EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
Topic: [GAM] Gambit | Private Trading Group | Trading Indicators | Trading Classroom - page 55. (Read 297543 times)
June 11, 2015, 11:34:18 AM
June 11, 2015, 07:22:44 AM
when you start burning the coins on the exchanges and setting buy walls how will you work out how high to start buying at?
We aren't going to share any information about how we are going about that. This is in order to protect the system from being easily gamed. We will be reporting on the burned coins only after the fact.
will you have set burning days or as and when profits come in?
June 11, 2015, 04:16:20 AM
EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
June 11, 2015, 04:02:12 AM
when you start burning the coins on the exchanges and setting buy walls how will you work out how high to start buying at?
June 10, 2015, 08:10:19 PM
EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
June 10, 2015, 01:26:41 PM
I was going to reply (to the FUD) with "patience is a virtue"
but Collin had a more substantial reply.
My main concern with Collin's evaluation of trader calls is that it does not represent a weight of the trade.
For example, I am known for my bad calls, that is one of the reasons why I did not put my name in,
but still I managed to quadruple my BTC in a few months, because even though I made many bad calls,
most were of little consequence (usually by sitting them out until the market rebounded, so I lost not much money)
and only a few very good calls that more than doubled the money I put in.
So, if I would submit my past trades to Collin, I would likely get less than 50% and it would look like I am losing money,
while that is not what is reality.
The opposite can also be true: a trader that has 10 good calls, each delivering a few percent gains and one bad calls
that slashes his money in half has a 91% good call record but is losing money.
I suggest to take into account the *percentage of gain/loss* in the evaluation of traders.
but Collin had a more substantial reply.
My main concern with Collin's evaluation of trader calls is that it does not represent a weight of the trade.
For example, I am known for my bad calls, that is one of the reasons why I did not put my name in,
but still I managed to quadruple my BTC in a few months, because even though I made many bad calls,
most were of little consequence (usually by sitting them out until the market rebounded, so I lost not much money)
and only a few very good calls that more than doubled the money I put in.
So, if I would submit my past trades to Collin, I would likely get less than 50% and it would look like I am losing money,
while that is not what is reality.
The opposite can also be true: a trader that has 10 good calls, each delivering a few percent gains and one bad calls
that slashes his money in half has a 91% good call record but is losing money.
I suggest to take into account the *percentage of gain/loss* in the evaluation of traders.
I understand what you are saying, that's a fair consideration. There are many variables at play. The liquidity of the markets being traded on needs to also be considered, as they differ from each other greatly. This is especially the case when we refer altcoin calls to btc/forex. All in all, this is data that we are gathering and looking at. Trading merely comes down to risk management -- stops and trailing stops are used for a reason. One could easily argue that anyone that loses half of their portfolio without stops in place is a gambler not a trader. Trade outcomes will be visible in BTC gains/losses.
Understandable. Dev, do you feel you could use more help with dev or marketing side of the coin? Or do you have things lined up? I'm just wondering since you have many good ideas/plans and just hope you're not over-burdening yourself and miss any development or delivery dates. Not sure how big you/your team is re. GAM development but hopefully it's enough to make it big.
June 10, 2015, 01:23:56 PM
Hi Collin,
I think I have seen this with other staking wallets also, so just to confirm:
Does the wallet subtract a minimum 0.0001 miner fee on every transaction, including staking a block?
I have about 4,000 transactions in my wallet's transaction list, the vast majority from staking.
Also I see a discrepancy of 0.4 Gam between my wallet balance and the block explorer,
because the block explorer somehow does not notice miner fees, so it is always a little higher
than the balance in the wallet (which obviously does subtract the miner fees from the balance).
The agreement between the 0.0001 min miner fee, the approx 4000 transactions and the 0.4 balance difference is striking.
I think I have seen this with other staking wallets also, so just to confirm:
Does the wallet subtract a minimum 0.0001 miner fee on every transaction, including staking a block?
I have about 4,000 transactions in my wallet's transaction list, the vast majority from staking.
Also I see a discrepancy of 0.4 Gam between my wallet balance and the block explorer,
because the block explorer somehow does not notice miner fees, so it is always a little higher
than the balance in the wallet (which obviously does subtract the miner fees from the balance).
The agreement between the 0.0001 min miner fee, the approx 4000 transactions and the 0.4 balance difference is striking.
June 09, 2015, 05:55:43 PM
EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
June 09, 2015, 05:11:44 PM
I was going to reply (to the FUD) with "patience is a virtue"
but Collin had a more substantial reply.
My main concern with Collin's evaluation of trader calls is that it does not represent a weight of the trade.
For example, I am known for my bad calls, that is one of the reasons why I did not put my name in,
but still I managed to quadruple my BTC in a few months, because even though I made many bad calls,
most were of little consequence (usually by sitting them out until the market rebounded, so I lost not much money)
and only a few very good calls that more than doubled the money I put in.
So, if I would submit my past trades to Collin, I would likely get less than 50% and it would look like I am losing money,
while that is not what is reality.
The opposite can also be true: a trader that has 10 good calls, each delivering a few percent gains and one bad calls
that slashes his money in half has a 91% good call record but is losing money.
I suggest to take into account the *percentage of gain/loss* in the evaluation of traders.
but Collin had a more substantial reply.
My main concern with Collin's evaluation of trader calls is that it does not represent a weight of the trade.
For example, I am known for my bad calls, that is one of the reasons why I did not put my name in,
but still I managed to quadruple my BTC in a few months, because even though I made many bad calls,
most were of little consequence (usually by sitting them out until the market rebounded, so I lost not much money)
and only a few very good calls that more than doubled the money I put in.
So, if I would submit my past trades to Collin, I would likely get less than 50% and it would look like I am losing money,
while that is not what is reality.
The opposite can also be true: a trader that has 10 good calls, each delivering a few percent gains and one bad calls
that slashes his money in half has a 91% good call record but is losing money.
I suggest to take into account the *percentage of gain/loss* in the evaluation of traders.
June 09, 2015, 02:41:54 PM
I really like the idea of more non-crypto traders. Good update.
June 09, 2015, 07:53:46 AM
June 09, 2015, 02:37:47 AM
EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
This post is very old. Please see the main thread at GambitCrypto.com for up-to-date information.
EDITED
June 09, 2015, 01:49:45 AM
Before FUDding and speculating everyone should go check out the google doc linked in OP to see trades done by competing traders & details of GAM already burned using income from other sources.
June 09, 2015, 12:59:23 AM
Well, thats funny.
I see that you always look at the bright side.
Let's give the dev some time to actually select the traders
and then some trades to be made before jumping to conclusions.
Only thing I am missing at this moment is a timeline as to what is happening when.
The dev has been dragging his feet and giving excuses for over a month and still no trades. How many more red flags do you need?
Yes, all of us have invested because we like the logo and ONLY want the dev to make money. You are correct. 
Oh wait...
Ponder the post above. If this was truly legit and the dev was just trying to raise capital it would have all been ready to go at launch and the trades would have started at launch or shortly thereafter.Oh wait...
Since the responses to this thread are so slow and volume is low I can't help but wonder if the above statement is correct or just trying to troll us to dump our GAM.
June 08, 2015, 01:58:12 AM
That's not how "investing" works. Never has, never will. The only one who could possibly make money here is the dev.
Yes, all of us have invested because we like the logo and ONLY want the dev to make money. You are correct.
Oh wait...
June 07, 2015, 06:33:34 PM
Everyone making money. Am I right?
That's not how "investing" works. Never has, never will. The only one who could possibly make money here is the dev.how long till some actual trades are going to be made to start burning properly on successful trades??
They start the second Tuesday of next week.I see that you always look at the bright side.
Let's give the dev some time to actually select the traders
and then some trades to be made before jumping to conclusions.
Only thing I am missing at this moment is a timeline as to what is happening when.
June 07, 2015, 03:59:25 PM
Everyone making money. Am I right?
That's not how "investing" works. Never has, never will. The only one who could possibly make money here is the dev.how long till some actual trades are going to be made to start burning properly on successful trades??
They start the second Tuesday of next week. June 05, 2015, 10:40:54 AM
how long till some actual trades are going to be made to start burning properly on successful trades??
June 05, 2015, 05:00:31 AM
ok so it is short/mid term speculative instrument. Long term plan is either not there or still undecided. Eventually when everyone has sold to take profit, that will be it. Everyone making money. Am I right? I am okay with that, just wanted to clear some doubts. Thanks 
June 05, 2015, 03:23:58 AM
Is there anything exciting going on?
Did you read the OP?Everyone investing here expects a return on their investment from successful trades leading to buy pressure for burning coins,
increasing the value of the remaining coins. I think that is as simple as I can tell it - there is a lot more to it, you just need to
invest a little time to read the info that is presented here and you find your answer.
Unless of course, you did not come here to find answers but only to troll and spread negativity, then you won't find answers here.
Let me ask one more question. We have taken care of supply side by burning the coins but what are we doing for generating demand? Where can we use this coin other than staking. I would like to see discounts on services like Coinigy, coingecko & other trading & chart related services while paying with GAM. Personally if there is a discount for cloud mining, i will be all for it. I think that's what SecretOfCrypto might be asking. We have all seen coin with very little supply but no demand, that only kills liquidity but didn't help much with price/demand.
Someone didn't read OP.
http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Peekaboo_3ef209_640992.jpg
I read it, it only says about constant buy pressure. This will only kill liquidity, other than profit taking there is no incentive to sell/use GAM. If there is no seller then how can they keep buying? May be i am not understanding something. If people will be using it then only we will have constant supply of new token to buy from merchants selling it for BTC, with fund money. Also what is the end game? To buy all the tokens and burn them? After a certain point burning has to stop, as you need people to stake to keep n/w running. There has to be some use other than staking & profit taking. If i am missing something please help me understand. Thanks.
Jump to: