Author Topic: plan to raise the bitCNY force settlement offset to 5%  (Read 28289 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1923
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Look at it this way: I have 1 CNY and I want 1 CNY worth of BTS.

If we put bitCNY settlement mechanism in the middle of this, 1 CNY will get me X bitCNY and 1.05 * X bitCNY will get me 1 CNY worth of BTS.

Thus X <1 -> premium

Essentially work backwards... I think settlement is affecting the market more than the market affects settlement at this juncture.

sure, any time 1CNY will get 1CNY worth of BTS, whether there is bitCNY or not.

we have seen 1bitCNY = 0.95-1.2 CNY when offset = 5%, the offset do not determine the premium. it just make sure premium >-5% supposing feed price = market price.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
I have to disagree with bitcrab and support clockwork here. Same rational

Offline clockwork

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clockwork
I seriously think it's time to return settlement offset to 1% and I believe it will also play a part in reducing bitCNY premium

(as well as bringing consistency among bitAssets)

no, it will help to reduce discount if there is, helpless to reduce premium.

I believe bitCNY market is now in a state where it works in the opposite way.

0.95 of bitCNY value (i.e. what it can be settled for) is considered = 1 CNY and thus traders are trading 1 bitCNY as >1+ CNY leading to premium.

IMHO that is part of the reason why bitCNY over the last couple of months prior to BSIP42 always had a greater premium than other bitAssets.

5% offset  make 1.05bitCNY considered 1 CNY if feed price = market price.

You misunderstand me. One thing is what it can be settled for, and a different thing is what the belief/sentiment is.

Look at it this way: I have 1 CNY and I want 1 CNY worth of BTS.

If we put bitCNY settlement mechanism in the middle of this, 1 CNY will get me X bitCNY and 1.05 * X bitCNY will get me 1 CNY worth of BTS.

Thus X <1 -> premium

Essentially work backwards... I think settlement is affecting the market more than the market affects settlement at this juncture.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2018, 09:54:04 am by clockwork »

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1923
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
I seriously think it's time to return settlement offset to 1% and I believe it will also play a part in reducing bitCNY premium

(as well as bringing consistency among bitAssets)

no, it will help to reduce discount if there is, helpless to reduce premium.

I believe bitCNY market is now in a state where it works in the opposite way.

0.95 of bitCNY value (i.e. what it can be settled for) is considered = 1 CNY and thus traders are trading 1 bitCNY as >1+ CNY leading to premium.

IMHO that is part of the reason why bitCNY over the last couple of months prior to BSIP42 always had a greater premium than other bitAssets.

5% offset  make 1.05bitCNY considered 1 CNY if feed price = market price.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline clockwork

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clockwork
I seriously think it's time to return settlement offset to 1% and I believe it will also play a part in reducing bitCNY premium

(as well as bringing consistency among bitAssets)

no, it will help to reduce discount if there is, helpless to reduce premium.

I believe bitCNY market is now in a state where it works in the opposite way.

0.95 of bitCNY value (i.e. what it can be settled for) is considered = 1 CNY and thus traders are trading 1 bitCNY as >1+ CNY leading to premium.

IMHO that is part of the reason why bitCNY over the last couple of months prior to BSIP42 always had a greater premium than other bitAssets.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1923
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
I seriously think it's time to return settlement offset to 1% and I believe it will also play a part in reducing bitCNY premium

(as well as bringing consistency among bitAssets)

no, it will help to reduce discount if there is, helpless to reduce premium.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline Thul3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
    • View Profile
I seriously think it's time to return settlement offset to 1% and I believe it will also play a part in reducing bitCNY premium

(as well as bringing consistency among bitAssets)

+++

Offline clockwork

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clockwork
I seriously think it's time to return settlement offset to 1% and I believe it will also play a part in reducing bitCNY premium

(as well as bringing consistency among bitAssets)

Offline Methodise

8 months later BitCNY is still at an offset of 5%

Was told at the time it was a temporary measure.

why should BitCNY be offset at 5% and BitUSD at 1% it just makes no sense and damages the reputation of our stable coins.

srsly.
BTS: methodise

Offline JonnyB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 636
    • View Profile
    • twitter.com/jonnybitcoin
8 months later BitCNY is still at an offset of 5%

Was told at the time it was a temporary measure.

why should BitCNY be offset at 5% and BitUSD at 1% it just makes no sense and damages the reputation of our stable coins.
I run the @bitshares twitter handle
twitter.com/bitshares

Offline Methodise

I'm forever protesting that the rules for bitCNY must be the same as for bitUSD and bitEUR and bitBTC and everything else.

How can bitCNY be anything but the CNY equivalent of bitUSD?

Traders shouldn't have to do fine-grain research to be comfortable trading any/all of these instruments.
BTS: methodise

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
  • 世间太多瘪犊子
    • View Profile
I suggest to design a floating Force settlement offset, and establish a max and min  Force settlement offset to protect the Force settlement person.
This can protect the debtor which have the high collateral ratio and reduce the debor which have the low collateral ratio.

Assumption the collateral ratio above 175%,  Force settlement offset max 5% . floating rate=0

Assumption arithmetic 1:
Force settlement offset=collateral ratio- maintenance collateral ratio+floating rate
IF the debtor wants to get the max  Force settlement offset 5%, he need to keep his collateral  ratio above 180%.


Assumption arithmetic 2:
Force settlement offset=[collateral ratio - maintenance collateral ratio]/2+floating rate
IF the debtor wants to get the max  Force settlement offset 5%, he need to keep his collateral ratio above 185%.


Assumption arithmetic 3:
Force settlement offset={[collateral ratio+maintenance collateral ratio ]/2- maintenance collateral ratio}/2+floating rate
IF the debtor want get the max  Force settlement offset 5%, he need to keep his collateral ratio above 195%.


Assumption collateral ratio below 175% ,  Force settlement offset Min  -10%.
of caurse, when the collateral ratio below 175%, the debt was Margin Call, the Force settlement person don't need the Force settlement to get bts, he can eat the Margin Call.

Asummption arithmetic 1
Force settlement offset=collateral ratio- maintenance collateral ratio
the Force settlement person want get the Min Force settlement offset -10%, he need to wait the collateral ratio to 165%.


Asummption arithmetic 2
Force settlement offset=[collateral ratio- maintenance collateral ratio]/2
the Force settlement person want get the Min Force settlement offset -10%, he need to wait the collateral ratio to 155%.


Assumption arithmetic 3
Force settlement offset={[collateral ratio+maintenance collateral ratio]/2- maintenance collateral ratio}/2
the Force settlement person want get the Min Force settlement offset -10%, he need to wait the collateral ratio to 135%.

Assumption 4
the debt which the collateral ratio below 175%, when it was force settlement, take -10% as the fixed Force settlement offset.
I don't think this Assumption is a good idea.

Assumption 5
the debt which the collateral ratio below 175% will not get the Force settlement offset.


another important key
Settlement delay, now is 24H
if the rules of the  Force settlement can be designed, it can be change to 12h or 6h.

another important key:
Max force settle vol ,now is 0.5%.
this can be changed to 1% or 2%.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2018, 02:04:00 pm by binggo »

Offline renkcub

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 143
    • View Profile
A further comment on this: I only think a fee makes sense for unwinding a BTS short / Smartcoin margin position for the instant settlement. 24 hour delay (like there is for Force Settle) could be an even smaller or non-existent fee. I also think perhaps a longer timeframe option for the two could be offered with less/no fee, such as 3 or 7 days for force settle (in this case to avoid the equivalent of the larger 5% fee).

Offline renkcub

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 143
    • View Profile
Is there any fee for creating or unwinding a BitCNY margin position? Or are fees ONLY for settlement offset?

If so, why don't we have a small fee for unwinding one, to reduce the opportunity for manipulation? No more than executing a forex trade - 1% or so (about the round trip cost on Forex), maybe a little more for now to encourage certain things, as we're doing with the 5% for BitCNY to prevent removing smartcoins and manipulation (although this fee is extremely high, I understand the temporary need. In the end I envision maybe something like 0.5% for unwinding a margin position, and 1% for force settlement as fair and the funds go back to the BTS ecosystem anyway...)

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1923
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
the key point is the price feeding.

up to now we can still see that the settlement price is always 3-5% lower than latest price.



this does not happen in bitUSD/BTS market.

from Magicwallet data we can know that bitCNY peg CNY well, bitCNY is not cheaper than CNY.

so the problem is still in price feeding, the force settlement offset can be reduced only when the fed price can trace the market price well enough.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2017, 02:07:34 am by bitcrab »
Email:bitcrab@qq.com