Coin
Explanation
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 21805. (Read 26608261 times)
May 04, 2015, 07:58:02 PM
May 04, 2015, 07:54:26 PM
anyone could explain the hell is "Each GBTC share represents ownership of approximately 0.1 bitcoin" supposed to mean? is one share 1/10th of an bitcoin or not?
My understanding is that they refer to the fees that Greyscale will discount from the BTC returned if/when they redeem BIT shares.
[ Institutional funds ] would never, ever, send money to unregulated exchanges. It's simply against their basic policies. Institutional money has no mechanism of acquiring significant amount of BTC, except for the FBI auctions which is not usual way how they do business. Even if they want to buy BTC they can't, putting aside question whether they want to do that or not. That's why I've said any "good-intended" announcement of big money entering BTC which ends up being false, leaves much more damage then idiot who announced it imagined.
Can't such a fund strike a private contract with a sufficiently reliable middleman, who would buy the bitcoins on the exchanges or other places, shouldering the risks, and then sell them to the fund?
I consider the GBTC the first "crystal clear" way for someone to get BTCs and not worrying about losing their money.
Unless Greyscale loses their BTC because of hacking, accidents, embezzlement, etc.? If I recall correctly, they are not insured against those things, and refuse to be held responsible for any resulting losses.
Quote
The price will definitely find its way - thats how free market works.
My understanding is that discrepancies between the GBTC price and the market price of "raw" BTC will take many months to be equalized by arbitragers, because the BIT shares would have to be redeemed by Greyscale (at turtle speed again, perhaps?), or issued by Greyscale and then held for a year. is this correct?
May 04, 2015, 07:22:45 PM
Nobody is buying or selling actual bitcoins with gbtc. They are shares of stock. Completely separate.
Nawt liek any stalk I eva herd of.
*edited for lolspeak*
May 04, 2015, 07:20:23 PM
Nobody is buying or selling actual bitcoins with gbtc. They are shares of stock. Completely separate.
May 04, 2015, 07:14:35 PM
What does that mean, "Volx100" and then "0.01"
I'm thinking it means Vol/100 (0.01*100 = 1), but it actually says 0.01/100 = 0.0001?
I'm thinking it means Vol/100 (0.01*100 = 1), but it actually says 0.01/100 = 0.0001?
.01 * 100 = 1 share of GBTC which equals ~.1 BTC so currently the price of BTC on GBTC is $1750/BTC
That's my understanding. How many do they have to sell before they have to buy more BTC to keep the price even remotely close to the equivalent prices on the major exchanges?
May 04, 2015, 06:58:03 PM
May 04, 2015, 06:39:22 PM
Good lord. It was the first day of trading gbtc and the reasonable asks were instantly bought. Give it some time.
May 04, 2015, 06:39:02 PM
The shares I sold at $133.7 were shares I bought within my self-directed Ameritrade Roth IRA.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
This GBTC thing is such a joke. It's obvious that each of these long-announced big-things-turned-fiascoes leave a BTC in worse state then before, because of broken expectations that some serious funds can get hold of BTC without sending money to unregulated exchanges. Please, please, never again announce "Big money in BTC" before there is a real mechanism for it to reach there, you make more harm then good even if you are thinking that being positive can't do any damage. Well, it actually can when many expectations get broken again and again.
Explain to me if you are in charge of an institutional fund (e.g. endowment, pension) why on earth you would wire 20$million to bitstamp/finex/coinbase and buy bitcoins?
Have you read what I've written? That's exactly what I've said: They would never, ever, send money to unregulated exchanges. It's simply against their basic policies. Institutional money has no mechanism of acquiring significant amount of BTC, except for the FBI auctions which is not usual way how they do business. Even if they want to buy BTC they can't, putting aside question whether they want to do that or not. That's why I've said any "good-intended" announcement of big money entering BTC which ends up being false, leaves much more damage then idiot who announced it imagined.
we've known probably since late fall 2014 that only investors who had shares of GBTC for more than 12 months would be eligibile to trade them on the OTC market.
What's happened today is no surprise, there's no liquidity.
May 04, 2015, 06:38:17 PM
The shares I sold at $133.7 were shares I bought within my self-directed Ameritrade Roth IRA.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
This GBTC thing is such a joke. It's obvious that each of these long-announced big-things-turned-fiascoes leave a BTC in worse state then before, because of broken expectations that some serious funds can get hold of BTC without sending money to unregulated exchanges. Please, please, never again announce "Big money in BTC" before there is a real mechanism for it to reach there, you make more harm then good even if you are thinking that being positive can't do any damage. Well, it actually can when many expectations get broken again and again.
Explain to me if you are in charge of an institutional fund (e.g. endowment, pension) why on earth you would wire 20$million to bitstamp/finex/coinbase and buy bitcoins?
Have you read what I've written? That's exactly what I've said: They would never, ever, send money to unregulated exchanges. It's simply against their basic policies. Institutional money has no mechanism of acquiring significant amount of BTC, except for the FBI auctions which is not usual way how they do business. Even if they want to buy BTC they can't, putting aside question whether they want to do that or not. That's why I've said any "good-intended" announcement of big money entering BTC which ends up being false, leaves much more damage then idiot who announced it imagined.
Fortress Investment Group LLC(NYSE: FIG) Withdrawn 20$ million to MTgox and bought over 28K bitcoins.
No more bad excuses please! it's just that simple that no institutional fund wants this shitcoin any more.
They already know bitcoin is just a dying pyramid scheme, they will only build service to earn fees from this dying scam until it hit $0! they won't buy this shitcoin! so don't fool yourself with "wall st just hasn't found the way to get in".
Shame on you liars!
In its 2013 annual report, the 10-K filing it sends to the SEC, Fortress noted that it purchased $20 million worth of “Digital currency (Bitcoin)” in 2013. Its holdings at the end of 2013 were $16.3 million, and it recorded an unrealized loss of $3.7 million.
May 04, 2015, 06:31:57 PM
The shares I sold at $133.7 were shares I bought within my self-directed Ameritrade Roth IRA.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
This GBTC thing is such a joke. It's obvious that each of these long-announced big-things-turned-fiascoes leave a BTC in worse state then before, because of broken expectations that some serious funds can get hold of BTC without sending money to unregulated exchanges. Please, please, never again announce "Big money in BTC" before there is a real mechanism for it to reach there, you make more harm then good even if you are thinking that being positive can't do any damage. Well, it actually can when many expectations get broken again and again.
Explain to me if you are in charge of an institutional fund (e.g. endowment, pension) why on earth you would wire 20$million to bitstamp/finex/coinbase and buy bitcoins?
Have you read what I've written? That's exactly what I've said: They would never, ever, send money to unregulated exchanges. It's simply against their basic policies. Institutional money has no mechanism of acquiring significant amount of BTC, except for the FBI auctions which is not usual way how they do business. Even if they want to buy BTC they can't, putting aside question whether they want to do that or not. That's why I've said any "good-intended" announcement of big money entering BTC which ends up being false, leaves much more damage then idiot who announced it imagined.
May 04, 2015, 06:24:33 PM
The shares I sold at $133.7 were shares I bought within my self-directed Ameritrade Roth IRA.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
This GBTC thing is such a joke. It's obvious that each of these long-announced big-things-turned-fiascoes leave a BTC in worse state then before, because of broken expectations that some serious funds can get hold of BTC without sending money to unregulated exchanges. Please, please, never again announce "Big money in BTC" before there is a real mechanism for it to reach there, you make more harm then good even if you are thinking that being positive can't do any damage. Well, it actually can when many expectations get broken again and again.
Explain to me if you are in charge of an institutional fund (e.g. endowment, pension) why on earth you would wire 20$million to bitstamp/finex/coinbase and buy bitcoins?
The irony of GBTC is that there is no liquidity, which is the same exact issue that we had before GBTC, and still will have until an ETF becomes approved.
May 04, 2015, 06:22:48 PM
I wouldn't buy GBTC at 1750 per coin, but I could do 380 and 420 like some have. By the time I would cash out some of my 401k and get taxed and penalized I would end up spending more than that per BTC, so to be able to roll a bunch of my 401k into bitcoin is well worth the added cost of each share. I am planning on buying GBTC shares with 10% of my incoming 401k contributions once the ask side is built up. For every $1 I put into my 401k my company contributes $2, so I am very excited about this.
Wouldn't you be far better off making a loan to yourself from your 401k avoiding the tax/penalties and then buying Bitcoin with that for 1/2 price?
Or is that too much work and your 401k doesn't mean that much to you at this point in your life because the majority of it comes from your company & you don't need it yet?
This is the first time in my +2 years of fucking around with Bitcoin that I would not recommend it to a friend... something feels fishy.
Definitely a little fuckery in the ether.
Are we discussing the difference between personal investing or institutional investing, because I think you're getting confused about the difference here, especially on the buyside.
May 04, 2015, 06:11:48 PM
The shares I sold at $133.7 were shares I bought within my self-directed Ameritrade Roth IRA.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
This GBTC thing is such a joke. It's obvious that each of these long-announced big-things-turned-fiascoes leave a BTC in worse state then before, because of broken expectations that some serious funds can get hold of BTC without sending money to unregulated exchanges. Please, please, never again announce "Big money in BTC" before there is a real mechanism for it to reach there, you make more harm then good even if you are thinking that being positive can't do any damage. Well, it actually can when many expectations get broken again and again.
May 04, 2015, 06:08:44 PM
How do I sel my BTC there at that price?
Be an accredited investor for which you'll need to prove you have a huge amount of play money then be patient for 12 months so you can sell.
You can't 'sell your BTC there'.
You have to buy or sell shares of GBTC which you own.
(IF you are an accredited investor and own coins within the trust, then yes, you have other options available to you.)
The shares I sold at $133.7 were shares I bought within my self-directed Ameritrade Roth IRA.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
im not sure what kind of sorcery is this.
May 04, 2015, 06:05:03 PM
How do I sel my BTC there at that price?
Be an accredited investor for which you'll need to prove you have a huge amount of play money then be patient for 12 months so you can sell.
You can't 'sell your BTC there'.
You have to buy or sell shares of GBTC which you own.
(IF you are an accredited investor and own coins within the trust, then yes, you have other options available to you.)
The shares I sold at $133.7 were shares I bought within my self-directed Ameritrade Roth IRA.
You do not have to be an accredited investor to buy or sell shares of this stock, whose value is backed by the number of bitcoins it holds.
May 04, 2015, 05:57:58 PM
May 04, 2015, 05:50:39 PM
How do I sel my BTC there at that price?
Be an accredited investor for which you'll need to prove you have a huge amount of play money then be patient for 12 months so you can sell.
May 04, 2015, 05:48:08 PM
How is it $1750/BTC on that exchange?
How do I sel my BTC there at that price?
How do I sel my BTC there at that price?
May 04, 2015, 05:42:19 PM
So they really traded 75 btc today? WoW.
+wow
May 04, 2015, 05:42:02 PM
I wouldn't buy GBTC at 1750 per coin, but I could do 380 and 420 like some have. By the time I would cash out some of my 401k and get taxed and penalized I would end up spending more than that per BTC, so to be able to roll a bunch of my 401k into bitcoin is well worth the added cost of each share. I am planning on buying GBTC shares with 10% of my incoming 401k contributions once the ask side is built up. For every $1 I put into my 401k my company contributes $2, so I am very excited about this.
Wouldn't you be far better off making a loan to yourself from your 401k avoiding the tax/penalties and then buying Bitcoin with that for 1/2 price?
Or is that too much work and your 401k doesn't mean that much to you at this point in your life because the majority of it comes from your company & you don't need it yet?
This is the first time in my +2 years of fucking around with Bitcoin that I would not recommend it to a friend... something feels fishy.
Definitely a little fuckery in the ether.
Jump to: