About a token that generates revenue for the issuing corporation

ConfusedObserver 2016-09-26 14:11:12 UTC #41

To make a future proof solution: I think so.
Using only crypto coins in that fund you already have that solution available.

Are you speaking of the crypto coin index or the attempt to provide “good money” on a blockchain that fails because of the inability to handle stocks, commodities, ETFs easily?

You want to rely on a third party? What for? Does Nulagoon have anything except for BTC and NBT pools available? How to include all the coins you want to? Make requests at Nulagoon? I don’t understand why you prefer using a third party with all the overhead and consequences.

Don’t you think a crypto coin index can be understood, maintained and reported more easily?
If you publish the addresses involved in the index (the multisig addresses holding the coins), anyone can check the transactions and balances on the blockchain.

mhps 2016-09-26 16:21:12 UTC #42

I mean that NuLagoon DEMONSTRATED the way. A crypto doesn’t need to invent anything earth shattering – it just needs to make such pools like Nulagoon did – and it will have a crypto that is useful and in principle make money for the issuer from spread. With some modification one can issue a set of three coins – one short-btc, one X-time long btc, one stable (0% interest pool) coin.

The question still remains the same: why call it a currency when you are just selling fund/shares?

ConfusedObserver 2016-09-26 17:04:48 UTC #43

I didn’t call it that. I even stated

Indeed I’m just trying to sell shares of a crypto coin fund at an offset.
Being processed on a blockchain they can be bought/sold at nominal value - or whatever the market decides. At least I expect these tokens to be traded.
Nu will always buy them back at book value in case somebody wants the BTC from Nu and not from a trader.
The book value will create the (still volatile!) price floor of the tokens.

ConfusedObserver:

The issuer requests an offset when selling the tokens of quite a few percent. 10% or more doesn’t look unrealistic, especially not if you account for the real inflation rate of e.g. USD. I’m aware that the Fed proclaims a low inflation rate, but depending on what you look at, USD had a considerable inflation rate during the last 8 years. You save the customers creating a basket of all that commodities and goods, provide them with a token that’s fungible and can be transferred in small units, save them from the exchange fees they have to pay when buying e.g. exchange traded funds (ETF) and offer a token that represents all those commodities and goods.
I’m favoring ETF, because that would save from some trouble dealing with way too many individual products/index funds.
From that offset the operational costs are paid and on top of that revenue can be made.

I don’t know how I could make my proposal more clear.

BusinessGuy 2016-09-28 23:06:31 UTC #44

It’s been a while since I have caught up with your posts. Firstly @Phoenix well done in restoring the peg. I continue to believe though that without a revenue model the peg is still very exposed to a significant increase in the value of Bitcoin, or simply time eking away at any reserves/liquidity.
This post was of interest as I think a Cryptocoin fund is a good idea. XBT Provider do a Bitcoin tracker fund on a regulated exchange in Stockholm and charge 2.5% per annum in fees (see http://xbtprovider.com/lang_en/)
The question I have is why look to build a new product to derive revenue when you already have one that is not being used in this way? Looking at it from a potential user point of view I see the following:

a) CRYPTOCOIN FUND

The idea is to create a cryptocurrency index fund based on a yet to be determined basket.
This basket should be less volatile on average than each cryptocurrency individually.
Much like the stock market the basket value will rise and fall based on the confidence in the assets that underlie it.
Unlike the stock market the index would not need to be recalculated due to dividend payments, stock splits or other annoying corporate actions.
Unlike stocks the cryptoshares can be exchanged easily cross chain for other cryptocurrencies. No need to be exposed to the outside non blockchain world.
To invest in such a basket is really saying that I am optimistic about the future of cryptocurrencies but not confident enough in any particular cryptocurrency to make a sole bet on it. If I lose confidence in cryptocurrencies as an asset class I can switch to Nubits as it is pegged to fiat.
I believe it to be cheaper and easier to invest in a token that gives me exposure to a cryptocurrency basket rather than doing it myself via Shapeshift or some other similar service.
It also has the advantage I do not need to re weight my basket when necessary. The company or organisation calculating the index will do that for me.
–
So I am prepared to pay for the privilege of simplicity and this payment will be made via a spread or offset.

b) NUBITS

For Nubits I have a service that lets me invest in a cryptocurrency that is pegged to the USD.
This allows me to avoid the volatility that I would otherwise be exposed to by investing in cryptocurrencies that are not so pegged.
I can convert my other cryptocurrencies to Nubits (via BTC if necessary) at times when I feel that the volatility in my otherwise held cryptocurrency will increase beyond my risk threshold, is falling likely to fall or when I believe that confidence in cryptocurrencies in general is falling or likely to fall.
To avoid this, I would otherwise need to cash out my cryptocurrency into fiat and back again paying fees to do so while taking my store of value off chain.
–
Yet the fee for conversion to Nubits and back again is negligible thereby giving me almost the full economic benefit of taking such action.

ConfusedObserver 2016-10-05 13:29:44 UTC #45