lol, we're trying to build something to last, as you'll see from our partnerships xbtc.fi we're taking this seriously. It's a very different value proposition to rebasing and tokens in general. It's a way to bring off chain data to on-chain economics in a new way.
Conversation
so I think the fundamental problem is that doing a rebase doesn't change the economic fundamentals -- it's just a stock split, so holders shouldn't win or lose to them in general, they're just neutral
2
2
AFAIK nothing in the protocol ties the market cap of xBTC to bitcoin dominance beyond the name
2
2
1/ I mean the traditional derivatives market is notionally worth 600T, and the real value is 12T, the thought that they are tied to real value is comical. They are just a bet with a buyer and seller, and some of them are illiquid if they don't have that. We provide an open market
1
1
bet for people to make quickly and easily, putting a decentralized spot price on BMCD. Also through liquidity pools you can create partial collateralization just like SNX. SNX forces their spot price through their walled garden, we let the market make our spot price.
1
1
not disagreeing with any of that in particular -- just that I don't think you predictably make/lose money if you buy xBTC and then BTC dominance goes down/up.
1
like I think it fails a much simpler check that decentralization etc.
I don't think it rewards the holder for BTC dominance moves.
1
1
1/ Depends on how you play the rebase, when BMCD falls it does trend the coin towards more positive rebases, which introduces economic incentives. Add in the open market demand for a way to quickly and easily trade BMCD. How are people valuing simply and quickly trading that.
2
1
when BMCD falls it does cause positive rebases, which increases supply, but also decreases price, because it increases everyone else's supply too. So you still don't win from it, unless the theory is that people will be convinced by the name of the coin into trading it that way.
1
Sam save yourself some energy. These dudes are scammers.
1
1/ And some people think Ampleforth is wrong and a "scam". I don't think it is so simple, when you connect a real world number to the tokenomics of a coin and have liquidity pools, something is created. We think that something could be a new synthetic or derivative. Some don't.
2
2/ Something like this has never existed and could never exist in traditional markets, it took digital assets to make it possible. People can absolutely disagree with our key hypothesis, as you can disagree with many digital assets' key hypotheses...
1
Show replies