So how do I transfer a million dollars worth of NYC coin from A to B while preserving that value and turning it back into dollars? While transaction fees might be low, the liquidity premium will be off the charts and hence make it more expensive than using the coins you mentioned.
Thats a fair point, I get 0% forex fees offered to me all the time but I immediately have to go check their bid offer spread competitiveness because this is where the costs are mostly contained and what will eventually cost me in sum total, possibly even more then that fee might. The low fee part is always useful for the poor peeps who arent transferring much and so dont mind the % costs involved quite as badly as the fixed fee would charge them.
My personal take for the whole of crypto is the greatest success is going to come from addressing solving the problems of the common people, the people who have least but greatest need for crypto as useful and secure way to transact value; they in turn if finding value will return growth and stability by providing this liquidity to the blockchain that enables them. Thats how I hope crypto progresses and somehow does the impossible climb that the larger finance bodies believe it cannot. Costs and value returned stands as a common problem across the whole currency spectrum, I have to constantly consider this when pricing anything globally and its not especially a criticism of nyc.
Why you say can't and shouldn't be disputed. Still the question remains why a lot of coins claim to have low fees when there is literally no trading volume (no liquidity) at all. Transaction fees might be low, but you just can't use the coin to transfer funds as you can't get out of it anymore. That's why I think that there won't be tens of thousands of functional currencies in the future. It makes more sense for all of us to converge to a couple of them and thereby reduce all kinds of premiums, like the liquidity premium.