Very true - this was something that I neglected to mention in one of the previous posts - not only is there the .6% of EXCH provided to the NAV/U, there is also the difference between the Period NAV/U and the Daily NAV/U that goes to the Fund.
I'd prefer that people pay as close to the NAV/U as possible, but yes, it's just more for SELL (assuming that Difficulty continues to rise). I haven't ignored your previous post, by the way, I'm just rolling it around in my head at the moment-
The fact that DMS and BDD are NOT just about betting on the increase, calculating a range of likely outcomes once and then executing that plan is what I anticipated and liked about DMS back then and BDD now. "Inefficienties" in the market like having to check wether buying at a certain price is really cheaper than buying EXCH and selling the other or wether buy-back conditions are true are added fun for me.I'd prefer that people pay as close to the NAV/U as possible, but yes, it's just more for SELL (assuming that Difficulty continues to rise). I haven't ignored your previous post, by the way, I'm just rolling it around in my head at the moment-
I didn't anticipate from the beginning that the effect of buybacks would be that huge! Or for example back when DMS was running Deprived put up a wrong EXCH price, and only very few lucky ones even noticed and arbitraged. knockonwood
I'm definitely in favour of keeping oddities like this as they are. For plot-twists and lulz!