At first, you need to prove your Nuās model is sustainable, then investors dare to invest into your new projects, otherwise, B&C is the bad example. You just cannot replenish money into Nuās dark hole with endlessly new projects ICO, I donāt think there are so many stupid investors on market.
Nu first or B&C first? Will B&C save Nu or Nu save B&C? My opinion is Nu cannot live without B&Cās help, so B&C must be the first target. If you have no fund, just begin to write source code by yourself, this is the only way to save Nu.
@phoenix You need to improve your IQ, although you understand there is price gap between NSR price @buyback and @sale, you donāt care it and hope people to āarbitrageā between the prices. Indeed some people will earn money in this way, but majority of NSR holders will suffer because there must be some people to pay the expenditure.And there is tragedy of commons in your liquidity engine as I explained before. And many smart speculators will not buy a kind of crypto without quantity upper limit at all, the NSR price can be lower and lower as you continuously changing the unit from X1000 to X1000,000.
And you think the inflated value of NBT as FIAT can save you some expenditure, but this trick is already well known to the public because governments have played for hundreds of years, you can get a little benefit, but lose the large potential customers, so I donāt think you are smart because you have no nuclear warhead/tanks.
Iāve spent more than two years here to suggest, today I still cannot find enough common view here. I think my invest on B&C has been completely lost, and wonāt waste my energy any more. My time is also money.