Topic: [GLBSE] Nyancat Financial: Your Friend for Life (see post #2 for FAQ) - page 2. (Read 17820 times)
September 27, 2012, 07:20:39 PM
I reduced my exposure to NYAN.A and NYAN.B because its holding OBSI.HRPT and MOVE.TO.FUND looks on the verge of collapse from so many bad investments. My contract doesn't allow me to hold high risk funds so Im trading them in, its not anything to do with what the trolls are saying.
September 27, 2012, 02:57:57 PM
Since Usagi's spreadsheets are... dysfunctional, Ive taken it up on me to copy paste the latest available share data in to a spreadsheet, and pull in GLSBE latest price (blue) and 5 day avg price (purple) through GLSBE API. If usagi has done trades meanwhile, I will update this when the information becomes available.
I also made a third column that where possible uses the actual NAV of the asset, or applies a discount it if its a defaulting asset like uninsured pirate bonds or another fund that holds such debt (like move.to). The numbers I manually changed in that column (and that column only) are in red, you are free to have a different opinion of those values, they only represent just my personal assessment, but Im willing to back up my opinion if anyone wants.
If I made any mistakes, please point them out so that I can correct them.
edit: I manually set obsi.1MH to .1 BTC which is above what the API tells me because I understand obsi paid this out to his investors.
I also made a third column that where possible uses the actual NAV of the asset, or applies a discount it if its a defaulting asset like uninsured pirate bonds or another fund that holds such debt (like move.to). The numbers I manually changed in that column (and that column only) are in red, you are free to have a different opinion of those values, they only represent just my personal assessment, but Im willing to back up my opinion if anyone wants.
If I made any mistakes, please point them out so that I can correct them.
edit: I manually set obsi.1MH to .1 BTC which is above what the API tells me because I understand obsi paid this out to his investors.
This post actually added more value to NYAN/etc than two week's worth of "socialite usagi".
September 27, 2012, 02:45:46 PM
Since Usagi's spreadsheets are... dysfunctional, Ive taken it up on me to copy paste the latest available share data in to a spreadsheet, and pull in GLSBE latest price (blue) and 5 day avg price (purple) through GLSBE API. If usagi has done trades meanwhile, I will update this when the information becomes available.
I also made a third column that where possible uses the actual NAV of the asset, or applies a discount it if its a defaulting asset like uninsured pirate bonds or another fund that holds such debt (like move.to). The numbers I manually changed in that column (and that column only) are in red, you are free to have a different opinion of those values, they only represent just my personal assessment, but Im willing to back up my opinion if anyone wants.
If I made any mistakes, please point them out so that I can correct them.
edit: I manually set obsi.1MH to .1 BTC which is above what the API tells me because I understand obsi paid this out to his investors.
I also made a third column that where possible uses the actual NAV of the asset, or applies a discount it if its a defaulting asset like uninsured pirate bonds or another fund that holds such debt (like move.to). The numbers I manually changed in that column (and that column only) are in red, you are free to have a different opinion of those values, they only represent just my personal assessment, but Im willing to back up my opinion if anyone wants.
If I made any mistakes, please point them out so that I can correct them.
edit: I manually set obsi.1MH to .1 BTC which is above what the API tells me because I understand obsi paid this out to his investors.
September 27, 2012, 12:52:11 PM
Have fun trying to hold some gypsy in Romania accountable.
I'm sure European Union citizens are deeply sorry they don't meet your Aryan criteria, you valuable contributor to the discussion, you.
Sure thing, gypsy king. Now, can you please take care of my BTC?
September 27, 2012, 12:46:36 PM
Have fun trying to hold some gypsy in Romania accountable.
I'm sure European Union citizens are deeply sorry they don't meet your Aryan criteria, you valuable contributor to the discussion, you.
September 27, 2012, 12:13:23 PM
From what you saying, you made a good profit that is good news for the Nyan Asset, right? Well done.
Since Nyan just came into decent profits, does that mean Nyan.C is confirmed to have an increase in dividends this week?
"the more money flows into NYAN.C." - This implies, yes, I admit. But It could be dividends or reinvested, I don't know.
Since Nyan just came into decent profits, does that mean Nyan.C is confirmed to have an increase in dividends this week?
"the more money flows into NYAN.C." - This implies, yes, I admit. But It could be dividends or reinvested, I don't know.
The current strategy is to rejuvenate NYAN.C back to 1 in addition to paying reasonable dividends based on the 5 day average of 1 to 2% per week. It will be a long and slow road, and we muct pray OBSI.HRPT does not default. However, I hasten to add, that I am in close contact with OBSI.HRPT and if what he tells me is correct the trolls will be in for a nasty surprise.
NYAN.C is high risk, I make no bones about it, the entire point of NYAN.C is to invest in securities by the % return alone. Some people like that strategy. Well... this is the plan, and I hope it works!
I'll be happy to see dividends go back up. If it goes up enough, I'm sure their would be enough people willing to buy them at their current price that would drive it's price back up.
Same goes for most assets in their situation. No need to provoke the trolls, I'm sure they will be surprised without it.
September 27, 2012, 11:58:30 AM
NYAN.B has sold all it's DMC for ~0.1 per share for 1000% profit,
Im calling shenanigans.
What really happened here? First, Diablo inexplicably and indefensibly sold 4000+ DMC shares to you and an even bigger amount to someone else (obsi?) at less than 10% of their market value, robbing and infuriating DMC's actual shareholders who got wiped out and got nothing in return.
Then, when DMC got suspended for suspected fraud, after berating Diablo for being the bloody idiot he is, you inexplicably change your tune 180 degrees and begin backing up Diablo as if he is the greatest CEO of all times, including presenting a "plan" that is beyond indefensible, even allowing Diablo to steal all of his shareholders coins.
Diablo predictably wins the motion against him with the help of his 2 new majority shareholders who got their shares for nothing, leaving his investors, who were the only ones to really cough up coins, completely empty handed.
So DMC gets unblocked, Obsi pays out Diablo, his majority shareholder, for one of his bonds. The same day, again inexplicably and indefensibly, Diablo spends almost every coin repurchasing his own bonds all the way up 2x his own published NAV, even though DMC is simply a holding company holding like 3 shares. Why on earth did he overpay for his own shares like that, instead of buying more of the assets he owns?
Well, now we know. Usagi got repaid for his services.
Good job robbing DMCs shareholders blind, I hope you are proud.
Im gonna call on Nefario to investigate this, too many things here dont make the slightest sense, unless you look at the outcome: good for you, good for Diablo, probably good for Obsi, HORRIBLE for DMC investors.
This is an outrage.
What does a pedophile do when he is outraged? Builds a porno exchange.
September 27, 2012, 11:55:27 AM
NYAN.B has sold all it's DMC for ~0.1 per share for 1000% profit,
Im calling shenanigans.
What really happened here? First, Diablo inexplicably and indefensibly sold 4000+ DMC shares to you and an even bigger amount to someone else (obsi?) at less than 10% of their market value, robbing and infuriating DMC's actual shareholders who got wiped out and got nothing in return.
Then, when DMC got suspended for suspected fraud, after berating Diablo for being the bloody idiot he is, you inexplicably change your tune 180 degrees and begin backing up Diablo as if he is the greatest CEO of all times, including presenting a "plan" that is beyond indefensible, even allowing Diablo to steal all of his shareholders coins.
Diablo predictably wins the motion against him with the help of his 2 new majority shareholders who got their shares for nothing, leaving his investors, who were the only ones to really cough up coins, completely empty handed.
So DMC gets unblocked, Obsi pays out Diablo, his majority shareholder, for one of his bonds. The same day, again inexplicably and indefensibly, Diablo spends almost every coin repurchasing his own bonds all the way up 2x his own published NAV, even though DMC is simply a holding company holding like 3 shares. Why on earth did he overpay for his own shares like that, instead of buying more of the assets he owns?
Well, now we know. Usagi got repaid for his services.
Good job robbing DMCs shareholders blind, I hope you are proud.
Im gonna call on Nefario to investigate this, too many things here dont make the slightest sense, unless you look at the outcome: good for you, good for Diablo, probably good for Obsi, HORRIBLE for DMC investors.
This is an outrage.
September 27, 2012, 11:23:46 AM
September 27, 2012, 10:24:53 AM
From what you saying, you made a good profit that is good news for the Nyan Asset, right? Well done.
Since Nyan just came into decent profits, does that mean Nyan.C is confirmed to have an increase in dividends this week?
"the more money flows into NYAN.C." - This implies, yes, I admit. But It could be dividends or reinvested, I don't know.
Since Nyan just came into decent profits, does that mean Nyan.C is confirmed to have an increase in dividends this week?
"the more money flows into NYAN.C." - This implies, yes, I admit. But It could be dividends or reinvested, I don't know.
September 27, 2012, 09:44:07 AM
NYAN.B has sold all it's DMC for ~0.1 per share for 1000% profit,
Im calling shenanigans.
What really happened here? First, Diablo inexplicably and indefensibly sold 4000+ DMC shares to you and an even bigger amount to someone else (obsi?) at less than 10% of their market value, robbing and infuriating DMC's actual shareholders who got wiped out and got nothing in return.
Then, when DMC got suspended for suspected fraud, after berating Diablo for being the bloody idiot he is, you inexplicably change your tune 180 degrees and begin backing up Diablo as if he is the greatest CEO of all times, including presenting a "plan" that is beyond indefensible, even allowing Diablo to steal all of his shareholders coins.
Diablo predictably wins the motion against him with the help of his 2 new majority shareholders who got their shares for nothing, leaving his investors, who were the only ones to really cough up coins, completely empty handed.
So DMC gets unblocked, Obsi pays out Diablo, his majority shareholder, for one of his bonds. The same day, again inexplicably and indefensibly, Diablo spends almost every coin repurchasing his own bonds all the way up 2x his own published NAV, even though DMC is simply a holding company holding like 3 shares. Why on earth did he overpay for his own shares like that, instead of buying more of the assets he owns?
Well, now we know. Usagi got repaid for his services.
Good job robbing DMCs shareholders blind, I hope you are proud.
Im gonna call on Nefario to investigate this, too many things here dont make the slightest sense, unless you look at the outcome: good for you, good for Diablo, probably good for Obsi, HORRIBLE for DMC investors.
September 27, 2012, 08:51:56 AM
Imho, NYAN.C does not really count; it was just a gamble on Pirate and Pirate-like, ad it was lost.
As for the 'sane' part, we went from about 3300 to maybe 2500 -a 24% loss
As for the 'sane' part, we went from about 3300 to maybe 2500 -a 24% loss
I get around 2300 paper value after discounting obsiponzi by 50% and valuing DMC, BMF, MOVETO.FUND etc at closer to NAV instead of their inflated prices. That doesnt mean I expect those shares could be sold for 2300, mind you, I will post the spreadsheet later.
But making it really shows the fundamental issue with all these GLSBE assets, not just Usagi. For instance, who knew Nyan.B still had -admittedly fairly small amounts- of NCKRAZZE debt at full face value in its books? And ZIP.A. And STARFISH. And Bitcoindaytrade? All of them defaulted.
Surprised ? You thought usagi wrote them off already? Well, then you didnt do your due diligence, nor did Usagi do it for you, as he should, because they are all in MOVETO.FUND at full face value:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1152726
MOVETO.FUND supposedly trades slightly above NAV, but who in their right minds expects all these bad debts to be repayed in full, and these are 70+% of moveto's NAV!
This is just one example, GLBSE consists almost entirely of such chains, everyone invests in everyone else forward and backward, yet almost no one adds any real value that could pay for the promised and paid dividends, its only empty bubbles that plop once in a while, particularly when one scammer decides to run off with the coins and this hole chain comes crashing down, ripping off investors who didnt have the faintest idea they were exposed.
September 27, 2012, 08:18:16 AM
Imho, NYAN.C does not really count; it was just a gamble on Pirate and Pirate-like, ad it was lost.
As for the 'sane' part, we went from about 3300 to maybe 2500 -a 24% loss is not so bad when many important assets have lost much more, and many minor ones have seen panic down to satoshi bidders.
Of course, if this goes on some more weeks, then even NYAN.A will be in hot waters -and usagi's loops will only make the fall of the whole thing spectacular.
But we could also stop the fall, and even partly recover hopefully... or if not, there should be time to smell the wind again and leave ship for good. 'Some weeks' here is a long time.
As for the 'sane' part, we went from about 3300 to maybe 2500 -a 24% loss is not so bad when many important assets have lost much more, and many minor ones have seen panic down to satoshi bidders.
Of course, if this goes on some more weeks, then even NYAN.A will be in hot waters -and usagi's loops will only make the fall of the whole thing spectacular.
But we could also stop the fall, and even partly recover hopefully... or if not, there should be time to smell the wind again and leave ship for good. 'Some weeks' here is a long time.
September 27, 2012, 06:39:43 AM
Anyway, I am here to hearthfully thank the unknown investor that bought my last NYAN.B shares not much under 1BTC 
Couldnt agree more (except for the last paragraph, see below). But if you are delighted, just imagine how euphoric BMF shareholders must be that are getting out at 0.5 thanks to usagi buying them at almost 2x NAV to prop up his Nyan books.
As for Nyan.A, it appears relatively solid for now, since its essentially funded by the suckers that bought .B and .C. If you add up the NAV for the 3 bonds, there is no reason for panic yet (unless you hold B or C), however that might change quickly; Nyan.B has a NAV of around 0.7-0.8 and after it covered for Nyan.A losses it will be closer to 0.5 while .C will be worth zero as you pointed out. Once angry investors find that out and start dumping all Nyans, usagi will have to make good on his 1 BTC guarantee.
He is already illiquid by his own admission, he has spent a substantial amount of borrowed BTCs to prop up his other company valuations (with very limited success I might add), so if he would be forced to start dumping his assets, it could unravel very quickly. Usagi has a 1500 BTC liability (plus dividends) towards Nyan.A owners, I very much doubt a sale of all nyan assets would get you there, particularly since a large part of Nyans portfolio consists of other overpriced Usagi companies like BMF, or things for which there simply is no demand at all.
Another way to look at it; Nyan.A has sold 1502 BTC worth of bonds, Nyan.B 1823 and Nyan.C 3300. Total is ~6600 BTC. Roughly 6 (?) weeks later, at most 3000 BTC remains on paper, and almost certainly less than 2000 BTC is realizable. How long until the asset value falls below Nyan.A's liability? At that rate, not very long indeed.
September 27, 2012, 06:35:44 AM
Fascinating.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
You're kidding, right? We use it because it provides a service. I agree, it's very slow at times.
But not all of us can afford to pay >200 dollars for a website that could be gone in a year or two.
I'm sure you can say that your site is only for "serious investors." But if that's true, why do you come on the forum and berate nobodies? Don't you have serious investors to take care of?
~pyotr
Well, no. This is specifically what I do, talk on this forum. It's kind of a sucky job but someone has do it (apparently). Also, you might want to read this.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
In general, the fact that most assets are terrible isn't an issue for me: and the fairly irrational behaviour of most investors is an absolute positive for me. Bear in mind that I'm not buying most assets to hold - just to turnover a quick 5-10% profit on. That's harder to do somewhere that there's sensible pricing of stocks and good liquidity.
The API takes about half as long to load data as the web-interface. So far my own bot/trading interface can only download data (having issues formatting POST orders). So right now all it can do is monitor my bids/asks and warn me when a range is moving, one of my orders has been filled or my order is no longer priced in the correct spot. Once I've sorted the POST side of things I'll then be able to delegate the actual placement of orders to software, meaning it wont take much of MY time to place 5,10 or 100 orders.
When I last looked at MPex there wasn't much diversity there - the problem would become one of there not being 6 stocks worth bidding on, rather than (as it is on GLBSE) the sheer pain of actually trying to place and monitor 6 orders. FWIW I have no interest in options at the moment.
Apologies for derailing the thread - but it seemed an honest question and deserved an answer.
I see your point.
Fascinating.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
Because it is the only serious exchange available?
for money losing fools, this is correct. There are serious exchanges for people who prefer to make money, but you're not using them. You're looking at porn.
My friend, there are a number of good assets on GLBSE. The problem is that you can't find them.
PS: One of them is in my signature.
Not really. Actually, the reason you spend half your waking hours trying to sling mud is simply the fact that I called out your scam a while back. You really should be ashamed of yourself.
You can't value shares on GLBSE based on bid depth - as there's very few shares which have any signifiant bid depth at all. That doesn't necessarily reflect any lack of desire to bid for shares on GLBSE - it's (in part, maybe largely) down to a couple of major problems with GLBSE itself. Here's why:
Say I have a chunk of funds I want to invest (I mainly day-trade, rather than invest long-term on GLBSE). I look at my short-list of stocks that I'm willing to touch (majority of offerings on GLBSE I won't even buy to flip). Maybe I find 6 where I'd be happy to have someone sell into my bids.
I have X BTC available. What I'd LIKE to do is put bids on all 6 stocks for X BTC worth and take whatever gets sold to first (volume on most stocks is pretty low - so I can't be too fussy which I get unless there's a very good reason to want to favour one). Obviously if one of my orders got sold to then the others would be automatically reduced down to whatever my remaining balance could cover. But GLBSE doesn't support that (or even the cruder alternative of cancelling any bids which can no longer be covered in their entirety). That's the first problem with GLBSE.
So: my alternatives are either to bid X on one stock or to bid X/6 on all 6. I'd prefer to do the latter - but X isn't particularly massive and here the second problem with GLBSE forces me to do the first. That problem being that GLBSE appears to be run on a 10 year old computer connected over a 56k dial-up modem. Loading the market regularly takes 10-20 seconds and about 1 time in 3 it doesn't even load properly (plus after I place an order it gos back to portfolio rather than staying on market - meaning I have to go to market again to double-check my order is correctly placed relative to other orders). It's just not an efficient use of time to try to place and monitor multiple orders with a small value of X.
This means that, most of the time, the bids from me on market tend to be 1/4 - 1/6th the size they'd be if the site worked in a more reasonable fashion. It also means that there's always a bunch of stocks that I'd have bids on if it weren't such a chore to actually place them.
Unless i'm unique in this (and I KNOW I'm not as others have said pretty much the same thing) it means that the actual bids on stocks don't reflect the real funds available (and willing) to buy them. Pricing based on Asks is obviously not correct (the lowest Ask is the cheapest price someone is willing to sell for but noone is willing to buy at right now) - but trying to price based on bids on GLBSE would be far more misleading.
Say I have a chunk of funds I want to invest (I mainly day-trade, rather than invest long-term on GLBSE). I look at my short-list of stocks that I'm willing to touch (majority of offerings on GLBSE I won't even buy to flip). Maybe I find 6 where I'd be happy to have someone sell into my bids.
I have X BTC available. What I'd LIKE to do is put bids on all 6 stocks for X BTC worth and take whatever gets sold to first (volume on most stocks is pretty low - so I can't be too fussy which I get unless there's a very good reason to want to favour one). Obviously if one of my orders got sold to then the others would be automatically reduced down to whatever my remaining balance could cover. But GLBSE doesn't support that (or even the cruder alternative of cancelling any bids which can no longer be covered in their entirety). That's the first problem with GLBSE.
So: my alternatives are either to bid X on one stock or to bid X/6 on all 6. I'd prefer to do the latter - but X isn't particularly massive and here the second problem with GLBSE forces me to do the first. That problem being that GLBSE appears to be run on a 10 year old computer connected over a 56k dial-up modem. Loading the market regularly takes 10-20 seconds and about 1 time in 3 it doesn't even load properly (plus after I place an order it gos back to portfolio rather than staying on market - meaning I have to go to market again to double-check my order is correctly placed relative to other orders). It's just not an efficient use of time to try to place and monitor multiple orders with a small value of X.
This means that, most of the time, the bids from me on market tend to be 1/4 - 1/6th the size they'd be if the site worked in a more reasonable fashion. It also means that there's always a bunch of stocks that I'd have bids on if it weren't such a chore to actually place them.
Unless i'm unique in this (and I KNOW I'm not as others have said pretty much the same thing) it means that the actual bids on stocks don't reflect the real funds available (and willing) to buy them. Pricing based on Asks is obviously not correct (the lowest Ask is the cheapest price someone is willing to sell for but noone is willing to buy at right now) - but trying to price based on bids on GLBSE would be far more misleading.
Fascinating.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
Because your exchange is run by an anonymous entity and people should not get in the habit of investing in such things. Nearly all the time they turn out to be scams. Plus you also dont verify anyone who lists on your exchange either.
You're seriously saying Mircea Popescu is anonymous? That's the man's name wtf.
Have fun trying to hold some gypsy in Romania accountable.
September 27, 2012, 06:32:27 AM
I'm happy I got your attention pedophile Mircea. By now most of the people here know about your porno past, so they can prevent another pirate.
Mircea Popescu you are a proven pedophile, who runs a porno site. You have no financial education, and nobody have ever seen you.
Do you believe anybody can trust you? If yes, I have a bridge to sell you.
Mircea Popescu you are a proven pedophile, who runs a porno site. You have no financial education, and nobody have ever seen you.
Do you believe anybody can trust you? If yes, I have a bridge to sell you.
September 27, 2012, 06:22:51 AM
Fascinating.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
You're kidding, right? We use it because it provides a service. I agree, it's very slow at times.
But not all of us can afford to pay >200 dollars for a website that could be gone in a year or two.
I'm sure you can say that your site is only for "serious investors." But if that's true, why do you come on the forum and berate nobodies? Don't you have serious investors to take care of?
~pyotr
Well, no. This is specifically what I do, talk on this forum. It's kind of a sucky job but someone has do it (apparently). Also, you might want to read this.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
In general, the fact that most assets are terrible isn't an issue for me: and the fairly irrational behaviour of most investors is an absolute positive for me. Bear in mind that I'm not buying most assets to hold - just to turnover a quick 5-10% profit on. That's harder to do somewhere that there's sensible pricing of stocks and good liquidity.
The API takes about half as long to load data as the web-interface. So far my own bot/trading interface can only download data (having issues formatting POST orders). So right now all it can do is monitor my bids/asks and warn me when a range is moving, one of my orders has been filled or my order is no longer priced in the correct spot. Once I've sorted the POST side of things I'll then be able to delegate the actual placement of orders to software, meaning it wont take much of MY time to place 5,10 or 100 orders.
When I last looked at MPex there wasn't much diversity there - the problem would become one of there not being 6 stocks worth bidding on, rather than (as it is on GLBSE) the sheer pain of actually trying to place and monitor 6 orders. FWIW I have no interest in options at the moment.
Apologies for derailing the thread - but it seemed an honest question and deserved an answer.
I see your point.
Fascinating.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
Because it is the only serious exchange available?
for money losing fools, this is correct. There are serious exchanges for people who prefer to make money, but you're not using them. You're looking at porn.
My friend, there are a number of good assets on GLBSE. The problem is that you can't find them.
PS: One of them is in my signature.
Not really. Actually, the reason you spend half your waking hours trying to sling mud is simply the fact that I called out your scam a while back. You really should be ashamed of yourself.
You can't value shares on GLBSE based on bid depth - as there's very few shares which have any signifiant bid depth at all. That doesn't necessarily reflect any lack of desire to bid for shares on GLBSE - it's (in part, maybe largely) down to a couple of major problems with GLBSE itself. Here's why:
Say I have a chunk of funds I want to invest (I mainly day-trade, rather than invest long-term on GLBSE). I look at my short-list of stocks that I'm willing to touch (majority of offerings on GLBSE I won't even buy to flip). Maybe I find 6 where I'd be happy to have someone sell into my bids.
I have X BTC available. What I'd LIKE to do is put bids on all 6 stocks for X BTC worth and take whatever gets sold to first (volume on most stocks is pretty low - so I can't be too fussy which I get unless there's a very good reason to want to favour one). Obviously if one of my orders got sold to then the others would be automatically reduced down to whatever my remaining balance could cover. But GLBSE doesn't support that (or even the cruder alternative of cancelling any bids which can no longer be covered in their entirety). That's the first problem with GLBSE.
So: my alternatives are either to bid X on one stock or to bid X/6 on all 6. I'd prefer to do the latter - but X isn't particularly massive and here the second problem with GLBSE forces me to do the first. That problem being that GLBSE appears to be run on a 10 year old computer connected over a 56k dial-up modem. Loading the market regularly takes 10-20 seconds and about 1 time in 3 it doesn't even load properly (plus after I place an order it gos back to portfolio rather than staying on market - meaning I have to go to market again to double-check my order is correctly placed relative to other orders). It's just not an efficient use of time to try to place and monitor multiple orders with a small value of X.
This means that, most of the time, the bids from me on market tend to be 1/4 - 1/6th the size they'd be if the site worked in a more reasonable fashion. It also means that there's always a bunch of stocks that I'd have bids on if it weren't such a chore to actually place them.
Unless i'm unique in this (and I KNOW I'm not as others have said pretty much the same thing) it means that the actual bids on stocks don't reflect the real funds available (and willing) to buy them. Pricing based on Asks is obviously not correct (the lowest Ask is the cheapest price someone is willing to sell for but noone is willing to buy at right now) - but trying to price based on bids on GLBSE would be far more misleading.
Say I have a chunk of funds I want to invest (I mainly day-trade, rather than invest long-term on GLBSE). I look at my short-list of stocks that I'm willing to touch (majority of offerings on GLBSE I won't even buy to flip). Maybe I find 6 where I'd be happy to have someone sell into my bids.
I have X BTC available. What I'd LIKE to do is put bids on all 6 stocks for X BTC worth and take whatever gets sold to first (volume on most stocks is pretty low - so I can't be too fussy which I get unless there's a very good reason to want to favour one). Obviously if one of my orders got sold to then the others would be automatically reduced down to whatever my remaining balance could cover. But GLBSE doesn't support that (or even the cruder alternative of cancelling any bids which can no longer be covered in their entirety). That's the first problem with GLBSE.
So: my alternatives are either to bid X on one stock or to bid X/6 on all 6. I'd prefer to do the latter - but X isn't particularly massive and here the second problem with GLBSE forces me to do the first. That problem being that GLBSE appears to be run on a 10 year old computer connected over a 56k dial-up modem. Loading the market regularly takes 10-20 seconds and about 1 time in 3 it doesn't even load properly (plus after I place an order it gos back to portfolio rather than staying on market - meaning I have to go to market again to double-check my order is correctly placed relative to other orders). It's just not an efficient use of time to try to place and monitor multiple orders with a small value of X.
This means that, most of the time, the bids from me on market tend to be 1/4 - 1/6th the size they'd be if the site worked in a more reasonable fashion. It also means that there's always a bunch of stocks that I'd have bids on if it weren't such a chore to actually place them.
Unless i'm unique in this (and I KNOW I'm not as others have said pretty much the same thing) it means that the actual bids on stocks don't reflect the real funds available (and willing) to buy them. Pricing based on Asks is obviously not correct (the lowest Ask is the cheapest price someone is willing to sell for but noone is willing to buy at right now) - but trying to price based on bids on GLBSE would be far more misleading.
Fascinating.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
Because your exchange is run by an anonymous entity and people should not get in the habit of investing in such things. Nearly all the time they turn out to be scams. Plus you also dont verify anyone who lists on your exchange either.
You're seriously saying Mircea Popescu is anonymous? That's the man's name wtf.
September 27, 2012, 06:00:39 AM
Wasn't this thread about NYAN.* once, instead of MPOE and CIUCIU?
Anyway, I am here to hearthfully thank the unknown investor that bought my last NYAN.B shares not much under 1BTC
Now that I don't need to sustain the price any more, I can finally move my bids from 0.7 (the two adventitious bids a bit above will probably be gone soon too) to 0.15. Which is probably still not a bad price, after factoring out usagi's loopholes, delayed accounting, and tranferred toxic assets -and considering that with C almost gone, B carries the full risk of both itself and A. (and in fact, my bid is still 5 times the next one)
Note I am not accusing of anything, I am thanking With your level of transparency, usagi, you have set the bar low enough for careful investors to figure out what's going on, and profit plenty; while high enough for careless ones to get royally screwed in their favour (as it's almost inevitable would happen anyway -but it goes really smooth with you). Really, how can anyone believe nothing's wrong with a fund "Thinking..." about its value for almost a week now?
Oh, and I guess it's still your merit if since yesterday I am also finally out of that crazy black box that CPA is without too much loss. How happy can I be?
P.S. I still have faith enough in usagi and NYAN to consider NYAN.A one of the most sure investments out there. At the expense of NYAN.B, but c'est la vie, that's what the contract says.
Anyway, I am here to hearthfully thank the unknown investor that bought my last NYAN.B shares not much under 1BTC
Now that I don't need to sustain the price any more, I can finally move my bids from 0.7 (the two adventitious bids a bit above will probably be gone soon too) to 0.15. Which is probably still not a bad price, after factoring out usagi's loopholes, delayed accounting, and tranferred toxic assets -and considering that with C almost gone, B carries the full risk of both itself and A. (and in fact, my bid is still 5 times the next one)
Note I am not accusing of anything, I am thanking
With your level of transparency, usagi, you have set the bar low enough for careful investors to figure out what's going on, and profit plenty; while high enough for careless ones to get royally screwed in their favour (as it's almost inevitable would happen anyway -but it goes really smooth with you). Really, how can anyone believe nothing's wrong with a fund "Thinking..." about its value for almost a week now?Oh, and I guess it's still your merit if since yesterday I am also finally out of that crazy black box that CPA is without too much loss. How happy can I be?
P.S. I still have faith enough in usagi and NYAN to consider NYAN.A one of the most sure investments out there. At the expense of NYAN.B, but c'est la vie, that's what the contract says.
September 25, 2012, 08:04:53 PM
You can't value shares on GLBSE based on bid depth - as there's very few shares which have any signifiant bid depth at all. That doesn't necessarily reflect any lack of desire to bid for shares on GLBSE - it's (in part, maybe largely) down to a couple of major problems with GLBSE itself. Here's why:
Say I have a chunk of funds I want to invest (I mainly day-trade, rather than invest long-term on GLBSE). I look at my short-list of stocks that I'm willing to touch (majority of offerings on GLBSE I won't even buy to flip). Maybe I find 6 where I'd be happy to have someone sell into my bids.
I have X BTC available. What I'd LIKE to do is put bids on all 6 stocks for X BTC worth and take whatever gets sold to first (volume on most stocks is pretty low - so I can't be too fussy which I get unless there's a very good reason to want to favour one). Obviously if one of my orders got sold to then the others would be automatically reduced down to whatever my remaining balance could cover. But GLBSE doesn't support that (or even the cruder alternative of cancelling any bids which can no longer be covered in their entirety). That's the first problem with GLBSE.
So: my alternatives are either to bid X on one stock or to bid X/6 on all 6. I'd prefer to do the latter - but X isn't particularly massive and here the second problem with GLBSE forces me to do the first. That problem being that GLBSE appears to be run on a 10 year old computer connected over a 56k dial-up modem. Loading the market regularly takes 10-20 seconds and about 1 time in 3 it doesn't even load properly (plus after I place an order it gos back to portfolio rather than staying on market - meaning I have to go to market again to double-check my order is correctly placed relative to other orders). It's just not an efficient use of time to try to place and monitor multiple orders with a small value of X.
This means that, most of the time, the bids from me on market tend to be 1/4 - 1/6th the size they'd be if the site worked in a more reasonable fashion. It also means that there's always a bunch of stocks that I'd have bids on if it weren't such a chore to actually place them.
Unless i'm unique in this (and I KNOW I'm not as others have said pretty much the same thing) it means that the actual bids on stocks don't reflect the real funds available (and willing) to buy them. Pricing based on Asks is obviously not correct (the lowest Ask is the cheapest price someone is willing to sell for but noone is willing to buy at right now) - but trying to price based on bids on GLBSE would be far more misleading.
Say I have a chunk of funds I want to invest (I mainly day-trade, rather than invest long-term on GLBSE). I look at my short-list of stocks that I'm willing to touch (majority of offerings on GLBSE I won't even buy to flip). Maybe I find 6 where I'd be happy to have someone sell into my bids.
I have X BTC available. What I'd LIKE to do is put bids on all 6 stocks for X BTC worth and take whatever gets sold to first (volume on most stocks is pretty low - so I can't be too fussy which I get unless there's a very good reason to want to favour one). Obviously if one of my orders got sold to then the others would be automatically reduced down to whatever my remaining balance could cover. But GLBSE doesn't support that (or even the cruder alternative of cancelling any bids which can no longer be covered in their entirety). That's the first problem with GLBSE.
So: my alternatives are either to bid X on one stock or to bid X/6 on all 6. I'd prefer to do the latter - but X isn't particularly massive and here the second problem with GLBSE forces me to do the first. That problem being that GLBSE appears to be run on a 10 year old computer connected over a 56k dial-up modem. Loading the market regularly takes 10-20 seconds and about 1 time in 3 it doesn't even load properly (plus after I place an order it gos back to portfolio rather than staying on market - meaning I have to go to market again to double-check my order is correctly placed relative to other orders). It's just not an efficient use of time to try to place and monitor multiple orders with a small value of X.
This means that, most of the time, the bids from me on market tend to be 1/4 - 1/6th the size they'd be if the site worked in a more reasonable fashion. It also means that there's always a bunch of stocks that I'd have bids on if it weren't such a chore to actually place them.
Unless i'm unique in this (and I KNOW I'm not as others have said pretty much the same thing) it means that the actual bids on stocks don't reflect the real funds available (and willing) to buy them. Pricing based on Asks is obviously not correct (the lowest Ask is the cheapest price someone is willing to sell for but noone is willing to buy at right now) - but trying to price based on bids on GLBSE would be far more misleading.
Fascinating.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
Because your exchange is run by an anonymous entity and people should not get in the habit of investing in such things. Nearly all the time they turn out to be scams. Plus you also dont verify anyone who lists on your exchange either.
September 25, 2012, 07:49:33 PM
Fascinating.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, why are you on GLBSE? If most assets are crap, if the site itself doesn't work, if it has all these unresolved and likely unresolvable problems, why do you persist?
Because it is the only serious exchange available?
for money losing fools, this is correct. There are serious exchanges for people who prefer to make money, but you're not using them. You're looking at porn.
My friend, there are a number of good assets on GLBSE. The problem is that you can't find them.
PS: One of them is in my signature.
You cite a mining bond as a quality GLBSE asset.
* guruvan lold
I found the one asset on GLBSE I'd buy. Ain't got your name anywhere on it. Or usagi's for that matter.
usagi, we come off as assholes because we're right in exposing the scams, incompetence, and thievery on GLBSE. People who call you out are usually referred to as "assholes" because you don't like the message. You come off as one of those perpetrating one of the above. I'll leave it to the reader to decide which. Especially when you try to misdirect conversations, and avoid direct questions.
You sure lack reading skills, no wonder you can't find good assets on GLBSE!
I couldn't imagine you meant to say This https://glbse.com/asset/view/CIUCIU.BOND is a good asset on GLBSE. It's trading at 20% below IPO price, has no stated business plan on GLBSE, has no maturity, nor limit on the number of bond coupons to be issued, and thus has all the earmarks of the standard issue bitcointalk/GLBSE ponzi plan. mmmmm...no thanks. Contracts that look like that go into the "scam" pile. They completely offload all the risk to the investor, they allow the issuer to not only borrow from the investor, but profit at his expense. Again. Good assets. Apparently your reading comprehension is about on par with your financial skills.
I think you can't comprehend the liquidity crunch these days. Actually you do, but you are the pedophile Mircea Popescu shill and he told you to spread shit around in preparation of his Bitcoin scam.
I must be the most stupid scammer, as I'm fully verified by GLBSE which you and your pedophile friend will never be.
Jump to: