Author Topic: I want to make a summary of my idea for the market and peg  (Read 1203 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline starspirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
  • Financial markets pro over 20 years
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: starspirit

Problem of the idea that BitAsset holder can settle for bts
BTA holders have an advantage: can settle back BTS whenever they want. This leads to the same result as the old rules.
For a healthy market:
  • if market mainly want to sell, sellers need place lower price orders to match buyers'.This leads the price to go down.
    if market mainly want to buy, buyers need place higher price orders to match sellers'. This leads the price to go up.

In the settlement rule, the settlement function make the market do not work normally. Hold BitAsset to settle for BTS, will not leads BTS price go up, but hold BTS to get BitAsset leads BTS price to go down.


xiahui, I agree this concern is worth exploring further. It's one I'm thinking about too.
The pegging approach you suggest would not create the right incentives however...

Placing orders will affect the price instantly, and this affect the peg directly.
  • if the bitUSD price is lower than realUSD,  new short orders pay instant interest. (to the system fund, not to the bitUSD seller. bitUSD can be sold to both short and buyer with BTS)
    if the bitUSD price is premium than realUSD, new short orders get instant interest. (from the system fund. not from the bitUSD holder.)

If the bitUSD is at a premium to realUSD, and users are not inclined to open new short orders in the absence of incentive, then the instant interest incentive would merely encourage them to open a new short, take the instant interest, then close their short again, ending up back where they started. So the premium will not close.
In the case of a discount, a fee on new shorts orders discourages new shorts, but does not incentivise any existing shorts to close, so the discount would remain.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline xiahui135

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
    • View Profile
I am sorry I start a new post. Other posts are too long. I hope some of you may consider this. The ideas come from inspiration by the the community members' discussion.

1. Market trade and peg
They are different.
Market trade mainly concentrate on the fair trade. The longs and shorts need to match each other, so the game can be played forever.
Peg mainly concentrate on the relationship of bitAsset price and real asset price.

2. About the market trade
Our purpose is let the market run very long time. The longs and shorts are two sides of the market. If it is not equal, the market will fail to continue some day.
The market design is just to let bitAsset exist, and under well collateral. (As to the peg, we'll discuss later)

Problem of old BitAsset rule
In old BitAsset, the BTA shorters have an expiring date, but the BTA holders have not. This means holding BTA have advantage than holding BTS(or the bts collateral). So the BTA holders are winner, and BTS price is falling all the way.

Problem of the idea that BitAsset holder can settle for bts
BTA holders have an advantage: can settle back BTS whenever they want. This leads to the same result as the old rules.
For a healthy market:
  • if market mainly want to sell, sellers need place lower price orders to match buyers'.This leads the price to go down.
    if market mainly want to buy, buyers need place higher price orders to match sellers'. This leads the price to go up.

In the settlement rule, the settlement function make the market do not work normally. Hold BitAsset to settle for BTS, will not leads BTS price go up, but hold BTS to get BitAsset leads BTS price to go down.

Market rules summary and proposal
  • cancel short orders' time limit;
    let shorts can cover any available amount, at any time and with the collateral itself;
    force bad collateral shorts to cover when the collateral is under some level, because the shorts enjoyed the leverage. (Say 120% the bitAsset value. The system auto place market order for the shorts, and give the rest bts to the shorts after order filled))

3. About the peg
Purpose of peg, is to let bitAsset price follow real assets'. We mainly can achieve this from two ways.

The market make way
We need some people to accept 1 bitusd as 1 usd. If nobody do, we the community should be the first.
  • establish market make funds, and the profit dividend to the fund's share holders.
    establish gateways or bridges to do the 1:1 exchange (this is real peg)
In fact, with larger and larger market fund, we can cancel the price feed for some bitAsset.

The supply control way
There will be some different ways to do the control. I just want to talk about the yield.

I am against the yield to the long and short holders. But maybe yield to the short traders will work.

Why?

What I mean "traders", are the people who are placing orders.
Placing orders will affect the price instantly, and this affect the peg directly.
  • if the bitUSD price is lower than realUSD,  new short orders pay instant interest. (to the system fund, not to the bitUSD seller. bitUSD can be sold to both short and buyer with BTS)
    if the bitUSD price is premium than realUSD, new short orders get instant interest. (from the system fund. not from the bitUSD holder.)

What I mean "holders" are people already hold bitasset or short orders.
We should not do the yield thing to the longs and shorts.  This will not help the instant price, but make the two sides much complex.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2015, 04:37:31 am by xiahui135 »