9 ms·

Bitcoin's UK future looks bleak

174 points by AshleysBrain 13y ago

jebus989 13y ago
I think a remaining problem with Bitcoin is that people think it somehow owes them free money, as detailed by this post. (While that may have been true in the early GPU and CPU mining days, now to venture down that road requires serious investment for diminishing returns.) The further away the currency gets from this way of thinking, the more stable and accepted it'll become.
- brador 13y ago
  Stable? It will crash and rise and crash and rise. Once we get faster tradability we'll start to see flash crashes. That's when the fun begins.
  - jebus989 13y ago
    As an established currency we can only assume it'll become as largely uninteresting as the others (major economic events aside). Of course, we need the infrastructure and diversification of exchanges etc. etc. I for one will be pretty disappointed if in a few years people can still make money shorting BTC and DDoS'ing exchange front-ends.
    - brador 13y ago
      A flash crash will be caused by panic selling. And it will happen soon after average joe gets a way to sell his bitcoins into traditional currency, reliably, within an hour or a day. And it will be unstoppable. The current stability/rise is from a reluctance to sell, which dissapears fast when markets are falling. This is why Bitcoin is essentially a pyramid scheme. People are gonna get burnt. The Vancouver ATM shows the authorities still don't know what they're dealing with and how to apply the laws already in place in this area.
      - asciimo 13y ago
        How did "average joe" purchase the the bitcoins that he is unable to sell? When this hypothetical selloff occurs, who will buy his bitcoins? How is this hypothetical selloff different than those that have already occurred in the bitcoin markets? Why will it be unstoppable? Please explain the "current stability" of bitcoin that you referenced. How is bitcoin like a pyramid scheme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_scheme http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_scheme)? What are the laws that the Vancouver ATM is circumventing? Thank you in advance.
        betterunix 13y ago
        "How did "average joe" purchase the the bitcoins that he is unable to sell?" The same way he purchased stock he could not sell of. Time elapsed between the buying and the selling. "When this hypothetical selloff occurs, who will buy his bitcoins?" Who buys stock during a sell-off? There will be people who believe that Bitcoin will rise again, and who see a chance to profit from that.
      - xixi77 13y ago
        "slow boom, fast crash" is pretty much a property of any financial investment of any kind. Most assuredly, it will be the case with bitcoins as well. It hasn't destroyed stocks, it hasn't destroyed bonds (which not very easy to sell btw, but crash just fine), it won't destroy bitcoin either. It's exactly the opposite -- it's lack of an ability to quickly turn bitcoins into regular currency, and slowness of transaction processing, that has a chance of dooming the whole enterprise. As it stands, these are constraints on growth, and an incentive to develop and use alternatives. BTW, the "flash crash" term is usually used to refer to transitory liquidity events followed by equally fast recoveries, rather than regular busts after which price tends to stay depressed for a while, which seems to be what you are talking about here.
      - BTCatFidorBank 13y ago
        Hi Brador, here i can give more infos on that: Our partnerplatform Bitcoin.de will enable near-relatime trading & settlement of Bitcoins for German customers. And with realtime, we are talking about seconds to max. a few minutes. Regards from Munich, Florian
  - vbuterin 13y ago
    Umm, we see flash crashes already. What else would you call the drop from $350 to $310 here: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg5zig15-minzczsg2013-11-07zeg2013-11-09ztgSzm1g10zm2g25 http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg5zig15-minzczs... ?
    - brador 13y ago
      I'd call that a correction not a crash.
- TomGullen 13y ago
  How does my post detail that bitcoin owes people free money? I'm just trying to push for a more level playing field.
  - jebus989 13y ago
    From what I gather you're attempting a high-volume, low-margin resale "business" and you want to currency to be on a level playing field with forex? Because then you're dealing with more efficient markets (hence won't get free money) and will have to leverage your kidneys just to bring home a few satoshis.
    - TomGullen 13y ago
      Interesting you mention forex. We get paid commission via Steam each month in USD. Using our banks forex, it costs us a lot in crappy non competitive spreads. Using Bitcoin, we save literal thousands. We don't actually use Bitcoin for this process because transfer wise is competitive in comparison. But if transfer wise didn't exist, we'd definitely do it that way. Low level forex might have razor sharp margins, but consumer forex is a fixed rip-off industry. Another reason I support bitcoin. Free markets should be driving prices down and exist in competitive markets. Consumer forex does not exist in a market with these conditions. Bitcoin is a good mechanism some startups could use to introduce more competition and introduce significantly more value for consumers.
      - jebus989 13y ago
        Sorry I think there's been some confusion. Forex refers to the currencies exchange markets, not swapping holiday money at a bureau de change or doing the same through your bank. (As an aside it's pretty straightforward to open a USD account in the UK.) While HN is great and all it sounds like you need to consult an accountant.
- lcampbell 13y ago
  Looking further into it, it seems pretty much any forex in the UK is subject to VAT[1]. Even though Bitcoin is classified as a single-purpose voucher, I suspect it comes out to being the same amount of taxes (from the perspective of running an exchange). (EDIT: completely wrong, heh) -- [1] http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/vatfinmanual/vatfin2740.htm http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/vatfinmanual/vatfin2740.htm
  - robinhouston 13y ago
    “Foreign exchange transactions are normally exempt supplies.” [1] [1] http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageLibrary_PublicNoticesAndInfoSheets&propertyType=document&columns=1&id=HMCE_CL_000111#P84_9183 http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPort...
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
- DanBC 13y ago
  > I think a remaining problem with Bitcoin is that people think it somehow owes them free money, as detailed by this post That's not the impression I got from the post. I understood the OP to be asking for fair, equal, footing for dealing bitcoin as with other money. Financial services in the UK tend to be VAT free. Bitcoins have been given a classification which means VAT, at 20%, is payable. Perhaps OP should check what other EU bitcoin vendors pay in VAT. Or maybe set up complex routes of bitcoins from tax havens to the customers, ala Starbucks etc.
  - notahacker 13y ago
    Wouldn't fair, equal footing for dealing with Bitcoin involve paying £5000 to apply to register with the FSA and dealing with the same and money laundering regulations that financial services firms have to? Here's 145 pages to get you started on some of the rules you might have to follow as a provider of VAT-exempt "e-money" instead of "single purpose vouchers" http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/international/approach_emoney.pdf http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/international/approach_emoney.pdf These are in turn a lot less onerous than some of those those for exchangers and remitters of currency...
    - TomGullen 13y ago
      Sure. Was perfectly willing to register for MLR if it was necessary, and so would be happy to pay £5k or any other fees in the process. That's a small startup cost.
rurounijones 13y ago
Wow, that was a very in-depth investigation he did. Kudos, unfortunately outcome, but kudos none-the-less.
- TomGullen 13y ago
  Author here, thank you! It's tiring meeting all the resistance I do when trying to investigate these issues. As cheesy as it sounds any thanks I do get really does motivate me.
  - sarreph 13y ago
    Dude, despite not owning any bitcoins myself, it's a depressing picture that you've painted of our institutions' reluctance to accept what could be a revolutionary currency. I hope you keep us posted.
    - mseebach 13y ago
      > our institutions' reluctance to accept what could be a revolutionary currency So, that's a pretty inherent quality of revolutionary things. UK banks are under a lot of regulatory pressure to not facilitate money laundering. An important part of that is to be able to follow the paper trails of who has when money when. It's not just Bitcoin businesses that can't easily open accounts, there's trickiness across the board.
      - sarreph 13y ago
        It is simply my opinion that the UK considers itself too much of a financial stalwart in the schema of grandiose capitalism, where it feels as though it has to stand by its archaic principles, in the face of many other much more conventionally strict economies' (such as German) ability to accept a new concept that, for once, is gaining credible traction and interest. Were it not for the immense usage, support, and extensive literature that I would not take such an issue with the UK's reluctance to Bitcoin as I do.
ekpyrotic 13y ago
I cannot find a contact address. Please send me an email - see my profile for my address.
- AshleysBrain 13y ago
  His email is tom@scirra.com btw.
  - ekpyrotic 13y ago
    Thanks. Pinged him.
dotBen 13y ago
As a British citizen I admire his interest to operate the business domestically within the UK (and thus create UK tax nexus), but given the nature of the business and the run-around he's unsurprisingly receiving, I'm surprised he doesn't/didn't incorporate the business off-shore in the Caymens/Luxembourg/etc. You can still operate it from within the UK, especially if you have the proof from HMRC (UK IRS) that it's not illegal practice, etc.
- TomGullen 13y ago
  I did consider it. But my first exercise was to attempt to do things in what I consider to be the right way, open and upfront. For example the business name was "bitcoin anchor ltd" when I was repeatedly advised to name it something else to subvert bank flags. I wanted to see what resistance I would run into and I could see no compelling reason why I shouldn't be able to do this. As events unfolded (slowly) I've become more interested In working to level the playing field instead rather than running a second business that would require far more investment in time than it would if I was as to operate wholly in the uk. Don't mistake this for lack of drive, I have obligations to my current business which take priority.
  - yapcguy 13y ago
    The banks are committed to fighting fraud? What a joke. Any letter to the banks should inculde a list of all their recent scams and fraud, from interest rate rigging, to mis-selling of products, along with the penalties they've paid.
    - madaxe 13y ago
      Fighting fraud which loses them money. Fraud which makes them money is fine, because it's not fraud, it's "for your convenience".
  - madaxe 13y ago
    The UK is sadly becoming increasingly like defective ex-soviet states, where doing things in the "right, open and upfront" way is no longer possible, as one is actively punished for honesty. Had a fascinating chat with a Latvian chap who was telling me how literally every business in the country keeps two sets of books.
Pitarou 13y ago
TL;DR British financial institutions would like Bitcoin to go away. Any UK based Bitcoin exchange will be taxed out of existence. I really admire Tom Gullen for going the extra mile to get answers from those in power.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
cynicalkane 13y ago
The author misunderstands the current bank regulatory environment. Banks are not only obliged not to participate in criminal activity, the way the laws work is that they are increasingly required to do the policing themselves. If a bank does business with some guys and it turns out the guys are money laundering, that can be the bank's fault. For instance, one of the charges against HSBC is that they built up a backlog of fraud alerts. Another charge is that they didn't tune their fraud alert levels in a manner requested by the government. HSBC is also charged with actual money laundering but these two charges I mentioned are not money laundering in the sense understood by most people. And the more ethical reg execs at the more ethical banks have, among their top priorities nowdays, avoiding charges like these. There's even been a sort of reverse regulatory capture: top bankers see among their ethical responsibilities the job of being the world's money police. This is a natural consequence of voters demanding politicians "hold banks responsible" when their accounts are used for nefarious purposes. Many HN commenters, I've noticed, share the same view. Well, be careful what you wish for. A regulatory environment in which banks are liable if they handle digital cryptomoney from who-knows-where is a regulatory environment in which they will refuse to do so. The knee-jerk urge to paint big banks as shady criminals will only intensify, not mitigate, the regulatory pressure.
- eterm 13y ago
  They also from my reading misunderstand VAT. If they bought BC at £1 and sold at £1.20, then the VAT would be effectively only on £0.20 as they could claim back the VAT from the purchase when they sold. VAT would only scupper them if they were selling BC they had mined themselves, but their talk of trying to set up a bank makes it sound like this isn't the case.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    They buy bitcoin at £1. They add a markup of 5%, taking it to £1.05 Then they add 20% vat, taking it to £1.26 The final customer pays the VAT, which is collected from the OP. They reclaim VAT on things they buy, not things they sell.
    - 13y ago
rheide 13y ago
Offtopic but I have to mention it: this is one of the worst mobile experiences I've ever had. The text after initial load is too small, and when you try to zoom in it blurs the text until it finally loads, which on a crappy internet connection can take ages. seriously, why go out of your way to make reading text, one of the lightest possible activities on a mobile device, so horrible?
- TomGullen 13y ago
  I know, and sorry. Me and my brother run Scirra, along with our artist from Brazil. We've got a huge amount of work on our plate and were only a 3 man team. When I developed the website from the beginning I took the decision to not care too much for mobile friendliness as I'd rather spend the time developing new sections rather than testing on multiply evolving devices for a minority audience. Also consider our app is for desktop so mobile users are a minority. The sites already a lot for a small team, working on better mobile support isn't high on my list right now.
handelaar 13y ago
Is there some reason he went to the Office of Fair Trading and not -- say -- to the Banking Ombudsman, whose actual job this is?
- TomGullen 13y ago
  Is OFT not a suitable first port of call? I believe the banks are abusing their dominant market position, to suppress the competition bitcoin offers. I also suspect that collectively they may be working as a cartel on this issue again which falls under OFTs interest. They might claim otherwise but in my view they've lost the right for me to give them the benefit of doubt. For me to change my view they need to explain themselves better, certainly the reply from BBA failed on that. As to why I didn't approach the ombudsman, I'm an amateur at politics and government and this is all new to me. Doing the best I can and I'm well aware some of my choices may be sub optimal.
ye 13y ago
Are there any securities, like stocks or mutual funds, tied to the price of BTC?
- tmoullet 13y ago
  This is one: https://www.secondmarket.com/company/bitcoin-investment-trust https://www.secondmarket.com/company/bitcoin-investment-trus... There may be more. I remember reading about the Winkelvoss' trying to do something similar.
notdrunkatall 13y ago
I hold a fair amount of bitcoin as both a speculative investment, and because I support bitcoin in principle. I've long suspected that the biggest threat to bitcoin's long-term survival will be the power structure - banks or government or both - but I hold out hope that the will of the people to use this currency will overpower the will of the powers that be to suppress it. I've put my money where my mouth is, and I appreciate good articles like these which delve into the subject in detail.
- betterunix 13y ago
  "I hold out hope that the will of the people to use this currency will overpower the will of the powers that be to suppress it." What makes you think that such will exists beyond a fringe of extreme libertarians and anarchists? Excluding that fringe and excluding speculators, what you are left with are people who want to avoid the fees associated with electronic payments. Those people are using Bitcoin via intermediaries as a way to send and receive their local fiat currency. In other words, Bitcoin itself is irrelevant; any electronic payment system with lower fees would do, regardless of how it is structured.
  - aianus 13y ago
    There are a lot of people who live in countries like Argentina where there is no confidence in the currency as a store of value. Bitcoin provides a way for people in these countries to bypass unpopular capital controls. There are also a lot of people who live in countries with a high rate of fraud or don't have access to banking services or credit cards. Bitcoin, as an extremely cheap and irreversible payment method, would allow them to participate in e-commerce. It's true that the average law-abiding middle-class American isn't going to see much benefit from Bitcoin but they're a small subset of the population of the world.
  - notdrunkatall 13y ago
    I hate it when people inject their own political bias into my statements, thereby misinterpreting them before they proceed to knock the strawman down. It's such a waste of time for all involved. That statement included no specific reason for widespread adoption. I merely said that if people wish to use bitcoin for whatever reason, then I hope that they succeed. Whether they use it for convenience (the many) or for principle (the very few), I care not. Their reasons for using it are irrelevant. What matters in the long run is that consenting adults are allowed to do as they wish without interference from meddlesome third parties. That is all.
corford 13y ago
Isn't bitstamp a UK incorporated company?
- hackerboos 13y ago
  Incorporating isn't the problem. The problem is obtaining a bank account which is why Bitstamp doesn't have UK accounts.
  - corford 13y ago
    Sorry, I was wondering more about the VAT issue alluded to in the blog.
olefoo 13y ago
The cynical side of me would like to point out that he future of just about everything in the UK looks pretty bleak. Unless you're a banker or an authoritarian nutcase. And with no guarantee of press freedom, a massive surveillance state internally; etc. etc. It does not sound like an appealing place to do business.
- r00fus 13y ago
  The US proves that a "guarantee of press freedom" means squat, when it's ignored in high profile with other guaranteed rights. Where in the world is a good place to do business then?
  - olefoo 13y ago
    You have a valid point; although in the US you will have advocacy groups that can field convincing legal arguments if you are being tortured, prosecuted for espionage for whistle blowing, etc. But yes, in the US the mask is slipping more and more. I mean it's nice that when bad things go down we can point to the bill of rights and scream about it's being violated; even if it is cold comfort to the victims of official malfeasance. But hey at least we aren't a 1000-year old theocracy with no bill of rights whatsoever. And our guarantees of freedom of the press, means that those who want to know about stories that Very Serious People don't want heard will hear about them; even if they don't break out into open discussion until long after the fact. As to where is a good place to do business...? It depends on what your business is.
PaulAJ 13y ago
I think the OP needs to decide if he is going into business or politics. If business then incorporate outside the UK, get a bank account in Poland or Slovenia, and get on with it. If politics then set up a political association, call for members/donations, lobby parliament and organise demonstrations. Being effective at either requires single-minded dedication. Don't try to do both at the same time.
- user40 13y ago
  The problem with going offshore are the bank fees for international wire transfers. The UK uses GBP not EUR so that is also a barrier to overcome. edit: also, don't forget about what happened with transferwise.com. It was used to transfer GBP to EUR to get bitcoins from a Polish bank account. Transferwise then blocked people from using the service to buy bitcoins presumably due to UK bank pressure.
- TomGullen 13y ago
  I have taken the decision to not pursue the business side of it. I'm more interested in helping BTC politically.
pmorici 13y ago
Isn't one of the largest Bitcoin exchanges, BitStamp.net, based in the UK? They list a UK address on there website, why don't they have these problems... 5 Jupiter House Calleva Park, Aldermaston Reading Berkshire RG7 8NN United Kingdom
- TomGullen 13y ago
  Yes, but they run with international bank accounts. This means users of the service are often required to pay international transfer fees (was £25 for us). On the face of it this seems like a good solution, but it's another barrier for wider adoption. Also observe the gbp/usd value difference on a site like bitcoinaverage.com. It's often ~10% dearer when buying in gbp. This expensive price difference is caused by illiquidity and higher logistical differences when buying btc from a uk point of view. Uk buyers are suffering for it. It's not fair.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
tomrobinson 13y ago
The BitPrice team has been in discussions with the UK government and regulators about Bitcoin for the past 9 months. Although I share many of the frustrations expressed here, I am much more optimistic about the outlook for Bitcoin in the UK. As a prospective UK Bitcoin exchange, we have managed to secure meetings with the FCA, HM Treasury and Number 10 Policy Unit - in fact we’ve managed to get into Downing Street twice to talk about Bitcoin. At the higher levels there does seem to be a genuine desire to engage with and promote new financial technologies such as Bitcoin, and to increase competition in the UK banking and payments sector. Educating people is still 99% of the battle – explaining what Bitcoin is, dispelling the myths and spelling out the benefits, whilst not ignoring the risks. The VAT issue is an example of the obvious lack of understanding of Bitcoin in some quarters. We were also notified by HMRC that they consider Bitcoin to be a voucher: "most likely a face-value voucher", on which VAT must be paid. For anyone with even a basic understanding of Bitcoin, this obviously doesn't make sense: they aren't issued by anyone, they don't have a "face value" and they can be redeemed for a wide range of goods and services. If they insist on using the "voucher" classification, the "credit voucher", which can be "redeemed at a number of retailers" and on which VAT is not usually due, seems more appropriate. Hopefully this issue can be resolved quickly by simply switching to this classification. The upshot of these meetings is that we do now have a commitment from the Treasury that they will seriously consider how Bitcoin might achieve official recognition in the UK. In doing this the government is seeking input from Bitcoin businesses, for example through the FinTech Challenger Business Workshop that NewFinance organised a couple of weeks ago. Any interested parties can submit comments, which will be passed on to the government, see: http://files.meetup.com/2243521/RFC%20-%20FinTech%20Challenger%20Businesses%20Workshop%20-%20Oct%202013%20.pdf http://files.meetup.com/2243521/RFC%20-%20FinTech%20Challeng... A common concern expressed by many fintech businesses at this event was the difficulty in obtaining bank accounts and accessing the UK payments network. This issue isn’t restricted to Bitcoin businesses – at the moment it is almost impossible for any money service business to obtain a bank account in the UK. The current lack of recognition of Bitcoin by financial regulators doesn't help the situation, but it is a wider money laundering issue. Overall, I am optimistic that the UK will take an enlightened approach to Bitcoin, and that banking and tax issues will be resolved soon. London has become so dependent on the financial services sector that it simply cannot afford to ignore such a revolutionary financial innovation. Tom Robinson BitPrice www.bitprice.com
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
BTCatFidorBank 13y ago
Hi there, upfront, the disclaimer: I'm the product manager for Bitcoin business at Fidor Bank, Munich (The bank, operating with the marketplaces Bitcoin.de and Kraken.com) The discussion in the article is interesting, though it misses the point (in my opinion). As what i've heard from the Bitcoin industry, indeed it may be a problem in getting support from banks. But the denail of this support is not in the sense as mentioned in the article; and yes, big sorry for that, this article obviously smells to me like conspiracy+aliens+nazis-on-the-moon+"guys-meeting-in-a-carpeted-room-and-having-a-cigar-and-a-bottle-of-wine-to-decide-whom-to-support". No one ever has asked and discussed the role of banks in the whole thing. #1: I haven't checked the banks the colleague in the article has tried to work with. But: For "big banks" (whatever this may mean in your perspective), it may be somewhat problematic to support companies on a level beyond a regular bank account, because if you need regulatory consulting, this is something that doesn't work straight-through - instead, it involves a lot of tailormade solutions (and country by country, in the worst case) #2: If you do a business, that a bank can't judge, the bank is free to deny support. Classic business, a standard banks understands it. But Bitcoin? Since this is new, and since no body has real(!) experience with it, they do not know how to evaluate. Plus: If the police/government/regulatory-authority finds out that you are supporting a big money-laundering-factory (by giving a bank account to them), there are people at the bank who may be put in jail, just because they didn't understand/didn't know. (And if you are not specialized in those new things, and if you have no experience with this new phenomena, its very likely that you do not understand whats going on! People in good-'ol corporate banking come from a completely different background, so they can't have the experience) And thats the rub: Instead of complaining why someone doesn't get a bank account, try to imagine -for a second- if anybody of you would be in that position - and i guess, no one of you would take the risk, right? :-) So, the most simple thing is just to deny the application for a bank account, instead of spending hours and hours of investigating and jumping into the materia... #3: The above mentioned #2 is evebn more important, if you consider how many requests you get from people interested in running/starting a Bitcoin-whatever-business: Since market is new, there is a gold rush, barriers are low (at least it seems like to most people), and every kid today thinks of running an exchange is that easy. In fact it is not. (and i confirm this to you since i do have a lof background/insider informations). So, imagine the position of the bank: - You do not have the people & experience yet - You get tons of requests from startups, most of them will never survive - If there is a business opportunity for your company, you just don't know - but you have to invest a lot of money(!) to get something on the road Now the magical question: WHAT do you do? :-)) #4: For most Bitcoin businesses out there, its not that you just need a simple bank account; if you want to operate in the current scenario, you need a lot more, depending on the country and the opinion of the regulatory authority. This involves a lot of work, a lot of time, a lot of money, a lot of uncertainty etc. (By the way: If you want to exchange money, you need a license - but in Bitcoins, everyone thinks having no regulation is good? Maybe you wanna think about that twice) And since all of these costs, most banks just say no, because its the easier and more efficient answer. #5: Here is now the conspiracy-theory part: Why, ever, should any bank deny a startup because it works with Bitcoins? Its just a too simple thought, because every bank is interested in doing & expanding business, so why would they have a interested in shuting-down you just because you use a new currency? Most people think, banks do not support it currently, because its a new currency which will attack "the power structure" of the current monetary system (which is, obviously, somewhat flawed and i can tell you this because i'm working in this sector ;-) But maybe you wanna read #6. #6: Biggest problem is to think, that even if Bitcoin will rule the world tomorrow, that there are no more banks. Even at T(0) after Bitcoin has taken over the world, there will be "banks" - maybe not what you think a bank is today, but even then there will be banks. Why? Its just not practical for your parents in their 50's to carry around a USB stick with all their assets on it. Its just a dumb idea. And even if the todays digital natives have reached their 50's, and even if they are "native with Bitcoin", also then its a very very bad idea to have all you assets in your pocket or at your apparment. No comes the advertorial of my post ;-) Since Fidor Bank is a very young bank, we are able to support those types of business and we are proud to work with our partners www.bitcoin.de and www.kraken.com in the area of Bitcoin exchanges. We do this, because we think that the financial sector needs innovation and disruption. And yes, even if we are a bank (see #6 above), we do not belive that banks will be passed away. We have an optimistic approach on that. Regards from Munich, Florian

174 points by AshleysBrain 13y ago

I think a remaining problem with Bitcoin is that people think it somehow owes them free money, as detailed by this post. (While that may have been true in the early GPU and CPU mining days, now to venture down that road requires serious investment for diminishing returns.) The further away the currency gets from this way of thinking, the more stable and accepted it'll become.

brador 13y ago
Stable? It will crash and rise and crash and rise. Once we get faster tradability we'll start to see flash crashes. That's when the fun begins.
- jebus989 13y ago
  As an established currency we can only assume it'll become as largely uninteresting as the others (major economic events aside). Of course, we need the infrastructure and diversification of exchanges etc. etc. I for one will be pretty disappointed if in a few years people can still make money shorting BTC and DDoS'ing exchange front-ends.
  - brador 13y ago
    A flash crash will be caused by panic selling. And it will happen soon after average joe gets a way to sell his bitcoins into traditional currency, reliably, within an hour or a day. And it will be unstoppable. The current stability/rise is from a reluctance to sell, which dissapears fast when markets are falling. This is why Bitcoin is essentially a pyramid scheme. People are gonna get burnt. The Vancouver ATM shows the authorities still don't know what they're dealing with and how to apply the laws already in place in this area.
    - asciimo 13y ago
      How did "average joe" purchase the the bitcoins that he is unable to sell? When this hypothetical selloff occurs, who will buy his bitcoins? How is this hypothetical selloff different than those that have already occurred in the bitcoin markets? Why will it be unstoppable? Please explain the "current stability" of bitcoin that you referenced. How is bitcoin like a pyramid scheme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_scheme http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_scheme)? What are the laws that the Vancouver ATM is circumventing? Thank you in advance.
      - betterunix 13y ago
        "How did "average joe" purchase the the bitcoins that he is unable to sell?" The same way he purchased stock he could not sell of. Time elapsed between the buying and the selling. "When this hypothetical selloff occurs, who will buy his bitcoins?" Who buys stock during a sell-off? There will be people who believe that Bitcoin will rise again, and who see a chance to profit from that.
    - xixi77 13y ago
      "slow boom, fast crash" is pretty much a property of any financial investment of any kind. Most assuredly, it will be the case with bitcoins as well. It hasn't destroyed stocks, it hasn't destroyed bonds (which not very easy to sell btw, but crash just fine), it won't destroy bitcoin either. It's exactly the opposite -- it's lack of an ability to quickly turn bitcoins into regular currency, and slowness of transaction processing, that has a chance of dooming the whole enterprise. As it stands, these are constraints on growth, and an incentive to develop and use alternatives. BTW, the "flash crash" term is usually used to refer to transitory liquidity events followed by equally fast recoveries, rather than regular busts after which price tends to stay depressed for a while, which seems to be what you are talking about here.
    - BTCatFidorBank 13y ago
      Hi Brador, here i can give more infos on that: Our partnerplatform Bitcoin.de will enable near-relatime trading & settlement of Bitcoins for German customers. And with realtime, we are talking about seconds to max. a few minutes. Regards from Munich, Florian
- vbuterin 13y ago
  Umm, we see flash crashes already. What else would you call the drop from $350 to $310 here: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg5zig15-minzczsg2013-11-07zeg2013-11-09ztgSzm1g10zm2g25 http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg5zig15-minzczs... ?
  - brador 13y ago
    I'd call that a correction not a crash.
TomGullen 13y ago
How does my post detail that bitcoin owes people free money? I'm just trying to push for a more level playing field.
- jebus989 13y ago
  From what I gather you're attempting a high-volume, low-margin resale "business" and you want to currency to be on a level playing field with forex? Because then you're dealing with more efficient markets (hence won't get free money) and will have to leverage your kidneys just to bring home a few satoshis.
  - TomGullen 13y ago
    Interesting you mention forex. We get paid commission via Steam each month in USD. Using our banks forex, it costs us a lot in crappy non competitive spreads. Using Bitcoin, we save literal thousands. We don't actually use Bitcoin for this process because transfer wise is competitive in comparison. But if transfer wise didn't exist, we'd definitely do it that way. Low level forex might have razor sharp margins, but consumer forex is a fixed rip-off industry. Another reason I support bitcoin. Free markets should be driving prices down and exist in competitive markets. Consumer forex does not exist in a market with these conditions. Bitcoin is a good mechanism some startups could use to introduce more competition and introduce significantly more value for consumers.
    - jebus989 13y ago
      Sorry I think there's been some confusion. Forex refers to the currencies exchange markets, not swapping holiday money at a bureau de change or doing the same through your bank. (As an aside it's pretty straightforward to open a USD account in the UK.) While HN is great and all it sounds like you need to consult an accountant.
lcampbell 13y ago
Looking further into it, it seems pretty much any forex in the UK is subject to VAT[1]. Even though Bitcoin is classified as a single-purpose voucher, I suspect it comes out to being the same amount of taxes (from the perspective of running an exchange). (EDIT: completely wrong, heh) -- [1] http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/vatfinmanual/vatfin2740.htm http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/vatfinmanual/vatfin2740.htm
- robinhouston 13y ago
  “Foreign exchange transactions are normally exempt supplies.” [1] [1] http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageLibrary_PublicNoticesAndInfoSheets&propertyType=document&columns=1&id=HMCE_CL_000111#P84_9183 http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPort...
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
DanBC 13y ago
> I think a remaining problem with Bitcoin is that people think it somehow owes them free money, as detailed by this post That's not the impression I got from the post. I understood the OP to be asking for fair, equal, footing for dealing bitcoin as with other money. Financial services in the UK tend to be VAT free. Bitcoins have been given a classification which means VAT, at 20%, is payable. Perhaps OP should check what other EU bitcoin vendors pay in VAT. Or maybe set up complex routes of bitcoins from tax havens to the customers, ala Starbucks etc.
- notahacker 13y ago
  Wouldn't fair, equal footing for dealing with Bitcoin involve paying £5000 to apply to register with the FSA and dealing with the same and money laundering regulations that financial services firms have to? Here's 145 pages to get you started on some of the rules you might have to follow as a provider of VAT-exempt "e-money" instead of "single purpose vouchers" http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/international/approach_emoney.pdf http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/international/approach_emoney.pdf These are in turn a lot less onerous than some of those those for exchangers and remitters of currency...
  - TomGullen 13y ago
    Sure. Was perfectly willing to register for MLR if it was necessary, and so would be happy to pay £5k or any other fees in the process. That's a small startup cost.

rurounijones 13y ago

Wow, that was a very in-depth investigation he did. Kudos, unfortunately outcome, but kudos none-the-less.

TomGullen 13y ago
Author here, thank you! It's tiring meeting all the resistance I do when trying to investigate these issues. As cheesy as it sounds any thanks I do get really does motivate me.
- sarreph 13y ago
  Dude, despite not owning any bitcoins myself, it's a depressing picture that you've painted of our institutions' reluctance to accept what could be a revolutionary currency. I hope you keep us posted.
  - mseebach 13y ago
    > our institutions' reluctance to accept what could be a revolutionary currency So, that's a pretty inherent quality of revolutionary things. UK banks are under a lot of regulatory pressure to not facilitate money laundering. An important part of that is to be able to follow the paper trails of who has when money when. It's not just Bitcoin businesses that can't easily open accounts, there's trickiness across the board.
    - sarreph 13y ago
      It is simply my opinion that the UK considers itself too much of a financial stalwart in the schema of grandiose capitalism, where it feels as though it has to stand by its archaic principles, in the face of many other much more conventionally strict economies' (such as German) ability to accept a new concept that, for once, is gaining credible traction and interest. Were it not for the immense usage, support, and extensive literature that I would not take such an issue with the UK's reluctance to Bitcoin as I do.

ekpyrotic 13y ago

I cannot find a contact address. Please send me an email - see my profile for my address.

AshleysBrain 13y ago
His email is tom@scirra.com btw.
- ekpyrotic 13y ago
  Thanks. Pinged him.

dotBen 13y ago

As a British citizen I admire his interest to operate the business domestically within the UK (and thus create UK tax nexus), but given the nature of the business and the run-around he's unsurprisingly receiving, I'm surprised he doesn't/didn't incorporate the business off-shore in the Caymens/Luxembourg/etc. You can still operate it from within the UK, especially if you have the proof from HMRC (UK IRS) that it's not illegal practice, etc.

TomGullen 13y ago
I did consider it. But my first exercise was to attempt to do things in what I consider to be the right way, open and upfront. For example the business name was "bitcoin anchor ltd" when I was repeatedly advised to name it something else to subvert bank flags. I wanted to see what resistance I would run into and I could see no compelling reason why I shouldn't be able to do this. As events unfolded (slowly) I've become more interested In working to level the playing field instead rather than running a second business that would require far more investment in time than it would if I was as to operate wholly in the uk. Don't mistake this for lack of drive, I have obligations to my current business which take priority.
- yapcguy 13y ago
  The banks are committed to fighting fraud? What a joke. Any letter to the banks should inculde a list of all their recent scams and fraud, from interest rate rigging, to mis-selling of products, along with the penalties they've paid.
  - madaxe 13y ago
    Fighting fraud which loses them money. Fraud which makes them money is fine, because it's not fraud, it's "for your convenience".
- madaxe 13y ago
  The UK is sadly becoming increasingly like defective ex-soviet states, where doing things in the "right, open and upfront" way is no longer possible, as one is actively punished for honesty. Had a fascinating chat with a Latvian chap who was telling me how literally every business in the country keeps two sets of books.

Pitarou 13y ago

TL;DR British financial institutions would like Bitcoin to go away. Any UK based Bitcoin exchange will be taxed out of existence. I really admire Tom Gullen for going the extra mile to get answers from those in power.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

cynicalkane 13y ago

The author misunderstands the current bank regulatory environment. Banks are not only obliged not to participate in criminal activity, the way the laws work is that they are increasingly required to do the policing themselves. If a bank does business with some guys and it turns out the guys are money laundering, that can be the bank's fault. For instance, one of the charges against HSBC is that they built up a backlog of fraud alerts. Another charge is that they didn't tune their fraud alert levels in a manner requested by the government. HSBC is also charged with actual money laundering but these two charges I mentioned are not money laundering in the sense understood by most people. And the more ethical reg execs at the more ethical banks have, among their top priorities nowdays, avoiding charges like these. There's even been a sort of reverse regulatory capture: top bankers see among their ethical responsibilities the job of being the world's money police. This is a natural consequence of voters demanding politicians "hold banks responsible" when their accounts are used for nefarious purposes. Many HN commenters, I've noticed, share the same view. Well, be careful what you wish for. A regulatory environment in which banks are liable if they handle digital cryptomoney from who-knows-where is a regulatory environment in which they will refuse to do so. The knee-jerk urge to paint big banks as shady criminals will only intensify, not mitigate, the regulatory pressure.

eterm 13y ago
They also from my reading misunderstand VAT. If they bought BC at £1 and sold at £1.20, then the VAT would be effectively only on £0.20 as they could claim back the VAT from the purchase when they sold. VAT would only scupper them if they were selling BC they had mined themselves, but their talk of trying to set up a bank makes it sound like this isn't the case.
- DanBC 13y ago
  They buy bitcoin at £1. They add a markup of 5%, taking it to £1.05 Then they add 20% vat, taking it to £1.26 The final customer pays the VAT, which is collected from the OP. They reclaim VAT on things they buy, not things they sell.
  - 13y ago

rheide 13y ago

Offtopic but I have to mention it: this is one of the worst mobile experiences I've ever had. The text after initial load is too small, and when you try to zoom in it blurs the text until it finally loads, which on a crappy internet connection can take ages. seriously, why go out of your way to make reading text, one of the lightest possible activities on a mobile device, so horrible?

TomGullen 13y ago
I know, and sorry. Me and my brother run Scirra, along with our artist from Brazil. We've got a huge amount of work on our plate and were only a 3 man team. When I developed the website from the beginning I took the decision to not care too much for mobile friendliness as I'd rather spend the time developing new sections rather than testing on multiply evolving devices for a minority audience. Also consider our app is for desktop so mobile users are a minority. The sites already a lot for a small team, working on better mobile support isn't high on my list right now.

handelaar 13y ago

Is there some reason he went to the Office of Fair Trading and not -- say -- to the Banking Ombudsman, whose actual job this is?

TomGullen 13y ago
Is OFT not a suitable first port of call? I believe the banks are abusing their dominant market position, to suppress the competition bitcoin offers. I also suspect that collectively they may be working as a cartel on this issue again which falls under OFTs interest. They might claim otherwise but in my view they've lost the right for me to give them the benefit of doubt. For me to change my view they need to explain themselves better, certainly the reply from BBA failed on that. As to why I didn't approach the ombudsman, I'm an amateur at politics and government and this is all new to me. Doing the best I can and I'm well aware some of my choices may be sub optimal.

ye 13y ago

Are there any securities, like stocks or mutual funds, tied to the price of BTC?

tmoullet 13y ago
This is one: https://www.secondmarket.com/company/bitcoin-investment-trust https://www.secondmarket.com/company/bitcoin-investment-trus... There may be more. I remember reading about the Winkelvoss' trying to do something similar.

notdrunkatall 13y ago

I hold a fair amount of bitcoin as both a speculative investment, and because I support bitcoin in principle. I've long suspected that the biggest threat to bitcoin's long-term survival will be the power structure - banks or government or both - but I hold out hope that the will of the people to use this currency will overpower the will of the powers that be to suppress it. I've put my money where my mouth is, and I appreciate good articles like these which delve into the subject in detail.

betterunix 13y ago
"I hold out hope that the will of the people to use this currency will overpower the will of the powers that be to suppress it." What makes you think that such will exists beyond a fringe of extreme libertarians and anarchists? Excluding that fringe and excluding speculators, what you are left with are people who want to avoid the fees associated with electronic payments. Those people are using Bitcoin via intermediaries as a way to send and receive their local fiat currency. In other words, Bitcoin itself is irrelevant; any electronic payment system with lower fees would do, regardless of how it is structured.
- aianus 13y ago
  There are a lot of people who live in countries like Argentina where there is no confidence in the currency as a store of value. Bitcoin provides a way for people in these countries to bypass unpopular capital controls. There are also a lot of people who live in countries with a high rate of fraud or don't have access to banking services or credit cards. Bitcoin, as an extremely cheap and irreversible payment method, would allow them to participate in e-commerce. It's true that the average law-abiding middle-class American isn't going to see much benefit from Bitcoin but they're a small subset of the population of the world.
- notdrunkatall 13y ago
  I hate it when people inject their own political bias into my statements, thereby misinterpreting them before they proceed to knock the strawman down. It's such a waste of time for all involved. That statement included no specific reason for widespread adoption. I merely said that if people wish to use bitcoin for whatever reason, then I hope that they succeed. Whether they use it for convenience (the many) or for principle (the very few), I care not. Their reasons for using it are irrelevant. What matters in the long run is that consenting adults are allowed to do as they wish without interference from meddlesome third parties. That is all.

corford 13y ago

Isn't bitstamp a UK incorporated company?

hackerboos 13y ago
Incorporating isn't the problem. The problem is obtaining a bank account which is why Bitstamp doesn't have UK accounts.
- corford 13y ago
  Sorry, I was wondering more about the VAT issue alluded to in the blog.

olefoo 13y ago

The cynical side of me would like to point out that he future of just about everything in the UK looks pretty bleak. Unless you're a banker or an authoritarian nutcase. And with no guarantee of press freedom, a massive surveillance state internally; etc. etc. It does not sound like an appealing place to do business.

r00fus 13y ago
The US proves that a "guarantee of press freedom" means squat, when it's ignored in high profile with other guaranteed rights. Where in the world is a good place to do business then?
- olefoo 13y ago
  You have a valid point; although in the US you will have advocacy groups that can field convincing legal arguments if you are being tortured, prosecuted for espionage for whistle blowing, etc. But yes, in the US the mask is slipping more and more. I mean it's nice that when bad things go down we can point to the bill of rights and scream about it's being violated; even if it is cold comfort to the victims of official malfeasance. But hey at least we aren't a 1000-year old theocracy with no bill of rights whatsoever. And our guarantees of freedom of the press, means that those who want to know about stories that Very Serious People don't want heard will hear about them; even if they don't break out into open discussion until long after the fact. As to where is a good place to do business...? It depends on what your business is.

PaulAJ 13y ago

I think the OP needs to decide if he is going into business or politics. If business then incorporate outside the UK, get a bank account in Poland or Slovenia, and get on with it. If politics then set up a political association, call for members/donations, lobby parliament and organise demonstrations. Being effective at either requires single-minded dedication. Don't try to do both at the same time.

user40 13y ago
The problem with going offshore are the bank fees for international wire transfers. The UK uses GBP not EUR so that is also a barrier to overcome. edit: also, don't forget about what happened with transferwise.com. It was used to transfer GBP to EUR to get bitcoins from a Polish bank account. Transferwise then blocked people from using the service to buy bitcoins presumably due to UK bank pressure.
TomGullen 13y ago
I have taken the decision to not pursue the business side of it. I'm more interested in helping BTC politically.

pmorici 13y ago

Isn't one of the largest Bitcoin exchanges, BitStamp.net, based in the UK? They list a UK address on there website, why don't they have these problems... 5 Jupiter House Calleva Park, Aldermaston Reading Berkshire RG7 8NN United Kingdom

TomGullen 13y ago
Yes, but they run with international bank accounts. This means users of the service are often required to pay international transfer fees (was £25 for us). On the face of it this seems like a good solution, but it's another barrier for wider adoption. Also observe the gbp/usd value difference on a site like bitcoinaverage.com. It's often ~10% dearer when buying in gbp. This expensive price difference is caused by illiquidity and higher logistical differences when buying btc from a uk point of view. Uk buyers are suffering for it. It's not fair.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

tomrobinson 13y ago

The BitPrice team has been in discussions with the UK government and regulators about Bitcoin for the past 9 months. Although I share many of the frustrations expressed here, I am much more optimistic about the outlook for Bitcoin in the UK. As a prospective UK Bitcoin exchange, we have managed to secure meetings with the FCA, HM Treasury and Number 10 Policy Unit - in fact we’ve managed to get into Downing Street twice to talk about Bitcoin. At the higher levels there does seem to be a genuine desire to engage with and promote new financial technologies such as Bitcoin, and to increase competition in the UK banking and payments sector. Educating people is still 99% of the battle – explaining what Bitcoin is, dispelling the myths and spelling out the benefits, whilst not ignoring the risks. The VAT issue is an example of the obvious lack of understanding of Bitcoin in some quarters. We were also notified by HMRC that they consider Bitcoin to be a voucher: "most likely a face-value voucher", on which VAT must be paid. For anyone with even a basic understanding of Bitcoin, this obviously doesn't make sense: they aren't issued by anyone, they don't have a "face value" and they can be redeemed for a wide range of goods and services. If they insist on using the "voucher" classification, the "credit voucher", which can be "redeemed at a number of retailers" and on which VAT is not usually due, seems more appropriate. Hopefully this issue can be resolved quickly by simply switching to this classification. The upshot of these meetings is that we do now have a commitment from the Treasury that they will seriously consider how Bitcoin might achieve official recognition in the UK. In doing this the government is seeking input from Bitcoin businesses, for example through the FinTech Challenger Business Workshop that NewFinance organised a couple of weeks ago. Any interested parties can submit comments, which will be passed on to the government, see: http://files.meetup.com/2243521/RFC%20-%20FinTech%20Challenger%20Businesses%20Workshop%20-%20Oct%202013%20.pdf http://files.meetup.com/2243521/RFC%20-%20FinTech%20Challeng... A common concern expressed by many fintech businesses at this event was the difficulty in obtaining bank accounts and accessing the UK payments network. This issue isn’t restricted to Bitcoin businesses – at the moment it is almost impossible for any money service business to obtain a bank account in the UK. The current lack of recognition of Bitcoin by financial regulators doesn't help the situation, but it is a wider money laundering issue. Overall, I am optimistic that the UK will take an enlightened approach to Bitcoin, and that banking and tax issues will be resolved soon. London has become so dependent on the financial services sector that it simply cannot afford to ignore such a revolutionary financial innovation. Tom Robinson BitPrice www.bitprice.com

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

BTCatFidorBank 13y ago

Hi there, upfront, the disclaimer: I'm the product manager for Bitcoin business at Fidor Bank, Munich (The bank, operating with the marketplaces Bitcoin.de and Kraken.com) The discussion in the article is interesting, though it misses the point (in my opinion). As what i've heard from the Bitcoin industry, indeed it may be a problem in getting support from banks. But the denail of this support is not in the sense as mentioned in the article; and yes, big sorry for that, this article obviously smells to me like conspiracy+aliens+nazis-on-the-moon+"guys-meeting-in-a-carpeted-room-and-having-a-cigar-and-a-bottle-of-wine-to-decide-whom-to-support". No one ever has asked and discussed the role of banks in the whole thing. #1: I haven't checked the banks the colleague in the article has tried to work with. But: For "big banks" (whatever this may mean in your perspective), it may be somewhat problematic to support companies on a level beyond a regular bank account, because if you need regulatory consulting, this is something that doesn't work straight-through - instead, it involves a lot of tailormade solutions (and country by country, in the worst case) #2: If you do a business, that a bank can't judge, the bank is free to deny support. Classic business, a standard banks understands it. But Bitcoin? Since this is new, and since no body has real(!) experience with it, they do not know how to evaluate. Plus: If the police/government/regulatory-authority finds out that you are supporting a big money-laundering-factory (by giving a bank account to them), there are people at the bank who may be put in jail, just because they didn't understand/didn't know. (And if you are not specialized in those new things, and if you have no experience with this new phenomena, its very likely that you do not understand whats going on! People in good-'ol corporate banking come from a completely different background, so they can't have the experience) And thats the rub: Instead of complaining why someone doesn't get a bank account, try to imagine -for a second- if anybody of you would be in that position - and i guess, no one of you would take the risk, right? :-) So, the most simple thing is just to deny the application for a bank account, instead of spending hours and hours of investigating and jumping into the materia... #3: The above mentioned #2 is evebn more important, if you consider how many requests you get from people interested in running/starting a Bitcoin-whatever-business: Since market is new, there is a gold rush, barriers are low (at least it seems like to most people), and every kid today thinks of running an exchange is that easy. In fact it is not. (and i confirm this to you since i do have a lof background/insider informations). So, imagine the position of the bank: - You do not have the people & experience yet - You get tons of requests from startups, most of them will never survive - If there is a business opportunity for your company, you just don't know - but you have to invest a lot of money(!) to get something on the road Now the magical question: WHAT do you do? :-)) #4: For most Bitcoin businesses out there, its not that you just need a simple bank account; if you want to operate in the current scenario, you need a lot more, depending on the country and the opinion of the regulatory authority. This involves a lot of work, a lot of time, a lot of money, a lot of uncertainty etc. (By the way: If you want to exchange money, you need a license - but in Bitcoins, everyone thinks having no regulation is good? Maybe you wanna think about that twice) And since all of these costs, most banks just say no, because its the easier and more efficient answer. #5: Here is now the conspiracy-theory part: Why, ever, should any bank deny a startup because it works with Bitcoins? Its just a too simple thought, because every bank is interested in doing & expanding business, so why would they have a interested in shuting-down you just because you use a new currency? Most people think, banks do not support it currently, because its a new currency which will attack "the power structure" of the current monetary system (which is, obviously, somewhat flawed and i can tell you this because i'm working in this sector ;-) But maybe you wanna read #6. #6: Biggest problem is to think, that even if Bitcoin will rule the world tomorrow, that there are no more banks. Even at T(0) after Bitcoin has taken over the world, there will be "banks" - maybe not what you think a bank is today, but even then there will be banks. Why? Its just not practical for your parents in their 50's to carry around a USB stick with all their assets on it. Its just a dumb idea. And even if the todays digital natives have reached their 50's, and even if they are "native with Bitcoin", also then its a very very bad idea to have all you assets in your pocket or at your apparment. No comes the advertorial of my post ;-) Since Fidor Bank is a very young bank, we are able to support those types of business and we are proud to work with our partners www.bitcoin.de and www.kraken.com in the area of Bitcoin exchanges. We do this, because we think that the financial sector needs innovation and disruption. And yes, even if we are a bank (see #6 above), we do not belive that banks will be passed away. We have an optimistic approach on that. Regards from Munich, Florian