Discussion of a motion outlining how Nu will handle BCH funds from the blockchain fork


Tough call and I believe mainly a bet. If it was me I would sell half, just hedging a bit. On the other hand BTC has increased over 15% in last week so there is no real loss even when it goes to zero what I don’t expect. Every BCC is just a bonus anytime. I believe now is the worst time to sell as there is a lot of sell pressure. In a few weeks that will wear off and than it will be clear whether it can stand on its own feet around the $200+ mark.


Same applies to the raised B&C funds - just a bonus for Nushareholders. Thanks.


It’s discouraging that the default answer from the liquidity team is that, ‘unless shareholders pass a motion, we will just decide’.

At the very least you should craft your own motion. I am all but certain it would be trivial for the both of you to pass it.


How will Nu handle a situation where Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin engage in competition for market share? It’s gotta be scary to own a lot of NuBits right now.


I understand from the reports that Nu kept the BCH so that would alleviate some of the concerns. Even if BTC devalues further and BCH increase in value at a similar rate the network is safe I believe as the reserves won’t devalue against both BCH and BTC. On top of that I believe there need to be a trading pair BCH/NBT established when BCH will get over approximately 25% of the BTC value and continues to match or exceeds the volumes in BTC.


It’s worth noting that in the past 6 hours BCH was over 25% of BTC market capitalization with around $11 billion in volume, an all-time record high for trade volume of any crypto currency.


Nu has not sold any of its Bitcoin Cash yet. In light of recent market activity, we are considering selling some, most likely for Ether.


… without any discussion or input from minority shareholders as per our governance policy.


If you are a shareholder please give us your input, either here or privately. I am the servant of shareholders. I care a great deal about their interests and my relationship with them. I try to consult directly with major shareholders regularly.

I don’t know what governance policy you are referring to. Multiple shareholder passed motions certainly substantiate the right and responsibility the Chief of Liquidity Operations has to allocate reserve funds. It is a responsibility I am a little uncomfortable with, because I cannot predict future pricing of assets in the reserve with much accuracy. I do know, however, that when an asset in the reserve more than doubles in price in less than 2 days on high volume, it is time to sell some.

My decision to sell 25% of Liquidity Operation’s Bitcoin Cash for Ether is a reaction to the huge spike in price, most of which has occurred in the last day. This is a very fast moving situation. There simply isn’t time to have a discussion involving a large number of people and use a voting process that takes at least a week. Fast reaction time is one of the reasons Nu uses custodians to make decisions on behalf of shareholders.

Even though I have to make the decision myself, I seek input. Do you think we should sell more than 25% of our Bitcoin Cash immediately? I am considering that.

[Passed] Reimbursing shareholder

As I already stated prior to the fork, I think it would have been in the best interest of Nu to use the BCH to provide liquidity to BCH/USNBT trading pair. In my opinion, Ethereum is a poor investment at this price level.


Hey @lissajous!

Wonderful read where @JordanLee / @Phoenix explains why ETH is bad and why DASH’s system is not as good as Nu’s :smiley: He also said that Ethereum’s success was solely based on hype + transaction capacity. As we know transaction capacity reached its limit. Are we left with hype now does the equation hype + transaction capacity = success still hold even without transaction capacity? @Phoenix, why do you think Ethereum is a proper investment right now whereas you thoroughly explained all its disadvantages back then?


He contradicted himself in his own post, nevermind previous decisions he’s made with shareholder funds that went belly up. Remember all the propping up of the NSR price when the peg was lost? How about his trading back and forth between NSR and NBT with the BC dev fund? Yet he has the nerve to blame “Nu shareholders” for not keeping the value of said fund. It is this sort of centralized mistake making that Nu needs to solve before growing to the level they appear to be targeting.


I also support providing liquidity on BCH/USNBT pairs, as well as many other pairs. Our next priority is supporting an ETH trading pair. The software is ready. At this point it is a matter of finding an exchange to list the pair and implementing a utilization of their API. Under the current circumstances, BCH is indeed the next priority after ETH. The criteria for prioritization is mostly demand for trading, or simply trading volume. I realize BCH trading has been higher than ETH in the past 3 days, but this is a deviation from the long term pattern.

To implement a BCH/USNBT pair, what is required is to have @woolly_sammoth modify the NuBot code to get real time pricing for BCH. Secondarily, he must also implement the utilization of the API of an exchange that decides to list a BCH/NuBit trading pair of some sort. @woolly_sammoth will be working for Liquidity Operations full time beginning December 4th. We also plan to hire someone part time to work on recruiting exchanges to list trading pairs for us as part of our Vancouver expansion. I expect our ability to implement support for new pairs will increase a great deal with these two new contractors (one of which hasn’t been identified yet).

Nu seeks to base its tier 4 reserve upon assets that minimize counterparty risk. Blockchain assets are unique in the benefits they offer in this way. At the present time, we are essentially restricted to blockchain assets to accommodate this priority. Nu also seeks a reserve that is stable in value. This second value is very much at odds with the first value. Blockchain assets are certainly not known for their stable value. Even so, Nu would do well to acquire well established and highly liquid blockchain assets. Bitcoin is clearly the most established and liquid, while Ethereum is clearly the second most established and liquid. Diversification can also be used to help stabilize the value of the tier 4 reserve. As we begin to diversify the tier 4 reserve, Ethereum is the logical starting point, due to its wide acceptance, use and deep liquidity.

I have decided to allocate a tiny 1% of the tier 4 reserve to BlockShares. The reasons for inclusion of BlockShares in the reserve is due to different values. It seems likely that BlockShares are highly undervalued right now and poised for a rise soon. More importantly, the B&C Exchange network is somewhat unstable. The reasons for this are nuanced, but to be brief, the main reason is its low market cap, currently around $140,000. Nu’s market cap is much higher: around $5,000,000 average recently. There is an opportunity for B&C Exchange to acquire some of the stability of the Nu network by Nu Liquidity Operations purchasing and minting with BlockShares. The stability of the B&C Exchange network is very much in the interest of NuShare holders because B&C Exchange is expected to grow into the ideal environment for Nu to provide liquidity. Essentially, B&C Exchange needs to be nurtured and protected by Nu while it is young and immature so it can succeed enough to benefit Nu later.