Topic: There is a way we can trade Bitcoin without getting shut down constantly - read - page 4. (Read 20948 times)

I don't think you can starting offering all 21billion (i forgot how many zeros actually) shares right now, some of them will not have the equivalent 'coins currently; how will you deal with that? Also, is it wise to go with round bitcoins instead of using at least some of the decimal places?

Awesome!

It is already happening. You will soon be able to purchase Bitcoin through a financial instrument. I will announce it when its ready and the product is readily available to purchase online and through banks on the stock market.

Lets implement the idea in this thread ASAP. What skills do we need? How many people? How much planning? When can we start?

not sure what you mean by underlying business case? Ive sent a signifcant amount all over the world for all kinds of reasons and never had any trouble (not saying I should have been lol, just may seem suspicious I guess).

I guess its all very much a grey area...

They don't have to check if you're a criminal in any case but they do have to follow AML regulations, which usually requires banks to do background checks on the underlying business case and or parties involved with a bank transfer that looks suspicious. They usually also have to halt the transfer and report to the authorities in case their AML department has reason to doubt the legitimacy of your transaction.

if they are regulated on the stock market as long as they keep records shouldnt their responsability to vet people incase they are criminals. Isnt that the police & such forths job.

If i wanted to send 120kk to someone in japan isnt the banks job to check im a criminal. They just have to keep records incase I am lol.

The difference here might be that the company would be directly exchanging something of monetary value (the tradable bond) for bitcoins. No other bond works like that.

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but when creating the bonds, I think they'd be in the same position as MtGox and so would need to be careful about their customers above a certain level of USD.

Companys have to hold records of who owns bonds with them. They are fully disclosable to the IRS or w/e else tax service is in that country. I dont think the company would be held reposible aslongs they are following the system.

I could be wrong but given that situation any bond could be used to launder money otherwise.

What if the private person purchasing the bond is a criminal, a drug-dealer or such, using the company to launder the BTC received from illegal activities?

Wouldn't the company/CEO be held liable for aiding money laundering?

Sounds like a great idea if you can get it set up for that kind of money.

I really wish there were a co-operative of the the big BTC holders to offer financial support to projects like this with the goal of increase their own holdings. In short, I wish people would just act in their own enlightened self-interest.

I like this idea, but I have a question that I don't quite understand:

Would the price of the bond/coupon (and therefore the underlying implicit USD/EUR-BTC exchange rate) be regularly pegged to the MtGox exchange rate?  OOr does this only happen at the initial setup and we then have effectively a "new" independent exchange rate, depending on the currently trading prices of the bond/coupon on the public exchanges?

If someone wants to buy bitcoins with Visa/MC/Amex/PayPal, send them to MemoryDealers for some physical bitcoins and then have them use MtGox as a wallet.  Let them be our test pilots for how well it will work.  It very well might.

http://www.memorydealers.com

You'd really have to look into the legal requirements wherever you set this up.  In a lot of places the issuing of shares, securities and bonds to the public is highly regulated and requires authorisation by a specific government department and organisations which issue them have to pit out a prospectus and or product disclosure statement as well as submit audited account to the regulator.  There's bound to be somewhere where it's not so tightly regulated, but you'd need to find that place.

I don't think it would be that easy to outlaw trading Bitcoins for fiat.

The law surely couldn't just mention "Bitcoin". It would have to be defined what exactly Bitcoin is, without accidentally including other forms of digital goods. At the same time the law would have to be general enough to prevent Bitcoin from being modified in a way that it still works as digital cash but doesn't fall under the new legal definition anymore.

I honestly cannot think of a way to achieve that.

For example, why am I allowed to sell access codes to my online game or service, but not a Bitcoin private key? Both give me access to something of value, which can in turn be exchanged for other things or money.

Also, what exactly would be outlawed to buy/sell? The announcement of a transaction to a foreign address? A copy of an unannounced transaction? A private key printed on a paper strip? Access to a GPU cluster suitable for Bitcoin mining? What about Mt. Gox redeemable codes? What about mini private keys or passphrases for deterministic wallets? What about valid shares for a mining pool? What about GLBSE shares for a mining corporation? What about one key to an input that requires two keys to be spent? What about a link to an instawallet? What if the address of the key you bought/sold did not contain any Bitcoins at the time of purchase?

Of course, in cases like this, lawmakers tend to go after the intent behind the action instead of after the action itself. But even then Bitcoin would have to be clearly defined in legal terms without accidentally outlawing the trade with e-books, Linden-dollars or cloud computing services. Also, direct private exchanges like bitmarket.eu or bitcoin-otc would probably be not affected at all.

Can you start to imagine the implications of voiding thousands of people's investments through a regulated entity in a publicly listed financial instrument? This is unheard of historically. We have no past comparison of a stock being removed from a stock exchange, especially if its held by private investors, banks and what not.

Banning Bitcoin would bring a lot of complications if this instrument was already out. Who would pay people's investment back?

And imagine the media attention to this, do you really think they want that? This would make Bitcoin the most talked about financial tool the world has even witnessed. Hardly what "they" would like to see happening with Bitcoin.

Regardless what, I am going to go ahead with this option, it can only bring more funds into the Bitcoin economy.

Agreed but two points
1) Other that a single politician spinning there has been no effort to make bitcoin illegal (yet).
2) There is no universal "they".  Even if bitcoin becomes illegal in the US I would gladly rent out my rigs to support network in other places.

Personally I feel Bitcoin has the most value in chaotic economies (places with rampant inflation, or unstable currencies) and totalitarian regimes (where the privacy aspects have higher utility).

I hate to be a wet blanket, but if "they" wanted to stop this why couldn't "they" simply pass a law stating that it was illegal to buy or sell bitcoins?

Or "they" could impose a punitive tax on purchases or sales of bitcoins.

I suppose my point is: if "they" really want to make bitcoin illegal, then they will find a way to do it; I don't think creating bitcoin derivatives will help much on the legal front.

Nothing to add except that this could be a big boon.

Bitcoin is just another asset, and adding it there could allow big money to flow.

Now for a dissenting opinion:

I'm not a finance person so I can't really make an informed opinion, but what do you think of the above?

Glad to see someone really got it! You are correct, that is exactly what I want to archive!

Required funds is in the range of 10.000€ to 15.000€ depending on which stock exchange and how we eventually end up listing the bond/EFT's.