Everyone's looking at Dusk's €300M NPEX pipeline and seeing demand. I see a giant misread.
The privacy layer is beautiful—zero-knowledge settlements, no front-running, compliant out of the box. But here's the tension nobody's talking about: privacy kills liquidity. Market makers need to see flow to hedge. If everything's shielded, they trade blind, spreads widen, and institutions won't touch it except for post-trade clearing.
And if Dusk becomes just a settlement rail? Then you're looking at a few hundred transactions per day even with billions in notional value. That's not enough gas fees to move the token.
What actually matters is whether Dusk charges on volume or just compute. Right now it's the latter. Token captures none of the asset value.
What changes my mind: real trading volume on DuskTrade, not just assets in custody. Until then, €300M is a story, not demand. DUSK isn't a claim on those assets—it's just a settlement fee.
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK
The privacy layer is beautiful—zero-knowledge settlements, no front-running, compliant out of the box. But here's the tension nobody's talking about: privacy kills liquidity. Market makers need to see flow to hedge. If everything's shielded, they trade blind, spreads widen, and institutions won't touch it except for post-trade clearing.
And if Dusk becomes just a settlement rail? Then you're looking at a few hundred transactions per day even with billions in notional value. That's not enough gas fees to move the token.
What actually matters is whether Dusk charges on volume or just compute. Right now it's the latter. Token captures none of the asset value.
What changes my mind: real trading volume on DuskTrade, not just assets in custody. Until then, €300M is a story, not demand. DUSK isn't a claim on those assets—it's just a settlement fee.
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK
