalm, so thanks
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
Can you back your opinion with any further information? Are you an expert on computer security infrastructure?
So, they are using the cloud...so what?
Very little can be concluded just based on that, IMO.
There can be just as much security risk running their
own physical servers, and possibly a lot more other
risks such as server availability, DDOS, maintenance, etc.
you would rather trust a guy with crap security to hold millions of dollars, thousands of bitcoins.. on blind faith and not questioning them.
yet you question my credentials, when i have no coins belonging to other people..... thats a weird way to live.
how about realise that btcdelta is accepting dollars.. US dollars.. so show me their money transmission licence.... have you even checked to see if they have one?? or still trusting them on blind faith...?
My comment had nothing to do
with BtcDelta's integrity, competence,
or anything else.
YOU made the assertion that use of AWS
was somehow bad when you facepalmed it...
and then proceeded to give an opinion on
the appropriateness of it for a bitcoin application,
when you probably have no professional experience in this area,
and certainly don't know how the details of their stack.
I showed you that AWS is the industry leader in
distributed computing and you want to keep arguing.
Do you always have to be right or have the last word?
Can you back your opinion with any further information? Are you an expert on computer security infrastructure?
So, they are using the cloud...so what?
Very little can be concluded just based on that, IMO.
There can be just as much security risk running their
own physical servers, and possibly a lot more other
risks such as server availability, DDOS, maintenance, etc.
you would rather trust a guy with crap security to hold millions of dollars, thousands of bitcoins.. on blind faith and not questioning them.
yet you question my credentials, when i have no coins belonging to other people..... thats a weird way to live.
how about realise that btcdelta is accepting dollars.. US dollars.. so show me their money transmission licence.... have you even checked to see if they have one?? or still trusting them on blind faith...?
So I'm assuming that is a resounding USE AT YOUR OWN RISK and/or DO NOT USE.
legendary
Activity: 2758
Merit: 1115
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
So high risk derivative that allows interest to be generated by providing loans denominated in Bitcoins
Similar to the coinlenders model I presume at the same time they can issue shorts and charge high fees on the loans while building a reserve of Bitcoins guess this mechanism is just asking for trouble but some people will use it.
Like to see them get FDC insurance on this ^_^
Similar to the coinlenders model I presume at the same time they can issue shorts and charge high fees on the loans while building a reserve of Bitcoins guess this mechanism is just asking for trouble but some people will use it.
Like to see them get FDC insurance on this ^_^
Jump to: