Topic: ICBIT Derivatives Market (USD/BTC futures trading) - LIVE - page 30. (Read 97654 times)
Page not found
.
The requested page "/sec/BUZ2/buz2.csv" could not be found.
Heightened security is preventing me from viewing the file.
Log of all BUZ2 trades since the very beginning till today:
http://data.icbit.se/sec/BUZ2/buz2.csv
http://data.icbit.se/sec/BUZ2/buz2.csv
You are risking your reputation!!!
I will tell everybody ( https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/100748061612454612677/ )not to use your service again, if that doesnt get solved in a fair way for the customers!
You will make plenty of Profits in Future, use that!!
I will tell everybody ( https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/100748061612454612677/ )not to use your service again, if that doesnt get solved in a fair way for the customers!
You will make plenty of Profits in Future, use that!!
Wasn't margin calls supposed to prevent this?
It is exactly for this, but for the beginning period we had it was not possible to forcefully buy 14k of BUZ2 contracts. There just were not enough sellers. And for this bad moment I listed two solutions above.
You made more than 200btc profit, you may invest some of that 
Wasn't margin calls supposed to prevent this?
crap :/
Trading will be stopped up to an hour after today's 20:00 UTC clearing.
About debts problem:
we had a long discussion with Tycho and there are two ways to solve problem of debt, when there is a customer who opened a position, market moved against her, and there is a lack of liquidity (you can still see huge BUZ2 buy "wall" at ~12 which is a liquidation of debtors' positions, there is no such liquidity on the market to forcefully close his positions).
To fix such situation there are two ways:
1. Profit capping. This solution will be applied to BUZ2 this time and will not be used again for any other futures. In simple words, if you made profit buying/selling/leaving BUZ2 contract for settlement, your profit will be reduced, but you still get a profit, as much as counterparties could pay.
However, Tycho said its inacceptable for further ICBIT development.
2. Mutually closing positions of debtor against equally distributed counter-positions holders. In simple words, this means if the market does not have enough liquidity to close debtor's position, and you hold profitable open position, your position will be partially closed (at a rate which still brings you profit).
Soon after BUZ2 setllement I will open up a separate thread for arbitraging strategies discussion with arbitrage bots samples source code provided, because ideally we need to solve the problem of liquidity so that neither points 1 or 2 above would be needed at all.
About debts problem:
we had a long discussion with Tycho and there are two ways to solve problem of debt, when there is a customer who opened a position, market moved against her, and there is a lack of liquidity (you can still see huge BUZ2 buy "wall" at ~12 which is a liquidation of debtors' positions, there is no such liquidity on the market to forcefully close his positions).
To fix such situation there are two ways:
1. Profit capping. This solution will be applied to BUZ2 this time and will not be used again for any other futures. In simple words, if you made profit buying/selling/leaving BUZ2 contract for settlement, your profit will be reduced, but you still get a profit, as much as counterparties could pay.
However, Tycho said its inacceptable for further ICBIT development.
2. Mutually closing positions of debtor against equally distributed counter-positions holders. In simple words, this means if the market does not have enough liquidity to close debtor's position, and you hold profitable open position, your position will be partially closed (at a rate which still brings you profit).
Soon after BUZ2 setllement I will open up a separate thread for arbitraging strategies discussion with arbitrage bots samples source code provided, because ideally we need to solve the problem of liquidity so that neither points 1 or 2 above would be needed at all.
For the current month these considerations are moot. Your site currently has unsettled open positions, which you are to satisfy in full. For the future you're welcome to figure out whatever.
Trading will be stopped up to an hour after today's 20:00 UTC clearing.
Lets's hope all goes well.... this is a big moment for this young platform. Some of us had the opportunity to watch it grow from the first public releases into a widely used trading platform 
Trading will be stopped up to an hour after today's 20:00 UTC clearing.
About debts problem:
we had a long discussion with Tycho and there are two ways to solve problem of debt, when there is a customer who opened a position, market moved against her, and there is a lack of liquidity (you can still see huge BUZ2 buy "wall" at ~12 which is a liquidation of debtors' positions, there is no such liquidity on the market to forcefully close his positions).
To fix such situation there are two ways:
1. Profit capping. In simple words, if you made profit buying/selling/leaving contract for settlement, your profit will be reduced, but you still get a profit, as much as counterparties could pay.
However, Tycho said its inacceptable and this option will not be used.
2. Mutually closing positions of debtor against equally distributed counter-positions holders. In simple words, this means if the market does not have enough liquidity to close debtor's position, and you hold profitable open position, your position will be partially closed (at a rate which still brings you profit). This is what's going to be used.
Soon after BUZ2 setllement I will open up a separate thread for arbitraging strategies discussion with arbitrage bots samples source code provided, because ideally we need to solve the problem of liquidity so that neither points 1 or 2 above would be needed at all.
About debts problem:
we had a long discussion with Tycho and there are two ways to solve problem of debt, when there is a customer who opened a position, market moved against her, and there is a lack of liquidity (you can still see huge BUZ2 buy "wall" at ~12 which is a liquidation of debtors' positions, there is no such liquidity on the market to forcefully close his positions).
To fix such situation there are two ways:
1. Profit capping. In simple words, if you made profit buying/selling/leaving contract for settlement, your profit will be reduced, but you still get a profit, as much as counterparties could pay.
However, Tycho said its inacceptable and this option will not be used.
2. Mutually closing positions of debtor against equally distributed counter-positions holders. In simple words, this means if the market does not have enough liquidity to close debtor's position, and you hold profitable open position, your position will be partially closed (at a rate which still brings you profit). This is what's going to be used.
Soon after BUZ2 setllement I will open up a separate thread for arbitraging strategies discussion with arbitrage bots samples source code provided, because ideally we need to solve the problem of liquidity so that neither points 1 or 2 above would be needed at all.
Thats not acceptable too. It should be announced befor the Future is started!
"well before teh contract's settlement date" == contract launch day, maybe :-)Seriously speaking, there is no need to introduce the settlement fees in ICBIT now.
Thats not acceptable too. It should be announced befor the Future is started!
Is the settlement for free? Or do we have to pay 0.005 too?
No fees for BUZ2 settlement, so it'll be free.Is the settlement for free? Or do we have to pay 0.005 too?
No fees for BUZ2 settlement, so it'll be free.Is the settlement for free? Or do we have to pay 0.005 too?
No fees for BUZ2 settlement, so it'll be free.
Is the settlement for free? Or do we have to pay 0.005 too?
yes. they're incorrect on the website.
Ouch, copypasta :-). Fixed already, thanks. The equations for both are VM = (1/PriceClose - 1/PriceOpen) * W/R;
Shouldn't that be VM = (PriceClose - PriceOpen) * W/R; ?
Since the prices are in BTC. Obviously, the BTC/USD rate is indirectly factored into these rates "Oil/BTC" or "Gold/BTC" but that's another story
yes. they're incorrect on the website.
The equations for both are VM = (1/PriceClose - 1/PriceOpen) * W/R;
Shouldn't that be VM = (PriceClose - PriceOpen) * W/R; ?
Since the prices are in BTC. Obviously, the BTC/USD rate is indirectly factored into these rates "Oil/BTC" or "Gold/BTC" but that's another story
Jump to: