This is purely speculative:
If fees remain high, can lightning BTC have a significantly different price than BTC on-chain?
There are already lightning to stables exchanges, so could this lead to different prices?
What do you think?
pull down to refresh
25 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 8 May 2023
This is interesting to think about ...
If I wanted to buy a small amount of bitcoin, self-custody, transact with it today, and I'm rational, I would pay a premium that's at least equal to the amount of fees I'd save not having to touch the chain.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 10 May 2023
add non-KYC to that list
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @iguano 8 May 2023
well it only can be 20$ (atm) difference as you can always create/close channels with that fee.
https://i.imgur.com/5usFV5U.png
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @senf 8 May 2023
Any difference would be tiny. You can submarine swap between them just fine so large discrepancies would be arbitraged away.
reply
3 sats \ 0 replies \ @scottathan 8 May 2023
Well, I would be willing to trade several dollars higher for LN-BTC than mainchain BTC right now, so perhaps.
It is vital to differentiate between premiums and differently priced tokens though. You already pay premiums for some LN exchanges like RoboSats. Nonetheless, it is the same token. For BTC to really become two-price, we would need to start considering them different tokens. Because the market is unlikely to ever do that due to the 1:1 mapping of LN-BTC and BTC, we may see premiums but not a two-price situation. Subtle but imho important distinction.
reply