Yeah, but why not do it with their own funds if this is what they want?
Because it has a cost that results in a benefit to Steem and not to a privately owned business like Steem Monsters.
Since the benefit is to the platform, it makes perfect sense to use platform/community funds (aka reward pool and/or SPS) to pay for it.
And why their argument is that buyin it in one swoop won't work, but their way of buying slowly will?
The argument is not about buying it slowly vs buying it quickly, it is buying it repeatedly vs. once.
65k STEEM is not enough to increase SBD to $1 and keep it there. In order to get it to $1 will require a lot more than 65k STEEM worth of SBD to be bought and destroyed (already about 50000 STEEM worth has been bought and the task does not appear to be close to complete). The faster you try to do this, the more it costs due to slippage (you pay more STEEM for the SBD than you get back from converting it), so less STEEM is available on the next cycle and the process slows down overall (less SBD is bought and removed from circulation over time).
"Since the benefit is to the platform(...)"
Please, elaborate that. How is an sbd increase in price be beneficial for the platform as a whole, and not only to this that have enough influence to generate big amounts of sbd at once?
Sbd will still be useless, and have no value.
Again, all this thing is busted mostly because this don't add value to the network. Only have a virtual effect on price.
In the end, doenst matter if this succeed or not (spoiler alert: It won't succeed), sbd will still be useless and have no value.
Again, and again, since I don't know how this is so hard to understand: to increase the price, increase the value. Create projects that make sbd demand be real.
"it is buying it repeatedly vs. once"
Well, just do it again next month. 65 steem is pennies to all witness + whales combined.
"65k STEEM is not enough to increase SBD to $1 and keep it there."
Indeed. Just add 65k more and create a huge buy order at 1 usd price. Easy.
Burn the sbd bought both ways, there.... You reduced around 10% of the supply.
Whatfukinever. No matter Wich way, it's just a pump n dump style of market manipulation. And guess how long people keep their attention on project that manipulate the markets? I will answer for you: not much, until they realize their gain and move on to the next asset.
It doesn't add any fukin value to the network.
A stable value coin has clear value as I explained elsewhere. This is why SBD is used in SPS, because of real world experience trying to run budgets with volatile tokens. It doesn't work. SBD is a clear advantage and a clear value add.
This is circular. More utility and more usage comes from having it maintain a value. It it doesn't already have and maintain a stable value, then it is useless to any project.
No one is going to create a project to create value for SBD in order to restore or strengthen the peg. It has to happen in the other order.
That isn't even close to 10% of the supply. Your math is goofy.
Stable value tokens have their value 'manipulated' by design. In every case it is with some combination of algorithmic agents as well as people responding to incentives. That's what is happening here.
The real problem is that it took so long for anyone to do something, allowing the problem to fester and grow in magnitude (so not it is not so easy to fix, but will take time).