I know this flies in the face of most people here, including myself. But I am wondering how this would fare..
Set up a group of people who have large holdings and interest in Bitcoin and have them use their large holdings to stabilize the price of Bitcoin.
Bitcoin may have a $1 Billion market cap but it is mainly the amount traded on MtGox that determines the price. Something that could be easily controlled with just a fraction of the full Bitcoin economy.
If the group were to set huge ask and bid walls around a set number, while still raising or lowering on a regular basis as market trends indicate (much like the Fed board meeting to set interest rates), then we could have a bit more stability and we could avoid huge swings either way.
Of course, if the market is too heavy either way and they underestimate the market pressure they could lose one of their walls and lose money so it would be in their interest to follow the market closely and rise and fall at a sustainable rate that the market is calling for.
It could even be advertised that the rate will be going up or down at X% per day so people could plan accordingly. If a major event occurs the rate can be changed.
Judging from some of the walls, a half million dollars worth on each side would probably help to lead the market and hold off on any major wall falling.
History suggests such an endeavour would be doomed to failure, even if its aims were desirable.
What you describe sounds very much like the European Exchange Rate Mechanism in the 1990s - and the UK's ignominious exit in particular:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_WednesdayUltimately, something is worth what people are willing to pay... not what some people (insiders or others) would like it to be worth.
A promise to keep a currency trading between certain bounds is only credible if everybody believes those making the promise can and will do whatever it takes to maintain those bounds. Sadly, as the UK learned and Bitcoin holders attempting the same thing will learn, is that your promise isn't credible if it depends on having access to unlimited amounts of gold (or Bitcoins).
I guess such a scheme could help smooth over fluctuations caused by illiquidity (some sort of market-making function) but an attempt to manipulate levels outside that narrow function just isn't going to work in the long term, IMO.