HitBTC news

Established in 2013, UK. No. of pairs - 723. Fiat - no. Centralized exchange. KYC & Restrictions - US traders are not accepted.

World latest news

HitBTC Crypto Exchange in Trouble after a Reddit User Threatens Legal Action

Crypto exchanges have played an important role in linking stakeholders within the industry. The firms behind these projects focused on building ecosystems that enable P2P interactions for investors and traders to exchange crypto coins. However, their growth has not been as smooth as one would imagine given the volatile nature of crypto markets. HitBTC, a […]
Bitcoin Exchange Guide

HitBTC and Binance Market Making Bot, Live Projections and Graphs!

​ http://techvoices.club/ How to read the site: Brief summary Total orders, # buy # sell orders - note that a. est volume is updated on buy, b. returns %s are calculated on sell recent trades Balances of all coins, in free + on order amounts Date of oldest trade in recent memory btc volume in recent memory Hours since oldest trade est. daily btc volume, current balance and recent btcvol wrt hours in a day estimates on 1, 5, 10, 20 btc invested a. daily volume estimate b. monthly volume estimate c. # days til 0% fees d. drawdown, as % returns by hours wrt hours in a day e. how much btc drawdown as an exponential value of drawdown * # days til 0% fees f. daily fees @ 0.1% g. income at 0.1% fees h. income @ 0.0% fees i. income at 0.1% rebate —- https://hackernoon.com/binance-hitbtc-etc-market-maker-pitch-how-to-get-rich-online-2988c1d328ac —- https://github.com/DunnCreativeSS/privateMarketMakerRepo ask for access - charging 0.01 BTC or equiv donation, below addresses, to fund the dev acc If you prefer not to use the referral link, (either is good to access code, there is no hitbtc aff link at present, binance link in chat inside hackernoon article): consider a crypto donation! —— let targetSpread = 0.55; - higher spread should mean more profit, overall, because the difference in bid ask is higher so we should get less trades for more gain. The downside is that with higher spread there will be less pairs to trade. let targetVolDiv = 5; - this is how many times lower than the average, per base (BTC, BNB, ETH) the volume is allowed to be to consider a pair to trade. let targetVolMult = 20; - and this is how much larger than the average. If these are higher, then you'll notice more pairs that want to trade, but the downside of a higher Div is that they will have lesser volume and might not be really liquid... a higher Mult means that the more liquid markets might not have a good enough spread. let maxOrder = 1500; - this means that the maximum order size for a pair can be 1500 units. This is to protect against trading shitcoins that will get 12000 coins for 0.001 btc, because these pairs generally trade at a bid/ask that's exactly 1 point away from each other.. so think about it like we don't want to trade Doge because we want to have our own unique orders above/below the bid/ask let minOrder = 0; - the minimum order amount (a fix that's since been fixed better, might as well leave at 0) let maxBetterVol = 1.5; - this exists as a matter to ensure people can run competing bots. If there's a # volume of tokens/coins better than your bid/ask order # of this multiplier or less, it won't re-enter the market. If the amount better than your order * this multiplier is larger, it'll re-enter the market
/r/CryptoMarkets

Disgruntled Reddit User Calls for Legal Action Against HitBTC

Cryptocurrency exchanges play a key role in this volatile industry. Companies provide exposure to various currencies, tokens, and assets, while making it easier for consumers and investors to gain access to these offerings. One particular exchange, which goes by the name of HitBTC, is seemingly subjected to a one-man crusade on Reddit as of right now. This is not all that surprising, as many users have expressed their dismay with the company in recent years. The Crusade Against HitBTC In this day and age of social media, it has become easier for the average person to speak up about negative experiences. Even in the cryptocurrency world, there are a lot more apparent complaints than during the early days. This is primarily because media such as Twitter and Facebook have started to take center stage. Not only are those platforms used for crying foul, but companies also rely on them to provide customer support. For HitBTC, social media has proven to be a double-edged blade. On the one hand, it provides the company a lot more exposure. On the other, it has also allowed a lot more complaints regarding this company to become apparent. While it is impossible to please every customer in this day and age, it seems the growing dismay regarding HitBTC is still a very big problem. So much even that one Reddit user dedicated an entire subreddit to these particular problems. Known as the HitBTC_Victims subreddit, it is not necessarily the most popular corner of Reddit by any means. Although several posts exist, it quickly becomes apparent this is a one-man effort. Reddit user Vandenhof has a grudge against HitBTC, primarily because this user has experienced a lot of things which warrant outcry. Ranging from account restrictions to odd KYC requirements and withdrawals being – allegedly – blocked, one has to wonder why anyone would put up with this exchange after all of those problems. If all of the information provided by this user is to be believed, he has suffered from HitBTC’s “shenanigans” since December 2017 or earlier. Most people would simply give up after one or two mishaps caused by the same platform. There are dozens of cryptocurrency exchanges to choose from and most of those seemingly have a “better” reputation than HitBTC. However, this user is sticking with HitBTC despite all of the problems. A bit of an odd train of thought, although it seems to date back to his funds being locked in late 2017. The latest post on this subreddit is perhaps the most interesting one. More specifically, Vandenhof expects to take legal action against HitBTC. The main reasons for doing so are the growing number of complaints and unorthodox KYC/AML practices maintained by this company, according to the post. This user even went as far as setting up different deposit addresses for different cryptocurrencies to cover the retainer fees. While it remains to be seen if anyone will accept this offer – which is ill-advised without conducting proper research – it seems the crusade against this exchange is far from over at this point. All things considered, it is good to see more crypto exchange users become vocal about odd things happening to their accounts and balances. While dedicating a subreddit tot his ordeal is a good way to get the word out, it seems the HitBTC/Victims corner is not getting too much attention as of right now. While it is true a lot of people are not too happy with this exchange, it seems Vandenhof is pretty much alone in his fight right now. Even so, it is a remarkable effort, even if it is falling on deaf ears for the most part. Disclaimer: This is not trading or investment advice. The above article is for entertainment and education purposes only. Please do your own research before purchasing or investing into any cryptocurrency. Image(s): Shutterstock.com The post Disgruntled Reddit User Calls for Legal Action Against HitBTC appeared first on NullTX.
NullTX

Binance, HitBTC, etc., Market Maker Pitch: How To Get Rich Online

Cheap VPShttp://techvoices.clubpress ‘all’ after about 15sCase in PointImagine this hourly graph without the steep drops from paying fees on the green (buy) lines:As a follow-up to this:https://hackernoon.com/making-markets-moving-crypto-free-and-open-source-binance-9bcea607e57bhttps://github.com/DunnCreativeSS/binanceMarketMakerhttps://github.com/DunnCreativeSS/hitBTCMarketMakerTL;DR join us here https://t.me/themarketmakerbotElevator PitchMarket making on Deribit and BitMex failed because it counted on the market to remain more or less stagnant on the 0.25$ step. We’re now looking at automating two market making strategies for smaller volume, higher spread pairs.Market Maker TraderWe buy just above the highest bid and sell just below the lowest ask. We repeat this process, using a fraction of account balance in base pairs, until we see the net profits as price fluctuations cancel each other out in the approaching infinity sense — while we soak up profits from the spread itself in the ‘relative orders’ strategy.Conversationally, and not coded yet, is the ‘staggered order’ strategy, where you pick a maximum and minimum price for that pair and then stagger orders up and down the order book to buy and sell along set intervals.Resources: Would need servers close to different exchanges.Scalability: More coins; more scalePros: I’ve had 0.57 bitcoin volume on my deposit of $18 worth of coins on the ‘relative’ strategy in the last 24 hours, while sustaining about -0.5% growth. There are other exchanges (some with margin) where we can reproduce the bot, like bitfinex/ethfinex who have a market maker rebate paid monthly in their proprietary coin, or liquid who has a market maker rebate on pairs that were previously on qryptosAdd’l pros: on Binance I can effect a 20% or 40% income on fees via my referral link, on HitBTC the affiliate program is on pause but I may eventually be able to effect 75% — although the potential gains from HitBTC affiliate are less as there will eventually be a 0% or rebate on the maker feesCons: To prove profitable on Binance or HitBTC, you’d need to eliminate the fees or effect a market maker rebate. On Binance this involves volume as well as holding BNB — while still paying some fees, while on HitBTC that only involves building volume first — effecting 0% maker fees then 0.01% rebate. https://hitbtc.com/fee-tier https://www.binance.com/en/fee/schedule On HitBTC there’s also a market making program https://hitbtc.com/mm.To Prove for ViabilityConsistent over all types of markets, but identify when it does betterIn the long run, price volatility helps the ‘staggered’ strategy more than it does the ‘relative’ strategyLess volatility but still having volume, there will be gains from the ‘relative’ strategyThe potential loss is 1. Fees 2. Grabbing a coin that immediately dies, inclusive.If you’re to eliminate fees or effect a fee rebate, this risk goes downIf you automate many pairs you lessen the negative effect of grabbing a coin that diesConversationally, a stop loss can be created to further lessen this riskSunk costs of developmentNone — need to code the ‘staggered’ strategy, which I can doScalability given current market liquidity and volumeOn exchanges like Binance or HitBTC, with many coin pairs that have significant volume, we can scale indefinitelyThe bot currently checks the average volume per base asset, then the spread of a given pair, and enters only into those markets that meet the minimum and maximum volumes and target spread, as well as a minimum order quantity and maximum order quantity (to avoid sh#tcoins)In base: market pair: volume in base, that looks like this:{ BTC: { XDNBTC: 69.3393775486, VETBTC: 42.606415325 }, TUSD: { NXTUSD: 67247.7248096, TNTUSD: 53891.073732 }, MUSD: { QTUMUSD: 2545776.043225 }, NUSD: { XDNUSD: 280614.7629689 }, DUSD: { MAIDUSD: 54019.8292817 }, ETH: { ICXETH: 589.145211656, NXTETH: 266.992269315, REPETH: 616.456689351, ONTETH: 5359.788369161, NTKETH: 197.416308344, KBCETH: 355.311810444, ROXETH: 311.845628547 }, BUSD: { DGBUSD: 2445.14526651 }, GUSD: { BTGUSD: 141765.29622322 }, UUSD: { QNTUUSD: 29.4731369 }, PUSD: { ETPUSD: 68.5015549, ZAPUSD: 40.1461164 }, YUSD: { DAYUSD: 338.8757426, BERRYUSD: 248.9052084 }, QUSD: { STQUSD: 6039.7474451 }, IUSD: { WIKIUSD: 10575.2656811 }, FUSD: { ELFUSD: 14.04120135 }, URS: { ETHEURS: 2486.24206583, LTCEURS: 1485.789705, XMREURS: 2807.0239136 }, ‘0USD’: { POA20USD: 20.1087685 }, EOS: { LSKEOS: 39.06901764 }, RWB: { BTCKRWB: 44.82036 } }Forward TestsThis strategy was first coded about 48 hours ago on Binance. It lost about 0.5% in one day, and had 0.46 BTC in volume.https://medium.com/media/b998ee17f9822e2470a3fcd3a21577e1/hrefThe second iteration was on HitBTC, and as of about 10–12 hours ago has 0.12 BTC in volume (across many smaller orders, instead of the test version on Binance risking everything on one pair).https://medium.com/media/2a92a3ba02b0430036a88d80ce856f22/hrefIt’s lost about 0.23% in that time:https://medium.com/media/fcaee3f63ecb646cb972d2c362465b0c/hrefMy calculations, based on losing 0.5% a day on average with entry level fees and based on HitBTC’s 0% maker fee after 1500BTC in 30-day volume, indicate that after a certain amount of time while trading a certain balance we can effect 0% fees, and therein effect profits:https://medium.com/media/0db9bcb29e02b6038f6f53317921da66/hrefThis is not including the chance we can get market maker benefits or the 0.01% rebate after 6000 BTC volume.https://medium.com/media/003fad58768ac02ee74d9c3b11481d5c/hrefhttps://medium.com/media/730d56d181ba690652f2fc2fc7f5afe6/hrefConclusionWith enough volume anything is possible. Come join us! https://t.me/themarketmakerbotBinance, HitBTC, etc., Market Maker Pitch: How To Get Rich Online was originally published in Hacker Noon on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.
Hackernoon

Binance, HitBTC, etc., Market Maker Pitch: How To Get Rich Online

As a follow-up to this: https://hackernoon.com/making-markets-moving-crypto-free-and-open-source-binance-9bcea607e57b https://github.com/DunnCreativeSS/binanceMarketMaker https://github.com/DunnCreativeSS/hitBTCMarketMaker Elevator Pitch Market making on Deribit and BitMex failed because it counted on the market to remain more or less stagnant on the 0.25$ step. We’re now looking at automating two market making strategies for smaller volume, higher spread pairs. Market Maker Trader We buy just above the highest bid and sell just below the lowest ask. We repeat this process, using a fraction of account balance in base pairs, until we see the net profits as price fluctuations cancel each other out in the approaching infinity sense - while we soak up profits from the spread itself in the ‘relative orders’ strategy. Conversationally, and not coded yet, is the ‘staggered order’ strategy, where you pick a maximum and minimum price for that pair and then stagger orders up and down the order book to buy and sell along set intervals. Resources: Would need servers close to different exchanges. Scalability: More coins; more scale Pros: I’ve had .57 bitcoin volume on my deposit of $18 worth of coins on the ‘relative’ strategy in the last 24 hours, while sustaining about -0.5% growth. There are other exchanges (some with margin) where we can reproduce the bot, like bitfinex/ethfinex who have a market maker rebate paid monthly in their proprietary coin, or liquid who has a market maker rebate on pairs that were previously on qryptos Add’l pros: on Binance I can effect a 20% or 40% income on fees via my referral link, on HitBTC the affiliate program is on pause but I may eventually be able to effect 75% - although the potential gains from HitBTC affiliate are less as there will eventually be a 0% or rebate on the maker fees Cons: To prove profitable on Binance or HitBTC, you’d need to eliminate the fees or effect a market maker rebate. On Binance this involves volume as well as holding BNB - while still paying some fees, while on HitBTC that only involves building volume first - effecting 0% maker fees then 0.01% rebate. hitbtc dot com slash fee-tier binance dot come slash en/fee/schedule On HitBTC there’s also a market making program hitbtc dot com slash mm. To Prove for Viability Consistent over all types of markets, but identify when it does better In the long run, price volatility helps the ‘staggered’ strategy more than it does the ‘relative’ strategy Less volatility but still having volume, there will be gains from the ‘relative’ strategy The potential loss is 1. Fees 2. Grabbing a coin that immediately dies, inclusive. If you’re to eliminate fees or effect a fee rebate, this risk goes down If you automate many pairs you lessen the negative effect of grabbing a coin that dies Conversationally, a stop loss can be created to further lessen this risk Sunk costs of dev None - need to code the ‘staggered’ strategy, which I can do Scalability given current market liquidity and volume On exchanges like Binance or HitBTC, with many coinpairs that have significant volume, we can scale indefinitely The bot currently checks the average volume per base asset, then the spread of a given pair, and enters only into those markets that meet the minimum and maximum volumes and target spread, as well as a minimum order quantity and maximum order quantity (to avoid sh#tcoins) In base: market pair: volume in base, that looks like this: { BTC: { XDNBTC: 69.3393775486, VETBTC: 42.606415325 }, TUSD: { NXTUSD: 67247.7248096, TNTUSD: 53891.073732 }, MUSD: { QTUMUSD: 2545776.043225 }, NUSD: { XDNUSD: 280614.7629689 }, DUSD: { MAIDUSD: 54019.8292817 }, ETH: { ICXETH: 589.145211656, NXTETH: 266.992269315, REPETH: 616.456689351, ONTETH: 5359.788369161, NTKETH: 197.416308344, KBCETH: 355.311810444, ROXETH: 311.845628547 }, BUSD: { DGBUSD: 2445.14526651 }, GUSD: { BTGUSD: 141765.29622322 }, UUSD: { QNTUUSD: 29.4731369 }, PUSD: { ETPUSD: 68.5015549, ZAPUSD: 40.1461164 }, YUSD: { DAYUSD: 338.8757426, BERRYUSD: 248.9052084 }, QUSD: { STQUSD: 6039.7474451 }, IUSD: { WIKIUSD: 10575.2656811 }, FUSD: { ELFUSD: 14.04120135 }, URS: { ETHEURS: 2486.24206583, LTCEURS: 1485.789705, XMREURS: 2807.0239136 }, '0USD': { POA20USD: 20.1087685 }, EOS: { LSKEOS: 39.06901764 }, RWB: { BTCKRWB: 44.82036 } } Forward Tests This strategy was first coded about 48 hours ago on Binance. It lost about 0.5% in one day, and had 0.46 BTC in volume. https://imgur.com/qEyq1ZB The second iteration was on HitBTC, and as of about 10-12 hours ago has 0.12 BTC in volume (across many smaller orders, instead of the test version on Binance risking everything on one pair). https://imgur.com/U6p4pX6 It’s lost about 0.23% in that time: https://imgur.com/xEk6xe4 My calculations, based on losing 0.5% a day on average with entry level fees and based on HitBTC’s 0% maker fee after 1500BTC in 30-day volume, indicate that after a certain amount of time while trading a certain balance we can effect 0% fees, and therein effect profits: https://imgur.com/HFQjgl0 This is not including the chance we can get market maker benefits or the 0.01% rebate after 6000 BTC volume. https://imgur.com/80ifssM https://imgur.com/o5mpKYc Conclusion With enough volume anything is possible.
/r/CryptoMarkets
More news sources

HitBTC news by Finrazor

Trending

Hot news

Hot world news

Crypto Exchanges Under Fire: DragonEx Hacked, Coinbene Undergoes Sudden Maintenance

Singapore Exchange Loses A Mass Of Crypto Exchanges haven’t had the best start to 2019. Sure, Binance has been doing A-OK with its initial exchange offering (IEO) model, with its resident token rallying past $17, but lesser-known crypto platforms have been suffering. Earlier this year, QuadrigaCX was revealed to have ‘lost’ access to over $150 million worth of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other assets, as Cryptopia suffered a devastating hack. This facet of the industry’s misfortune has continued, unfortunately enough. According to CoinDesk, DragonEx, a Singapore-based exchange, was hacked. The company announced this unfortunate happening via its Telegram channel, in which DragonEx’s PR staff claimed that funds of users and the platform itself were “transferred and stolen.” DragonEx has yet to divulge the exact details of the crypto assets stolen, including the type and the nominal value. However, the company did post the addresses of the assumed hackers, of which there were about 20 pertaining to a series of assets (Bitcoin, XEM, EOS, XRP, ETC, etc.). From a brief look, a minimum of 135 BTC, 500 Ether, and 4,670 LTC were forcibly yanked from the exchange’s coffers. This, for those who are wondering, racks up to ~$800,000. The full amount hacked, however, could easily be much higher than this sum. DragonEx has purportedly informed a number of local authorities, including those in Estonia, Thailand, Singapore, and Hong Kong, to the attack. Elaborating, the crypto startup wrote: “We’re assisting policemen to do investigation. All platform services will be closed and the accurate assets loss recovery situation will be announced in a week. It was added that the firm will “take the responsibility no matter what.” Coinbene Under Seige? This comes as Coinbene suddenly revealed it would be undergoing maintenance. A tweet from the company claims that it “upgraded the platform wallet… operations such as deposit and withdraw will be affected.” While this is a normal announcement for exchanges across the board, Coinbene’s session came straight out of left field, leading to ramping speculation. Nick Schteringard posted the below message in a bid to draw suspicion to the exchange’s Ethereum wallets, which sent out a mass of ERC-20 tokens yesterday. Some strange activity spotted on #Coinbene. Users report that #ETH wallets were hacked and attach these two addresses. https://t.co/f5NxvfscSC https://t.co/S1WnwI8CUx #bitcoin #exchange— Nick Schteringard (@schteringard) March 26, 2019 Coinbene’s ongoing imbroglio comes after Bitwise Asset Management, an American crypto-centric investment services provider, targeted the exchange in its scathing report on fake Bitcoin trading activity. As reported by Ethereum World News previously, Bitwise drew attention to “suspicious exchanges” such as the little-known CoinBene to back its report. CoinBene purportedly utilizes “trade printing” between the bid and ask prices, hinting that there could be an automated system behind much of the trades. Thus, some have concluded that this sudden period of maintenance could be the platform’s bid to rectify bots and other bad actors. Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash The post Crypto Exchanges Under Fire: DragonEx Hacked, Coinbene Undergoes Sudden Maintenance appeared first on Ethereum World News.
Ethereum World News

Japanese E-Commerce Giant, Rakuten, Gets Nod of Approval by FSA to Launch Crypto Exchange

Rakuten, the e-commerce giant and Japan's Amazon has completed the registration of its cryptocurrency exchange Rakuten Wallet that will be going live next month, as per the press release of the company on March 25. The official announcement reads: “We are pleased to announce that our registration with the Kanto Finance Bureau has been completed […]
Bitcoin Exchange Guide

$3.4M Huobi Prime Sale Shows Investor Enthusiasm Remains High

Huobi Prime successfully completed its first initial exchange offering (IEO) on Huobi Prime this afternoon. The sale concluded in a matter of seconds, and raised $3.4M – proving that investor enthusiasm for the new token sale format isn’t confined to Binance Launchpad. TOP Network, a blockchain-based messaging service, was the first project featured on the new platform. More than 1.5bn TOP tokens were sold, around 7.5% of the total supply. The token was made available for trading almost immediately, and at the time of writing was exchanging hands at a multiple of around four times the asking price. The sale comprised three funding rounds, each offering larger quantities at a slightly higher asking price than the last. Although each round was set to last 30 minutes, each round was heavily oversubscribed and finished within seconds of opening. The first round completed within seven seconds. Huobi only announced its new Prime feature last week, as Crypto Briefing reported. Unlike the first few sales on Binance Launchpad, which were open to the general public, Huobi requires eligible participants to hold 500 Huobi Tokens (HT) – used to purchase tokens – at least 30 days prior to the sale. As Ross Zhang, Huobi’s head of marketing said at the time, this was to ensure the exchange gave equal opportunities to investors who were “involved and invested in our ecosystem”. Binance announced Sunday that Launchpad sales would now feature a new lottery-based format to its token sales. Better Protections For Investors… Unless Conflicts Arise? What makes IEOs interesting is that they tweak the token sale model. Instead of direct transactions between investors and projects, the exchange itself forms the counter-party. Participants must register and create an account on the platform, and this requires them to first pass KYC/AML checks. It’s also within the best interests of exchanges to ensure sales are full compliance. It’s their necks on the line and this means they are likely to carefully vet projects first. As Huobi said in its initial announcement, tokens must first pass a “[r]igorous screening and selection processes to ensure only premium projects that have yet to be listed on any major exchange are included.” Binance upgraded its own KYC/AML procedures today. Other exchanges are also looking at the IEO model, and despite a failure to launch with their first effort, Bittrex is seeking to offer VeriBlock as its next attempt. The VeriBlock project, which counts Bittrex CEO Bill Shihara as an advisor, would be valued at over $200M if the sale is completed successfully. Bittrex includes a disclaimer on its website explaining that as a result of Shihara’s dual role, “Bittrex holds a customary minority equity position in an affiliate of the sponsor of the VBK Coin Initial Exchange Offering, and will indirectly benefit from the successful completion of the Initial Exchange Offering.” Whether this discourages investors remains to be seen. Few would have thought three months ago that sales such as BitTorrent (BTT), Celer Network (CELR) and now TOP Network would have been possible. KuCoin’s Spotlight platform will be hosting its first token sale next week. Is an IEO season upon us? The author is invested in digital assets, but none mentioned in this article. Join the conversation on Telegram and Twitter! The post $3.4M Huobi Prime Sale Shows Investor Enthusiasm Remains High appeared first on Crypto Briefing.
CryptoBriefing

Why the New ‘Apple Card’ Credit Card Doesn’t Compete With Bitcoin

The Apple credit card launches this summer. Here’s why it nothing like Bitcoin and is more underwhelming than a utility token with no use-case. Apple Announces Credit Card Apple has long been revered as the world’s most innovative company. There’s no denying that the smartphone changed the way billions of people around the world live their lives forever. But it’s time for the trailblazing tech company to wake up and smell the roses. While Apple was releasing one carbon-copy product after another at higher and higher prices, the competition was busy doing the opposite. Now the high-end, high-priced tech manufacturer is scrambling to hold its own in a rapidly evolving market. And with the launch of its underwhelming Apple Card, there’s something sad about the stench of its desperation. Apple Card vs Samsung’s Built-In Bitcoin Wallet Apple’s largest competitor apart from the slew of cheaper Chinese products is undoubtedly Samsung. The South Korean giant hasn’t had an easy ride either with equally pricey products getting undercut left and right. But as one large company embraces the future, its flagship Galaxy S10 coming with a built-in Bitcoin wallet, Apple’s response is disappointing, to say the least. Rather than acknowledge the cryptocurrency revolution, and appeal to a younger market, the smartphone manufacturer aims to ‘disrupt’ the credit card industry. Isn’t that the wrong pool to be swimming in? The revolution won’t come in the form of borderless transactions since it’s only available in the United States. It also won’t be peer-to-peer, eliminate centralized institutions, or greatly reduce fees. Although its interest rates will be: Among the lowest in the industry Mind. Blown. Apple’s game plan is more about additional security of payments, no annual or foreign transaction fees, and the fact that (wait for it) its partner Goldman Sachs will never sell your data for marketing. You can even buy yourself a coffee on the Goldman Sachs blockchain. You just have to trust Apple and Goldman Sachs to do so. It’s a Custodial Hardware Hot Wallet The Apple Card will come built into the iPhone’s Wallet App, which effectively makes it a custodial hardware hot wallet for USD. Apple claims they will never track your transactions, and all the information will be held on your device. Users can request a laser-etched titanium card, should they be so inclined, although, there seems to be little point in that. In fact, why even offer a traditional card for a wallet the company wants you to get rid of in the first place? If you’ve failed to be bowled over by so much innovation so far, there’s more. Users can track their spending on their phone through a user-friendly app. You Have to Trust Goldman Sachs In the wake of major gaffes by tech companies like Facebook and Google, Apple is pushing its next-generation security and privacy features. The centralized entity will not track your transactions and Goldman Sachs (the other centralized entity) has agreed not to sell user data. Explosive stuff compared to a decentralized alternative financial system which requires no intermediaries at all. Increased adoption of Apple Pay? Perhaps. A revolution in finance? It’s just as well Cook wasn’t speaking at a Bitcoin conference, the audience would have walked out in droves. Steve Jobs Would Have Had Bitcoin in iOS by Now Apple Card seems like a desperate bid to push Apply Pay onto the people rather than let them to choose how they manage their finances. CEO Tim Cook enthused that the card was: The most significant change in the credit card experience in 50 years. Exactly where has he been lately? Steve Jobs would have Bitcoin integrated into iOS by now.  The aim of the game is presumably to bump up the adoption of Apple Pay in partnership with market leaders MasterCard and Goldman Sachs. Two giant financial institutions that will hardly feel the pinch from Apple Pay and its meager card. There are no real tangible benefits for users of the card beyond a few outstandingly mundane offers. For example, paying for Apple products with your built-in Apple Card gets you a whopping 1-3% cash back on purchases. So what is Apple thinking entering an already saturated market that swathes of people are trying to overthrow? Once on the cutting-edge of innovation, Apple now seems to be extremely myopic when it comes to the future. What do you this of this new credit card? Will it undermine payment-focused cryptocurrencies with low fees? Share your thoughts below! Images via Shutterstock The post Why the New ‘Apple Card’ Credit Card Doesn’t Compete With Bitcoin appeared first on Bitcoinist.com.
Bitcoinist
By continuing to browse, you agree to the use of cookies. Read Privacy Policy to know more or withdraw your consent.