How many NBTs in circulation right now, meaning how many NBTs are stored in wallets, parked or at exchanges?
I call this total quantity QT.
Assuming that the parked units are unparked, I want to know whether or not Nu will be able to avoid a bank run in the hypothetical event in which every NBT in circulation is being sold for 1USD.
Wouldn’t that come down to just seeing whether QT is higher that the current Buy Liquidity which is 238467 NBTs right now?
Here JL evaluates the quantity of NBTs in circulation to 350k .
He also evaluates the quantity of parked NBTs to 56k .
The block explorer gives 2,273,978 NBTs produced so far.
The question is where is the difference: 1,867,978 NBTs.
I am aware some have been burnt but not everything.
It was around 350,000 when Jamie, KTm and I all reported the NBT we had on hand two or three weeks ago. I can’t calculate it at the present time without figures from @jmiller and @KTm. I can tell you I have 656,000 NBT on hand, most of which will be burned within a few weeks in accordance with a recently passed motion. The quantity of NuBits parked is available to anyone at all times via the NuBit getinfo RPC:
“totalparked” : 61719.8559
The quantity of NuBits taken out of circulation via auction is 185,000 and 35,000 NBT have been parked since the calculation two or three weeks ago for a total of 220,000 removed from circulation since then. I don’t know how many have been purchased from our sell walls since the last count, but 60,000 is a good guess. So my unreliable estimate of NuBits outstanding is 190,000.
Accurate figures are expected to be available in real time in the future.
Tks but I need a clarification on the definition of “to be in circulation” and “to be outstanding”.
To me, being in circulation means “not parked”…
Therefore I cannot grasp the figures you mentioned.
My definitions:
In Circulation – NBT that are held by parties other than the custodian they were granted to or @JordanLee. These NBT are funds are impacted by the amount of buy-side liquidity available and are liabilities.
Out of Circulation – NBT that are held by the active custodians (either in their exchange sell walls, or off-exchange in deeper tiers), in the strategic reserve fund, or by Jordan Lee (acquired through wall balancing actions in the past or from the NSR auction that was just held). Many of these NBT are slated to be burned as part of the recent set of motions passed by the Shareholders. While they are technically liabilities, because there’s always the chance that they could be put up for sale if a custodian or Jordan Lee “went rogue,” I find it extremely unlikely based on their prior actions and standing in the community. I will, however, feel more comfortable once the approved burns have taken place after the proscribed time intervals from the motions have been satisfied (25%, 33% of the remaining, etc.) 
You could consider any NBT that are parked to be “out of curiculation”, too, but personally I think of them as a different type of liability because they are a known quantity and can be verified that they are still parked by anyone through the client.
I’ll need to check to see if the block explorer’s money supply value correctly figures in amounts burned as fees; my gut feeling is that it doesn’t, but should.
Why liability?
Which type of NBT is the one intended for trade/transacting and exchange of goods and services, in other words defining a currency?
Why are these 2 still low in total volume? How can we raise them?
Edit: typo
I think a real time tool that displays the quantity of buy side liquidity in each Tier is a must for the average user because the average user wants to know to which extent he or she could sell his or her nbts quickly in case he or she wants to.
We have right now 70k parked.
51k of buy side liquidity Tiers1.
70k of sell side liquidity.
Wondering about the current quantity of NBTs in circulation. An approximative guess. 200k ?
Let us assume that it is 200k for a minute.
We have 149k “unbacked” but those holders are totally fine with only 51k of buy liquidity.
This in itself is already evidence that users are confident in the ability of Nu to maintain the peg.
If so, this in itself is already strong evidence of the robustness of Nu after 6 months of activity.
Is my interpretation correct?