The most important exchange with over 90% trading volume most of the time, sometimes even more:
The ALP there is based on CRFC and should be much more reliable than previous ALP with dutch auction.
Even if ALP at Poloniex fails, there’s still MLP (NuLagoon) and up to 3 Nu funded bot operations (1 NuBot by zoro and 1 PyBot by Cybnate currently being operational, 1 NuBot by me that can be activated on short notice).
I don’t fear for the peg at Poloniex.
If for whatever reason NBT trading volume surges at another exchange, winding up a Nu funded operation there should be possible on short notice as well.
If you fear for delay in deposits you can just ramp up the funding level of the bot operations to increase the buffer - up to what level’s the question, though.
More funds on exchange mean more risk of losing money against those who sucessfully hedge BTC volatility with NBT and an increased expected value of losses by exchange default, theft, etc.
The question is always the same:
how many costs do you want to bear to keep the peg sound?
Or you might view it from a slightly different angle and ask:
what’s more expensive - protecting the peg with [insert amount here] or having a damaged brand image?
We are already in a very good position and just need to pull some strings.
Being aware of what’s going on will be more important in the next weeks than it’s now already.
FLOT will be happy to have a lot of others keeping an eye on the liquidity situation!
That’s the basic problem if you peg a cryptocurrency to fiat, but trade it for other cryptocurrencies at a synthetic peg: volatility of the pegged cryptoasset…
