Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 23302. (Read 26709960 times)

And pension/government checks for others.

I got $6k getting fired into BTC, a friend with $20k firing into it and one more with $10k.

Small potatoes, but it all adds up I suppose... not bad for a Monday!!

Can't wait for the new week, either... Sunday evening will be interesting, since there seems to be some selling going on for some reason. We can just hope for fresh FIAT to hit the exchanges to get the new week really going! It's the beginning of a new month soon, as well! That means paychecks coming in for some people!

If I thought that then I would have said that. But I didn't.

I could not listen to the interview to the very end.  From the part that I heard, his project is a set of bitcoin exchanges, one in each country, that allow you to do two matched trades in one operation: e.g., buy N bitcoins in Peru, with soles, and sell them in Argentina, for pesos which will be deposited into someone else's account.

One can do that now, but it would involve two independent exchanges, and the first user would have to withdraw the bitcoins from one exchange ad deposit them into the other one.  The guy's company (Bitinka, I suppose). would remove those two extra steps so that the users would not need to "touch" the bitcoins.

As the guy points out, a nice feature of that schema is that it does not require users to exchange their national currency for dollars (as they would have to if they used Bitstamp, say), which could attract the unwelcome attention of the central banks.  

That core service, by itself, would have the merit of using bitcoin as it was intended to be -- a payment medium.  Remittances via Bitinka would not be free, of course, because Bitinka would have to charge fees or profit from BTC price spreads at both ends.

However, to the users, that service would look pretty much like any Western Union or any other classic remittance service.  Since the bitcoin transfers are done inside the system, they can be lumped and deferred.  If Jose and Juan send the equivalent of 10 BTC each from P(eru) to A(rgentina), and Manuel sends the equivalent of 15 BTC from A to P, the company needs to send only 5 BTC from P to A; and may do that later, if the Argentina branch has enough reserves.

They may even manipulate the exchange rates and fees to match the flow in both directions, so that they would not even have to move any bitcoins.  Or they may use banks to exchange the currencies and move them across borders -- if, for some reason, they find that option more convenient than buying and sending bitcoins.

But if the trades are not balanced -- say, there is more value sent from P to A than the other way around -- and they do not want to use banks, then the company would have to buy bitcoins in P and sell them in A.  What is the money flow in that process?

The two prmary parties in a money transfer from P to A can be lumped together as one "family", so the sending and receiving cancel out: the "family" does not lose or gain anything, except some fees, and can be excluded from the analysis.  The remaining net money flow is: someone in A gave his money (and got some bitcoin) to someone in P (who parted with some of his bitcoin).

Thus, apart from the implied change of currencies, the situation is the same as when someone buys BTC from someone else, with dollars or any other currency.  Any profit that the seller makes comes out of the buyer's pocket.  If the seller bought for 500$ and is selling for 200$, then he is keeping 300$ of his initial 500$ loss, and passing the other 200$ to the buyer.

In summary, the matched trades that Bitinka propose to do would be proper use of bitcoin, but by themselves they would not generate much demand:  the bitcoins would be kept by Bitinka only for a few days at most.  Bitinka will be "good for bitcoin" (i.e. help push the price up) mainly if it encourages people to buy bitcoins and hold them (like that guy in A who bought the bitcoins from the company).  And you already know what I think about investing in bitcoins...

Moreover, if Bitinka is successful, it would be "stealing" remittance service customers from the local banks, by undercutting their fees.  Good luck getting bank accounts and the necessary approvals from the local governments...

CCMF

Futures back up with Bitcointalk back up

Keep telling yourself that.

I suppose you'll blame Willybot for the June 2011 and April 2013 bubbles too.

 

Dead lamb

Yeah I told you not to disappear!

But you don't fucking listen.

Fucking lamb.

Yeah yeah, very nice.
Now move this MOFO 250 wall, we've waited long enough.

People bought and sold at that price level, ergo it was a real bubble regardless of what caused it.

I'm not going to be overly shocked to see $300 before the end of the month.

I'm <3ing the Europe news as a whole.

Nah. Then the March bubble could've been explained simply by Gox, as well. But if you take a look at the volume, China was a much bigger player than Gox in the November bubble, especially compared to the March 2013 bubble!

Saving for 6mo.

I disagree. 1k was a false bubble courtesy of that clown Mark Karpeles and the WIllybot. The actual true ATH is probably $250......

i just found out today that bitcoin has a dragon that is about to be released.

bag holder  CCMF

$20 is around the corner folks, the sky is falling, sell your sheep now so you can buy them back later 

Too early. We haven't even clawed our way back to where we started the year.

Give it some time. $500 I'll start taking this rise seriously. $800 I'll consider it a rally.

When it hits 4 digits again, CCMF.