[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

Search:


View post   

>> No.53446437 [View]
File: 52 KB, 640x640, lphcll4feh591.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53446437

OK, I have a few questions
Pls no bully if I seem to be misunderstanding something that's supposed to be very basic, I'm genuinely trying to learn here
OK, so in the last thread an anon said one possible solution to encourage large amounts of supply burn is the following:
>The most promising idea, in a general sense, involves re-pegging USTC (not necessarily to $1) to create arbitrage opportunities via one-way LUNC>>>USTC swaps. Again, the specifics of how to accomplish this are still being debated.
So basically if I'm understanding this correctly, for an example of the above:
>let's say LUNC price is approximately $0.0002
>let's also say USTC price is temporarily pegged at $0.02
>so normally this would mean an equal-value swap of 1 USTC = 100 LUNC
>however a one-way swap opportunity is somehow "created" where people can swap their LUNC to get an instant 5x in the form of exchanging for USTC, so instead of the regular 100 LUNC >>> 1 USTC swap it would actually be 20 LUNC >>> 1 USTC
>the LUNC that is swapped in this one-way swap is burned
Do I have that right?
And if my understanding behind the idea is correct, then are there any downsides to such a swap happening that I'm not seeing?
The idea just seems too good to be true, obviously LUNC holders would benefit bigly in terms of profit but I feel like someone would be losing somehow (USTC holders, perhaps?) or there's some major disadvantage to the idea for LUNC holders that I'm not seeing

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]