Talk:Binary option

message: The UK is in the process of moving the regulation of binary options to the Financial Conduct Authority, rather than as gambling.. This is to close a loophole. Some other EU countries regulate binary options via their financial authorities, and once allowed in the EU, binary option brokers can operate anywhere in the EU.  This allows regulator shopping, where a binary option broker can find a friendly regulator country and then operate EU-wide..  See Banc de Binary and these articles on binary options scams. 
This has not yet taken effect. The final rules are supposed to be published on 3 January 2016, to take effect on 3 
January 2017. The binary options article probably should be updated early in 2016, when the new rules are out. John Nagle (talk) 20:49, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd just removed a section saying much the same from a May 2015 unreliable source.  The new reg will likely be good, taking the uncertainly out of who regulates them.  As of last May it looked like it was increasing the uncertainty. I'd still leave out the section until the change comes to pass.  Smallbones(smalltalk) 21:19, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Right. Let's see what comes out in January. This is a small part of a big realignment of financial regulation in the EU ("MiFID II ). Wikipedia has an article for MiFID, but it hasn't been updated and is out of date.  A good project for January. John Nagle (talk) 04:43, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: MiFID II delayed one year.. John Nagle (talk) 19:32, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK regulation changing 

message: There have been many edits from addresses from Wind.it, an ISP in Italy.  Someone seems to be trying to get a message across, but failing because of language problems.  Can you tell us what you are trying to do? Thanks. John Nagle (talk) 21:38, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: While this page has been invaded by PR and salespersons, the fellow is different as he appears to be simply driven by some theoretical reluctance in accepting the product as a genuine economic transaction. It may be valid, but he needs to refer to something other than a 19th century philosopher. Limit-theorem (talk) 00:05, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Right, this is neither PR nor vandalism.  The IP editor has inserted "Binary options don't represent investments but are the means for trying to do money with money, without any substantial activity, representing from a human perspective a wrong behaviour on ethical-moral grounds."  That's a legitimate ethical and theological position.  Warren Buffett has a nice statement on the subject. It's somewhat relevant to binary options, because regulators in different countries disagree on whether they're gambling or investment.  The UK currently considers them gambling, which is causing single-market trouble because other parts of the EU consider them investment. The US considers them illegal if the counterparty is the "broker", which is why Banc De Binary is in trouble. In any case, we need to hear from the IP editor. The article has been semi-protected for a week in hopes that they will communicate. If you're the IP editor, please comment here.  John Nagle (talk) 05:03, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  One cannot question binaries without questioning all financial products and mathematical finance. Mathematically, a binary is the building block of all financial products, so there is not analytic difference between a binary and a stock, a stock being an infinite sequence of binaries, with a strike price at every "tick". We use binaries as "atomic securities" to price markets. Maybe all of math-fin is bad, and all finance is bad, all markets are bad, according to some higher moral criterion, but questioning binaries without questioning other trading instruments and markets in general is inconsistent.  But I agree that betting parlors should not be a place for binary options; these should be part of general regulated markets (though this is my personal opinion). Limit-theorem (talk) 12:39, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  151.47.66.63, what are you trying to do? 

message: Someone has been removing the equations on grounds of "overkill". It makes absolutely no sense. This is an encyclopedia and we send students and trainees to get formulae from Wiki. When you google the page that's what you get.
The formulas need to be reinstated.  I will revert unless there is a specific spot where these formulas are found. Limit-theorem (talk) 16:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing the equations 

message: The Times of Israel just published an expose, "The wolves of Tel Aviv: Israel’s vast, amoral binary options scam exposed" which indicates that the binary options industry is mostly a scam.. Maybe we should take a stronger line in the lede.
We should distinguish between real options, where there's someone on the other side of the trade other than the broker, and bucket-shop operations, where the other party is the broker, acting as the "house" in a gambling transaction.  The US doesn't allow those. See Banc de Binary.  John Nagle (talk) 21:09, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on that article, and the previous SEC and CFTC actions against Banc De Binary, I've made the lede describe binary options as something that's usually a scam. That's pretty much what every reliable source that isn't selling binary options says. If you want to argue against this, do so here. Thanks. John Nagle (talk) 21:23, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  More Times of Israel articles: "Ex binary options salesman - here's how we fleece the clients" "Every single client with whom he worked ultimately lost all of their money." Another article "Why hasn't Israel shut down binary options scam"  John Nagle (talk) 21:32, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  After reading the Times expose, I've revised the lede and criticism sections.  In practice, it seems that most binary options are scams.  John Nagle (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the discussion; just something cosmetic: I find it preferable to not use "scam" as it is not very defined and instead resort to "questionable operation". Limit-theorem (talk) 22:51, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "Questionable operation" is a bit weak, given the Times of Israel expose. This is way beyond "questionable". The Times uses the term "scam". The SEC and CFTC use the terms "fraud" (when dealing with Banc de Binary), and "alleged fraud" and "illegal" talking about the industry. See the SEC alert "Binary Options and Fraud"  "Fraud scheme" is a possibility.  Thesaurus results: fraud, swindle, racket, trick;  hustle, flimflam, bunco, grift, gyp, cheat, deceive, trick, dupe, hoodwink, double-cross, gull; rip off, con, fleece, shaft, hose, bilk, diddle, rook, gyp, finagle, bamboozle, flimflam, hornswoggle.  The Times article points out that the binary option industry uses extensive SEO operations to make the top results for binary options look legit. Wikipedia shouldn't be a part of that.  John Nagle (talk) 00:44, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Something cannot be regulated by the SEC and then called fraud by the same SEC. So I see you mean prone to fraud or exploited by fraud operators such as Banc de Binary and similar sham outfits. Will look at a phrasing that reflects that. Limit-theorem (talk) 02:10, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  In the US, any option, binary or otherwise, must be traded on a real exchange, with an identifiable independent counterparty on the other side of the transaction.   This is much less profitable for the "broker" than running an operation where the customer bets against the "house" and the broker controls the odds.  NADEX does offer legitimate binary options in the US.. They list all the transactions each day. Outside the US, it's not clear that anybody in binary options is legitimate, although some jurisdictions allow transactions which are "betting against the house". How to express this?  Anyone else have an idea?  John Nagle (talk) 04:51, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a legitimate interbank market, worldwide. So not all nonlisted is in bucket ships. We should mention that.Limit-theorem (talk) 10:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there? Do institutions actually trade binary options?  I tried searching Google for "institutional investor" "binary option" and got nothing but spam and PR. John Nagle (talk) 16:52, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Tons have been done by banks in the interbank market. The web is biased to news. Limit-theorem (talk) 18:01, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  That needs to be sourced.  Searched for "interbank" and "binary", but got nothing but spam sites. There's an organization called "Binary Interbank", with a Facebook page and a web site that's down. Not finding anything useful.  John Nagle (talk) 18:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed, surprise! Found a lot in google books and google scholar but not in web. Added structured notes. Limit-theorem (talk) 19:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are lots of papers on binary options from a theoretical perspective, but not much on them as an actual finance tool. There has to be an active market with significant market depth if they're to be used for corporate finance hedging. Is there any indication that such a market exists? John Nagle (talk) 19:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Put a note on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Finance#Binary_options to get more attention on this article. John Nagle (talk) 01:24, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the whole binary options industry a scam? 

message: A binary option has a mathematical importance as the density of the risk neutral distribution. So the lede should distinguish between its theoretical and gambling roles.  I teach students binary options and link to this page and want to make sure they do not get confused with this gambling and shady aspect of the binaries. Limit-theorem (talk) 10:20, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that a declaration of a COI? The recent change to the lede looks a bit like trying to obfuscate the fraud aspect. John Nagle (talk) 22:00, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is teaching quantitative finance a COI? Limit-theorem (talk) 03:15, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I suppose not.  But we do need cites to show that binary options are an actual financial product used by institutions, if you want to claim that.  Here are today's transactions on Cantor's binary option exchange. Those are all far too small for institutional trading. NADEX isn't doing that many transactions, either.  John Nagle (talk) 04:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  We are talking about different aspects. A dice is a gambling instrument with shady characters involved but for us it is (with coin flips) the building block of probability for pedagogical reasons. So most of our interest in binaries in in the theory not the execution, as a pricing tool for financial derivatives as they deliver probabilities while regular options don't. I would be happy if they banned binaries just as probabilists would not mind if casinos were closed. Maybe we need two pages, one for theory the other for gambling ...  Incidentally I have reverted every advertisement by Banc de Binary and similar firms in the past two years to avoid polluting the page.Limit-theorem (talk) 04:21, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

text:  Fair enough.  Although, for most binary options, the time to maturity period is so short (minutes, sometimes seconds) that a Black-Scholes analysis is not meaningful.  John Nagle (talk) 19:09, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, I do not think this is accurate about time to maturity. The confusion may come from the fact that the hedge ratio blows up close to maturity, around the strike, hence the Greeks no longer work. To explain once again: is a theoretical construct that is invariant to expiration: regular options are sums of binaries. Limit-theorem (talk) 20:07, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Making the lede clearer about the binary

message: The binary options industry has a trade convention. The Times of Israel sent a reporter. Misc comments: "“In Asia, the region is really growing in appetite for forex trading,” Google executive Panos Lamprakos said in a presentation, while showing slides illustrating how the number of searches for “forex” and “binary options” in southeast Asia has skyrocketed in recent years." “We’ve worked very closely with the forex and binary industry over the last, I would say, six months,” said Liset van Oosterhout, an account executive for Twitter’s Israeli market, to a rapt audience. “We saw great results with a few of the advertisers, and it’s really a growing industry for us.”  Mention in article? There was also a note that SpotOption (the binary option platform) invented binary options, but the cited source was anonymous.John Nagle (talk) 20:20, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Binary option convention 

message: Reuters just exposed NRGbinary and Titan Traders as scams. John Nagle (talk) 21:23, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Israel-based scammers 

message: Undid a big revision to the math which was cited to a student site at the University of Waterloo. The anon IP resolves to the University of Waterloo.  Possible WP:OR. 
The Black-Scholes model math needs work.  Currently, the article claims that a common binary option which pays out if the underlying asset is higher at the end of the option period should be valued at
 C = e^{-rT}\Phi(d_2). \,
But most binary options are valid for less than a day, some only for minutes.  So rT, the risk-free increase in the value of the funds bet invested, is effectively zero.  So the formula simplifies to
 C = \Phi(d_2). \,
I think that for rT = 0, and r = k this is going to simplify to 1, which is what you'd expect. Unless the option can be exercised at any time (as in "American-type options"), it's just a bet against a random walk.  For a short period, the Black-Scholes analysis isn't useful. All that math kind of hides that basic fact. John Nagle (talk) 06:56, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with the removal of this material for the OR reasons stated. I wonder if there is some documented application of the random walk hypothesis to this trading instrument/method (which is it by the way?). - Brianhe (talk) 13:20, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undid big insertion of math by an anon 

message: Someone proposed a merge, but didn't start the discussion. Does anyone want to make a case for a merge with index trading?  Merging index trading into Stock market index option might be more useful. John Nagle (talk) 19:57, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed the tag. It looks like a drive-by tag. Merging this into index trading makes as much sense as merging apple into orange. I don't think a merge into Stock market index option would help much.  If anybody wants to merge somewhere, feel free to put on a tag, but they need to explain what they are thinking.  Smallbones(smalltalk) 20:30, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger? 

message: I'm doing some editing to try to make the article less jargon-y and more understandable to a broader audience. However, my technical knowledge in this field is not great and I encourage subject matter experts to determine if I've made anything wrong by accident. Coretheapple (talk) 15:29, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Noted that binary options are gambling only in some jurisdictions.  The UK had the most trouble with this; their gambling regulator decided they were financial, and their financial regulator decided they were gambling, which meant no regulation.  Both regulators finally agreed they were financial.  The real distinction with binary options is whether you're betting against a counterparty who bought the other side of the option (that's how NADEX works in the US, and that's legal and regulated) or whether you're betting against the house (that's called a Bucket shop (stock market), and illegal in the US, although not in Cyprus.) NADEX doesn't care whether who wins; they just take a commission from the winning side. A bucket shop, like a casino, needs the customer to lose.  Most of the scam-type binary option operators claim to be brokers, but they're the house.  (Although in 2014, SpotOption stopped pretending and came out with a binary option slot machine.) John Nagle (talk) 19:47, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  SpotOption's web site is now returning only a message "Our platform is currently undergoing improvements. Please try again later". Something may have happened. No news stories yet.  John Nagle (talk) 19:59, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I took out a reference to Nadex. Should that go back in? It didn't seem very consequential in the scheme of things, but maybe it is. Coretheapple (talk) 21:06, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: NADEX, which is a US exchange regulated by the CFTC, is worth a mention because there really are a few non-scam places to trade binary options.  Their shortest option is 20 minutes, not 30 seconds.. John Nagle (talk) 18:15, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I put that back in. I notice the Nadex article itself could use some additional sources and also seems to have dead links. Coretheapple (talk) 19:19, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Simplifying language

message: The Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission, as part of their belated crackdown on the binary option industry, has issued a list of domains they know about which are doing binary options business but are not regulated by them. Quebec's financial regulator also has a list. If any of these have Wikipedia articles, that's worth a mention there. Banc De Binary is on the Quebec list, and that's already covered.  John Nagle (talk) 18:08, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps these two sites should be external links? Coretheapple (talk) 18:13, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The US CFTC has a list, too. .  Probably worth mentioning all of them. John Nagle (talk) 23:56, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I support adding all the relevant ELs discussed above. Interesting entry on the US list "Banc de Options" I wonder if they are related to BdB? - Brianhe (talk) 00:03, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's hard to tell.  There are upwards of 400 binary option "brokers", but only a few "platforms" behind them, SpotOption being the biggest.  Things are opaque at the back end, with few reliable sources good enough for Wikipedia.  The financial arrangements between "brokers" and "platforms" are rarely clear, either. Sometimes the "broker" takes the financial risk.  Sometimes the "platform" does, and the "broker" is just a lead generator.  SpotOption offers both modes of operation. Other back ends include "O-Systems" . Tradeologic , and Airsoft Ltd.. SpotOption is the only one with enough third-party references to be in Wikipedia. Latest Times of Israel expose: . "... The binary options industry is “layered” in a manner he has seen only in espionage organizations or among world-class money launderers or terrorist organizations. Binary options companies, 90 percent of which, Carmon estimates, operate from Israel, similarly hide behind layers of false identities." This is from someone who makes their money by digging through those layers and collecting from the people behind the scam.  John Nagle (talk) 03:31, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists of unauthorized binary option broker domains 

message: "The greed of the crooks in the binary options sector knows no bounds and their long claws reach every corner of the earth. ... We have joined together, all the enforcement agencies, to combat this ugly phenomenon. We have declared an all-out war against binary options. We hear dreadful testimonies and stories about people being persuaded to enter this arena. Not Israelis. I make it clear all the time that see these operations as forbidden and akin to extortion and exploitation of the public by greedy charlatans, that phone them up and take their money. We are doing everything that we can today to stop this." -  Israel Securities Authority chairman Shmuel Hauser. It's still legal in Israel to run a binary options scam against non-Israelis; he can't stop them unless the Knesset changes the law. John Nagle (talk) 07:21, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "There are at least 100 binary options brokers who are either based in [Israel] or are somehow connected to it and make anywhere between $1 billion and $10 billion per annum."  Wow. - Brianhe (talk) 00:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "FBI, EU fraud authorities hold emergency summit on binary options fraud". Europol hosted at The Hague. 20 police agencies involved. Israeli police didn't show up at Knesset hearing on binary options. They're being ordered to show up for the next hearing. John Nagle (talk) 19:54, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  More news reports this week 

message: One binary option operator has renamed binary options "Digital 100s". Another name is "Binarex".  Probably worth a mention once there are more sources, and redirects to binary option would be appropriate.  John Nagle (talk) 18:19, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  New names for binary options: "Digital 100s", "Binarex". 

message: I request to add under "further reading" the following: "Behind the Scenes of Binary Options" with Simona Weinglass, Invastigative Reporter for the Times of Israel, on the podcast Two Nice Jewish Boys, December 2016. Hativa1 (talk) 17:46, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Simona Weinglass' writing on the subject, in the Times of Israel, is already in the article. She's one of the authors of the big binary option expose.  We already have a reliable source for that and don't need a possibly-promotional link to a podcast site. Here she is on YouTube, saying much the same stuff, put up by the Times of Israel. John Nagle (talk) 18:46, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template.  B E C K Y  S A Y L E S  06:38, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a link under for "further reading" 

message: A little off topic on this page, please forgive me, but a new article at IQ Option could use a once over by people familiar with this topic area. Wikipedia already has a bit of a history with IQ Option - their website is on our spam blacklist. - MrOllie (talk) 17:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Just pointing out that this was moved to Draft:IQ Option with a  I can't quite decipher: "due to ambiguous decisions taken by moderators"??? - Brianhe (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  New IQ Option article 

message: I've added the new section at Binary_option#FBI_investigation, but understand that this is not the usual type of material you see on Wikipedia, and would like somebody to review it. For example, for some reason I am hesitant to name the FBI agent who was quoted, even though it's right there in the Times of Israel. It just seems that the important thing is his position within the FBI, not his name.  But whatever people think best.  Another example is whether to include the FBI's complaint website address.  Thanks in advance for any help. Smallbones(smalltalk) 17:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tweaked it a little. I'm a little dubious about including the URL of the web address, actually. Coretheapple (talk) 16:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section on FBI investigation 

message: Any contributor to this article or this talk page who is paid to contribute needs to declare their paid status according to our Terms of Use.  See WP:Paid. Reading WP:COI would be useful as well. Unfortunately pages related to binary options have had lots of paid editing (both declared and undeclared) and lots of disruption has resulted from that.  Examples might include Banc De Binary, and deleted pages on IQ option, and anyoption.
I've been bold in removing a post here that seems to have been advertising (See WP:NOADS) or paid editing for a publication that seems to promote binary options trading from certain firms.  If anybody objects to my boldness, you can certainly add back the section using the the history page.
Note that I do not blame the editor, he may have been acting in good faith without knowing our sometimes complicated rules.  But I do think it is up to us to actively let people know what our rules are, and when they seem to be violating our rules.  Smallbones(smalltalk) 17:29, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reminder 

message: Yesterday there was an arrest of an binary options firm *owner* with multiple reliable and unreliable sources giving basic details.  Times of Israel gives a name, but it's not a name I'd recognize.  One semi-reliable (??) source suggests that this is just the start of owners getting arrested.  Others have said this was from an undercover operation by Israeli police. So it seems this might be more than a simple single arrest.  We can probably put the owner's name up as soon as another source confirms it.  Smallbones(smalltalk) 16:17, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting.  In the last few weeks, the binary option industry's profile has been much reduced. The massive SEO activity has stopped. Most of the fake sites promoting binary options intended to appear at the top of Google search results are gone.  Some of the companies are pivoting to other products. SpotOption is diversifying - they're now offering support for forex, contracts for difference, and something called a "ladder", in addition to binary options. Added "contract for difference" as a See Also for this article. A "ladder", as described by SpotOption, is a win/lose bet like a binary option, except the customer gets to specify the strike price. You can scroll through SpotOption's sample product screens for their offerings, which are all very similar and are all headed "Will XXX go up or down"? John Nagle (talk) 20:34, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd think this spells the beginning of the end for the Israeli bo industry.  SpotOption is pretty well insulated, at least on the surface, they're just providing the technology(!). If they went down that would be the end of the end - or everybody else would fall soon after. Smallbones(smalltalk) 04:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Just noticed the ping. I'll take a look at the sources. Coretheapple (talk) 19:41, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arrest in Israel. 

message: Contracts for differences are not in the same category, from a payoff standpoint, as Binary Options as 1) they have no strike, hence are not options, 2) pay continuously (binary options by definition are in {0,1}). However there may be a similar problem to binaries in the sense that they can be used by bucket shops. Limit-theorem (talk) 12:17, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  CFD 

message: The Times of Israel has done an investigative series on binary options, and has mentioned this very article in so doing. I think this needs to be incorporated in this article. See http://www.timesofisrael.com/wikipedia-vs-banc-de-binary-a-3-year-battle-against-binary-options-fake-news/ for the Wiki article, quoting from our very own Smallbones. I think it deserves a brief mention. Sometimes editors go overboard in such situations, but let's not. Coretheapple (talk) 16:20, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Times of Israel

message: Please see Israeli ministers approve bill to outlaw entire binary options industry. Not that it's a done deal.  The law could take over 6 weeks to pass, as I see it, even if everything goes smoothly.  Smallbones(smalltalk) 02:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The law was passed by the Knesset today--added a couple of sentences to the article. Coretheapple (talk) 16:40, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Israeli cabinet vote

message: "and because they require little or no knowledge of the markets."
I can't see how binary options are any different than traditional trading in this regard. Anyone can open a brokerage account and start trading without knowing what moves whatever they're trading. It's not like brokerages require their clients to take a test before they can start trading.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xzxfff (talk • contribs) 00:58, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Watch this video from Spotoption. It's dumbed down as far as possible. So is their online interface. John Nagle (talk) 17:38, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue in the "How binary options work" section 

message: The article explains (based on Investopedia) that binary options are always traded with a bid and ask price (e.g. $42.50 vs $44.50) and then settle at $0 or $100. But then the article gives a (slightly confusing) example from Forbes, where options trade at $100 and settle at $15 or $171. This contradicts the first statement that options trade below $100 and settle for $0 or $100.
So are there two different pricing schemes for binary options? Can someone who understands this make the section non-contradictory? Billgordon1099 (talk) 17:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have clarified the contradictions - there are indeed two widely used pricing models - the one found mostly in the U.S. exchanges, and the one found mostly at the online brokers (gambling-style). I hope it is now more clear. Enivid (talk) 11:45, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictory explanation in Function subsection 

message: : Just thought I'd let you know that Simona Weinglass won an international investigative reporting prize .  I just checked here to see what's up and do think the article needs a bit of sprucing up. Smallbones(smalltalk) 12:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simona wins prize 

message: I came to this page because I remember it used to have some useful information regarding what binary options are and how to price them. I needed this for some documentation I was writing. 
Instead, I find copious information about their regulation or lack of it in various jurisdictions. All completely irrelevant to me and, I suspect, most people visiting this page. 
It's almost seems as if a small minority of Wikipedia editors lost some money trading binary options and are now *determined* to hijack this Wikipedia page to push their agenda of educating the public not to make the same mistake they did!   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.10.135 (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It is about both because the latter is a crucial part of the topic of binary options in general due to the prevalence of fraud in the industry. You are free to propose and make your changes, however. Enivid (talk) 09:55, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The theoretical/mathematical aspect of binaries is discussed in the Black-Scholes model page. This page tends to discuss the activity/execution. Limit-theorem (talk) 12:52, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: May I ask why? That article is not even linked from this one. Granted, they are not the most traded contracts by volume (I count only 4k active positions in our organisation), but there is a market, not to mention their importance in derivatives theory. Regulations surrounding binaries are receiving undue weight and prominence. Compare with FX Options. Edits such as this and this without discussion would normally go down as vandalism around here. 2A02:C7D:DA0A:DB00:CC4B:4F02:CE09:E0C0 (talk) 06:54, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The article has suffered from active promotion by COI and promoters; this is to protect.  Limit-theorem (talk) 16:48, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand. 2A02:C7D:DA0A:DB00:CC4B:4F02:CE09:E0C0 (talk) 20:58, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  People have been editing the site to promote their own company or simply to harm the page. Many edits have been made by people with conflicts of intrests so it has to have been protected. Zubin12 (talk) 23:42, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't see how this has anything to do with the removal of entire (sourced) sections by registered users, which is what is being brought up here. See the two diffs above. 2A02:C7D:DA0A:DB00:8C76:54D0:9DA1:9B35 (talk) 06:48, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  These need to be reinstated: entirely theoretical. OK to do so. Limit-theorem (talk) 09:58, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

text: . 2A02:C7D:DA0A:DB00:8014:2A52:685B:6CDE (talk) 06:29, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this a page about Binary Options or Binary Options regulation?