B&C Share Sales Have Been Stuck Between 45-48% for the Past Several Days. We Need to Boost Awareness of the Sale by Purchasing Direct Advertisements on Coinmarketcap and Reddit

[tomjoad]

I’m curious to see if @tomjoad has interest in moving it forward and can tell us what it would cost for a logo.

I would be enthusiastic about leading the creation of a B&C logo. The NuBits logo was developed for a little over 1000 NBT using 99designs.ca and some follow-up polishing from Skycatchfire. The pricing seems to have increased slightly since then so I would estimate 1500 NBT. That contest type approach worked quite well for Nu. The other alternative would be to work directly with a reputable designer, and that would probably cost between 1000-2000 NBT.

Running coinmarketcap.com banner ads would be possible soon after the logo is finalized. I would expect the logo creation process to take about 2 weeks, and CMC banners created and displayed 2 weeks after that.

I haven’t seen much discussion about the idea @masterofdisaster referenced here and am unsure if it’s generally considered undesirable or if the length of the post scared people off. As a NuShareholder I would support it (and the dilution of my NSR to fund it) completely.

[Sentinelrv]

Please check this thread, as it connects with the idea of advertising the sale on popular websites…

Paying Developers in BlockShares in Case we Can't Raise the Remaining Amount Would Allow us to Lock in the Funds Currently Raised & Start Development of B&C Immediately

Edit: The plan has slightly changed. Instead of NuShares going to the devs, BlockShares would. Check this post for a clear understanding of how it would work. Original Post: I have an alternative solution for raising the rest of the funds necessary to build B&C Exchange. It would allow development to start immediately and it removes the risk of our current pledgers walking away due to a lengthy fundraising process. Please read the whole thing… So far we’ve raised about half of the needed funds…

[Yurizhai]

What is the reason the current auction hasn’t had as many pledges as the one before it? Was it due to the fact the first one did not meet the goals?

[Sabreiib]

I guess some potential investors like to buy both NSR and BKS, just like me.
I believe B&C is a very risky project because ethereum and open transaction is near.

nubits project has little income and the furture is up to BTC price and more and more new NBT sales proceed. I suggest:

1. make profit before you spend, if you have no profit, don’t spend at all.
2. wait for OP or ethereum, these can save our expenditure.

In NBTers’ eyes, is the NSR a infinite resource that you can drain it endlessly? Today we grant some money for this, tomorow we spend some NBT for that, are you magician? Where is the finacial/accounting report, the company operation status?

Equity=?
Liability=?
Asset=?

Tell potential investors about accounting before let them invest, Nu is a DAC/DAO, a company, not Bitcoin.

[cryptog]

Tell potential investors about accounting before let them invest, Nu is a DAC/DAO, a company, not Bitcoin.

I cannot agree more.

[Nagalim]

Equity=?Liability=?Asset=?

Equity=nsr marketcap
Liability=nbt marketcap
Asset=liquidity provided

[JordanLee]

I believe B&C is a very risky project because ethereum and open transaction is near.

I wanted to reply on bitcointalk.org, but it is down at the moment, so I will post here for now and there later.

The Open Transactions project was started in 2011 and has been months away from release for years. I took a look at their source code some time ago and was quite unimpressed with their architecture. Their code was extremely verbose and repetitive. They seemed to not make good use of core programming concepts such as inheritance, overrides and abstract classes. Chris Odom is the original developer of Open Transactions, but stepped down from his role as CTO at Monetas (the company developing Open Transactions) two months ago. What is it that makes you think the release of Open Transactions is near? I hope they succeed, but my guess is it will never be released. I have said before I wouldn’t want to be tasked with building Open Transactions because I don’t know how to implement the specifications. I don’t see any reason to think anyone else knows how to either.

Ethereum is making better progress toward release, but is there any reason to think it will be an effective competitor of B&C Exchange? Looking at the Ethereum subreddit, I found this discussion of a decentralized exchange to be hosted on Ethereum:

There, I found the following comments:

EtherEx is strictly for trading crypto-assets based on Ethereum. However, there should be similar projects in the not-too-distant future that facilitate fiat-to-ether (and Ethereum-based assets).

It only allows the exchange of digital tokens created on the Ethereum platform

You will not be able to use Ethereum to trade native cryptoassets. Proxy assets may be employed, like BitBTC on Bitshares. That is not at all the same as trading native Bitcoin for native Bitshares, which B&C Exchange will allow users to do and is what users want to do. B&C Exchange is a groundbreaking design that meets needs no competitor can.

Ethereum is based on the notion that one blockchain can rule them all, or that a cleverly built blockchain can serve a wide variety of business models simultaneously. My guess is that it will not optimally serve any business model. The Peershare philosophy is quite different. It employs separate blockchains with diverse protocols for diverse business models. Each Peershare doesn’t do everything, but each one does something very well. As a group, they can serve a wide variety of business models.

[Sentinelrv]

@JordanLee, I have responded to your post in my other thread about the use of BlockShares, rather than NuShares in case you didn’t see it yet. I also posted a clear layout of what could happen in response to Tomjoad’s post.

[JordanLee]

Equity=nsr marketcap
Liability=nbt marketcap
Asset=liquidity provided

Liability equals the NBT market cap minus the NBT held by all custodians. This includes myself, KTm, Jamie and maybe Cybnate (depending on your perspective). I believe this number is around 250,000, but the others would need to report to arrive at a precise figure. Assets don’t really compute in our decentralized, zero reserve design. However, from some perspectives the NSR market cap can be viewed as containing assets.

You don’t see as much accounting information as you would like precisely because Nu is decentralized: no single person has the info. However, I have asked everyone involved to report figures simultaneously at times in the past, but I hope you don’t view that as my job, because it isn’t.

I have provided many updates regarding my own part of the accounting for the organization. Two days ago I had 207,000 NBT plus ~30,000 NBT in the hands of the person handling some contractor payments. I’m sure that 30,000 is less today, but I don’t have specifics right now. I have ~26,000 in tier 4 liquidity right now.

[Sabreiib]

Equity=nsr marketcapLiability=nbt marketcapAsset=liquidity provided

Equity = asset - liability

So your comprehension is not correct.

In order to run a company, we need some basic accounting knowledge.

[Sabreiib]

Their code was extremely verbose and repetitive. They seemed to not make good use of core programming concepts such as inheritance, overrides and abstract classes.

oh, they are amateur programmers if so.

Ethereum is based on the notion that one blockchain can rule them all, or that a cleverly built blockchain can serve a wide variety of business models simultaneously. My guess is that it will not optimally serve any business model. The Peershare philosophy is quite different. It employs separate blockchains with diverse protocols for diverse business models. Each Peershare doesn’t do everything, but each one does something very well. As a group, they can serve a wide variety of business models.

One ethereum blockchain handle all business? Sounds not very good approach. I like the “distributed” style.

I think you need to advertise the difference between B&C and OT/Ethereum on bitcointalk forum to get more investors. Bring up a white paper/ppt to demonstrate the pros and cons, if an argument occurs, more people are interested because nowadays the bitcointalk thread participants are mainly from PPC/Nu community.

Liability equals the NBT market cap minus the NBT held by all custodians. This includes myself, KTm, Jamie and maybe Cybnate (depending on your perspective). I believe this number is around 250,000, but the others would need to report to arrive at a precise figure. Assets don’t really compute in our decentralized, zero reserve design. However, from some perspectives the NSR market cap can be viewed as containing assets

Agree with that the Liability = sold NBT.

The asset of Nu should include software, computer(hardware) of NSR miners and the BTC/FIAT/NBT held in LPCs’ hands. Some LPCs bring their own money(BTC) to provider liquidity, those BTC/FIAT/NBT is both Nu’s liability and asset, ie no impact on equity. But their comission/reward(such as 7.5%/month), is Nu’s expenditure. Those expenditure weakens equity continuously. We need find ways to compensate the expenditure, and make equity positive, othewise the Nu’s equity will be always negative. If Nu business cannot make profit, the market capitalization of NSR is nothing, worth nothing.

I think it’s not difficult to report the finacial status of Nu DAC, how many NBT sold(not in LPC’s hands)? How many BTC/NBT on buy/sell wall(in LPC hands)? How many NBT burned as transaction fee? etc… I even imagine in future people can print/export to CSV format of the finacial report of Nu just by clicking wallet’s menus.

As long as we manage the equity positive and even increase the equity, Nu is not ponzi at all because this system can last long, from this day, to the end of people’s days.

[masterOfDisaster]

Each Peershare doesn’t do everything, but each one does something very well. As a group, they can serve a wide variety of business models.

That reminds me of the Unix philosophy

The Unix philosophy emphasizes building short, simple, clear, modular, and extensible code that can be easily maintained and repurposed by developers other than its creators.
The Unix philosophy favors composability as opposed to monolithic design.

If you need to admit one thing about Unix, it is that Unix is very robust by design. That’s what an ecosystem formed by Peershares DACs can be as well.
And B&C Exchange can be one of these Peershares DACs, a special one which is a hub to trade assets - in the near future of crypto currencies and wanna-be-currencies; mid-term it might become something like NYSE, but instead of the centralized NYSE it would be a distributed version.

[JordanLee]

But their comission/reward(such as 7.5%/month), is Nu’s expenditure. Those expenditure weakens equity continuously. We need find ways to compensate the expenditure, and make equity positive, othewise the Nu’s equity will be always negative. If Nu business cannot make profit, the market capitalization of NSR is nothing, worth nothing.

During the first six months of operations, shareholders spent around 50,000 NBT per month funding liquidity operations, not including development expenses. When Jamie and KTm cease general operations in the coming weeks this will have dropped to 10,000 NBT per month. Once B&C Exchange is well established, I expect the cost of liquidity per NBT to be less than 1% per month, a further reduction of 90%, or just 2% of the original cost. That is one reason why B&C Exchange is so important and why Nu shareholders should be diligent to ensure it gets funded: it is the best way to further reduce liquidity costs.

Even though liquidity costs money, it brings value to the network, so funds spent on it are not lost, but rather an investment that encourages adoption.

[masterOfDisaster]

Time to advertise the funding at places different from bitcointalk.org.
It might take some time until they are up again:

BitcoinTalk (bitcointalk)

[Sentinelrv]

I was going to do some more advertising last night. Glad I waited. Hopefully the thread isn’t unavailable for more than a couple days.

[masterOfDisaster]

Maybe it’s time to consider spending some money on this idea

An estimate for coinmarketcap.com banner costs based on what @Cybnate and I have found out in our preparations for mobile wallet advertising: 100-200 NBT for the creation of the banner with our graphic designer, and 2500 NBT for 1 month of advertising on coinmarketcap.

and direct people to a nice thread here to inform them about B&C Exchange (and maybe to discuss that matter)?
Or would it be considered inconvenient for people to have to register here if they want to join the discussion?
Clearly bitcointalk.org is a good place to find people who might be interested in buying a share of a corporation like B&C Exchange.

But I dare to say that the people who visit bitcointalk.org and that are interested in B&C Exchange have been found already.

It was good to start the advertisement there, because it was very effective, but as bitcointalk.org is an external resource which appears to be down for an unknown time, we should strive for alternatives.

Directing people here could have the side-effect of getting them in contact with Nu.
That would give them an even better base to make up their mind.

[irritant]

shouldn’t this be a motion, so shareholders can vote on it?

[Sentinelrv]

shouldn’t this be a motion, so shareholders can vote on it?

I said in my first couple posts that I will leave that to people like @tomjoad that are more informed about what is involved.

[masterOfDisaster]

shouldn’t this be a motion, so shareholders can vote on it?

If it creates costs, it requires a grant.
If it requires consensus in any other way, it requires a motion.

[zoro]

perhaps using start up platforms like koinify?
i remembered factom