[Passed] Dual side gateway at hitBTC by masterOfDisaster

Motion hash: c178a7fcd6941ae8845bdd286eef3130460eaab3

Continuing the discussion from [Activated at 2016-03-023] sell side gateway at hitBTC by masterOfDisaster:

To support the analysis of theories around liquidity provision, I’d like to propose a dual side gateway operation at hitBTC.
The sell side only operation, which might be replaced by this dual side gateway, was rarely used.
Only a few NBT have been traded.
The offset of 1.5% was not attractive enough (combined with not offering a buy side operation) OR there was simply only little activity.

The question whether a tight peg is bad for liquidity providers, because it can draw money from them

was raised.

@muchogusto has made an offer to anaylze that on Poloniex.
If we have a similar test going on at e.g. hitBTC, the informative value will be increased by that.

So I decided to make a proposal for running a Nu funded NuBot at hitBTC that replaces the current sell side only operation.
The account is currently at 1,995 NBT and $4.34 in BTC

        "1:NBTBTC:hitbtc:0.4.1_1463249805072_2f0e73" : {
            "buy" : 0.0,
            "sell" : 500.0
        "2:NBTBTC:hitbtc:0.4.1_1463249805072_2f0e73" : {
            "buy" : 4.34,
            "sell" : 1495.693

Details like the spread (maybe with a shift between sell side and buy side offset?) should be discussed here.

Copy from Daology:


Like the proposal and spread of 1% is fine.
Just don’t like the automatic endless extensions and FLOT payments as discussed earlier.

Just to be clear, spread 1% means offset 0.005 in each wall, right?

1 Like

I know and I understand it in parts.
I just want to keep the burden for shareholders low.
It’s not endless. FLOT or shareholders can end it.

1% is the max. spread in this proposal.
I’d dare reducing it far below that to gather data about the NAV in a highly liquid low spread environment.
The spread is one of the reasons why I want to sre more discussion before I promote this to voting.

Any more feedback?
Recommendations for the offsets (they can be negotiated later, though; the <1%spread will stay)?
If not, I’ll promote it to [Voting] soon.

I am fine with the proposal.

With the fees structure of hitBTC

I’m aiming at a SAF (and not only a spread) of below 1%.

The offsets I propose are 0.004 for both sides.
As that’s no part of the motion, it can be discussed later.
The predominant opinion seems to be that a smaller spread should be favoured. I’m including a lower limit of 0.5% for the spread to avoid buying/selling into the NuLagoon operation at hitBTC.

I’m aware that the API can’t be accessed by NuBot at the moment due to certificate issues. But I hope that will be fixed soon. If it’s not fixed soon, I’m suggesting to withdraw the funds from the exchange account to FLOT.

Sorry for the delay.



Will add probably this to my voting data feed – when my wallet has completed the DL

No need to hurry. NuBot is currently not able to operate at hitBTC due to certificate issues.
But thank you for the support!

Passed but sadly mod is not active any more :frowning: .

I can run the infra if it is still required. Won’t see that happening in the short term. Chances are that we will be delisted soon.

1 Like