Since the combination of BC_Exchange, Fixed Costs ALPs and Parametric order book could be a huge game changer for NuNet liquidity operations, I have a question to shareholders:
What do you think will be the proportion of the liquidity provided by BC_Exchange compared the overall liquidity provided by all exchanges that support NuBits, assuming that BC_Exchange is released and works as intended?
I am wondering if it is sustainable on the long run to depend on external exchanges for liquidity provision because at the end of the day, Nu cannot control the API changes and the exchange is not necessarily updating Nu as it should be. So liquidity may be harmed by recurring bugs on the connectivity between pools and exchanegs.
Right now, bter is causing some trouble (here).
In this sense, B&C Exchange is highly desirable since Nu would be updated in real time about the latest API changes etc…And since B&C Exchange is a decentralized exchange (if it works as intended), Nu would be fine even if most liquidity sits on it. Now the question is: do NuBits hedgers require rapid frequency trading? If the answer is No, then we can bet that most liquidity should be managed by B&C.
This is besides the liquidity cost reduction.
What do you think?
I wish B&C is the major exchange for NBT LPCs.
Of course, the BTC/LTC, BTC/Doge pairs are also important at B&C.