[SURVEY] Liquidity Custodianship Business - Profitable or Not Profitable

It takes time for ideas to sink in. Let’s spread the idea and get discussion going.


Can we get the NuPool on CCEDK NBT/USD? We just need a pool operator to propose a motion right? Who wants to be pool operator? I’d do it, but I’m afraid I don’t have the technical skills, commitable time, or trust of the community.


Thinking about it more, pegging NBT/USD on CCEDK is just pegging Swift and Payeer as payment processors. Still, this is far better than pegging nbt/btc in my opinion.


I tried this pair already and it is fully supported by the pool and working (alongside with EUR).

If anyone is interested in setting up a TLLP, be assured that you will get my full support in installing and maintaining it. Of course some technical skills are required.

Pegging against fiat was always the original goal and as far as I remember the whole crypto pegging was done because there were no other options. With open source we absolutely should evaluate our new options closely. @woolly_sammoth’s grant on Bittylicious is already a good start.


So I would be happy to put up something like 50USD on the NBT/USD using a btc-e code to get the USD to ccedk if I can get paid .25%/day. Can I use the latest nupool version and change the unit to USD and the exchange to ccedk? Would I need to use a different server than EU.nupool.net?

1 Like

I would be also willing to support the peg on ccedk on nbt/usd with a small liquidity (like 50 usd) without the fuss to remit cash from Japan to Denmark.
I did it once here.
I would not want to deposit a lot of usd (relatively) because it is too risky.
But if we can diversify the risks among say 100 custodians, I would be definitively in.
I would be interested in btc-e code.

1 Like

The eu.nupool server is only pointed to Bittrex at the moment in line with our custodial grant proposal here: [Passed] Trustless Liquidity Pool operation on Bittrex. We thought it best to restrict the number of exchanges that the pool operated on for this fisrt run as it meant fewer variables to untangle should things go wrong.
@Cybnate has been getting to know the pool server software and has suggested that she may start operation on some CCEDK pairs in the next few days. Current Liquidity
Once the NuPool term on Bittrex has come to an end, I would like to see it operate again across a range of exchanges.

1 Like

It looks like the response was that you got little volume. Is that a bad thing? I don’t think so. The risk is way lower than nbt/btc, that’s why we want to do it. The rate could probably be lower than .25%/day and I would still be up for it. We should pay high rates for risky stuff like nsr/nbt and lower interest rates for nbt/USD. Clearly all liquidity rates should be higher than park rates at least.

As for btce codes, they’re a good way to go from btc or ppc to USD that you can move over to ccedk, as there is basically no USD volume on ccedk for any pair.

Sorry for the lack of info.
I think too that NBT/USD should be the only pair for which liquidity is provided.
It is not a bad thing that I got very little volume.
It just that CCEDK got hacked during my operation.
I could withdraw the whole fund fortunately.
Therefore, I am not willing any more to deposit “so much” (5000 usd).
I would like to dilute the risk over 100 custodians ideally.


Likewise here , I would be willing to support such pair.

I would support nbt/usd as well.

I will support it, too.

I looked into it more and this is what I’m coming back with:

It is very difficult to withdraw USD from CCEDK. Your choices are Payeer with a volume cap or straight up wire transfer. This is why no one wants to trade anything in USD at CCEDK. This is unfortunate as it is our only nbt/usd open market. Reasons like this are why coinbase is so successful.

So what are we doing?

We are the withdrawal pathway for CCEDK. We allow usd arbitrage of its markets, allowing people to actually trade USD/BTC on CCEDK.

I see numerous people talking about re-establishing business with CCEDK.

The questions whirring in my head:

Are you aware that CCEDK has v e r y low volume? http://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/ccedk/
Have you completely forgotten what happened a couple of weeks ago? Quick reminder from my side:
Withdrawals were delayed because of a hack, that was never publicly dealt with by CCEDK, people were insulted on this very forum and a lot of questions are still open.

I support the idea of fiat-pegs, but getting one of the major exchanges (e. g. cryptsy?) with USD support to integrate NuBits would be far better way to go.


How do we do that? I like that option way better.

Cryptsy uses a voting system and we have 3,000 votes when we need 30,000. It would cost something like 5 BTC to get to the top of the list. I’m not sure how or if we could specify USD.

How about exmo?
There really aren’t that many high volume alt/usd exchanges out there.

1 Like

No. CCEDK claims that they haven’t found the bottom of the problem and doesn’t want to talk about it due to it. @ronny has allowed wuthdrawl for all users except KTm. So there is risk. That is why I support Nagalim to ask for a 0.25% fee to offset it.

I would like to re-iterate what I have said elsewhere: exchanges don’t make real money accepting users’ fiat. They probably lose money doing so due to regulatory overhead. So there are very few exchanges that offer this.

Although I support the effort but do realize NBT/USD, of which the price chart is a flat line, is not interesting to exchanges. I’ll just put what said in a link here


We participated in that coin vote but I think there was a paradigm shift…

0.25% per day? That would be the exact same amount the NuPool operation offers as max on a seemingly less problematic exchange (Bittrex.com.)

I agree, we need something like coinoUSD has. How do we blend a decentralized liquidity process with something like that? The NuLagoon might blend better than the NuPool.

Can we build a wallet that accepts USD debit and credit and registers as NBT? Selling is funded by the NuLagoon and uses payment options. Is this very difficult? I really have no clue about that kind of thing.

1 Like

Is that too high or too low in y our opinion? price needs to be discovered.

Not sure. I would tend to say, that an exchange with higher risk potential would require higher fees.

But yes, I agree, the actual price needs to be discovered.