No such thing as free money, amirite?
- Money doesn't grow on trees.
- A day late and a dollar short.
- A fool and his money are soon parted.
- A light purse is a heavy curse.
- A penny saved is a penny earned.
- All that glitters is not gold.
- If you can't explain the yield, you might be the yield.
- So on and so forth.
So I was thinking about this post I wrote on CUB the other day...
About all the wrapping fees + buy & burns.
And I had to ask myself...
Where does the money come from?
The new fees being generated used to buy and burn CUB are massive. The network is essentially burning just as many tokens as it prints. CUB could end up going deflationary given enough volatility in the markets, even with massive linear inflation printing. Money doesn't just appear out of nowhere... where it is coming from?
It must come from the users?
Normally in cases like this where a fee gets imposed on users, we'd assume that obviously the money is coming from the users. 0.25% is charged to wrap or unwrap, thus that expense is outsourced to the users who pay the fees that then gets used to buy and burn the governance token.
This is a simple enough explanation, and it makes sense, but it also isn't accurate. We already know that most of the money comes from arbitrage. Prices change on outside markets and it becomes profitable for people or bots to equalize the markets.
It must come from the arbitragers?
Again this is right, and also wrong, just like the previous assumption. Arbitragers are paying the majority of the fees and doing all the heavy lifting, but again that's not where the money comes from. This is proven by the fact that arbitragers make money in this process, to the point that the 0.25% fee becomes more than worth it to pay. So again we must go down another layer of the liquidity waterfall to see where the value ACTUALLY comes from.
Wait... so the value comes from... other exchanges?
More accurately: it comes from the users on other exchanges in the form of slippage. That's where all value from arbitrage is generated. CUB just taxes the arbitragers for equalizing the market on CUB, so they make 0.25% less than they would otherwise.
This is a double edged sword. On the one hand, it generates a lot of money for buy and burns. On the flip side, it means the derivative tokens on CUB will be 0.25% less pegged to the actual asset due to the 0.25% fee (which is actually slightly advantageous if you want to take the other side of the trade and bet against the market). I'd say this is an acceptable loss and a good trade for the network as a whole. 0.25% is a small number.
Say a whale wants to buy Hive.
There are a few options here.
The main ones are:
- Binance/Mandala
- Huobi
- Bittrex
- Blocktrades
- Upbit (Korean only)
If a whale makes a big splash on any of these exchanges without buying from all the pools at once, arbitrage occurs. If the whale doesn't want to be bothered to buy from every liquidity pool at once with a bot (or awkwardly by hand) then the price of Hive on the exchange they are buying from bumps up a little higher than the other available sources of Hive. This creates a liquidity stream of free money for any arbitrager who can buy Hive cheaper on another exchange, transfer it to the one that has artificially overpriced Hive and dump tokens on that market until the price is equalized across all the available markets. Whatever leftover is profit. This is just the classic definition of arbitrage.
It gets a little more complicated when looking at a decentralized exchange with wrapping fees. In all likelihood, the vast majority of people looking to buy Hive wouldn't even know that the CUB LPs to buy wrapped Hive even exist. However, that ignorance is irrelevant. The option is still there, whether they know it or not.
Within this context, we can see that the value from the CUB buy and burns and wrapping fees is being extracted from people on centralized exchanges that have no idea these pools even exist. Pretty crazy when you think about it.
But even this explanation isn't accurate.
Because even if everyone knew about the CUB LPs and even if they were buying from all available sources of Hive at once... they'd still have to pay the wrapping fee regardless. The wrapping fees extract value from volatility automatically, which is even weirder than all the explanations I've given thus far. Simple price ratio shifts create value generation like some kind of weird electrical generator in the ocean creating power from the tide going in and out.
So it sort of is basically just free money.
Or rather more efficient money. CUB was allocating yield to LPs that were providing less value back to the network than the new pools do. A lot of inflation is used to incentivize these liquidity pools, now a good chunk of that value is being kicked back to the network and used to burn the inflation that it created. It's a much more sustainable model.
Essentially the only reason there is liquidity within the CUB LPs is that inflation and yield are allocated to them. The wrapping fees can't exist without this liquidity in play. We can think of the wrapping fees as a kickback of value from the original amount we spent incentivizing the pools in the first place. Liquidity is incentivized by yield, and then that liquidity is leveraged into a value-capture mechanism that extracts a revenue-stream from the volatile market. The more volatile the market is, the more fees will get generated.
Within this context CUB wants both Hive and HBD to be extremely volatile because our money-generator is silently extracting value from those movements (even though that would technically not be great for Hive or HBD). Looking at the current volatility of the market... it's actually pretty quiet and not very volatile at all. We have to expect that the revenue will increase exponentially given big pumps or big dumps. The direction doesn't matter, only the price differences.
Conclusion
This is just a classic example of how complicated economies can get after stacking up just a few basic variables on top of each other. Each variable, no matter how simple, adds exponentially more complexity to the final outcome. This is akin to the Traveling Salesmen Problem.
The CUB arbitrage model is working shockingly well, especially at these low valuations. Obviously we LEO degens could use a win after so many slaps to the face. Soon™
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
~~~ embed:1571238944980746247 twitter metadata:RmluYW5jZUxlb3x8aHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0dGVyLmNvbS9GaW5hbmNlTGVvL3N0YXR1cy8xNTcxMjM4OTQ0OTgwNzQ2MjQ3fA== ~~~
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @luizeba ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.
I've earning tiny amounts of cub and hoping for the best -- maybe it will be HODL situation but I'm also looking for other things to invest in now. Splinterlands cards are super low compared to their prices last year. If the bear market's ending soon, now might be a good time to buy but I'll have to do more research to see which cards rent best or have the best chances of returning to bull-market prices. Thanks for the vote on my Elden Ring post! Very much appreciated :)
I need to look more into splinterlands as well.
It did seem like the cards were pretty cheap these days.
Yeah I feel a bit silly since I bought some Chaos Legion cards when they first came out last year and some of the legendaries went from $50 to $5 but that's on me for buying during selling time. Hopefully I scoop up some good ones this cycle and can sell for profit when the market goes back up high.
I remember the times when I was doing crypto arbitrage in 2018 clashing exchanges one against the other. An order left on the market holding 4,000 Ethereum allowed me to grab somewhere around 2 ETH doing arbitrage. Great times and I think that arbitrage leads to price optimization through trade competitivity.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I miss the days of moving 1,000 ETH around like Pennies!
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Have you considered the fact that everyone in a pool are losing money with each price change, regardless of the direction? And the fees they receive cannot compensate for the loss. To me this looks like the main source of "value". And what you call a "sustainable model" is more like trying to profit from rakeback at a casino
Have you considered that this is a 100% inaccurate assessment?
If an LP pumps and then dumps back to the same ratio it is literally impossible to lose money as a liquidity provider. In fact the only possible result from that scenario is profit.
You are really going to try and claim that it's impossible to make money providing liquidity for an LP? I'd say that's not going to age well except it's just dead on arrival.
You are one of the few people here that actually knows what rakeback even is, but your analogy is wildly misleading. LP providers only have to pay the rake one time. The "rakeback" they collect in return can be exponentially more than what they put in (without being a pyramid scheme).
The OP stands. The wrapping fee is a huge gain to the network compared to how it worked before with very little downside. This is the topic of discussion.
Yes, you will make some tiny profit if the price dumps back, but that's the best scenario.
Basically the LP providers are trading against the market, thus they are taking risks. But the profit they receive is not enough to cover the risks. So yes, I'm saying you cannot consistently make money from being an LP provider.
Also the wrapping fee is being paid by those who buy cheap from the pool and sell high externally or vice versa. So it is a fraction of their profit which is your loss
Taking the bHBD-BUSD pool as an example: the price always reverts to $1.
If it goes lower than $1 temporarily, it will go back up
Higher, it will go back down.
All of that volatility simply leads to arb and trading fees collected both by the protocol and by LPs. Impossible to lose money unless you enter the LP at $1 and exit at $0.90 in the moments before it is arb’ed and rebalanced. Since bHBD is always redeemable for HBD, the price always reverts back to $1 along with HBD returning to its peg.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
You're talking cliches that you've probably heard from some LP owners. What do you think will happen if you enter at $1, exit at $0.90 and then the price goes back to $1? You will make more profit than those staying in the pool. The problem is that this price movement would require someone to sell all the way down to $0.90 and then buy back to $1.
Ask yourself how do you call such guy and you'll know why it can't be consistent.
As long as the fees stay low I'm good :) The last thing I want to see is Eth snd BTC sized ones just to withdraw.
This post has been manually curated by the VYB curation project
I’ve dabbled in cub but I’m glad I don’t go crazy on it. I can’t wrap my head around these things lol it doesn’t behoove me to figure it out which I guess is the crux of the legacy money issues. People don’t have the time or motivation to get up on these things. Maybe one day!
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Eh I wouldn't mess around with it till we get out of the shit and build more sustainable models.
Need number to go up and stay up.
It's too late for me though.
Locked in tight!
This post has been manually curated by @bhattg from Indiaunited community. Join us on our Discord Server.
Do you know that you can earn a passive income by delegating your Leo power to @india-leo account? We share 100 % of the curation rewards with the delegators.
Please contribute to the community by upvoting this comment and posts made by @indiaunited.
This is outrightly true,there is a time I had a smooth time when it came to doing business with crypto and time came when everything downsized and had to come back again so its economics generally. Thank you for the post.
Thanks for the explicit explaination on how arbitrary trade can be profitable although earning on price move one need to put price spillage into consideration.
!PGM
!PIZZA
BUY AND STAKE THE PGM TO SEND A LOT OF TOKENS!
The tokens that the command sends are: 0.1 PGM-0.1 LVL-0.1 THGAMING-0.05 DEC-15 SBT-1 STARBITS-[0.00000001 BTC (SWAP.BTC) only if you have 2500 PGM in stake or more ]
5000 PGM IN STAKE = 2x rewards!
Discord
Support the curation account @ pgm-curator with a delegation 10 HP - 50 HP - 100 HP - 500 HP - 1000 HP
Get potential votes from @ pgm-curator by paying in PGM, here is a guide
I'm a bot, if you want a hand ask @ zottone444
PIZZA Holders sent $PIZZA tips in this post's comments:
@torran(4/10) tipped @edicted (x1)
Learn more at https://hive.pizza.
Yep we could indeed use a win.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta