What if we?

[clayop]

Still the question is how can we create a BitAsset that requires only 100% collateral from the short side?
That way a bridge can accept LTC and credit BitLTC & vice versa.

explain further?

A centralized exchange accepts real LTC and credits you with an LTC IOU.

We need a bridge like Metaexchange to be able to accept real LTC and credit people with BitLTC for a very low cost, then we can replicate the services of a centralized exchange.

I was under the impression that in addition to market makers, this would be easier if there was a lower collateral requirement to create BitAssets but I might be confused

@monsterer @Shentist
@kuro112 @hybridd, @Xypher 
@dannotestein

thoughts?

what is the financial incentive for an organization doing this ?

good question.  more volume?

Imo, 100% collateral easily causes fractional collateral (the ratio below 1.0), and has no big difference with IOUs.

[fuzzy]

Still the question is how can we create a BitAsset that requires only 100% collateral from the short side?
That way a bridge can accept LTC and credit BitLTC & vice versa.

explain further?

A centralized exchange accepts real LTC and credits you with an LTC IOU.

We need a bridge like Metaexchange to be able to accept real LTC and credit people with BitLTC for a very low cost, then we can replicate the services of a centralized exchange.

I was under the impression that in addition to market makers, this would be easier if there was a lower collateral requirement to create BitAssets but I might be confused

@monsterer @Shentist
@kuro112 @hybridd, @Xypher 
@dannotestein

thoughts?

what is the financial incentive for an organization doing this ?

good question.  more volume?

[Xypher]

Still the question is how can we create a BitAsset that requires only 100% collateral from the short side?
That way a bridge can accept LTC and credit BitLTC & vice versa.

explain further?

A centralized exchange accepts real LTC and credits you with an LTC IOU.

We need a bridge like Metaexchange to be able to accept real LTC and credit people with BitLTC for a very low cost, then we can replicate the services of a centralized exchange.

I was under the impression that in addition to market makers, this would be easier if there was a lower collateral requirement to create BitAssets but I might be confused

@monsterer @Shentist
@kuro112 @hybridd, @Xypher 
@dannotestein

thoughts?

what is the financial incentive for an organization doing this ?

[fuzzy]

Still the question is how can we create a BitAsset that requires only 100% collateral from the short side?
That way a bridge can accept LTC and credit BitLTC & vice versa.

explain further?

A centralized exchange accepts real LTC and credits you with an LTC IOU.

We need a bridge like Metaexchange to be able to accept real LTC and credit people with BitLTC for a very low cost, then we can replicate the services of a centralized exchange.

I was under the impression that in addition to market makers, this would be easier if there was a lower collateral requirement to create BitAssets but I might be confused

@monsterer @Shentist
@kuro112 @hybridd, @Xypher 
@dannotestein

thoughts?

[Empirical1.2]

Still the question is how can we create a BitAsset that requires only 100% collateral from the short side?
That way a bridge can accept LTC and credit BitLTC & vice versa.

explain further?

A centralized exchange accepts real LTC and credits you with an LTC IOU.

We need a bridge like Metaexchange to be able to accept real LTC and credit people with BitLTC for a very low cost, then we can replicate the services of a centralized exchange.

I was under the impression that in addition to market makers, this would be easier if there was a lower collateral requirement to create BitAssets but I might be confused

[Akado]

Yes bringing sharebot to other communities would definitely be a good first step.

[fuzzy]

Still the question is how can we create a BitAsset that requires only 100% collateral from the short side?
That way a bridge can accept LTC and credit BitLTC & vice versa.

explain further?

[Empirical1.2]

It's not that we shouldn't add them but you won't see other large communities promoting them.

The value in adding them comes from this community. The vast majority of BTS shareholders have an alt-coin portfolio that includes more than just BTS, so adding alt-coin BitAssets can bring our trading business onto the DEX.

If that volume is reasonable it will attract other traders who worry about exchange risk.

Still the question is how can we create a BitAsset that requires only 100% collateral from the short side?
That way a bridge can accept LTC and credit BitLTC & vice versa.

 

[fuzzy]

What if we made it free for top 10 cryptos to add their bitasset to our exchange free of charge or at significant discounts?  Then we would be able to benefit from all top 10 coin's media connections as they all work hard to let everyone know they are one of the first on our decentralized market pegged asset system

I think the problem is top cryptos are already established and are not struggling to get to new exchanges. Maybe new coins or a not so big one is and that will be the one with more interest in joining our DEX. Those should be our target.

You see, alts come and go, this generation of alts or whatever you want to call them are on Polo, Cryptsy, etc
If we start getting the new ones on our DEX, they will grow here and our DEX will be the "go to" spot to trade alts. We start this culture of adding and helping new alts and maybe in a year we will already be known as one of the top exchanges to trade alts. Of course we will have lots of different assets, pump and dump coins, etc but what matters is bringing in users.

With time alts will want to join our DEX and as we grow this culture, our volume will grow to and we might be able to compete with Polo or Btc38

nothing keeping us from doing that too.  but the smaller coins will not bring media attention until they grow.  as far as big coins not needing new exchanges...that might be a dangerous assumption. 

I mean we have been in the top 10 for how long and we still wish we were on every exchange possible.

I mean that might not be a priority for them, specially when integrating on a project that they see as competition, even if our objectives are completely different.

good points.  but what if we add onto the deal a hangout, their very owm forums and the implementation of the sharebot on forums both preexisting and newly awarded.  If we added the cost up for all that without the cost of creating a bitasset for them...it would be somewhere around 500 dollars max.  If the top 10 coins were to accept it  and get their coin in free, they would use our tools free of charge too...kind of the draw supernet created, right?

Lets remember that ultimately we win even if we just get these communities to see a real 3 sec tx...and the sharebot enables us to bring them in without having to mention bts

[Akado]

What if we made it free for top 10 cryptos to add their bitasset to our exchange free of charge or at significant discounts?  Then we would be able to benefit from all top 10 coin's media connections as they all work hard to let everyone know they are one of the first on our decentralized market pegged asset system

I think the problem is top cryptos are already established and are not struggling to get to new exchanges. Maybe new coins or a not so big one is and that will be the one with more interest in joining our DEX. Those should be our target.

You see, alts come and go, this generation of alts or whatever you want to call them are on Polo, Cryptsy, etc
If we start getting the new ones on our DEX, they will grow here and our DEX will be the "go to" spot to trade alts. We start this culture of adding and helping new alts and maybe in a year we will already be known as one of the top exchanges to trade alts. Of course we will have lots of different assets, pump and dump coins, etc but what matters is bringing in users.

With time alts will want to join our DEX and as we grow this culture, our volume will grow to and we might be able to compete with Polo or Btc38

nothing keeping us from doing that too.  but the smaller coins will not bring media attention until they grow.  as far as big coins not needing new exchanges...that might be a dangerous assumption. 

I mean we have been in the top 10 for how long and we still wish we were on every exchange possible.

I mean that might not be a priority for them, specially when integrating on a project that they see as competition, even if our objectives are completely different.

[fuzzy]

What if we made it free for top 10 cryptos to add their bitasset to our exchange free of charge or at significant discounts?  Then we would be able to benefit from all top 10 coin's media connections as they all work hard to let everyone know they are one of the first on our decentralized market pegged asset system

I think the problem is top cryptos are already established and are not struggling to get to new exchanges. Maybe new coins or a not so big one is and that will be the one with more interest in joining our DEX. Those should be our target.

You see, alts come and go, this generation of alts or whatever you want to call them are on Polo, Cryptsy, etc
If we start getting the new ones on our DEX, they will grow here and our DEX will be the "go to" spot to trade alts. We start this culture of adding and helping new alts and maybe in a year we will already be known as one of the top exchanges to trade alts. Of course we will have lots of different assets, pump and dump coins, etc but what matters is bringing in users.

With time alts will want to join our DEX and as we grow this culture, our volume will grow to and we might be able to compete with Polo or Btc38

nothing keeping us from doing that too.  but the smaller coins will not bring media attention until they grow.  as far as big coins not needing new exchanges...that might be a dangerous assumption. 

I mean we have been in the top 10 for how long and we still wish we were on every exchange possible.

[Akado]

What if we made it free for top 10 cryptos to add their bitasset to our exchange free of charge or at significant discounts?  Then we would be able to benefit from all top 10 coin's media connections as they all work hard to let everyone know they are one of the first on our decentralized market pegged asset system

I think the problem is top cryptos are already established and are not struggling to get to new exchanges. Maybe new coins or a not so big one is and that will be the one with more interest in joining our DEX. Those should be our target.

You see, alts come and go, this generation of alts or whatever you want to call them are on Polo, Cryptsy, etc
If we start getting the new ones on our DEX, they will grow here and our DEX will be the "go to" spot to trade alts. We start this culture of adding and helping new alts and maybe in a year we will already be known as one of the top exchanges to trade alts. Of course we will have lots of different assets, pump and dump coins, etc but what matters is bringing in users.

With time alts will want to join our DEX and as we grow this culture, our volume will grow to and we might be able to compete with Polo or Btc38

[Empirical1.2]

What if we made it free for top 10 cryptos to add their bitasset to our exchange free of charge or at significant discounts?  Then we would be able to benefit from all top 10 coin's media connections as they all work hard to let everyone know they are one of the first on our decentralized market pegged asset system

If Ethereum had a BTS market pegged asset, would we work hard to let everyone know that instead of buying BTS they should buy Ethereum and hold their BTS market pegged asset whenever they need BTS exposure?

[fuzzy]

What if we made it free for top 10 cryptos to add their bitasset to our exchange free of charge or at significant discounts?  Then we would be able to benefit from all top 10 coin's media connections as they all work hard to let everyone know they are one of the first on our decentralized market pegged asset system