Park Rate Voting

[Phoenix]

We have seen a slight uptick in the number of NuBits parked, to 8956.

Savers can get a 25% return on their US-NBT just for committing to hold them for 6 months (more than a 50% return on an annualized basis). Shorter terms with a similar annualized rate can also be had. It is a very compelling value, especially when compared to BitUSD or USDT.

I think it would be wise for shareholders to maintain this rate until we get two or three times as many funds parked. Then shareholders can slowly reduce the rate.

Being a stable currency, NuBits cannot be expected to gain any nominal value. They shouldn’t lose value either, although that did happen once last year for a short period due to the Augeas default and rebellion against shareholders (and the Nu blockchain). Given this history of a downside, it is necessary to provide some additional incentive to hold NuBits. We can do that with park rates. As time moves forward, less incentive will be needed as confidence in the stability of NuBits increases. I expect we will see park rates drop quite a bit in the coming months. This is an unusual opportunity to make a profit with modest risk. The standard Nu client has an interface that makes it very easy to park funds for interest.

There are some in the community who are very excited about the prospect of Hayek money, or currency that maintains its value. Parked NuBits take this property to the next level, going beyond just protecting against inflation to rates that are clearly profitable. If you like Hayek money, you should be loving US-NBT right now.

[Cybnate]

Can someone please tell me why the park rates are still high even though we do share buyback and the peg isn’t in danger? Especially the short term rates don’t makes sense to me. What are you drivers to vote for high rates?

[ConfusedObserver]

Of course I can tell you.
Bu allow me one question first:
you still wonder that Nu is in control of those with minting majority, the true owners of the network?

Now the answer:
Why should those with mining majority bother posting here in the forum, they are the sovereign.
They know what’s right without needing to discuss or justify it.

Maybe someone should investigate whether all Nu owned NBT are still where they should be.
I wouldn’t wonder at finding Nu owned NBT parked. Not after 200 million NSR missing from the B&C dev fund that have been used for minting although it was promised not to do that.

[MaVo]

@jooize ?

[Sabreiib]

There are some in the community who are very excited about the prospect of Hayek money, or currency that maintains its value. Parked NuBits take this property to the next level, going beyond just protecting against inflation to rates that are clearly profitable. If you like Hayek money, you should be loving US-NBT right now.

Anti-deflation is same important as anti-inflation.

Deflation, is also Hayek’s enemy, providing NBT with 40% annually interest is opposite to Hayek theory.

[jooize]

Good question. Park rates can be used to directly increase demand (theoretically, it doesn’t seem to have been very effective yet) and also provide an overview and grace period for Nu to manage its provision of backing (reserves).

I think Nu may benefit more from lowered park rates to appear more realistic. As significant buyers of NuBits seem not to be parking them much, it doesn’t look like a driving force for demand.

[Cybnate]

Park rates can be used to directly increase demand

It is buying demand which comes at a cost. [quote=“jooize, post:577, topic:161”]
I think Nu may benefit more from lowered park rates to appear more realistic.
[/quote]
I believe that the park rates should be zero anyway when share buybacks are happening.[quote=“ConfusedObserver, post:574, topic:161”]
you still wonder that Nu is in control of those with minting majority, the true owners of the network?
[/quote]
I still think whoever is minting should be made aware of this. Maybe it is just inattention. If not, I’m keen to know as a shareholder what the new economic model is to sustain high rates when buy backs are happening.
BTW the difficulty is close to ATH’s so lot’s of shares are in the wallets minting. Are the B&C dev fund shares still used for minting?

[ConfusedObserver]

Are the B&C dev fund shares still used for minting?

Last time I had a look, the NSR weren’t used for minting since 9 Apr 2017, but 200 million NSR were missing from the address.
Have a look here:

BKS Sale

Given the current condition of BKS (especially the dev fund), the community (what’s left of it) and the competition I offer $0.10 per BKS. Not willing to renegotiate. I request 10,000 BKS at that rate. And I wonder how long it takes until a BKS sale to fund development is announced. Or would B&C dare to put pressure on the NSR market to fund development? Btw. what happened with the dev fund? SSajkovCPXwdw46nyJ7vpTDkwtRZJzyY2z currently holds only 75 million NSR. [image] https://nuexpl…

Neither @Phoenix nor @jooize seem to be interested in commenting this.
Most shareholders or community members don’t care.
I could care less.
I just want to let others know how reliable @Phoenix is, how good he cares for funds and how close he sticks to promises.
As he is one single point of failure of Nu and B&C people should know.

It strikes me as odd that minting continued, after funds have been withdrawn from the address, e.g. in this transaction:
https://nuexplorer.ddns.net/transactions/3b8adc168dab89a0e79a8bca35720d7c727671344db830a9027ccffd91c22dc7
in which funds were moved to an address (14 million NSR to Sh5okqoxnFoiCVAJEdzfxzHqSyunriVPmp) that was later blackballed:

NuBits v5.0.1 Release

A wallet containing B&C Exchange shareholder NSR under my control has been compromised. The exact method of compromise is not known, though it is suspected the attack vector was a sigaint.org email account used to register the VPS upon which the encrypted wallet was being used. Sigaint is a Tor based email service that suddenly disappeared recently. While my sigaint credentials were not compromised, it is possible that either the sigaint administrator or a hacker who had compromised the sigaint …

What kind of attacker withdraws from time to time portions of the funds and not all?
I find it hard to believe that this was not intentional.

And if that really was a theft, I think @Phoenix needs to answer for that, because this couldn’t have happened, if he had stored the NSR offline instead of minting with them.

[jooize]

I believe that the park rates should be zero anyway when share buybacks are happening.

Yes, I agree. When park rates are used to manage liquidity, they should be used with more care. If we show strong commitment to the peg, low interest rates should be attractive already. 20% effective interest in six months for any amount appears to me a huge risk for liabilities to run out of control.

I still think whoever is minting should be made aware of this. Maybe it is just inattention. If not, I’m keen to know as a shareholder what the new economic model is to sustain high rates when buy backs are happening.

Inattention, personal gain, or belief of effective promotion. I’d sure like to hear an argument for high rates at this point.

BTW the difficulty is close to ATH’s so lot’s of shares are in the wallets minting. Are the B&C dev fund shares still used for minting?

The remaining NuShares are not used for minting that I can see.

https://nuexplorer.ddns.net/address/SSajkovCPXwdw46nyJ7vpTDkwtRZJzyY2z/1/newest

ATH = all time high
(I didn’t know)

It strikes me as odd that minting continued, after funds have been withdrawn from the address, e.g. in this transaction:
https://nuexplorer.ddns.net/transactions/3b8adc168dab89a0e79a8bca35720d7c727671344db830a9027ccffd91c22dc7
in which funds were moved to an address (14 million NSR to Sh5okqoxnFoiCVAJEdzfxzHqSyunriVPmp) that was later blackballed:

Perhaps the wallet leaked but the minting client wasn’t touched. Had they not been minting, more NuShares could have been lost. Funds being locked by minting could explain making multiple transactions, but otherwise that would be odd.

Also keep in mind that after the block explorer was fixed, the balances changed. Previously, the address SSajkovCPXwdw46nyJ7vpTDkwtRZJzyY2z displayed 183,562,721 NSR, now it’s 75,524,661 NSR. No transactions were made between.

[ConfusedObserver]

Perhaps the wallet leaked but the minting client wasn’t touched. Had they not been minting, more NuShares could have been lost.

lol, offline storage would have been no option?
You seriously defend that behaviour? I need to call this ridiculous.
By what mandate were these NSR used for minting and in what way?

[MaVo]

@jooize could you as “Vice Chief of Liquidity Operations” please answer why those Nushares have been used for minting while it was “agreed upon” otherwise?

[jooize]

Depending on personal operational requirements (e.g. for privacy), keeping them entirely off the internet may not be feasible. I’m not defending his inadequate safekeeping of the funds. We work with what we have. The improvement will be to set up multisig.

@jooize could you as “Vice Chief of Liquidity Operations” please answer why those Nushares have been used for minting while it was “agreed upon” otherwise?

I can only guess that in his opinion the circumstances changed to an unexpected degree making it defensible to do so. Some misunderstanding is also a possibility. Why would B&C shareholders not be allowed to mint with their NuShares? Whether it’s within his right to mint with them is up to B&C Law.

[Cybnate]

Inattention, personal gain, or belief of effective promotion. I’d sure like to hear an argument for high rates at this point.

Back to the topic. Still hoping against all odds. If anything, the rates have been increased to close to 50% lately. It looks like some personal gains or frustration from major shareholders are at play here and a lack of willingness to share views. Quick wins short term, lack of vision. Disappointing, softly sad.

[cryptog]

I expect we will see park rates drop quite a bit in the coming months.

We have almost doubled compared to Feb, from 25 to almost 50%.

What should be the directive from the chief liquidity officer, @Phoenix about the rates?

I am voting for zero now.

[jooize]

I recommend shareholders set park rates to zero.

[Cybnate]

Park rates will pump much needed capital into circulation for a long period

We have park rates for 3 to 6 weeks. I think that is wrong for the current situation. One can argue about long term park rates, but I don’t like to take too much debt into the future. [quote=“excell, post:587, topic:161”]
the price to drop to .95 because we know we are going to make a guaranteed 5%.
[/quote]
Not going to happen with the highest % reserves we ever had since the start of this project.

[MaVo]

I completely disagree, park rates should be where they are if not higher

Where does the money come from to pay for (extraordinary high) park rates? Any idea?

[excell]

If there is no demand then reserves will be used… But I don’t know guys it seems every time I check Nubits on coinmarketcap we are slowly drifting away into nothingness, nonetheless I have full faith in the project, its incredible how much activity there is on this forum still even with situations like this and it is reassuring. I will buy some nubits and park them for a year, maybe like 500 dollars worth and see what happens, the interest I will use to buy nushares… That being said we really need some updates to the website, why is poloniex still on there? Why are some videos broken? Investors will only think that the project has been abandoned if they visit the main site which is not at all what we want.

[Cybnate]

That being said we really need some updates to the website, why is poloniex still on there? Why are some videos broken? Investors will only think that the project has been abandoned if they visit the main site which is not at all what we want.

Off-topic: We didn’t had easy access to do updates to the website before and a lack of time I suppose. It has only be handed over to us this week. Will have a look if I can do some basic maintenance over the weekend and submit a few pull-requests another team member can approve after review. BTW anyone can submit pull requests to the repo behind the website, only a few can accept them after having them reviewed.

[ConfusedObserver]

the highest % reserves we ever had since the start of this project.

Really? Didn’t this project start with more or less full reserve, were each NBT was backed by the equivalent of BTC?
At least until the first ridiculous dividend payouts happened.
The only way to bring the reserve to below 100% back then was loss from trading and other operational costs that couldn’t be covered by the dev fund…
But that’s still ignored by and large.
I’d say have a look at the books, but well, you know…

I have full faith in the project

Is this a kind of religious belief? The fundamentals of the project are a perfect match for the shape it is in.

I will buy some nubits and park them for a year, maybe like 500 dollars worth

Do you realize that Nu only works as long as NBT or NSR can be sold?
Nu has costs, but makes no revenue. The reserve can only cover half the NBT in circulation and the total buy side of the major NSR exchange has a total of less than 5 BTC.

Better buy any combination of shitcoins for you will have a better expectancy value.
Let’s see, e.g. where Spectrecoin goes within a year. It’s currently being traded at $0.17, so you get 2,941 XPEC for $500. This is just a random pick of a shitcoin. I’d recommend diversification otherwise, but I want the challenge
Let’s see what you get for 500 NBT in one year and what 2,941 XPEC are worth

Investors will only think that the project has been abandoned if they visit the main site which is not at all what we want.

Investors should have a look at numbers before they invest.