I’m not so sure about that. As I’m not the final recipient but literally the custodian for most of the grant. I have a contract and in order to fulfil my contractual obligations towards the developer I need a stable coin like NBT and not NSR which are volatile. For my own fee I probably would have asked for NSR at the time when that option was available.
So basically I think it only makes sense to ask for NSR as custodian when you are the final beneficiary of the grant.
The Android grant is worth 27,840 NBT or just under NSR 10m currently (market price). So that would be a reduction of about 1.25% of the value of each Share assuming 800m Shares.
BTW I don’t have the intention to buy that many Shares right now, but others might. Or I might with future smaller grants.
Having a grant at market value (and not much more) could still be a good deal for both Nu and the grant receiver.
Benefit for the receiver:
it wouldn’t be possible to buy a big amount of NSR in a short time without pushing the price up because of the low volume. That might change in future, but it would then for sure affect the NSR/NBT burn rates as well.
That makes it beneficial for the receiver considering a NSR grant.
Benefit for Nu:
it’s unlikely that a grant receiver would prefer NSR grants over NBT grants (under these conditions and depending on the rate), if the intention were to sell them soon, because the NSR couldn’t be sold at market without pushing the price down.
In the end Nu has paid a bill by printing some more shares instead of caring for liquidity.
One might say that without NSR grants a NBT receiver would have to buy NSR at the market, which could be good for the NSR price. So not offering NSR grants could be better for Nu than offering NSR grants.
It all depends on the rate.
I think that is short-sighted, because it inhibits the motivation to propose for a grant if you have a desire for getting NSR, but you can’t ask for a fair NSR grant.
Plus Nu has to decide what Nu’s business shall be based upon - customers or owners?