http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/22/Use-Gold-and-Silver-with-BitShares-to-bypass-Fiat-Regulations/
He charged just 1% transaction fee with a 50 cent cap.
QuoteHe charged just 1% transaction fee with a 50 cent cap.
Who is "he"?
QuoteHe charged just 1% transaction fee with a 50 cent cap.
Who is "he"?
http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/22/Use-Gold-and-Silver-with-BitShares-to-bypass-Fiat-Regulations/
QuoteHe charged just 1% transaction fee with a 50 cent cap.
Who is "he"?
e-gold was founded by oncologist Douglas Jackson[5] and attorney Barry Downey in 1996.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-gold
QuoteHe charged just 1% transaction fee with a 50 cent cap.
Who is "he"?
e-gold was founded by oncologist Douglas Jackson[5] and attorney Barry Downey in 1996.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-gold
If there existed $85 million dollars of BitGold within the BitShares ecosystem, then it would have a total collateral worth at least $255 million and would likely represent less than 10% of the BitShares supply (because not everyone would be willing to short) and because people would likely have an equal amount of value held in BitUSD, BitSilver, and BitCNY. In any event, we can conclude that if BitShares can gain the same adoption for BitGold that e-gold managed years ago then it would have a market cap of over $2.5 billion dollars and a price of $1 per BTS.
BitShares delegates should heavily consider whether or not their price feeds are reflective of the true price of 1 oz of gold for immediate delivery and consider making adjustments to the spot price to account for the real world premiums that exist.
QuoteHe charged just 1% transaction fee with a 50 cent cap.
Who is "he"?
e-gold was founded by oncologist Douglas Jackson[5] and attorney Barry Downey in 1996.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-gold
He was a good guy. I had a little left in there and I didn't try to claim it, even though he spent years trying to track down all the holders after the Feds closed him down.
P.S. Great blog post. Lots to think about.
+5% +5% Great blog.
I'm not sure of the merits of pricing in 1oz coins.
People expect to pay a premium the smaller the size of physical you want. So I would stick to the global market price per ounce & just charge a % on that.
The Shanghai Gold Exchange has a high delivery rate & go as low as 1kg bars I think.
Exchanges like them will take over the pricing mechanism in the event Comex and others default.
(Edit: Just saw above, yeah 1:1 +5% would be good, if it was possible, but whatever it is, is probably fine. I think people are more comfortable with the widely quoted price of silver per ounce. A new system with a new price system would be a hard sell I think.)
Why not bitGold at spot, and then have other assets like bitGoldMaple and bitGoldKruger, etc? They all have different values. It costs a lot more to mint 10 1 ounce mapleleafs than it costs to make a generic 10 oz bar.
It's a nice idea, but I think it makes more problems than it solves.
How are we supposed to get a reliable feed.
Shop a charges a fee of 10 usd
Shop b charges 30 usd.
Take the average?
And with that said, if I wanted to get a 100 USD bill here in Europe. I have to pay a fee too.
Should those be calculated in BitUSD?
+5% +5% Great blog.
I'm not sure of the merits of pricing in 1oz coins.
People expect to pay a premium the smaller the size of physical you want. So I would stick to the global market price per ounce & just charge a % on that.
The Shanghai Gold Exchange has a high delivery rate & go as low as 1kg bars I think.
Exchanges like them will take over the pricing mechanism in the event Comex and others default.
(Edit: Just saw above, yeah 1:1 +5% would be good, if it was possible, but whatever it is, is probably fine. I think people are more comfortable with the widely quoted price of silver per ounce. A new system with a new price system would be a hard sell I think.)
Unfortunately that widely quoted price is highly manipulated. For every ounce of silver there are nearly 100 ounces of paper silver driving the supply/demand equilibrium way down. We need to decouple from that in order to be of any interest to silver bugs.
Why not bitGold at spot, and then have other assets like bitGoldMaple and bitGoldKruger, etc? They all have different values. It costs a lot more to mint 10 1 ounce mapleleafs than it costs to make a generic 10 oz bar.
I think this is a great idea. They could be 'SubAssets' which are based on the price feed, but trade at a percentage offset. The offset would need to be set by Delegates in order for this to work correctly.
Delegates could cooperate and include SubAssets in their price feeds, and as long as 51 delegates have SubAssets of the same name, they qualify to be included in the marketplace.
This could account for the different mints, but also may be a path to decoupling paper/physical while still serving both markets.
+5% +5% Great blog.
I'm not sure of the merits of pricing in 1oz coins.
People expect to pay a premium the smaller the size of physical you want. So I would stick to the global market price per ounce & just charge a % on that.
The Shanghai Gold Exchange has a high delivery rate & go as low as 1kg bars I think.
Exchanges like them will take over the pricing mechanism in the event Comex and others default.
(Edit: Just saw above, yeah 1:1 +5% would be good, if it was possible, but whatever it is, is probably fine. I think people are more comfortable with the widely quoted price of silver per ounce. A new system with a new price system would be a hard sell I think.)
Unfortunately that widely quoted price is highly manipulated. For every ounce of silver there are nearly 100 ounces of paper silver driving the supply/demand equilibrium way down. We need to decouple from that in order to be of any interest to silver bugs.
Unfortunately that widely quoted price is highly manipulated. For every ounce of silver there are nearly 100 ounces of paper silver driving the supply/demand equilibrium way down. We need to decouple from that in order to be of any interest to silver bugs.
I'm aware how manipulated the price is, I expect the paper price to ultimately decouple and our delegates will have to be on top of that transition, which will probably just involve switching price feeds to Asia and places like the SGE I mentioned.
Tracking the global average price of a 1oz physical coin independently is tough. The reason I'm interested though is that there's a great marketing angle here, I'm not sure anyone else does this. I'm pretty sure we'd have to have two markets though. BitSilver & BitSilverPhyzz1oz.
Also even if the price wasn't manipulated there's stil just a natural huge deviation between the price of silver and the price of a small 1oz coin.
Purchasing a 5kg Bar of silver would work out at about $20 per ounce but buying a solitary silver eagle might cost $25 an ounce. (So trying to price in 1oz is very deceptive and is more production cost related & would result in the overpricing of gold & silver.)Why not bitGold at spot, and then have other assets like bitGoldMaple and bitGoldKruger, etc? They all have different values. It costs a lot more to mint 10 1 ounce mapleleafs than it costs to make a generic 10 oz bar.
I think this is a great idea. They could be 'SubAssets' which are based on the price feed, but trade at a percentage offset. The offset would need to be set by Delegates in order for this to work correctly.
Delegates could cooperate and include SubAssets in their price feeds, and as long as 51 delegates have SubAssets of the same name, they qualify to be included in the marketplace.
This could account for the different mints, but also may be a path to decoupling paper/physical while still serving both markets.
Yeah, maybe 1 sub-asset market that tried to maintain a generic BitGold & Silver 1oz phyzz price would be interesting.
Unfortunately that widely quoted price is highly manipulated. For every ounce of silver there are nearly 100 ounces of paper silver driving the supply/demand equilibrium way down. We need to decouple from that in order to be of any interest to silver bugs.
I'm aware how manipulated the price is, I expect the paper price to ultimately decouple and our delegates will have to be on top of that transition, which will probably just involve switching price feeds to Asia and places like the SGE I mentioned.
Tracking the global average price of a 1oz physical coin independently is tough. The reason I'm interested though is that there's a great marketing angle here, I'm not sure anyone else does this. I'm pretty sure we'd have to have two markets though. BitSilver & BitSilverPhyzz1oz.
Also even if the price wasn't manipulated there's stil just a natural huge deviation between the price of silver and the price of a small 1oz coin.
Purchasing a 5kg Bar of silver would work out at about $20 per ounce but buying a solitary silver eagle might cost $25 an ounce. (So trying to price in 1oz is very deceptive and is more production cost related & would result in the overpricing of gold & silver.)Why not bitGold at spot, and then have other assets like bitGoldMaple and bitGoldKruger, etc? They all have different values. It costs a lot more to mint 10 1 ounce mapleleafs than it costs to make a generic 10 oz bar.
I think this is a great idea. They could be 'SubAssets' which are based on the price feed, but trade at a percentage offset. The offset would need to be set by Delegates in order for this to work correctly.
Delegates could cooperate and include SubAssets in their price feeds, and as long as 51 delegates have SubAssets of the same name, they qualify to be included in the marketplace.
This could account for the different mints, but also may be a path to decoupling paper/physical while still serving both markets.
Yeah, maybe 1 sub-asset market that tried to maintain a generic BitGold & Silver 1oz phyzz price would be interesting.
If I were going to try it (and I just might) I would want to pick the most commonly traded and most recognizable form of silver I could find. There are about a half dozen good candidates, but to me the US Silver Eagle is as good as any.
So I like the idea of a sub-asset called BitSilverEagle.
It should be easy enough to establish the peg based on any five of the top ten dealers - selected because they have the same way of handling shipping and fees perhaps.
I would simply define the peg to be the average of a basket of coins from these dealers. This would be easy for delegates to compute and easy to audit by everyone. No need to argue about what the other dealers are doing, the Big Five are already dynamically adjusting their prices to be competitive in the global market.
Then any dealer would simply shop around to get a better price than the average of the Big Five and let that be part of the dealer's added value profit.
Sounds good.
Would you use the price they charge for a single oz or the price they charge when you buy 20+?
The only other thing that comes to mind, which is probably a non issue but the US mint occasionally runs out of silver. So BitSilverEagle might be more affected by the US mint than a generic 1oz silver BitAsset.
Unfortunately that widely quoted price is highly manipulated. For every ounce of silver there are nearly 100 ounces of paper silver driving the supply/demand equilibrium way down. We need to decouple from that in order to be of any interest to silver bugs.
I'm aware how manipulated the price is, I expect the paper price to ultimately decouple and our delegates will have to be on top of that transition, which will probably just involve switching price feeds to Asia and places like the SGE I mentioned.
Tracking the global average price of a 1oz physical coin independently is tough. The reason I'm interested though is that there's a great marketing angle here, I'm not sure anyone else does this. I'm pretty sure we'd have to have two markets though. BitSilver & BitSilverPhyzz1oz.
Also even if the price wasn't manipulated there's stil just a natural huge deviation between the price of silver and the price of a small 1oz coin.
Purchasing a 5kg Bar of silver would work out at about $20 per ounce but buying a solitary silver eagle might cost $25 an ounce. (So trying to price in 1oz is very deceptive and is more production cost related & would result in the overpricing of gold & silver.)Why not bitGold at spot, and then have other assets like bitGoldMaple and bitGoldKruger, etc? They all have different values. It costs a lot more to mint 10 1 ounce mapleleafs than it costs to make a generic 10 oz bar.
I think this is a great idea. They could be 'SubAssets' which are based on the price feed, but trade at a percentage offset. The offset would need to be set by Delegates in order for this to work correctly.
Delegates could cooperate and include SubAssets in their price feeds, and as long as 51 delegates have SubAssets of the same name, they qualify to be included in the marketplace.
This could account for the different mints, but also may be a path to decoupling paper/physical while still serving both markets.
Yeah, maybe 1 sub-asset market that tried to maintain a generic BitGold & Silver 1oz phyzz price would be interesting.
If I were going to try it (and I just might) I would want to pick the most commonly traded and most recognizable form of silver I could find. There are about a half dozen good candidates, but to me the US Silver Eagle is as good as any.
So I like the idea of a sub-asset called BitSilverEagle.
It should be easy enough to establish the peg based on any five of the top ten dealers - selected because they have the same way of handling shipping and fees perhaps.
I would simply define the peg to be the average of a basket of coins from these dealers. This would be easy for delegates to compute and easy to audit by everyone. No need to argue about what the other dealers are doing, the Big Five are already dynamically adjusting their prices to be competitive in the global market.
Then any dealer would simply shop around to get a better price than the average of the Big Five and let that be part of the dealer's added value profit.
Unfortunately that widely quoted price is highly manipulated. For every ounce of silver there are nearly 100 ounces of paper silver driving the supply/demand equilibrium way down. We need to decouple from that in order to be of any interest to silver bugs.
I'm aware how manipulated the price is, I expect the paper price to ultimately decouple and our delegates will have to be on top of that transition, which will probably just involve switching price feeds to Asia and places like the SGE I mentioned.
Tracking the global average price of a 1oz physical coin independently is tough. The reason I'm interested though is that there's a great marketing angle here, I'm not sure anyone else does this. I'm pretty sure we'd have to have two markets though. BitSilver & BitSilverPhyzz1oz.
Also even if the price wasn't manipulated there's stil just a natural huge deviation between the price of silver and the price of a small 1oz coin.
Purchasing a 5kg Bar of silver would work out at about $20 per ounce but buying a solitary silver eagle might cost $25 an ounce. (So trying to price in 1oz is very deceptive and is more production cost related & would result in the overpricing of gold & silver.)Why not bitGold at spot, and then have other assets like bitGoldMaple and bitGoldKruger, etc? They all have different values. It costs a lot more to mint 10 1 ounce mapleleafs than it costs to make a generic 10 oz bar.
I think this is a great idea. They could be 'SubAssets' which are based on the price feed, but trade at a percentage offset. The offset would need to be set by Delegates in order for this to work correctly.
Delegates could cooperate and include SubAssets in their price feeds, and as long as 51 delegates have SubAssets of the same name, they qualify to be included in the marketplace.
This could account for the different mints, but also may be a path to decoupling paper/physical while still serving both markets.
Yeah, maybe 1 sub-asset market that tried to maintain a generic BitGold & Silver 1oz phyzz price would be interesting.
If I were going to try it (and I just might) I would want to pick the most commonly traded and most recognizable form of silver I could find. There are about a half dozen good candidates, but to me the US Silver Eagle is as good as any.
So I like the idea of a sub-asset called BitSilverEagle.
It should be easy enough to establish the peg based on any five of the top ten dealers - selected because they have the same way of handling shipping and fees perhaps.
I would simply define the peg to be the average of a basket of coins from these dealers. This would be easy for delegates to compute and easy to audit by everyone. No need to argue about what the other dealers are doing, the Big Five are already dynamically adjusting their prices to be competitive in the global market.
Then any dealer would simply shop around to get a better price than the average of the Big Five and let that be part of the dealer's added value profit.
One thing you don't seem to be taking into account here Stan is that dealers in the existing market base their prices on the manipulated spot price. Until an alternative to that exists you could just as easily base feeds on the spot and take the dealer variable commission out of the equation.
Once trade volume in the BitSilver / BitGold gets high enough let the blockchain define the average price. It's hard to determine the real "free market" price with all the influences / manipulations going on. It may not be possible to determine the real market price for some time, but the closest we could come is observing trades on the blockchain. Maybe some sort of rolling averages.
I don't think average people need to bypass fiat. They need fiat.
I don't think average people need to bypass fiat. They need fiat.
It is easy enough to convert from gold to fiat or fiat to gold for cash at a local coin dealer. It is hard to find exchanges for crypto.
I love this idea, go talk to Amagi Metals they might just be up for this!
My bitshares client is showing close to zero supply atm for bitgold and bitsilver.7.42 gold
Is this an error or is there actually no supply atm!?
Exactly this is so tiny! Is this a matter of patience for bitshares to grow? But there are a lot of bidders and almost no shorters. Will putting bids in above the price feed incentive shorters enough? This is happening with bitSILVER but is it working? Historical daily volumes are fairly small.
Is there a problem here? Do we need some other mechanisms to incentive the market?
I think we need someone willing to "make the market" here to boot strap it.
Bitsilver supply just went up a bit, from 133.51 yesterday to 221.48 today.I think we need someone willing to "make the market" here to boot strap it.
Ok so the answer is patience. Perhaps the early adopters of bitshares have similar economic outlooks and so atm most like me want to go long gold and silver.