Topic: [GLBSE] Nyancat Financial: Your Friend for Life (see post #2 for FAQ) - page 3. (Read 17814 times)

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.

You sure lack reading skills, no wonder you can't find good assets on GLBSE!

 
You cite a mining bond as a quality GLBSE asset.
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.

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.

I might as well come clean then myself... Archive.org's record of "Adult Knotwork"

(For those who prefer to make money, see also Makemoney Knotwork.)

-MarkM-

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.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to Open Transaction. I find your work interesting and useful to the community.

If you don't think Open Transactions is serious, maybe you can help make it so?

I have been working pretty much full time on it for a year and a half or more, FellowTraveler has been working on it for much longer. So your dismissing it as not serious is a little... unexpected. Possibly a far more detailed critique would be helpful to the developers?

-MarkM-

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.

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

Deprived, have you looked at Open Transactions at all?

Maybe your insights would be useful to its developers.

Currently it allows you to place as many offers as you like that don't individually exceed your available funds, but it also does not spend time / processor-power running around checking all your offers every time one of them gets picked up on by someone; instead if someone clicks on an offer in the GUI (I am not sure offhand what the equivalent act would be in the script language) it checks whether the nym making the offer has at that instant enough funds for it. At that point it adjusts it, but I also don't know offhand if it just deletes the whole thing or adjusts it down to what they do have funds enough to cover.

This seems a bit of a compromise but there seem to be good arguments on both sides of the issue.

I you are a Windows user thus have not been able to try Open Transactions yet due to the difficulty of compiling or even installing on that platform maybe you will find it easier now as apparently the latest ready-made binary for Windows is very easy to download and run: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1216747

-MarkM-

I never said you should price them on bids or the total of the bidbook. Ive more than once said thats not an accurate reflection either because of the way GLBSE works.  I did say you should not ignore a complete lack of bids and pretend lowest ask is an accurate price.

 Now perhaps in some cases you can, eg when there is a buyback clause from a trust worthy party or perhaps even when there is no reason to assume a certain asset is going to lose value significantly and fast. But when you look at obsiponzi (not just hrpt, but ambo too), there is every reason to be worried about it. Same with for instance Nyan. No one is bidding on it, the sum of all bids is like 0.2 BTC. Now there are 1300+ NYAN shares and last I checked it traded near 1 BTC, but the underlying NAV was significantly less (even by usagi's own creative accounting). Im not saying a fair assessment of value is 0.2 BTC / 1300 shares, but if you have >1000 Nyan shares, like CPA, its equally unreasonable to value that at ~1 BTC each.

For once I'm going to post (semi) in support of usagi.  Note first that I  totally agree with you that investing in obsi was a bad move.

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. 

As your liquidity crisis continues to grow, and your ability to borrow more (and actually service more debt) shrinks, you'll see just how much this phenomenon affects you. You'll be having to sell into exceptionally pathetic bids.

I'm sure Puppet isn't the one around here needing to be banned. It would be great if all the people selling financial koolaid & snake oil would be banned. But, I don't expect that to happen any time soon. You still have time to take a few more out with you...as obsi is going to 

Im saying what I told you before obsi collapsed: if there are close to zero bids on an asset, you shouldnt pretend your asset is worth anything like lowest ask, particularly if you own a shitload of it. You called me an idiot when I pointed that out for obsi, now go eat eat crow usagi. And update your numbers FFS.

Ignore NAV at your own peril.

Yes, value and returns for .A are guaranteed, but we've seen how much that means lately. Case in point, nyan owns a whole bunch of shares in CPA which is the company thats guaranteeing the asset. Worse still, CPA owns a whole bunch of overvalued Nyan shares. Think about it; if nyan bleeds because of obsiponzi, it will erode CPA's NAV and at the same time drain liquidity from it  (which it already doesnt have). And since Nyan owns a lot of CPA, if CPA gets in trouble Nyans troubles get worse, which impact CPA again.

 In short, by investing in his own companies, usagi is in effect using leverage. It works great as long as things go up,  but if the "the wind changes direction", it wont be pretty. Usagi has been borrowing bitcoins (at almost 2% per week) to push the snowball back uphill by buying back his own assets to push the price up, but that simply isnt sustainable. We've seen how it worked out for CPA.

The same goes for BMF btw. BMF also holds Nyan shares, and Nyan.A holds a truckload of BMF shares representing almost 50% of its assets. Now go calculate BMFs current NAV, and you will see Nyan has it on its books for roughly twice its actual value.


Considering usagi is still valuing obsiponzi at almost 3x latest price and probably >20x what he can actually recover from it, I  would strongly advice you to copy paste usagi's spreadsheets in to excel and manually fill in current asset prices on GLBSE. Dont take my word for it, do it yourself, you might be in for a nasty surprise, especially if you dig a little deeper and take market depth in to account.

Because I wasn't familiar with the acronym and I figure that may be the case for others.
From Wikipedia

Edit:That being said, I'd have to agree that this is probably a CDO

Seems like its pretty much a CDO, just not implemented/explained as simply and clearly.

-MarkM-