Not everyone is selling at a loss

[Volker]

Guys, I believe Volker means to buy borrow bitUSD to buy bitBTC, using the bought bitBTC as collateral, i.e. trading on margin as at bitfinex. e.g. Have $100, borrow $300, buy $400 of bitBTC, $400 of bitBTC serves as collateral on the $300 borrowing.

Yes.

[starspirit]

Guys, I believe Volker means to buy borrow bitUSD to buy bitBTC, using the bought bitBTC as collateral, i.e. trading on margin as at bitfinex. e.g. Have $100, borrow $300, buy $400 of bitBTC, $400 of bitBTC serves as collateral on the $300 borrowing.

[arhag]

The system would automatically liquidate my position if it fell below a certain level where I wouldn't be able to pay my lender back. It is what Bitfinex does.

Right, that is the margin trading that you are asking for. I agree we should have that. It is (almost) as simple as taking the current BitAsset system, tweaking the margin limit from its current 200% (actually I think it is still technically 150%) to any percentage greater than 100% defined by the BitAsset creator, not putting any initial collateral requirements on shorting BitAssets, and instead of having the short expire 30 days after it is created, all shorts and corresponding BitAssets created between time (T0 + k*T) and time (T0 + (k+1)*T) should expire at time (T0 + (k+1)*T) for all non-negative integers k, where T0 is the time the BitAsset was created and T is parameter defined by the BitAsset creator at the time the BitAsset is created.

But in that case you wouldn't "borrow BitUSD with BitUSD as collateral", you would borrow one asset type with another asset type as collateral. For example, you borrow BitUSD with BTS as collateral. It wouldn't make sense to borrow asset A with asset A as collateral. Since the collateral amount would have to be greater than the debt (otherwise it would automatically be margin called and liquidated) it means the person putting up the collateral already has enough of the asset borrowed to not need to borrow it. And since they are the same asset, the collateral provider doesn't get to potentially profit from any price changes like they could if the asset borrowed was different than the collateral asset.

[Volker]

Today I have zero use for BitShares. Let me lend bitUSD to traders on bitshares at 20% annually and I will put $20,000 into bitUSD tomorrow. Let me borrow bitUSD against my bitUSD collateral to buy bitBTC and I will stop using Bitfinex tomorrow.

I don't understand. You want to borrow BitUSD on a BitUSD collateral? How does that make sense?

Are you asking to borrow money from the blockchain that is not more than 100% collateralized? That's a big no no. The blockchain has no ability to force you to pay. The blockchain cannot sue you in court if you refuse to pay your debt. The only thing a blockchain can do is seize the digital assets on the blockchain that you lock up as collateral to back your debt.

Similarly, you can lend BitUSD to other people who do not collateralize their loans (I am not talking about margin trading which is possible with simple tweaks to the BitAsset rules) but when your counterparty is an anonymous person, there isn't much you can do if they refuse to pay the debt. Who are you going to sue? The most you would be able to rely on is hurting the reputation of their pseudonymous identity. No big deal, they just make another one. Until we have identity verification on the blockchain, uncollateralized lending is not interesting.

The system would automatically liquidate my position if it fell below a certain level where I wouldn't be able to pay my lender back. It is what Bitfinex does.

[arhag]

Today I have zero use for BitShares. Let me lend bitUSD to traders on bitshares at 20% annually and I will put $20,000 into bitUSD tomorrow. Let me borrow bitUSD against my bitUSD collateral to buy bitBTC and I will stop using Bitfinex tomorrow.

I don't understand. You want to borrow BitUSD on a BitUSD collateral? How does that make sense?

Are you asking to borrow money from the blockchain that is not more than 100% collateralized? That's a big no no. The blockchain has no ability to force you to pay. The blockchain cannot sue you in court if you refuse to pay your debt. The only thing a blockchain can do is seize the digital assets on the blockchain that you lock up as collateral to back your debt.

Similarly, you can lend BitUSD to other people who do not collateralize their loans (I am not talking about margin trading which is possible with simple tweaks to the BitAsset rules) but when your counterparty is an anonymous person, there isn't much you can do if they refuse to pay the debt. Who are you going to sue? The most you would be able to rely on is hurting the reputation of their pseudonymous identity. No big deal, they just make another one. Until we have identity verification on the blockchain, uncollateralized lending is not interesting.

[oldman]

When I first started looking at BitShares, the delegate system struck me as both genius and poorly implemented. Proof-of-work mining is a waste, but so is DPOS if there's no mechanism for tracking delegate performance. Yunbi was supposedly working on a wallet and then it turns out that they weren't working on anything at all. This sort of inaction should be detected and dealt with within 1 week's time. It shouldn't take months to realize that the system is paying two 100% delegates for nothing. There's very little demand for bitUSD or any BitShares services right now, so it seems silly to counter with "inflation is low much lower than bitcoin/litecoin/etc." Any inflation hurts when demand is near zero. BitShares price is a simple function of supply vs. demand. bitUSD is not very useful and using it to buy alpaca socks without volatility is not a killer app. Make BitShares the ultimate trading platform by adding margin long trading, lending markets and more bitAssets and there will be millions of dollars worth of daily trade in
bitCNY:________
bitBTC: ________
bitUSD:________
and BTS:________ trading pairs.

Today I have zero use for BitShares. Let me lend bitUSD to traders on bitshares at 20% annually and I will put $20,000 into bitUSD tomorrow. Let me borrow bitUSD against my bitUSD collateral to buy bitBTC and I will stop using Bitfinex tomorrow.

[cube]

Anyway at exactly 0 adoption... 800K new BTS coming to existence every day having exactly no new buyers  might be a very small percentage of some number but still remain 800K new BTS every morning ready to be dumped...

PS
I do not get to whom you think you are guys selling this crap, guys. New comers? Sure, all they need is to be fed cooked numbers....

800k each day is huge.  BTS needs to survive this onslaught till the end of the 2-year vest.

The vesting shares are far bigger and are murdering the price.  Especially because most of it went to people who are pissed off at Bitshares, like the DNS buyers who got screwed. 

Yes. Lesson learnt.  Don't screw people.  If you do, they will come back to haunt you.

[Volker]

When I first started looking at BitShares, the delegate system struck me as both genius and poorly implemented. Proof-of-work mining is a waste, but so is DPOS if there's no mechanism for tracking delegate performance. Yunbi was supposedly working on a wallet and then it turns out that they weren't working on anything at all. This sort of inaction should be detected and dealt with within 1 week's time. It shouldn't take months to realize that the system is paying two 100% delegates for nothing. There's very little demand for bitUSD or any BitShares services right now, so it seems silly to counter with "inflation is low much lower than bitcoin/litecoin/etc." Any inflation hurts when demand is near zero. BitShares price is a simple function of supply vs. demand. bitUSD is not very useful and using it to buy alpaca socks without volatility is not a killer app. Make BitShares the ultimate trading platform by adding margin long trading, lending markets and more bitAssets and there will be millions of dollars worth of daily trade in
bitCNY:________
bitBTC: ________
bitUSD:________
and BTS:________ trading pairs.

Today I have zero use for BitShares. Let me lend bitUSD to traders on bitshares at 20% annually and I will put $20,000 into bitUSD tomorrow. Let me borrow bitUSD against my bitUSD collateral to buy bitBTC and I will stop using Bitfinex tomorrow.

[Frodo]

Dilution is massively overrated by most people. Mostly irrational fear. Let's look at the numbers for a second here:

Current annualized inflation is about 1.451%. At a market cap of 16 million that amounts to ~ $232k worth of BTS each year. That's merely ~ $636 daily. (Assuming that every delegate immediately sells all BTS.)

Now let's take a look at cmc. Currently we have 24h volume of over $40k. And that is on the low side, we often have $100k+. At $40k daily volume about 1.59% of volume could be caused by delegates selling off BTS. At $100k volume just 0.636%.


I hope people stop blaming dilution and the merger for everything that isn't going according to plan.

I see... 'feed them cake' logic....

Anyway at exactly 0 adoption... 800K new BTS coming to existence every day having exactly no new buyers  might be a very small percentage of some number but still remain 800K new BTS every morning ready to be dumped...

PS
I do not get to whom you think you are guys selling this crap, guys. New comers? Sure, all they need is to be fed cooked numbers....

Speaking of cooked numbers, it is more like 120k BTS per day we are talking about, not 800k.

But I guess that doesn't matter to you anyway. Just some stupid numbers, have nothing to say.

TonyK was right about the number .....
120K is just the delegate part ...
the rest is from the unlock balance from the PTS/DNS/VOTE/AGS allocation which was vest in for 2 years in a liner manner .

Ah yes, I forgot about those. I think OP refered just to delegate pay though.
And we can only speculate how much of these are actually getting sold regularly.

[oldman]

Dilution is massively overrated by most people. Mostly irrational fear. Let's look at the numbers for a second here:

Current annualized inflation is about 1.451%. At a market cap of 16 million that amounts to ~ $232k worth of BTS each year. That's merely ~ $636 daily. (Assuming that every delegate immediately sells all BTS.)

Now let's take a look at cmc. Currently we have 24h volume of over $40k. And that is on the low side, we often have $100k+. At $40k daily volume about 1.59% of volume could be caused by delegates selling off BTS. At $100k volume just 0.636%.


I hope people stop blaming dilution and the merger for everything that isn't going according to plan.

I see... 'feed them cake' logic....

Anyway at exactly 0 adoption... 800K new BTS coming to existence every day having exactly no new buyers  might be a very small percentage of some number but still remain 800K new BTS every morning ready to be dumped...

PS
I do not get to whom you think you are guys selling this crap, guys. New comers? Sure, all they need is to be fed cooked numbers....

Speaking of cooked numbers, it is more like 120k BTS per day we are talking about, not 800k.

But I guess that doesn't matter to you anyway. Just some stupid numbers, have nothing to say.

TonyK was right about the number .....
120K is just the delegate part ...
the rest is from the unlock balance from the PTS/DNS/VOTE/AGS allocation which was vest in for 2 years in a liner manner .

The delegate pay isnt a big deal.

The vesting shares are far bigger and are murdering the price.  Especially because most of it went to people who are pissed off at Bitshares, like the DNS buyers who got screwed.  Give a bunch of free shares of your crypto to the people that hate you, great strategy!  I wonder why the price is going down?

Every share sold is bought...

[Ander]

Dilution is massively overrated by most people. Mostly irrational fear. Let's look at the numbers for a second here:

Current annualized inflation is about 1.451%. At a market cap of 16 million that amounts to ~ $232k worth of BTS each year. That's merely ~ $636 daily. (Assuming that every delegate immediately sells all BTS.)

Now let's take a look at cmc. Currently we have 24h volume of over $40k. And that is on the low side, we often have $100k+. At $40k daily volume about 1.59% of volume could be caused by delegates selling off BTS. At $100k volume just 0.636%.


I hope people stop blaming dilution and the merger for everything that isn't going according to plan.

I see... 'feed them cake' logic....

Anyway at exactly 0 adoption... 800K new BTS coming to existence every day having exactly no new buyers  might be a very small percentage of some number but still remain 800K new BTS every morning ready to be dumped...

PS
I do not get to whom you think you are guys selling this crap, guys. New comers? Sure, all they need is to be fed cooked numbers....

Speaking of cooked numbers, it is more like 120k BTS per day we are talking about, not 800k.

But I guess that doesn't matter to you anyway. Just some stupid numbers, have nothing to say.

TonyK was right about the number .....
120K is just the delegate part ...
the rest is from the unlock balance from the PTS/DNS/VOTE/AGS allocation which was vest in for 2 years in a liner manner .

The delegate pay isnt a big deal.

The vesting shares are far bigger and are murdering the price.  Especially because most of it went to people who are pissed off at Bitshares, like the DNS buyers who got screwed.  Give a bunch of free shares of your crypto to the people that hate you, great strategy!  I wonder why the price is going down?

[CalabiYau]

I am sure Dan alone could pretty much name his price and move to work with just about any company interested in Blockchain tech for a very very handsome sum.  It literally blows my mind that people actually complain about paying the dev team when they are basically working for free when all is said and done. 

Can't give enough respect and they deserve as much as we can give imho...

Fully agree 

[btswildpig]

Dilution is massively overrated by most people. Mostly irrational fear. Let's look at the numbers for a second here:

Current annualized inflation is about 1.451%. At a market cap of 16 million that amounts to ~ $232k worth of BTS each year. That's merely ~ $636 daily. (Assuming that every delegate immediately sells all BTS.)

Now let's take a look at cmc. Currently we have 24h volume of over $40k. And that is on the low side, we often have $100k+. At $40k daily volume about 1.59% of volume could be caused by delegates selling off BTS. At $100k volume just 0.636%.


I hope people stop blaming dilution and the merger for everything that isn't going according to plan.

I see... 'feed them cake' logic....

Anyway at exactly 0 adoption... 800K new BTS coming to existence every day having exactly no new buyers  might be a very small percentage of some number but still remain 800K new BTS every morning ready to be dumped...

PS
I do not get to whom you think you are guys selling this crap, guys. New comers? Sure, all they need is to be fed cooked numbers....

Speaking of cooked numbers, it is more like 120k BTS per day we are talking about, not 800k.

But I guess that doesn't matter to you anyway. Just some stupid numbers, have nothing to say.

TonyK was right about the number .....
120K is just the delegate part ...
the rest is from the unlock balance from the PTS/DNS/VOTE/AGS allocation which was vest in for 2 years in a liner manner .

[Frodo]

Dilution is massively overrated by most people. Mostly irrational fear. Let's look at the numbers for a second here:

Current annualized inflation is about 1.451%. At a market cap of 16 million that amounts to ~ $232k worth of BTS each year. That's merely ~ $636 daily. (Assuming that every delegate immediately sells all BTS.)

Now let's take a look at cmc. Currently we have 24h volume of over $40k. And that is on the low side, we often have $100k+. At $40k daily volume about 1.59% of volume could be caused by delegates selling off BTS. At $100k volume just 0.636%.


I hope people stop blaming dilution and the merger for everything that isn't going according to plan.

I see... 'feed them cake' logic....

Anyway at exactly 0 adoption... 800K new BTS coming to existence every day having exactly no new buyers  might be a very small percentage of some number but still remain 800K new BTS every morning ready to be dumped...

PS
I do not get to whom you think you are guys selling this crap, guys. New comers? Sure, all they need is to be fed cooked numbers....

Speaking of cooked numbers, it is more like 120k BTS per day we are talking about, not 800k.

But I guess that doesn't matter to you anyway. Just some stupid numbers, have nothing to say.

EDIT: You are right, if you count vesting balances.

[btswildpig]

Dilution is massively overrated by most people. Mostly irrational fear. Let's look at the numbers for a second here:

Current annualized inflation is about 1.451%. At a market cap of 16 million that amounts to ~ $232k worth of BTS each year. That's merely ~ $636 daily. (Assuming that every delegate immediately sells all BTS.)

Now let's take a look at cmc. Currently we have 24h volume of over $40k. And that is on the low side, we often have $100k+. At $40k daily volume about 1.59% of volume could be caused by delegates selling off BTS. At $100k volume just 0.636%.


I hope people stop blaming dilution and the merger for everything that isn't going according to plan.

I see... 'feed them cake' logic....

Anyway at exactly 0 adoption... 800K new BTS coming to existence every day having exactly no new buyers  might be a very small percentage of some number but still remain 800K new BTS every morning ready to be dumped...

Actually .... There are new buyers these days . Several people I knew who were bashing BitShares for nearly half a year suddenly saying good things about BitShares on social media ......  I bet they have bought in ....