So if we adopt such a model, Nu would radically pivot from providing NuBits for free to providing NuBits for a fee.
In that case, what should be a reasonable daily fee of such a service?
And isn’t a big problem with holders?
I mean when I hold 100 USD today, it is still 100 USD in one year.
(I am discarding the inflation part because NuBits being pegged to USD does not have any advantage over USD).
It is very legitimate to ask what would be the reaction of the holders?
Would they be like: “no way!” or rather": the fee is reasonable and after all paying for the privilege of using a stable crypto is not so unnatural"?
1 Like
There are so many sources of revenue available they are nearly innumerable. The talk about no revenues being available is really stupid, considering so many sources of revenue have been identified and discussed on this forum. I can’t think of a line of business with better prospects for revenue. Even Facebook found revenues. That was difficult. There were plenty of naysayers like you in their early days who didn’t know what they were talking about. We won’t have even 5% as much trouble finding revenue as Facebook. What we need is credibility in our product, and we will be flooded with revenue. We are a startup, however, and that requires investment. We have to demonstrate ourselves worthy of investment. Abandoning our main business operations in a disorderly and unplanned manner as we did is the worst way to court that investment. It is that unpredictable behavior that is our biggest problem at this point.
NuBits themselves are a depreciating liability. That is really important. We get transaction fees, which shareholders can and should raise. Volume dependent transaction fees are coming. There are trade spreads. There are lost NuBits. So many promising avenues that have already been discussed at length.
Sorry, saying we should destroy NuBits holders for lack of revenue is just incredibly stupid. I stand amazed.
All the idiots saying we should break our promises to customers because we don’t have the kind of revenue they want right now should leave the forum as far as I am concerned. You are no friend of NuShare holders. Like we are going to have more revenue by acting in the way we have the last month. Building trust and credibility are paramount, not making tons of revenue right now. But these people aren’t identifying ways to get tons of revenue. They are suggesting that we shut down operations until we get more revenue. The stupidity of this is truly amazing and I am weary of indulging it.
To those who insist on bringing suicidal values to our network, just please stop. You look like idiots.
Jordan, you seem to understand the concept just as well as liquidity operations. Sigmike already told us some stories about your ability to get into these things - maybe because you never show up in the development chat room just as you never did in this forum. In fact my proposal would allow for a 1 USD peg much sooner than your 10 cent NBT, because of the very basic game theoretical reasons already addressed in this thread.
No, I will not leave this forum and since I am a friend of the idea of Nu I am also a friend of Nushare holders. You however have proven on several occasions that you only want to enrich yourself and therefore I really hope you leave the forum and that you will stop trying to bring suicidal values to the network.
I think I don’t need to mention how you already look to shareholders and observers.
5 Likes
Yet Nu couldn’t stay in the black.
Can I expect this person to care about his idiots’ interest?
Yah, fuck @pheonix, it’s either some random person just tying to get a bunch of nsr to attack the pos security of the network or JL being a big fat coward and hoping to squeeze a couple more dimes out of a network he crippled for his own perverse reasons. Either way, fuck that shit.
2 Likes
I understand that most active forum participants, up until now, have been liquidity providers. It should come as no surprise that scaling back decentralized liquidity operations due to incompetence is not a narrative or outcome these people are fond of. I am also aware a large percentage of shareholders are also decentralized liquidity providers. They are not inclined to support me in this effort to bring structure to liquidity operations because it eliminates their role. This is a very difficult political issue in our community right now. But it will pass. We are a business and we have to be as efficient and effective as we can, or die. Business isn’t forgiving. I believe the majority of shareholders will see my proposals are in their economic interest, and will support me soon, even though this change doesn’t please most active forum participants.
Good luck with that
1 Like
Is that what FLOT made with @JordanLee - eliminate his role? Did that hurt, @JordanLee?
Why am I asking @JordanLee, who is offline?
Is it because @Phoenix reminds me of him?
I don’t know.
Anyway - this is the last thing Nu needs now:
Dumping NSR on the market, before sound revenue schemes are on the horizon is selling NSR below value. That’s of course nice for people who want to buy NSR cheaply.
The thing is: there’s no reason to do it.
Nu still has BTC left (haha, 1:0 masterOfDisaster and FLOT!) to fund development anbd pay for expenses until Nu can make a new attempt.
There’s no peg that needs to be kept.
NSR sale now are pointless, wannabe Chief of Liquidity Operations!
I agree with this one. But please tell me why you advocate NSR sales, if you understand that buy walls aren’t needed right now.
Are you sure NSR sales now aren’t advocated, because an evil mastermind wants to buy them cheaply?
Oh, I have no proof for that, but on the other hand I have no idea, why NSR should be sold now.
Do you want to explain why Nu needs to sell NSR right now? Please go beyond NuLaw, if you want to be taken seriously.
Not going to happen without a sound revenue scheme.
That’s why NSR sales mustn’t be done before the revenue schemes are just around the corner, for that would push the NSR rate up!
Someone wants to get cheap NSR and tries to push NSR sales right now…
But I agree that NBT rate will go up once there’s a reason for NSR rate to go up.
No NSR sale now! It just hurts the shareholders!
Why don’t you focus on them, if it’s so easy?
Bla, bla.
Go on dreamin, if you think that can cover Nu’s expenses.
Really? Please point me to that motion.
I thought they are evil?!
I got treated horribly, because I advocated them.
Do you really want to make revenue from the spread?
That would be amazing news. And you would - at least in this sector - follow my lead 
Sorry, saying we should destroy future NuBits holders to save the current ones by continuing a ponzi scheme is just incredibly stupid. I stand amazed.
If Nu makes revenue, NuBits holders can get all their money back, but it will take time.
That’s what Nu needs to achieve: revenue and paying NBT holders back - not offering a band-aid solution and hoping for a greater fool.
I only find one idiot here in the forum and I’ve read a lot more since my last post.
Then they have learned nothing.
It’s in their best economic interest to find revenue before they continue NSR sales.
And they should never ever trust an anonymous newbie with that much power, especially not if this newbie behaves a lot like @JordanLee, who really fucked a lot up.
2 Likes
Speculating motivation is fun but not productive. Let’s look at the numbers.
Standard and Core only asks to sell 0.5 - 1% of nsr coinbase a week. That is nothing compared with the 80% drop of market cap due to price drop. You last sentence above is also speculating that nsr prices is cheap. In general we don’t know that.
Anyway if we cap 0.5% dilution a week, it;s only 2% a month. We didn;t blink when we increase 10/700 = 1.4% of total NBT liability a month on liquidity provision. These are comparable scale of expenditure.
So I think Nu can afford to sell nsr to either get btc for development or rein in liability
2 Likes
To play devils advocate, nbt expenditure did not have PoS security on the line.
1 Like
possibly – but i urge other shareholders and recommend many new comers that are genuinely interested long term to purchase more shares too.
isn’t that necessary to burn NBTs?
In another thread I posted this comment about how I will conduct liquidity operations once elected:
These plans still stand but a modification is in order considering the NuShare price is up around 300% over the lat six hours or so. We ought to rapidly enter the Poloniex market and sell NuShares held by FLOT NSR right now. I recommend 7 million NSR be transferred from FLOT NSR to @jooize’s Poloniex account for immediate sale. I recommend sell orders start at the current market price and be distributed from current market price to 20% above it. This will yield about 25 BTC at current market rates. Proceeds will be regarded as part of tier 4 reserves. 10% of total tier 4 reserves should be used to purchase NuBits on Poloniex each day. I recommend the NuBit purchases start today. This means @jooize should leave BTC proceeds on Poloniex so they can be used in the coming days to purchase NuBits. I recommend @jooize burn the NuBits purchased.
Liquidity is very good in NuShares at the moment with 56 BTC in trade volume over the last 8 hours. We need to use this opportunity to fill our reserve so we can keep funding the purchase of NuBits.
I don’t have the authority at the moment to order these actions completed. It is just a recommendation. However, it is legal according to NuLaw for FLOT NSR and @jooize to take these recommended actions.
@jooize and FLOT NSR, please comment on the proposed actions. @Dhume, @ttutdxh, @cryptog, @mhps, @masterOfDisaster
The standard says 6 btc or so worth of nsrs according to: Supply, Reserves, and Equilibrium
I would be ok with more. But how much more?
I am onboard with that.
I were about to mention elsewhere (but now that FLOT will come here, this will do) that with the increase in NuShare price my withdrawal limit is more noticeable and Poloniex has messed with my basic Level 1 verification. If you send me yet more NuShares, that withdrawal issue will have time to resolve and not affect the blind auction. I believe I’ll solve it with Poloniex support before that, but that’s the current situation you should be aware of.
3,000,000 NSR are awaiting withdrawal approval.
982,378 NSR are immediately available for trade on exchange.
Thanks for taking the initiative. I was about to make a similar sugestion.
Standard and Core models around the nsr/btc market. the velocity was set to not disturb the nsr/btc market too much. Since the auction happens on nsr/nbt pair, although there is arbitrage effect to probagate action in one market to the other, I think it’s worth it to try selling another standard on the nsr/btc market when the auction goes on in the same week.
I recommend 7 million NSR at the moment. If they sell, we will put more up for sale at a higher price. We are required to sell NSR by NuLaw in an amount that equals or exceeds the requirement of the Standard. I recommend auction #2 that is underway continue, and that will meet the sale requirements of the Standard by itself.
I am also going to recommend that we define an estimated reserve price at the beginning of each auction. When bidding closes, I set an actual reserve price. This will give us the discretion to take orders that make sense and leave ones that don’t. The difference between the estimated reserve price and the actual reserve price will typically only differ according to changes in the market rate in the days between when the estimated and actual reserve price is announced. If the market for NuShares goes up during an auction, the actual reserve price will likely be higher than the estimated reserve price, for instance.
1 Like
There’s reserve price already, what do you mean you set a new one? You can’t set a new reserve price after bidding ended, what kind of auction is that???
It’s not honorable and hardly an ideal practice for auctions.
I don;t remember the exceed part.
Changing terms in the middle or setting complicated terms will defeat the purpose of an auction and drive people away.
You are mis-characterizing what I said. That isn’t honorable. Here is the unedited quote:
This is an action to be taken at the beginning of an auction. The next auction is scheduled to begin shortly after the next official Standard and Core calculation at the end of Friday UTC.
1 Like
This is not transparent at all. Phoenix clearly has a lot of NSR and is playing with the market. I don’t trust him to be in this position.
1 Like