We recently introduced interest. HBD price may be driven by this.
I trust your judgement 99.9% of the time man, but can't help but thinking the focus on trying to wrangle the price of HBD, a token that's peg has really never properly worked, at the cost of paying the guys developing our network out is extremely ill thought out. This comes as a one of the developers who because of this now unexpectedly has to figure out where their rent is going to come from but also as a long time community member who has watched HBD basically do whatever the fuck it wants price wise due to the market driving it and it's whole system being flawed for pegging right from the get go.
Anyways, I've said my peace, I really hope this HBD stabilizer shit actually works because if it doesn't the effect on the developer community here on HIVE has been quite massive.
I think the idea that 3% interest would drive the price of HBD to $3 is completely nonsensical. It's not even been advertised much, except to a small extent on Hive sites themselves, so even if 3% was somehow a super attractive rate (it's not), I think you will find that many current buyers don't even know it pays interest.
I'm also very tired of the argument that HBD can't be pegged. It's also a ridiculous argument, in my opinion. There's been no strong effort to make the peg work since it was created. The only attempt I can even think of was the hbdpotato effort, and it never looked like it would be strong enough to do too much.
Also, I know for a fact that you can create a peg just by market activity alone. That's basically how USDT works now.
But we're trying for something a little more interesting: a trustless stablecoin. While it's not yet proven, I think we can setup all the mechanics to make it work.
For the rest, I felt smooth gave a fairly straightforward answer, so let's leave it there.
I think that interest being offered would certainly drive demand upwards a bit would it not? (assuming anyone outside our community even realizes it's yielding interest, as you stated)
Sure HBD can be pegged.. And has somewhat been pegged in the past, but the built in mechanisms within HIVE to perform this pegging leave much to be desired for lack of a better term. Not sure USDT is a great example as they print and burn tokens at a rate reminiscent of central banks (the printing part anyway).
The whole concept of HBD stabilizer is neat. I'm totally down with the idea..! But I'm not sure it should be at the expense of developers trying to make a living populating our network with use cases. Seems a touch counterproductive and may infer to potential developers in the future that happen to yield successful proposals that their funding is secondary to attempting to wrangle a pegged token price against a volatile market.
Partially playing devils advocate, partially expressing my observations. Either way I'm quite interested in the outcome of this and seeing if the attempt to stabilize HBD is going to play out as intended. Hope it does honestly else this was all fruitless. :/
Yes, a little. It's just that buying at $3 risks $2. If you hold a whole year (with no price change), you earn an extra $0.09. It would take 20 years for the potential upside of interest to match the potential downside of price drop to the peg). I don't think anyone cares about this much (assuming they even know about it, which is often questionable as @blocktrades stated).
Ah. Yeah when you put it that way it certainly seems like a -EV move.
Does one only get interest on HBD on Hive? Are we seeing inflows from the relatively few external places it trades?
I don't think so, but I don't know. Absent that I'm pretty sure nobody is buying $2 HBD looking for 3% in a year while there is so much talk of how to drag it back to $1.
You get interest on Hive Power as well. Not sure what is driving the market to be honest.
You may be right. sounds silly when you put it tthat way but I don't thinnk it's someone in the community buying up the price.
The exchanges earn the interest if the HBD is held on an exchange. In theory they can pay it to the users (or only do so if users put it into a staking pool or such) as they do for other coins, but no exchange currently pays interest to the users for HBD. The users would only earn interest if they withdraw from the exchange, which doesn't seem to happen a whole lot if one looks at the balances on exchanges (high and stable if not growing).
So this is another reason why hardly anyone if anyone is buying and pushing the price up due to interest.
How about from the 30-50% extra pay received over the past month as a result of HBD being overvalued (or if you didn't sell it yet, you can still sell it for $1.75 now, meaning you got paid 75% extra)?
This is sort of a mute point I keep hearing over and over. It wasn't my fault our pegged currency doesn't work and it was what the proposal was paying me in. If being paid in HIVE was an options for proposals I'd use that in a heart beat.
It's not about the 50% extra pay value or whatever you're alluding to here man. It's about the developers on the network (unless dubbed "essential") that have been "thrown under the bus" in an attempt to wrangle a peg that's never really been proper. That is what I'm saying. It is an interesting experiment (hbdstabilizer) I admit, but I'm not entirely sure it warrants defunding HIVE developers on a hunch that it might help fixed an flawed from the start peg. :/
Nobody is assessing fault here. You asked where your rent was going to come from, and I'm pointing out that you've lost a few days pay from proposals being unfunded, but gotten 10-15 extra days pay from HDB being overvalued over the past month. In other words, you are still well ahead of the proposed pay rate. In another couple of weeks if funding hasn't been restored, then you will have a different case to make, but not yet.
The decision about funding isn't only about the peg. It is also about the stabilizer proposals having an enormous financial return for the DHF and for Hive stakeholders, and this applies even if the peg effort is totally unsuccessful. Stakeholders are well within their rights to support funding proposals for say, $100 per day, but then deciding that giving up an additional $100/day or $200/day in potential profits on top of the cost of the proposal makes those proposals worth suspending under these particular conditions.
Ah. Ok, sorry I misinterpreted that point.
In another couple weeks the Hive.Loans proposal will be over sadly so any income I'd budgeted in coming from that essentially sounds like it's going to be a write off I guess.
The extra pay was neat, of course impossible to complain about! The problem I've run into with all of this is I'd budgeted expecting x amount of income from the proposal and now will have to take on some extra work elsewhere to make up the deficit.
End of the day it's not something I'm going to ragequit over nor stop developing my stuff for HIVE, simply going to have to spend more time on stuff other that HIVE projects to make up for it..! But it certainly took me by surprise and has left me in a situation where I'm a bit demoralized and stressed. Ah well, my problems and issues to solve. It is what it is.
I hear you. Not trying to minimize the frustration, just explaining why this is so compelling to stakeholder voters, and some of the logic behind it. It isn't a common or typical situation.
Aye, thanks man. No worries. Will get it all figured out here in time.