Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Bitcoin
Options
Comments
-
Actually there's quite a bit of demand for another currency type instrument. It's not all about saving money on online transactions.Peterdalkey wrote: »There is a business and consumer demand for a low cost secure stable electronic payments/ money transmission service/structure, there is no demand for another currency type instrument.
One of the things that the sovereign debt crisis exposed was that between the advent of the Euro and the progress of globalization in the World economy, there were precious few avenues to put your money in when things turned nasty. Back in the eighties, you could shift your money from Sterling to Dollars, or Dollars to Deutsche Marks because economies were less tightly linked; suddenly there was nowhere to do, the Euro had swallowed many of the options that used to be available and pretty much every currency was a mess.
As a result we saw huge appreciation in the few options left; principally the Swiss Franc and in commodities, notably gold.
The creation of something like BitCoin would find demand in the financial markets, to address this, without doubt - given this, I say 'something like' BitCoin simply because BitCoin isn't a realistic contender, as things stand.
Actually, even if it wasn't at the centre of a speculative bubble at present, I'd be surprised if BitCoin would be viable in the long term, due to it's finite supply.
Where on Earth did you get this?email has nailed fax and now is killing SMS
A combination of affordable mobile Internet connectivity and OS's that allowed the development and installation of third party software on mobiles is what pretty much killed SMS. When someone can send a message for 'free' using Whatsapp, Facebook, iMessage or whatever, rather than pay for every 160 characters of text via SMS, it's a bit of a no-brainer.
Email didn't figure into it at all, if it did, Blackberry would have killed SMS ten years ago; which it didn't.
I believe the demand is there, but I'd agree that BitCoin is probably not the right supplier.Business is about giving the market what it wants or showing them innovation to create that demand, Bitcoin has failed these acid tests.0 -
There are plenty of alternative holdings to any particular currency, the last thing we need is another half assed currency.
Email on mobiles is a huge part of communications and has killed SMS, bundled data has simply facilitated it, despite free SMS bundles. Email killed fax in the hardwired world years ago. Just as fax killed telex! Blackberry got killed by wide availability of affordable smartphones and missed that boat.0 -
I know a few currency analysts that would disagree with you.Peterdalkey wrote: »There are plenty of alternative holdings to any particular currency, the last thing we need is another half assed currency.
I'm afraid that's not the case, and SMS usage only began to deteriorate significantly post-2007, as messaging apps took off. Email isn't even he most popular messaging platform any more.Email on mobiles is a huge part of communications and has killed SMS, bundled data has simply facilitated it, despite free SMS bundles.
That email killed fax (or for that matter traditional mail), is something I don't dispute. Nor would I dispute that Blackberry failed to see the Smartphone revolution until it was too late (Microsoft also didn't see it coming, but were able to turn things around a lot faster).Email killed fax in the hardwired world years ago. Just as fax killed telex! Blackberry got killed by wide availability of affordable smartphones and missed that boat.0 -
There are plenty of other asset classes other than currencies. I did give a hint by using the term alternative holdings!
Last figures I saw MS had a tiny market share <10% ! Android 50% IOS 25%0 -
I'm aware of that, doesn't really make any difference what I was said though.Peterdalkey wrote: »There are plenty of other asset classes other than currencies. I did give a hint by using the term alternative holdings!
And? I said that Blackberry didn't see it coming until it was too late and Microsoft didn't see it coming either, but fortunately for them they managed to do so before it was too late.Last figures I saw MS had a tiny market share <10% ! Android 50% IOS 25%
They're still in the game and growing (although I don't see them ever getting beyond 12% unless either Google or Apple screw up). Meanwhile, Blackberry has become the Dead Parrot of the Smartphone industry.0 -
Advertisement
-
Perhaps the desperate late purchase of Nokia Mobile by MS will turn their annihilation in this space around.
You responded about your currency analysts added nothing to the debate and seemed rather disjointed. But hey, whatever makes you happy is good with me.
Bitcoin is the topic and my points were made purely made as one who has moved from every technology mentioned, telex, fax, email, analog mobile, PC, web, gsm, 3G, blackberry and now smartphone/tablet. They come, they go. They add value and use-ability and get superceded. Bitcoin and it's variants are just steps along the way. The market will define the winners and losers, our job, as business owner managers is to keep up with the winners.0 -
They've already turned it around. WP has almost certainly survived the initial cull with third place in the race - a distant third at about 12% of the market by 2017, but still surviving; unlike Nokia's platforms (Symbian and Maemo), which are gone, and RIM-Blackberry which is really just waiting to be euthanased.Peterdalkey wrote: »Perhaps the desperate late purchase of Nokia Mobile by MS will turn their annihilation in this space around.
Because you expressing your opinion how "last thing we need is another half assed currency" added so much more value to the discussion?You responded about your currency analysts added nothing to the debate and seemed rather disjointed. But hey, whatever makes you happy is good with me.
Yes and no, because you left one out there - the Internet.Bitcoin is the topic and my points were made purely made as one who has moved from every technology mentioned, telex, fax, email, analog mobile, PC, web, gsm, 3G, blackberry and now smartphone/tablet. They come, they go.
No doubt it too will be superseded some day, but that won't be for a while and in the meantime it's been a complete game changer to how business is conducted.
So while I'd agree that presently BitCoin, or something like it, is probably not going to 'stick', I suspect that it's a good idea to keep an eye on this space as I think that sooner or later something like it will come alone that will.0 -
I will wait for the facts, your 2017 statistics are very "interesting", love to see how you would stand them up! Gotta love the faith of the young!
Sorry for using the term web, to me it means the internet but hey my error.
If you have a better proposition for a new currency other than the current crop of half assed crypto offerings, now would be a good time to speak up.0 -
There's actually a good chance I'm older than you.Peterdalkey wrote: »I will wait for the facts, your 2017 statistics are very "interesting", love to see how you would stand them up! Gotta love the faith of the young!
As to my prediction, it's an educated guess. If you'd like to PM me, I will happily supply you with links to an article I wrote in 2001 and another short one in 2007 that both included predictions around the telecoms/mobile sector that turned out to be correct (including the demise of opco run services, such as SMS).
So with respects, there's a bit more experience than faith behind what I've said and, at least in the telecoms sector, more experience than you appear to have.
I've never suggested that the current crop of 'currencies' isn't 'half assed'; I've actually repeatedly suggested that BitCoin isn't likely to succeed and is at best going to suffer a major backlash when the bubble it's in bursts. All I've said is that the idea behind them is ultimately a good one, and just needs proper implementation.If you have a better proposition for a new currency other than the current crop of half assed crypto offerings, now would be a good time to speak up.0 -
I just love a challenge, I was born in June 1952, documentary evidence available. I you predate me, I concede! I predicted in 1967 that Red Alligator would win the Brit Grand National and put my pocket money down to back my faith , I was right, just a year early!
You may well be an expert in your field, but not even you are infallible in relation to the future. I do admire your confidence...... In yourself!0 -
Advertisement
-
My first telex address was 90717PFSEI. I got my first cellular phone in August ( I think) 1986 , number was 088 5532XX. I launched my first website in September 1997. You can work it out, I was always a bit of a laggard.
Poor AtomicHorror and Stampfly must be devastated at the turn this thread has taken!0 -
OK, whatever, I'd rather not waste any more of my time with someone who's not only repeatedly been unable to actually read what I've written, but is seemingly incapable of stringing together anything that even vaguely approximates an argument or case without making a personal attack.Peterdalkey wrote: »I just love a challenge, I was born in June 1952, documentary evidence available. I you predate me, I concede! I predicted in 1967 that Red Alligator would win the Brit Grand National and put my pocket money down to back my faith , I was right, just a year early!
You may well be an expert in your field, but not even you are infallible in relation to the future. I do admire your confidence...... In yourself!0 -
Having failed to stand up any of your assertions, you now accuse me of personal abuse as an escape mechanism. Diversionary, but not at all effective or even correct! Classic!0
-
I fully agree with the bubble comment but disagree with the remainder. Bitcoin is not a currency, it is a commodity, as are its clones. Over time, commodity price variations are much more volatile than currency fluctuations. That is why economies built on commodities have a tougher time on planning – e.g. Chile (copper) and most of the African countries (agricultural produce). Corruption/wars for mineral rights, etc. are not a help and inevitably happen over commodities, not currencies.The Corinthian wrote: »I do think that BitCoin or a BitCoin-like currency is going to be a major player at some stage, but for the foreseeable future I believe what we're looking at is an investment bubble with very few commercial benefits.
A commodity such as bitcoin never can be regarded as or grow into a currency (real money) because its very nature precludes the basic support systems (regulated markets) and does not have an infrastructure (World Bank, IMF, ECB etc.) around it. Nor does it have links to recognized ‘honest’ and regulated international settlement systems –e.g. Fedwire, RTGS systems, SWIFT, etc. Those developed to handle ‘real money’ and have a proven track record of success. Why would anybody want to replace them with a spurious exchange that could disappear overnight? Peterdalkey is correct when he says
There always is a demand for a lower cost service - either travel fares, broadband rates, money transmission service, whatever – everyone always wants something cheaper. However, it will be hard to beat what is on offer at present prices for funds transfer unless you strip out the main cost factor – regulation and compliance. That will not happen because antimoney-laundering regulations, coupled with the cost of regulatory oversight will not go away but actually will get (and will continue to get) more expensive and invasive.Peterdalkey wrote: »There is a business and consumer demand for a low cost secure stable electronic payments/ money transmission service/structure, there is no demand for another currency type instrument. .
I share PeterDalkey’s view that there is no business community demand for a quasi-bitcoin product – there will be no demand because it would be too volatile, unsafe and possibly illegal. International legislation on AML on its own has raised the bar. Growing risk from both terrorism and tax evasion (or even tax avoidance) control measures will raise the bar further. That alone will doom any commodity like bitcoin.
Most of the ‘new currency’/bitcoin proponents posting here are either techies who are in love with the notion of a ‘cybercurrency’ or those who never ran a business, online or other. If there is a need for anything it is the development of a ‘trade facilitation aggregator’ incorporating multiservices including a tweaked/lowcost payment method operating within the existing regulated framework. If that is considered worthwhile, starting a thread on it would be better than leaving it here under the death knell tolling the toxicity of bitcoin.0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »I fully agree with the bubble comment but disagree with the remainder. Bitcoin is not a currency, it is a commodity, as are its clones. Over time, commodity price variations are much more volatile than currency fluctuations. That is why economies built on commodities have a tougher time on planning – e.g. Chile (copper) and most of the African countries (agricultural produce). Corruption/wars for mineral rights, etc. are not a help and inevitably happen over commodities, not currencies.
A commodity such as bitcoin never can be regarded as or grow into a currency (real money) because its very nature precludes the basic support systems (regulated markets) and does not have an infrastructure (World Bank, IMF, ECB etc.) around it. Nor does it have links to recognized ‘honest’ and regulated international settlement systems –e.g. Fedwire, RTGS systems, SWIFT, etc. Those developed to handle ‘real money’ and have a proven track record of success. Why would anybody want to replace them with a spurious exchange that could disappear overnight? Peterdalkey is correct when he says
There always is a demand for a lower cost service - either travel fares, broadband rates, money transmission service, whatever – everyone always wants something cheaper. However, it will be hard to beat what is on offer at present prices for funds transfer unless you strip out the main cost factor – regulation and compliance. That will not happen because antimoney-laundering regulations, coupled with the cost of regulatory oversight will not go away but actually will get (and will continue to get) more expensive and invasive.
I share PeterDalkey’s view that there is no business community demand for a quasi-bitcoin product – there will be no demand because it would be too volatile, unsafe and possibly illegal. International legislation on AML on its own has raised the bar. Growing risk from both terrorism and tax evasion (or even tax avoidance) control measures will raise the bar further. That alone will doom any commodity like bitcoin.
Most of the ‘new currency’/bitcoin proponents posting here are either techies who are in love with the notion of a ‘cybercurrency’ or those who never ran a business, online or other. If there is a need for anything it is the development of a ‘trade facilitation aggregator’ incorporating multiservices including a tweaked/lowcost payment method operating within the existing regulated framework. If that is considered worthwhile, starting a thread on it would be better than leaving it here under the death knell tolling the toxicity of bitcoin.
Not true. Zynga Accepting Virtual Currency. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-01-05/bitcoin-tops-1-000-again-on-adoption-by-zynga-amid-wider-usage
By the way, I am also very skeptical about this currency. Do not see any potential there.0 -
Not true. Zynga Accepting Virtual Currency. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-01-05/bitcoin-tops-1-000-again-on-adoption-by-zynga-amid-wider-usage
By the way, I am also very skeptical about this currency. Do not see any potential there.
Really? You claim my entire post is untrue because of a reference in an article stating that
(my bold) What is the underlying value proposition? Buying virtual bonus items in a game is not relevant to real commerce, it is tapping into a tiny income stream that buys a virtual product (gametime) that has an extremely low 'production' cost, so any income is likely to create some profit and capture a new customer.Zynga will accept bitcoin which can be used to buy virtual items in some of its games?
Did you miss the bit in the article where another said
(my bold)The company needs time before it starts accepting Bitcoins in order to figure out how to process Bitcoin transactions and to hedge Bitcoin sales (the currency is highly volatile), he said.
So how are they going to create a forward market? More importantly, if they do, who is going to test the hedge to prove it has value? Remember all those 'superb' hedge instruments that were designed to protect CDOs? Do you recall what happened to the options back then?0 -
Sorry, you're quite right - I actually referred to it as an electronic commodity currency earlier, which would be a far more accurate description of it than calling it a currency.pedroeibar1 wrote: »I fully agree with the bubble comment but disagree with the remainder. Bitcoin is not a currency, it is a commodity, as are its clones.
Indeed, it's use as a currency is questionable to begin with; has the topic of it's inbuilt finite supply been touched on in this thread? After all, why do you think we all shifted to fiat currencies in the first place?
It's nature no more precludes regulation or support than any other commodity - it's just a question of organizations and governments devising and enforcing the means of doing so.A commodity such as bitcoin never can be regarded as or grow into a currency (real money) because its very nature precludes the basic support systems (regulated markets) and does not have an infrastructure (World Bank, IMF, ECB etc.) around it.
Thing is, if ever happened, it would become like every other financial product, with commissions and restrictions, thus making the original motivation for the currency moot. My own feeling is that BitCoin, or something like it, will end up becoming just another financial investment product and not a 'currency', in the long term.
True, I get the impression that much of the support for BitCoin is ideological or tied to the hype surrounding the present investment bubble that has formed around it.Most of the ‘new currency’/bitcoin proponents posting here are either techies who are in love with the notion of a ‘cybercurrency’ or those who never ran a business, online or other.
At the same time, some of the 'business' views expressed here have been limited too. Being the digital equivalent of Steptoe and Son, may give one direct commercial insights, but it hardly makes one an economic guru and there's been more than one narrow conclusion made here on the lines of "it wouldn't work in my business, ergo it cannot work in any business".
Given this, I concur that for SME's in general, BitCoin offers little or no value and far too much risk and headache.0 -
The Corinthian wrote: »Indeed, it's use as a currency is questionable to begin with; has the topic of it's inbuilt finite supply been touched on in this thread? After all, why do you think we all shifted to fiat currencies in the first place?
It is infinitely divisible, so the fact that its supply is limited only serves to prevent third parties from devaluing by printing more wholesale. It is not finite in the sense that gold or other commodities are finite. Practically speaking, supply is infinite if it is infinitely divisible.
In conclusion, absolutely nothing definitive has come of this thread, but it was still worthwhile. Obviously serious question marks hang over Bitcoin's real utility. Nothing has been mentioned here about its value in developing markets with the right infrastructural & social environments, such as Argentina. Bitcoin is currently a better currency then about 40-50 of the worlds lowest fiat currencies, which gives can give it a foothold at least. No rational person would ever say it could compete with $ or €, but over time sophisticate financial & contractual instruments can be created to make carrying Bitcoin for short periods feasible, allowing for a safe level of cashflow and ultimately a more fluid online economy, unmolested by financial cleptocracies.
There is absolutely a good deal of ideology involved in being a proponent of Bitcoin. The idea that that is a purely negative thing is not worth commenting on. Ideology in itself does not make one blind to reality or practicality. In fact, those who claim no ideological bent are the ones who are blind, as not even being honest enough to introspect on the roots of their own views. Much of the vehemence in this blog against Bitcoin is ideological in the extreme. If it wasn't the thread would not have produced so much negative interest and emotion.
Nobody knows what will happen with Bitcoin, or more importantly, the underlying protocol (also called Bitcoin, confusingly) in the future.0 -
The debate on here has certainly been heated, but it is hardly surprising that business/commercial interests do not embrace the sentimental, philosophical or ideological. If it works and is of benefit, they are interested in it, if not, it is the work of the devil! It is the risks, extremely limited application and use of bitcoin that have drawn the negative comment.
That the proponents of bitcoin and those who have a wider interest in the topic continued to debate simply exacerbated the situation. As the thread became so long, it became totally ungainly, with many later arrivals not reading the foregoing posts. It is also hard not to conclude that there was not an element of cerebral showboating going on too!0 -
How are you going to do that exactly? Devalue by 50% by asking people to give you half of their BitCoins?It is infinitely divisible, so the fact that its supply is limited only serves to prevent third parties from devaluing by printing more wholesale. It is not finite in the sense that gold or other commodities are finite. Practically speaking, supply is infinite if it is infinitely divisible.
That reminds me of an old Not the Nine O'Clock News sketch which introduced a revolutionary system for letting deaf people know when the phone is ringing. After a long a detailed demonstration and explanation, the deaf person (played by Rowan Atkinson) finally picks up the phone and the punchline is that he ultimately can't use it anyway as he's deaf.Bitcoin is currently a better currency then about 40-50 of the worlds lowest fiat currencies, which gives can give it a foothold at least.
BitCoin is no doubt far better a 'currency' then about the worlds most worthless fiat currencies; but what is the telecommunications and IT infrastructure of Somalia, Zambia, Paraguay or Laos like?
Actually it's very much worth commenting on, as ideologically fuelled economics is what gave us mass starvation under Stalin's and Mao's Five-Year Plans. If the twentieth century taught us anything, is that just because you're ideologically committed to an economic policy, doesn't actually mean it isn't a complete lemon.There is absolutely a good deal of ideology involved in being a proponent of Bitcoin. The idea that that is a purely negative thing is not worth commenting on.
So, while ideology in itself may not make one blind to reality or practicality, it's interesting to note how often in the past it has done precisely this (more often than not perhaps), and thus very much worth commenting on.0 -
Advertisement
-
The Corinthian wrote: »How are you going to do that exactly? Devalue by 50% by asking people to give you half of their BitCoins?
Genuinely surprised at how this alludes your cognitive ability... I'm not going to explain the ramifications of it being infinitely divisible, they are too obvious!Actually it's very much worth commenting on, as ideologically fuelled economics is what gave us mass starvation under Stalin's and Mao's Five-Year Plans. If the twentieth century taught us anything, is that just because you're ideologically committed to an economic policy, doesn't actually mean it isn't a complete lemon.
So, while ideology in itself may not make one blind to reality or practicality, it's interesting to note how often in the past it has done precisely this (more often than not perhaps), and thus very much worth commenting on.
The idea that the likes of Alan Greenspan and their ilk are not ideologically driven is absolutely laughable. You can't have ANY economic system without ideology. A powerful enough ideology, adhered to by the majority, could support the function of Bitcoin in exactly the same way as the current system is upheld by its own internal logic & ideological promoters.0 -
So what’s the difference between infinitely divisible and printing more?It is infinitely divisible, so the fact that its supply is limited only serves to prevent third parties from devaluing by printing more wholesale.
Argentina has enough currency problems already without getting involved with bitcoin. It also has an infrastructure – shaky, I agree – but it it physical, not virtual. Bitcoiners failed to address how it could work, it is not for those who dismiss it to do so.Nothing has been mentioned here about its value in developing markets with the right infrastructural & social environments, such as Argentina.
I disagree, its volatility puts it further down the list. Even stating it is better than the bottom quartile is hardly praise! Also, the ZIM$ and the Korean WON have a tourist resale / souvenir value and also can be placed on a nail in the WC – a virtual currency cannot fulfil that role!Bitcoin is currently a better currency then about 40-50 of the worlds lowest fiat currencies, which gives can give it a foothold at least.
Bitcoin proponents have failed miserably to show how a futures market can be created, by whom and how it could be governed or regulated. A crock of s#1t remains a crock, no matter how it is dressed up. It will smell the same whether it is held for short or long periods. Ask anyone who once worked in Lehmans!........ over time sophisticate financial & contractual instruments can be created to make carrying Bitcoin for short periods feasible, allowing for a safe level of cashflow and ultimately a more fluid online economy
I agree with the first sentence. Your choice of expressions likeThere is absolutely a good deal of ideology involved in being a proponent of Bitcoin. .......Much of the vehemence in this blog against Bitcoin is ideological in the extreme. If it wasn't the thread would not have produced so much negative interest and emotion.
indicates where you are coming from. The negative comments on bitcoin came from those with ecommerce, money market, manufacturing and retail business experience. Some responses were harsh but that IMO was due to the business naivety of some posters’ comments and the failure of bitcoin promoters to show commercial applications that work (or even had a chance of working.) That disconnect makes it like trying to discuss the finer points of the plus-que-parfait with somebody who does not even speak French!...unmolested by financial cleptocracies0 -
OK, now you're trying to dismiss a challenge to your argument rather than address it and questioning my intelligence to do so. Not good.Genuinely surprised at how this alludes your cognitive ability... I'm not going to explain the ramifications of it being infinitely divisible, they are too obvious!
I'm quite aware of what you're saying, I'm just questioning whether it makes sense. So, for example, you want to increase money supply because economic activity is growing beyond the ability of the current supply to support it. You suggest some form of devaluation, say 50%, as the BitCoin is divisible - grand. I've got 20 bit coins in my 'wallet'. How's that work?
I never suggested they're not, so that's a strawman, although I would question that they are as ideologically motivated as the examples I gave.The idea that the likes of Alan Greenspan and their ilk are not ideologically driven is absolutely laughable.
Which is why the Soviet command economy ultimately succeeded...A powerful enough ideology, adhered to by the majority, could support the function of Bitcoin in exactly the same way as the current system is upheld by its own internal logic & ideological promoters.0 -
Eircoin Avoid run by a Cowboy Beware
Hey ******,
Please provide your bank account so I can return your funds. I not longer want your custom
We do our best to provide a service in a new area which goes through constant and unseen
changes. There is little we can do about the global forces which control bitcoin.
I will return your funds when I receive an account from you
Regards,
Dave
Actions
************
17:37
To: David Fleming
Hi
I only seen your email now, when i got back from the bank.So you have my money now but cannot provide what i ordered. The bitcoin exchange is closed since yesterday but your website was accepting orders today. I cannot find the terms of service on your website0 -
indeed this comes as a shock, but it does seems as if the "technical issues' related to wallet malleability and the like have had wider downsides for more than this poor bunch of "misfortunates" !0
-
B0 SELECTRA wrote: »Eircoin Avoid run by a Cowboy Beware
Hey ******,
Please provide your bank account so I can return your funds. I not longer want your custom
We do our best to provide a service in a new area which goes through constant and unseen
changes. There is little we can do about the global forces which control bitcoin.
I will return your funds when I receive an account from you
Regards,
Dave
Actions
************
17:37
To: David Fleming
Hi
I only seen your email now, when i got back from the bank.So you have my money now but cannot provide what i ordered. The bitcoin exchange is closed since yesterday but your website was accepting orders today. I cannot find the terms of service on your website
wut?0 -
howamidifferent wrote: »wut?
It would appear to be a semi-literate email exchange and a moan post from somebody who played with fire and got fingers burned. Alas, alack; Darwin was right!0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »It would appear to be a semi-literate email exchange and a moan post from somebody who played with fire and got fingers burned. Alas, alack; Darwin was right!
Sent money to buy bit coin -> order could not be fulfilled, refund offered -> tantrum0 -
They are claiming DNS attacks but it also appears that code has been hacked and issues with security etc http://www.forbes.com/sites/leoking/2014/02/12/bitcoin-hit-by-massive-ddos-attack-as-tensions-rise/
All this for the system that was supposed to be the ultimate in cyber technology!! Cryptocrap!0 -
Advertisement
-
Sort of funny/peculiar that this is one of the main forum banner ads at the moment, Timing is everything they say!! http://www.bitcoinirl.ie/?utm_source=Boards&utm_medium=Banner&utm_campaign=Boards0
Advertisement