Topic: ICBIT Derivatives Market (USD/BTC futures trading) - LIVE - page 25. (Read 97702 times)
All services are back online.
There is an unexpected down time for the server. I will post an announcement when it goes back online.
Yes, today indeed. We'll see ;-)
Would you post the final settlement numbers please?
I see the WTI settle price was something like $97.31 on Nymex, I didn't look up COMEX but I'm assuming they would be within pennies. So if the CLG3 "last" was 3.8709, that must mean the Mt. Gox daily weighted average price was somewhere near $25.14 today at 20:00 UTC.
Of course.
Weighted avg at MtGox was $25.13093.
Gold price was $1634.3 -> 65.0314 BTC. Traded volume was 268 contracts (eq. 26.8 tr.oz of gold)
Oil price was $97.28 -> 3.8709 BTC. Traded volume was 1513 contracts (eq. 1513 barrels of oil).
Speaking about numbers, BUH3 Open Interest is being exactly 5000 now.
Thank you and happy trading.
Yes, today indeed. We'll see ;-)
Would you post the final settlement numbers please?
I see the WTI settle price was something like $97.31 on Nymex, I didn't look up COMEX but I'm assuming they would be within pennies. So if the CLG3 "last" was 3.8709 BTC, that must mean the Mt. Gox daily weighted average price was somewhere near $25.14 today at 20:00 UTC.
Am I right that the old Gold and Oil Futures will be settled today?
In that case this will be a thrilling day, in the light of the recent price drop and rebounce on Gox right now
In that case this will be a thrilling day, in the light of the recent price drop and rebounce on Gox right now
Yes, today indeed. We'll see ;-)
Am I right that the old Gold and Oil Futures will be settled today?
In that case this will be a thrilling day, in the light of the recent price drop and rebounce on Gox right now
In that case this will be a thrilling day, in the light of the recent price drop and rebounce on Gox right now
the lending of bitfinex is cool. 120% on usd....to bad i dont trust tham 
I think it is only fair that Fireball earn some money for his efforts too. I also want to be paid for my job. 
Of course the customers will be shopping around if it gets too expensive, but right now icbit seems more attactive than bitfinex, 1broker or mpex.
Of course the customers will be shopping around if it gets too expensive, but right now icbit seems more attactive than bitfinex, 1broker or mpex.
Thanks :-)
And since you compare the three services, is there anything (service, user interface related) which is missing in ICBIT but exists in competitors implementation, and which is very useful?
so, nothing to worry -- free markets will do their job.
Just for the record: right now the level of fees on ICBIT is not much of a problem; I'd say its easier to make profit there then e.g. with day trading.
+1 to both.Just for the record: right now the level of fees on ICBIT is not much of a problem; I'd say its easier to make profit there then e.g. with day trading.
I think it is only fair that Fireball earn some money for his efforts too. I also want to be paid for my job.
Of course the customers will be shopping around if it gets too expensive, but right now icbit seems more attactive than bitfinex, 1broker or mpex.
To put this argument the other way round: If the fees would be so large that trading on ICBIT is no longer an interesting option, people will just start being reluctant to trade, the volume will decrease until either trading ceases, an competitor steps in with lower fees or Fireball "gets the message".
I think that's exactly what will happen.so, nothing to worry -- free markets will do their job.
Just for the record: right now the level of fees on ICBIT is not much of a problem; I'd say its easier to make profit there then e.g. with day trading.
To put this argument the other way round: If the fees would be so large that trading on ICBIT is no longer an interesting option, people will just start being reluctant to trade, the volume will decrease until either trading ceases, an competitor steps in with lower fees or Fireball "gets the message".
I think that's exactly what will happen.
Before anyone gets there it's the one who decided to start trading.
To put this argument the other way round: If the fees would be so large that trading on ICBIT is no longer an interesting option, people will just start being reluctant to trade, the volume will decrease until either trading ceases, an competitor steps in with lower fees or Fireball "gets the message".
Take Bitfinex as an example (somewhat a successor of Bitcoinica): There, users themselves are offering the liquidity for leverage. Some offer currently at insane rates of more than 1000% per year. But mostly traders just stay away and use the lending offers below 360% (1% a day), which allow still to open highly profitable long positions in the current bull market.
Before anyone gets there it's the one who decided to start trading. Might be too late to figure out how it really works. Like me, my friend.
You know the fee beforehand, so I really think it is unfair to call it looting.
Try to find it on the icbit.se website.
The fee is constant, and doesn't vary like it does in services using FOREX trading model with spread (which can be either narrow or wide).
Hence my question about fees on Bitcoinica.
You know the fee beforehand, so I really think it is unfair to call it looting.
Try to find it on the icbit.se website.
Bitcoinnica was a looting operation. If you justify current fees by being similar you are effectively saying that icbit.se is a looting operation too. And with such high fees it actually is.
You know the fee beforehand, so I really think it is unfair to call it looting. Bitcoinica lost all its customers' money, the customers did not know beforehand (obviously), although it looked more like incompetence than looting.
(e.g. if the contract is for 100kg of potatoes, and quoted in potatoes kg per 1 BTC, you're saying that the fee calculated in potatoes is too high, because BTC rose in value)
If the price of potatoes drop dramatically, a potato trading company would not be able to keep the same fee/markup in whatever currency they use, but would have to lower it proportionally to the dropping price.
I suppose you wouldn't see an elephant in the room as long as it represents a high fee that people need to pay you for trading.
A comment about the first comment. If the "ultimate goal is to break... bla bla bla..." so why the contract itself is calculated in USD not in BTC? If the contract was calculated in BTC the fee would not rise with the USD/BTC rate and remained steady.
Variation Margin is calculated in BTC, so you get BTC as profit, not USD. It's up to you how to use this profit - convert to USD, or buy something directly. You're not obliged to sell your profit for USD.The contract price is quoted in USD though, because USD per BTC is way more common in Bitcoin community than BTC per USD. The math is that you can convert one to another by doing 1/x operation (23.55 USD per 1 BTC equals to 0.0424628 BTC per 1 USD).
Bitcoinnica was a looting operation. If you justify current fees by being similar you are effectively saying that icbit.se is a looting operation too. And with such high fees it actually is.
The question was: "And finally, could someone tell me, what "fees" (effective) were on the infamous Bitcoinica?". Do you see any justification in it? I don't.
A comment about the first comment. If the "ultimate goal is to break... bla bla bla..." so why the contract itself is calculated in USD not in BTC? If the contract was calculated in BTC the fee would not rise with the USD/BTC rate and remained steady.
Bitcoinnica was a looting operation. If you justify current fees by being similar you are effectively saying that icbit.se is a looting operation too. And with such high fees it actually is.
Bitcoinnica was a looting operation. If you justify current fees by being similar you are effectively saying that icbit.se is a looting operation too. And with such high fees it actually is.
I think that the current trading fee is already huge (1.1% and 2.2% for opened and closed trade). It will soon be untradable if the BTC price goes higher which is rather probable.
A few comments:
- The ultimate goal is to break depends on fiat currencies, be it USD, EUR or whatever else. So recalculating a fee based on BTC/USD rate would not be really correct (e.g. if the contract is for 100kg of potatoes, and quoted in potatoes kg per 1 BTC, you're saying that the fee calculated in potatoes is too high, because BTC rose in value)
- We really avoid changing contract specification of a contract which already trades. So if BTC rises in value too much, new contract will be adjusted for that, and the fees lowered.
- These fees are not really to fill my own pocket. Fees are used to insure against non-paying users. And since all accounting is performed in Bitcoins (my dream which came to reality), I see no reason to make fees dependent on USD.
And some ideas we are considering to implement in future:
- Discounts for high volume traders.
- Discounts for liquidity providers.
And finally, could someone tell me, what "fees" (effective) were on the infamous Bitcoinica?
Jump to: