the name of 'bitGLD' should be reconsidered

[jsidhu]

XAUUSD is only used in bucket shop market making mt4 trading platforms and the like. We absolutely DO NOT want to follow in their footsteps and conventions.

Right, why would you want to attract $2B of forex accounts money parked in bucket shops to your platform?

Where do you get the number $2B parked in retail forex accounts? What % of them would move over just because XAUUSD was used and not bitGLD?

[bitmeat]

XAUUSD is only used in bucket shop market making mt4 trading platforms and the like. We absolutely DO NOT want to follow in their footsteps and conventions.

Right, why would you want to attract $2B of forex accounts money parked in bucket shops to your platform?

[jsidhu]

XAUUSD is only used in bucket shop market making mt4 trading platforms and the like. We absolutely DO NOT want to follow in their footsteps and conventions.

[xeroc]

In theory, all the assets are indexed by a number in addition to the ticker, so couldn't you just have the clients display a different symbol based on the localization or preference?  It would be a very simple thing to make a user-definable preference for displaying BitGLD or BitXAU, albeit probably not very high on the list of priorities for development.

I realize that the downside is the potential confusion going forward created by two tickers referring to the same asset; however, you have to weigh that against the confusion of arguably the largest market for bitGLD/XAU being initially confused by an unfamiliar ticker.

IMHO, for marketing purposes, the two symbol solution would be an acceptable tradeoff.

check this out:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=8674.0

[pariah99]

In theory, all the assets are indexed by a number in addition to the ticker, so couldn't you just have the clients display a different symbol based on the localization or preference?  It would be a very simple thing to make a user-definable preference for displaying BitGLD or BitXAU, albeit probably not very high on the list of priorities for development.

I realize that the downside is the potential confusion going forward created by two tickers referring to the same asset; however, you have to weigh that against the confusion of arguably the largest market for bitGLD/XAU being initially confused by an unfamiliar ticker.

IMHO, for marketing purposes, the two symbol solution would be an acceptable tradeoff.

[Mysto]

If that is true it would be wise to increase the limit.

Derived/pegged assets by their very nature are going to need descriptive names.

Each asset has a description that can be much longer ..

I am aware of this... but the vast majority of folks will never see the descriptions, just the asset names.

I don't think they need descriptive names per se just names that are recognized worldwide like... XAU

[oldman]

If that is true it would be wise to increase the limit.

Derived/pegged assets by their very nature are going to need descriptive names.

Each asset has a description that can be much longer ..

I am aware of this... but the vast majority of folks will never see the descriptions, just the asset names.

[xeroc]

If that is true it would be wise to increase the limit.

Derived/pegged assets by their very nature are going to need descriptive names.

Each asset has a description that can be much longer ..

[oldman]

XAU is correct, however, nearly impossible to market to average folks.

bitGOLD and bitSILVER should be implemented before a mainstream marketing push.

AFAIR there is a limit to the length of the bitasset name... and if I am not misstaken it's 6 byte .. i.e. 6 chars

If that is true it would be wise to increase the limit.

Derived/pegged assets by their very nature are going to need descriptive names.

[xeroc]

XAU is correct, however, nearly impossible to market to average folks.

bitGOLD and bitSILVER should be implemented before a mainstream marketing push.

AFAIR there is a limit to the length of the bitasset name... and if I am not misstaken it's 6 byte .. i.e. 6 chars

[nomoreheroes7]

XAU is correct, however, nearly impossible to market to average folks.

bitGOLD and bitSILVER should be implemented before a mainstream marketing push.

 

[oldman]

XAU is correct, however, nearly impossible to market to average folks.

bitGOLD and bitSILVER should be implemented before a mainstream marketing push.

[matt608]

bitXAU or bitGold I would much prefer! 

[xeroc]

middlemen and brokers are also expected! why not break with the traditions ..

or let's ask this way: why is it an INDEX after all?

[Kenof]

  for bitXAU

XAU comes from Index Aurum, it is universally excepted

[serejandmyself]

XAU is the correct symbol

[liondani]

I like bitGLD but if it change to something else I prefer bitGOLD

[johncitizen]

Bring the XAU! All assets should align with global standards

[fluxer555]

My vote is for BitXAU for sake of unambiguity. The peg's Nash Equilibrium relies on all parties having a very clear understanding of what the BitAsset is. If they aren't familiar with the XAU symbol, then they will learn quickly, and won't ever have to re-learn or make exceptions to what they know.

What if we wanted to make a BitAsset that tracks the ETF?

[mint chocolate chip]

bitGLD ftw!

[bitmeat]

In the USA we do use GLD as the symbol but seeing as bitshares is not just for people who live in the USA this makes sense.

GLD is an ETF. In finance big players usually use futures GC??? (based on the month/year/etc)

[Mysto]

In the USA we do use GLD as the symbol but seeing as bitshares is not just for people who live in the USA this makes sense.

[zhao150]

bitXAU is the best!
international forex market official used XAUUSD.
XAU is gold.
USD is U.S. dollar.

[麥可貓]

according to zhao150, who has practical experiences in foreign market, the name of gold market should be XAU or GOLD:



maybe we should keep bitGLD, which is easier to understand for us, but implement a synonym to have bitXAU market, which is actually the same of bitGLD market