Topic: GLBSE - request for next features - page 11. (Read 27744 times)
Maybe some kind of RSS feed for each stocks new trades and new orders would be good?
Full account history as CSV now available.
QR for deposit adresses, plz :-D
an option to allow ipo owners to set up an automated sell time for the release of their bonds/shares.
Feature request: A server that works.
+1
Uptime in the last week has been positively horrible.
Yes, uptime has been terrible, it's not that it's not been up, but not able to handle the amount of traffic, this is my first experience dealing with scaling issues, I apologize for any inconvenience caused.
Well at least the userbase is growing
Feature request: A server that works.
+1
Uptime in the last week has been positively horrible.
Yes, uptime has been terrible, it's not that it's not been up, but not able to handle the amount of traffic, this is my first experience dealing with scaling issues, I apologize for any inconvenience caused.
Can we get a column on the assets page for "market capitalisation"? Calculation is {last sale price} * {total issued assets}.
So I create an asset, issue 50 million shares and buy one with a sock puppert account for 1 BTC --> capitalization of 50 million BTC..?!
I'd rather have {last sale price} * {total assets no longer in the IPO account (transferred, sold)} but this still has room for errors/problems.
Agree to have this calculation for bonds, but for a share where the owner holds shares themselves, it's good to know the value of the whole company. In your example when you see a company with a 50 million BTC market cap, you know it's overvalued. For other companies, you can at least ask whether you think it's worth its market cap.
One suggestion: Order the IPO list by date.
Can we get a column on the assets page for "market capitalisation"? Calculation is {last sale price} * {total issued assets}.
So I create an asset, issue 50 million shares and buy one with a sock puppert account for 1 BTC --> capitalization of 50 million BTC..?!
I'd rather have {last sale price} * {total assets no longer in the IPO account (transferred, sold)} but this still has room for errors/problems.
Can we get a column on the assets page for "market capitalisation"? Calculation is {last sale price} * {total issued assets}.
+1
This would be a great feature
Can we get a column on the assets page for "market capitalisation"? Calculation is {last sale price} * {total issued assets}.
Maybe someone asked for this already. On the market page can you frees the column titles row so that it is still visible when you scroll down the page.
thanks
thanks
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market like this - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/deathbylollipop-futures-stocks-bonds-ads-lollipops-79890 - so they can protect there own market. They are even looking to lend the 8BTC to registrar which isn't that bad but there trying to list a company valued at $500,000.00 and not using the funds raised on the GLBSE to buy anything of value. That could be sold to compensate shareholders in the event of them going bust.
Maybe CEO's of high Cap company's have a higher vote ratio on high Cap IPO's and CEO's of small Cap company's have a higher vote ratio on adding other small Cap IPO's. Due to each type of CEO having more experience in each type of IPO.
I want to see the GLBSE expand and into different boards/exchanges as well. Maybe like a FSTE 100, a FSTE 250, a mining only board and so on. Although it is of great concern not just to Nefario but also each listed company that fraud and bad businesses on the exchange are kept to an absolute minimal to help keep the exchange looking trustworthy for investors.
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market like this - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/deathbylollipop-futures-stocks-bonds-ads-lollipops-79890 - so they can protect there own market. They are even looking to lend the 8BTC to registrar which isn't that bad but there trying to list a company valued at $500,000.00 and not using the funds raised on the GLBSE to buy anything of value. That could be sold to compensate shareholders in the event of them going bust.
Maybe CEO's of high Cap company's have a higher vote ratio on high Cap IPO's and CEO's of small Cap company's have a higher vote ratio on adding other small Cap IPO's. Due to each type of CEO having more experience in each type of IPO.
I think the GLBSE needs a panel of existing CEO's to vote on adding new company's to the market like this - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/deathbylollipop-futures-stocks-bonds-ads-lollipops-79890 - so they can protect there own market. They are even looking to lend the 8BTC to registrar which isn't that bad but there trying to list a company valued at $500,000.00 and not using the funds raised on the GLBSE to buy anything of value. That could be sold to compensate shareholders in the event of them going bust.
great work. on glbse the new charts are much better then the ones on 2.0
They need tooltips though! It's really hard (especially on GIGAMINING currently) to figure out exact trading prices.
Another feature request (again): Trade and dividend histories in a simple CSV format. I wouldn't even care if they only get released/updated every 24 hours and the most recent data has to be pulled from twitter, but for longer term statistics these are really necessary. Of course in the end I hope you'll get an API similar to MtGox where you can for example specify to get every data until a certain point in time.
Also: Pre-set times for dividend and buyback orders + an API for them. These could also be announced in the interface ("Upcoming dividends, Upcoming forced buybacks").
from here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=76594.320
Oh it is. At least it should be.
In Dutch Auction, there is ONE SALE at ONE PRICE.
If PPT is to auction off 2000 shares, these should be sold in ONE SALE at ONE PRICE (to x customers).
So the buyers will set their max buying price and then they see how they will fill up the 2000 shares.
If it needs to be one price they will need to set it at the price of the lowest of all the x costumers.
This doesn't make any sense for them because their profit is in the extra margins people pay and by lowering this their profit will shrink.
That is true.
It is also true, however, that nowhere it is stated that the issuer of a bond or somesuch be entitled to a profit.
Neither is the bond holder, to take that argument away as well.
I was only pointing out that in an auction at a stock exchange (vola phases, open, close) and at an IPO there is only ONE PRICE which is exactly where demand and supply meet. Any economics book will show two intersecting lines with supply and demand meeting at the intersection as the OPTIMUM (ie the state of MAXIMUM EFFICIENCY). Everything else favors either side of the deal greatly.
The way this is currently handled is neither optimal (as a whole) nor does it bear resemblance to any functioning stock market behavior.
It seems similar to a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction to me...
Oh it is. At least it should be.
In Dutch Auction, there is ONE SALE at ONE PRICE.
If PPT is to auction off 2000 shares, these should be sold in ONE SALE at ONE PRICE (to x customers).
So the buyers will set their max buying price and then they see how they will fill up the 2000 shares.
If it needs to be one price they will need to set it at the price of the lowest of all the x costumers.
This doesn't make any sense for them because their profit is in the extra margins people pay and by lowering this their profit will shrink.
That is true.
It is also true, however, that nowhere it is stated that the issuer of a bond or somesuch be entitled to a profit.
Neither is the bond holder, to take that argument away as well.
I was only pointing out that in an auction at a stock exchange (vola phases, open, close) and at an IPO there is only ONE PRICE which is exactly where demand and supply meet. Any economics book will show two intersecting lines with supply and demand meeting at the intersection as the OPTIMUM (ie the state of MAXIMUM EFFICIENCY). Everything else favors either side of the deal greatly.
The way this is currently handled is neither optimal (as a whole) nor does it bear resemblance to any functioning stock market behavior.
great work. on glbse the new charts are much better then the ones on 2.0
Can't recall if it's been mentioned before, but it would be nice if you could edit orders without having to cancel and then re-enter a new order.
if by edit you mean decrease the number of shares I agree. Thats the only way you should be able to edit an order without losing your "place" timestamp. It stinks putting up a sale of 200 only to take it down to put up 100 and lose my spot as being the first sale. I guess create a "revoke/edit" button on the portfolio page next to each current sale order and buy order allowing you to decrease the number of shares your buying or selling without losing your timestamp. 
Can't recall if it's been mentioned before, but it would be nice if you could edit orders without having to cancel and then re-enter a new order.
Also, in a few places it says "See you fees here" Where "you" should be "your"
Where do you see this?
I see it here:
https://glbse.com/asset/pay/COGNITIVE
Also: "You don't own any assets,head to the market and get some."
Missing a space after the ,
Jump to: