/biz/ - Business & Finance

Time to sell BNB?

>>10331575
Yes. It's literally a useless shit token now.

>>10331575
>he didn't sell yet

>>10331575
The price could go up for some strange reason. I bought.

>>10331584
>>10331596
>>10331575

you guys realise this just means that people need MORE bnb for a discount now?

IT changes little

>>10331557
fuck man, I just got started

>>10331633
More like more people won't give a shit to bother buying BNB to save up a few cents.

>>10331733

yes they will. 0.05 to 0.25? it was a few cents in the first place.
poor fags who only make one trade a month wont care but high volume traders will.

CZ has an intelligent pump and dump scheme going on with this coin, he knows what hes doing with it.

>traders need more bnb for fee discounts
>upcoming bnb chain
>binance about to start purchasing for the next burn

We're at the bottom of the cup and the next handle will take it above 0.003 BTC

The way I see it every trade now costs twice as much in bnb.
Or you can watch your .btc vanish with every trade.
Price should go up.

Fucking greedy chink

The tier system is designed to allow the huge market maker systems the ability to reduce spreads, cutting out smaller traders, and to capitalize on smaller margins. This will make scalping much more difficult for the average trader. Dare I say that these huge market maker bots are owned by Binance themselves.

For comparison, in order to get the same fee discount as before you would need to own $13,000 worth of BNB, and have $32,400,000 of trading volume in the past 30 days. This is the tier 3 system in its current state, and it assumes you also receive the 25% regular reduction.

The danger of this is that most of the liquidity will end up coming from a a select few, and thus the risk of losing that liquidity increases. Stratified entities diversify the volume. Failing that and you are at the mercy of whoever controls the market.... Unless it's Binance who controls the market ;).

Smaller market makers and scalpers will take their liquidity to other exchanges with lower maker/taker fees, such as Bitfinex and Poloniex. The average trader now has less interest or incentive to purchase BNB, and one of the pillar stones that made Binance the number 1 exchange has been removed.

>>10331869

>reduce fee to 0.025 reduction
>people need more bnb to save same cost on average
>binance make more from fees if people don't bother
>binance hold most their earnings in BNB, and they have a huge lock up for themselves
>with increased fees due to some people not buying bnb, they make more money, and then burn more tokens each quater, which will raise value of bnb.

hes smart. lmao at biztards thinking cheng peng will kill his coin

>>10331939

i just dont see it tht way. there no way this intelligent chink would do something against his interests (bnb lose value).

unless this fucks up and he revises it? anyway, he has the fuckinging data. how many times have binance reduced trading fees a shit load after "accidents" as compensation? there was a whole month they halved costs and bnb only went up in value.

really makes you think..

bitfinex fee (under 500K$) is 0.08% and 0.2% (maker and taker)
binance is 0.1% both way ,0.075% if u use BNB.
cmon. don't even compare

>>10331986
Why would they care about BNB if they controlled liquidity for every trading pair on the exchange with the most amount of volume?

Here is the tier system.
Loading up on bnb for a snapshot might be a good idea.

https://support.binance.com/hc/en-us/articles/360007480472-binance-launches-new-tiered-trading-fee-discount-program-and-adjusts-bnb-discount-rate

>>10331557
Yes, get suckers to sell right before it moons.

>>10332023

First, look how much is locked up for staff. its in the white paper. there is incentive

secondly, (speculation) we should have reason to assume binance does not hold that much liquid. they collect trading fees as primary income, which is collected in crypto or bnb.

coin burn each months demands they hold plenty of bnb too. binance also have no fiat pairings, so how do you think they can easily liquify all the fees they collect from each trade? they cannot. so they likely hold mostly crypto.
if the above is the case, they would have massive interest to try make bnb more valuable over time. (duh). in fact, they likely wont let it dump too hard without trying to increase demand for it. (look how they just announced a Coin of the month vote. this makes people have to buy lots of bnb to vote)

>>10331993
https://www.bitfinex.com/fees
$2,500,000.00 or more traded = maker fees: 0.040%

To achieve the same with Binance you need:
VIP 4 2,000 BNB ≥10,000 BTC
https://support.binance.com/hc/en-us/articles/360007480472

That's holding $26,000 worth of BNB, and having $72,500,000 of volume, kek.

where are these retards coming from ...

you need to SPEND more BNB because of the discount reduction.

you also need to HOLD BNB if you want more discounts (which every trader that isn't a brainlet will get) ... keep in mind, the value of BNB will increase, so everyone will want to secure their BNB now rather than later.

as a result, you have higher demand and less supply.

funds are fucking safu.

>>10332073
Of course when their printed token gets pumped they profit from it. But what's more lucrative is the ability to either form back room partnerships with huge institutions, flushing out the small guys, or even to maximize the profitability of their own bots by flushing out the small guys. They flushed out the small guys for a reason. You said it yourself, "there no way this intelligent chink would do something against his interests".

>>10332107

lmao, you are looking at the collective mental prowess of biz. always remember this when "muh bullrun" or shit posts lie that start.

>>10332114

you might be right. in all honesty we DONT know that kind of information so its 100% speculation. however if based CZ is acting in his interests ( adding value to bnb) its in MINE too as long as i hold it.

remember though: Binance's rise to significance was due to small traders. I imagine they will continue this for some time until its no longer profitable. maybe in a bear market things change. perhaps come the next normie run they will make it more small timer beneficial. my point here is that CZ is smart guy and he is always looking for the best way to add value to his coin right now.

also, reminder that they reduced the fees in HALF for all of april, and bnb still went on a mega rally.

>>10332153
My only point of contention is your claim that he is always looking for the best way to add value to his coin. I don't believe that to be true. His obligation as CEO and his biggest incentive as a business man is to make the most money possible, and seize as much control of the market as possible. BNB is just one outlet for attaining those profits, but rest assured, if an opportunity arose to control market liquidity for every trading pair on the exchange, flushing out other players, at the expense of reduced incentive for the average trader to own BNB? You can be sure that's what they will do.

>>10332153
small traders are pulling high amount of volume too. they just spam trades without even thinking much. bigger traders don't make as many trades.

>>10332219

i agree more or less. right now binance doesn't seem conductive to big traders. exchanges like Gdax and Bitfinex are more geared towards them and attractive to them. we are talking a different market model here. Gdax will even pay market makers to create volume on their exchange even if they make a loss.

but guess what? the trading volume for coins other than BTC/ETH/LTC/EOS is pathetic on bitfinex... big traders dont care about alts.

fiat exchanges are and always will be where the big boys play. Binance will come for that market soon, likely when they gain a fiat option... and we may not even have them as the same platform. there is no reason why they cant be split like coinbase/gdax are. this way they get the bet of both worlds.

>>10332303
Yeah I believe the new fee tier system is the switch to accommodate the bigger players, and their own pockets of course ;)

>>10332358


all that signifies to me is that their fiat trading exchange is almost completed or is a done deal behind the scenes. my prediction is a front end for fiat, which can be connected to the current exchange seamlessly but the two have different platforms.

complete with different fees and structures.
They also have a Dex in the works too, which will use BNB.
In other words, binance ARE trying to corner EVERY side of the market. and BNB will gain from this. i don't believe they are trying to lose market share from small traders for big. they are gunning for ALL of them.

Wait wtf I could have been saving 50% on trades

REEEEEE

>>10332074
correct. but sry for pointing out taker fee 0.2%.

>>10332405
My concern with this tier system isn't that they are aiming to lose smaller traders, but merely that it could be a possible consequence of excluding smaller traders from particular trading styles, i.e. scalping, market making etc. With huge players able to profit on minuscule spreads due to non existent fees, the smaller traders don't have a chance. It probably won't hurt the average trader who is trying to predict market swings or breakouts, but rather more secure and sophisticated trading methods via the use of bots etc. My market maker has made 160 trades since I started it up today, none of them are profitable under the new tier system (at least for the particular trading pair that I have been trading). They are attempting to flush me, and people like me out of the game, so their own systems can flourish. What they want are the naive traders, the ones who believe they can predict movements. The goal is not to play the game, but to own it and profit from the poor souls that do.

>>10332433
taker fees aren't a relevant point for the arguments that I'm making.

>>10332466
don't be a nerd, you're overthinking it - they just want to stay competitive for volume traders.

>>10332584
Welp you've convinced me

>>10332060
So wait. Brainlet here, if you’re <100 BTC trading volume, are maker + taker fees the same (0.1%)?

>>10332893
Yeah, although you will get a 25% reduction if you hold BNB and have the setting activated on your account page. So it is essentially 0.075% for maker and taker.

But for tier 1 you don't just need >= 100 BTC trading volume, you also need to hold 50 BNB.

>>10332914
Yeah of course. Well I’m obviously a small fry but I recently started trading on Mex and it blew my mind to find that they pay you to market make. Now I only do post-only orders.

I hold some BNB since late last year, but never looked into the fee breakdown. Kinda wish I had some incentive to not just fomo market-take on binance.

>>10331557
time to transfer to coinex .

holding a useless shit token when coinex pays dividend for holding and even pays for trading

Moderately sized bot trader here. I got some bad news sirs. This is a not a new incentive program. This tiered system had been handed out to high volume traders weeks/months ago. Fees are now being increased for everybody including established high volume liquidity providers.

What's worse and something I haven't seen discussed is changes in their API performance. Recently they switched from aws Tokyo to ??? and use cloudfront. This drastically hurt response times. More recently since having to update API keys I am no longer able to compete. I went from averaging tens of millions in daily volume to literal tens of thousands. I highly suspect that institutions or worse perhaps binance itself have secret access to a superior API (either an actual real time websocket or FIX API) despite adamantly spewing that everybody has the same access to data/order execution.

Anyway I sold my BNB and will likely stop attempting to provide liquidity here. It's just not profitable anymore. Kucoin, bibox, cointiger, coinex, fcoin, huobi, and others are all superior Chinese exchanges now for my purposes despite the average users feelings about wash trading. Even bittrex is now superior to binance. Possibly even poloniex.

Not fudding or shilling (could easily drop referral links to dozens of exchanges I'm on) just extremely frustrated with binance. I stupidly thought CZ was a different breed of China but turns out he's no better than coinbenes female CEO. ZJ of fcoin is now the last Chinese person I will ever put my faith in. If he lets me down I'll probably stick to exchanges headed by whites for the rest of my trading career.

>>10333175
Its strange. they risk losing a lot of business.
who the fuck is going to benefit from this if people migrate?

>>10333175
be real binance is a overhyped chinese normie shit exchange. i can not even trade there because everything looks shit.

>>10331838
Are you retarded
>Year 1: 50% discount; pay 50% of total fee in BNB
>Year 2: 25% discount: pay 75% of total fee in BNB

But is funds Safu ?

>>10333583
binance is not a sacmfu

https://www.cryptoglobe.com/latest/2018/07/crypto-billionaire-in-secret-recording-binance-and-tron-are-scammers-neo-worthless/

>>10333333

>>10333175
>More recently since having to update API keys I am no longer able to compete.

same, also got the feeling that shit got harder to trade on after each "maintenance" or api "hack"

>>10331557

just dump BNB and buy Bibox ....no brainer

>>10333696
bibox is shit. gives dividends every week.

coinex is the future

>>10333721
so why is it shit if it gives you dividends every week?

>>10333674

why would binance try to push out smaller bot traders and moderate ones? they are hoping that big volume traders make up the deficit + more i suppose

>>10333749
yeah has to be that, they treat regular api users like shit anyway
ressetting api keys overnight, changing weight on api endpoints out of the blue, no way to automatic cancel trades in case of maintance or if you hit the rate limit ...
but I would probably push out all small bot traders as well and focus on making the few big ones happy