Hi folks, two weekend questions for the community to learn about the perception of possible future changes around the fees table.
1: On market research and in interactions with partners (potential and current) one frequent critique is that while our fee structure is good, it is opaque - as the fees changes due to the relative trade of someone in relation to the volume of the exchange. Long story short, we are exploring changing the fees from being a % of the 30-day volume trade to be based on fixed numbers only related to oneself volume. Changing the fee table would affect running stakes. Important to note this change also has positive performance impact, as user fees can be computed in parallel and independently from the global volume, we could simplify the fee logic and add it to the same system that verify user Tier restrictions.
Q1) How do you feel about changing the fee from % to fixed values based on volumes?
- Negative, I dislike any change in the fees table.
- Positive, Nash should do what is best if investors are taken in consideration.
2: Nash has two sides, a costumer platform (B2C) and a business offering (B2B). On our B2B efforts we have been considered as an expensive platform - while Nash doesn’t seek to win by being cheaper - we are considering introducing new high volume levels to be competitive for B2B offerings such as brokers and other fintechs that might build on top of Nash platform. This usually is a non-issue for centralized exchanges, as they can do special deals with their clients, but Nash has a transparent fee policy due to the staking dividends.
Q2) After how much monthly volume should we introduce new lower fee levels?