0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: lil_jay890 on October 25, 2015, 03:46:25 pmThen go trade on a centralized exchange... obviously I am not being clear. decentralization has costs that are unavoidable for the benefit of 0 counterparty risk. it is going to cost you money to have a witness process your transaction to put your order on the order books, not only when the trade is successfully filled. The correct fee has yet to be determined but it will need to be above 0.It is not your job to tell me where should I go. I go where I think I need to go. Don't be surprised why most people stay on centralized exchanges.
Then go trade on a centralized exchange... obviously I am not being clear. decentralization has costs that are unavoidable for the benefit of 0 counterparty risk. it is going to cost you money to have a witness process your transaction to put your order on the order books, not only when the trade is successfully filled. The correct fee has yet to be determined but it will need to be above 0.
If you are placing and canceling thousands of orders with a bot and doing less than $55,000 of volume then chances are your bot is not effective and is spamming the network.
Quote from: lil_jay890 on October 25, 2015, 03:12:36 pmQuote from: yvv on October 25, 2015, 02:40:44 pmQuote from: lil_jay890 on October 25, 2015, 12:46:15 pmQuote from: yvv on October 23, 2015, 12:31:44 amQuote from: dannotestein on October 23, 2015, 12:03:37 amQuote from: yvv on October 22, 2015, 11:54:56 pmIt is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.Paying for an order which is not filled is not ridiculous. Placing an order has costs associated with it and the cost is significant in every trading system. Some systems just have chosen to subsidize this cost by increasing other fees.And while you don't necessarily profit from an order that isn't filled (you can, by the way, if you're using it as part of some trading methods), you certainly had the opportunity to profit from it.Taking care of restroom in a fast food place has also associated costs with it, but if they will start charging fees for using their restroom, then good luck in attracting customers.Most places make you buy something if you want to use their facilities.In some shitty slums may be so, but in the world where I live they allow me to use their facilities with no conditions, because they know that if I like their place I will buy something from them and come back again. When I come to eatery, I want to pay for food. Washing hands, using toilet, sitting at the table has to be included into price of damn hamburger. If they don't do this, I turn around and walk away. You have to decide what are you going to be: just another shitty exchange or high quality service.The reason why people get "0" fees for trades is because of centralization by your broker. You actually are getting a raw deal since the broker will expand the spread to make money. You are trading within their internal pool of funds and stocks... once you go out of their pool, there are costs associated with placing orders. Because bitshares is decentralized and all transactions are irreversible, you must pay a fee for that work to be done.There are costs associated with everything. So what? Your costs is not my problem. As you said, I must pay a fee for work to be done. The work is done when the trade is made. Before that, I don't owe you nothing.
Quote from: yvv on October 25, 2015, 02:40:44 pmQuote from: lil_jay890 on October 25, 2015, 12:46:15 pmQuote from: yvv on October 23, 2015, 12:31:44 amQuote from: dannotestein on October 23, 2015, 12:03:37 amQuote from: yvv on October 22, 2015, 11:54:56 pmIt is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.Paying for an order which is not filled is not ridiculous. Placing an order has costs associated with it and the cost is significant in every trading system. Some systems just have chosen to subsidize this cost by increasing other fees.And while you don't necessarily profit from an order that isn't filled (you can, by the way, if you're using it as part of some trading methods), you certainly had the opportunity to profit from it.Taking care of restroom in a fast food place has also associated costs with it, but if they will start charging fees for using their restroom, then good luck in attracting customers.Most places make you buy something if you want to use their facilities.In some shitty slums may be so, but in the world where I live they allow me to use their facilities with no conditions, because they know that if I like their place I will buy something from them and come back again. When I come to eatery, I want to pay for food. Washing hands, using toilet, sitting at the table has to be included into price of damn hamburger. If they don't do this, I turn around and walk away. You have to decide what are you going to be: just another shitty exchange or high quality service.The reason why people get "0" fees for trades is because of centralization by your broker. You actually are getting a raw deal since the broker will expand the spread to make money. You are trading within their internal pool of funds and stocks... once you go out of their pool, there are costs associated with placing orders. Because bitshares is decentralized and all transactions are irreversible, you must pay a fee for that work to be done.
Quote from: lil_jay890 on October 25, 2015, 12:46:15 pmQuote from: yvv on October 23, 2015, 12:31:44 amQuote from: dannotestein on October 23, 2015, 12:03:37 amQuote from: yvv on October 22, 2015, 11:54:56 pmIt is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.Paying for an order which is not filled is not ridiculous. Placing an order has costs associated with it and the cost is significant in every trading system. Some systems just have chosen to subsidize this cost by increasing other fees.And while you don't necessarily profit from an order that isn't filled (you can, by the way, if you're using it as part of some trading methods), you certainly had the opportunity to profit from it.Taking care of restroom in a fast food place has also associated costs with it, but if they will start charging fees for using their restroom, then good luck in attracting customers.Most places make you buy something if you want to use their facilities.In some shitty slums may be so, but in the world where I live they allow me to use their facilities with no conditions, because they know that if I like their place I will buy something from them and come back again. When I come to eatery, I want to pay for food. Washing hands, using toilet, sitting at the table has to be included into price of damn hamburger. If they don't do this, I turn around and walk away. You have to decide what are you going to be: just another shitty exchange or high quality service.
Quote from: yvv on October 23, 2015, 12:31:44 amQuote from: dannotestein on October 23, 2015, 12:03:37 amQuote from: yvv on October 22, 2015, 11:54:56 pmIt is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.Paying for an order which is not filled is not ridiculous. Placing an order has costs associated with it and the cost is significant in every trading system. Some systems just have chosen to subsidize this cost by increasing other fees.And while you don't necessarily profit from an order that isn't filled (you can, by the way, if you're using it as part of some trading methods), you certainly had the opportunity to profit from it.Taking care of restroom in a fast food place has also associated costs with it, but if they will start charging fees for using their restroom, then good luck in attracting customers.Most places make you buy something if you want to use their facilities.
Quote from: dannotestein on October 23, 2015, 12:03:37 amQuote from: yvv on October 22, 2015, 11:54:56 pmIt is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.Paying for an order which is not filled is not ridiculous. Placing an order has costs associated with it and the cost is significant in every trading system. Some systems just have chosen to subsidize this cost by increasing other fees.And while you don't necessarily profit from an order that isn't filled (you can, by the way, if you're using it as part of some trading methods), you certainly had the opportunity to profit from it.Taking care of restroom in a fast food place has also associated costs with it, but if they will start charging fees for using their restroom, then good luck in attracting customers.
Quote from: yvv on October 22, 2015, 11:54:56 pmIt is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.Paying for an order which is not filled is not ridiculous. Placing an order has costs associated with it and the cost is significant in every trading system. Some systems just have chosen to subsidize this cost by increasing other fees.And while you don't necessarily profit from an order that isn't filled (you can, by the way, if you're using it as part of some trading methods), you certainly had the opportunity to profit from it.
It is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.
People are discussing this polo and I agree with the traders (who by the way, are one of our main target markets):* The fee to place a trade needs to be extremely low. Just enough to prevent spam.* The fee to cancel an order should be 0.* The fee upon the EXECUTION of an order should be "high" (aka, current levels).
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/issues/393
Market participants expect placing / moving orders to be cheap and filling orders to be expensive.To prevent spam, all transactions require some kind of fee.Placing orders consumes memory and cannot be trivially cheap so needs a high fee.Canceling orders frees memory and has historically been free.We can make placing orders free, filling orders (relatively) expensive, and canceling orders cheap with the following change.User pays $0.25 to place an orderUser pays $0.001 to cancel an order, and gets a refund of $0.25 * NETWORK_FEE_PERCENTIf the order fills then there is no refund of the $0.25Under this plan the cost to place / update an order is $0.001 while the cost of having an order filled is $0.25.The only remaining issue with the above is that part of the original fee ($0.20) goes to the referrer who may have withdrawn their cashback. To keep things simple, the only fee that gets refunded is the network fee.If the user is a lifetime member then it looks like this:User pays $0.25 to place an order and receives $0.20 cash backUser pays $0.001 to cancel an order, and gets a refund of $0.05 and $0.0008 cash back. (total cost $0.0002)If the order is actually filled the user paid $0.05If the user is an annual subscriber then it looks like this:User pays $0.25 to place an order and receives $0.125 cash backUser pays $0.001 to cancel an order and receives $0.0005 cash back and a refund of $0.05 (total cost $0.0755)If the order is actually filled the user paid $0.125If the user is a basic member then it looks like this:User pays $0.25 to place an orderUser pays $0.001 to cancel an order and gets $0.05 back (total cost $0.20)If the order is actually filled the user pays $0.25The break even point for deciding whether to upgrade to a lifetime member is if the user would end up canceling 500 orders. If they end up canceling 10000 orders because they are a market maker then the average cost would be ($100 + 50000*.0002)/50000 => 0.0022 and the total spent would have been $110 dollars.As long as the average order size is greater than $25 dollars, the market fees on the filled orders will be less than other exchanges that charge (0.2%) of volume. Anyone who does $55,000 of volume will pay over $110 in fees on centralized exchanges. If you are placing and canceling thousands of orders with a bot and doing less than $55,000 of volume then chances are your bot is not effective and is spamming the network.
or maybe there can be a "market maker" membership for high trade
The cost to opening an order is MEMORY allocation that stays around until the order is canceled (if ever). A "one time promotional" could allow an attacker to force full nodes to have GB of memory allocated for ever for almost no cost.
so the point is "how to make the liquidity grow?"the answer is to attract market maker.market maker update orders frequently, robot trading is always used. so if placing orders cannot be free, it should be low enough, if market maker always need to calculate the fees before updating orders, they would not like to trade.maybe there can be a "market maker" membership for high trade, low transfer demand users, an account can pay say 1000 BTS monthly, and then enjoy the counter spamming fee for each order updating.
Quote from: clayop on October 22, 2015, 08:26:49 pmQuote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2015, 08:18:59 pmLets assume you are a trader on BitShares and plan on updating your order often, so become a lifetime member. The cost to place an order is 2 BTS or $0.01.20k BTS for lifetime member is also a cost. Why don't we think about a normal user who is not a lifetime member?I have paid more than $100 in fees to BitStamp and am a "normal" user. Paying a lifetime membership fee makes sense and is still cheaper than paying regular exchange fees. If I were an active trader on BitStamp my regular fees would be an order of magnitude higher than a lifetime member. So I think it is safe to assume that anyone who will trade so much that the fees matter it is worth it to become lifetime members. Everyone else it is still cheaper at the full rate.It is all psychological.
Quote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2015, 08:18:59 pmLets assume you are a trader on BitShares and plan on updating your order often, so become a lifetime member. The cost to place an order is 2 BTS or $0.01.20k BTS for lifetime member is also a cost. Why don't we think about a normal user who is not a lifetime member?
Lets assume you are a trader on BitShares and plan on updating your order often, so become a lifetime member. The cost to place an order is 2 BTS or $0.01.
Quote from: clayop on October 22, 2015, 11:37:17 pmQuote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2015, 10:50:29 pmQuote from: clayop on October 22, 2015, 08:26:49 pmQuote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2015, 08:18:59 pmLets assume you are a trader on BitShares and plan on updating your order often, so become a lifetime member. The cost to place an order is 2 BTS or $0.01.20k BTS for lifetime member is also a cost. Why don't we think about a normal user who is not a lifetime member?I have paid more than $100 in fees to BitStamp and am a "normal" user. Paying a lifetime membership fee makes sense and is still cheaper than paying regular exchange fees. If I were an active trader on BitStamp my regular fees would be an order of magnitude higher than a lifetime member. So I think it is safe to assume that anyone who will trade so much that the fees matter it is worth it to become lifetime members. Everyone else it is still cheaper at the full rate.It is all psychological. Probably 95% of users don't pay $100 a month for trading fee. They only pay 0.1~0.2% of their order when it filled.We have a high level of capacity (100 TPW atm). We don't have to be parsimonious. Why don't we sell our network resources at a lower price (with lower trading fees)? IMHO, trading fee at the initial stage of ecosystem expansion, in which attracting new users is the most priority, should be as low as to prevent spammy transactions. In BTS 1.0 with 0.1 fee, there were no spamming attacks. So I would suggest 2.5 BTS trading fee for non-lifetime members (and 0.5 for lifetime members as like a default setting of BTS 1.0).agree 0.5 BTS trading fee for lifetime member.the method to get money from customers' pocket really matters.a good method can make the customers pay much with happiness.a bad method always make the customers feel unhappy, and always decide not to buy.now Bitshares looks like a restaurant that few people sit inside and enjoy food, but the manager keep on shouting "go out, poor guys, don't sit here without buying food!"yunbi is free, btc38 charges 0.1%, polo charges 0.2%, bitstamp may charge more.but why more users trade BTS in polo and btc38, not yunbi? yes, liquidity.now the liquidity in DEX is low, either high or low fees, few trading chance here.so the point is "how to make the liquidity grow?"the answer is to attract market maker.market maker update orders frequently, robot trading is always used. so if placing orders cannot be free, it should be low enough, if market maker always need to calculate the fees before updating orders, they would not like to trade.or maybe there can be a "market maker" membership for high trade, low transfer demand users, an account can pay say 1000 BTS monthly, and then enjoy the counter spamming fee for each order updating.
Quote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2015, 10:50:29 pmQuote from: clayop on October 22, 2015, 08:26:49 pmQuote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2015, 08:18:59 pmLets assume you are a trader on BitShares and plan on updating your order often, so become a lifetime member. The cost to place an order is 2 BTS or $0.01.20k BTS for lifetime member is also a cost. Why don't we think about a normal user who is not a lifetime member?I have paid more than $100 in fees to BitStamp and am a "normal" user. Paying a lifetime membership fee makes sense and is still cheaper than paying regular exchange fees. If I were an active trader on BitStamp my regular fees would be an order of magnitude higher than a lifetime member. So I think it is safe to assume that anyone who will trade so much that the fees matter it is worth it to become lifetime members. Everyone else it is still cheaper at the full rate.It is all psychological. Probably 95% of users don't pay $100 a month for trading fee. They only pay 0.1~0.2% of their order when it filled.We have a high level of capacity (100 TPW atm). We don't have to be parsimonious. Why don't we sell our network resources at a lower price (with lower trading fees)? IMHO, trading fee at the initial stage of ecosystem expansion, in which attracting new users is the most priority, should be as low as to prevent spammy transactions. In BTS 1.0 with 0.1 fee, there were no spamming attacks. So I would suggest 2.5 BTS trading fee for non-lifetime members (and 0.5 for lifetime members as like a default setting of BTS 1.0).
Also, they're used to doing it a certain way already. Going against the grain is never good for adoption.
Quote from: dannotestein on October 23, 2015, 12:03:37 amQuote from: yvv on October 22, 2015, 11:54:56 pmIt is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.Paying for an order which is not filled is not ridiculous. Placing an order has costs associated with it and the cost is significant in every trading system. Some systems just have chosen to subsidize this cost by increasing other fees.Why are we supposed to keep 3 cents? Are there any specific reasons? If lowering trading fee lead to maximization of profit (by inducing more demands), we should do.
Quote from: yvv on October 22, 2015, 11:54:56 pmIt is not only the amount of fee which matters, what are you paying for matters too. It is ok if fancy restaurant charges more then fast food eatery, but I don't know anybody in good mind who would agree to pay anything just for sitting in a restaurant having no food. It is ok to pay $1 fee for a trade which brings you $5 profit, but paying for an offer which was not even filled is ridiculous. It is not physiological, this is common sense.Paying for an order which is not filled is not ridiculous. Placing an order has costs associated with it and the cost is significant in every trading system. Some systems just have chosen to subsidize this cost by increasing other fees.
I kind of agree ... we first need to incentivize people to use the dex .. once we have some traction we can increase the fees ..how about a public offer for 3 months of almost zero fees in the dex!! just enough to prevent spamming?