Not quite. The theory that everything will average out over the longterm, as prices go up and down, relies on the incorrect assumption that all traders have no idea what they’re doing and all buying and selling is completely random. Imagine this extreme example:
PPC = $2
Custodian holds 1000 NBT and 0 PPC. Custodian value = $1000 USD.
PPC sellers buy all of the 1000 NBT, leaving our custodian with 0 NBT and 500 PPC.
PPC declines to $1. Custodian value = 500 NBT.
PPC goes up to $1.10 and traders decide it’s a good time to buy, so they buy all 500 PPC.
Custodian holds 550 NBT and 0 PPC.
PPC goes back to $2. Now we’re back to where we started but the custodian has lost 450 NBT.
This is an extreme example of what we see happening in both the Bitcoin and Peercoin NBT markets. My point was that Bitcoin buying and selling will be slightly more random than Peercoin since Bitcoin is used for a lot more things than Peercoin. Bitcoin is also a much larger market that we really must be involved in to move forward.
I’m saying all of this to make my case for why I believe we need Bitcoin but not Peercoin, despite losing from both markets. I have no doubt that @woolly_sammoth and @desrever could engineer NuBot to fit whatever liquidity operations require, but I would honestly rather see us putting our time and efforts towards merchant adoption because THIS is what will ultimately cause NuBits to be used for something other than speculation hedging. I want to buy stuff on Newegg with my NuBits that I bought from Coinbase.com. I want to trade my NuBits for NuShares on ShapeShift. I want to play online poker with my NuBits. I want my margin account on OKCoin to be backed with NuBits. These are the directions we need to be headed in and focused on innovating solutions for.