[Passed] B&C Exchange should trade all US-NBT for NSR

The liquidity of NSR has been impressive lately, but it isn’t that good. B&C owns about 20% of all NSR.

why not put some in tether and btc-e USD Voucher? nu and B&C interdepend too much

1 Like

We passed a motion to transfer all B&C’s NBT to NSR, but not the motion for you to freely transfer among BTC, NBT, NSR etc. so if you like to do such a thing, you may draft a motion to pass.


I think it is reasonable to speculate that this was done to benefit Phoenix’s trade positions.

1 Like

Uh duh.

Total US-NBT proceeds from the NSR sales are 24,745.

what these proceeds will be used for? is any development being currently done that needs that much NBT?


First of all, let me report total funds under my control, which constitutes the complete B&C development fund:

49,108 US-NBT
196,000,000 NSR at SSajkovCPXwdw46nyJ7vpTDkwtRZJzyY2z

The original NSR were purchased for 53 satoshi. About a third of it was sold for US-NBT at various prices, all much higher than 53 satoshis. With NSR prices now at 37 satoshis, it is prudent to sell most of the US-NBT for NSR once again. The result will be more NSR in the fund. I plan to sell around 30,000 US-NBT for NSR very soon. Another 10,000 US-NBT will be parked soon. These actions are expected to have almost no impact on peg support for US-NBT or the NSR price. This is because it won’t change the quantity of funds in the network. It merely switches them from US-NBT to NSR.

I wish to draw attention to this trading pattern for a number of reasons. First, it shows that providing liquidity in NSR can be lucrative to those who are patient and simply sell on spikes while purchasing on dips. It is a good illustration of how we create win-win scenarios. B&C provides liquidity to NSR (which means peg support), and it gets more NSR.

We will see a continued pattern of NuShare holders selling NSR low and buying it high. While this may seem stupid, it isn’t, because it makes providing liquidity to NSR very profitable. There is a sort of arbitrage to be had there by players such as B&C. Competition for this arbitrage should continue to grow. That will take the form of even greater NSR liquidity and smaller differences between the shareholder buy and sell prices. NuShare holders selling low and buying high is generating NSR liquidity. NSR liquidity is the most important factor in peg strength. We have created a synergy between B&C and Nu in this way. I encourage everyone to do the same. Anyone can.

So while @jooize keeps selling granted NSR for BTC, which subsequently are being traded for NBT, you then take these NBT and buy NSR for a significantly higher price back?

It is stupid except for the person who knows exactly when the market actions are taking place. Why don’t you just stop posting and take all the money you have right now? I mean you know no one will come after you and you also know that you don’t have a voice here anymore. And that’s ok, you made good money from this, just let it go now.

Is that because you are alienating shareholders? Emotional people do sell low, yes. However typically shareholders don’t sell low and buy high with exceptions excluded. So I don’t believe that is a sustainable mode of operations.

Having all (or almost all) B&C funds in NSR is ridiculous, you are just gambling with development funds. Although I understand better as most that there is a strong relation between Nu surviving and B&C development, I don’t believe this is a good move. You should work much harder in regaining confidence to NBT holders instead of continuing to manipulate the markets and creating ever more NSR. That is a vicious downward circle in case you didn’t notice after creating 1.2 billion NSR and still going.

Any forecast when you think that will end?
Do you actually know how many NBT still to buy back assuming almost nothing is being sold?


What motion empowers you to do that?

1 Like

There are quite a few motions that empower him to now do exactly whatever he wants. Prime example:

I beg to differ.
We are here talking about B&C funds and I’m not aware of any motion granting him discretion about development fund usage.

1 Like

Well, the deception of the initial distribution and the buyback event decisively helped to finally put the Chief Bird in an incontestable position regarding major decisions for both Nu and B&C. You ask for motions. I’d like to ask you for your opinion on the meaningfulness of motions within both networks (that actually have been merged to one network because in terms of assets B&C literally is Nu, and Nu is compromised and bankrupt)?

I tend to agree regarding Nu, but don’t recognize Phoenix in that position at B&C.

Either this motion passing

and seeing this motion in addition

is a trick or shows that B&C isn’t in the hands of Phoenix.

What I was trying to highlight with my question for the motion is this:
there was a motion that empowered Phoenix to trade NBT for NSR: [Passed] B&C Exchange should trade all US-NBT for NSR

There’s no motion that I’m aware of that allows any of what happened (or is announced to happen) to the B&C dev fund NSR afterwards, e.g. this:

or that

Phoenix is in the position (not by right, but by power) to play games with the B&C dev funds, but he shouldn’t think he can do so unnoticed.

I’m looking forward to seeing the dev funds in the hands of RSOT and at the same time wonder if that will ever happen…

1 Like

The truth is that there is no way to put pressure on @Phoenix to comply with anything as long as there are little birds intentionally failing to see the facts. It doesn’t matter whether we complain or not, there will always be someone like @jooize who values a bonus higher than his integrity (or what is left of it) and who is willing to keep the system running.

This is music to my ears! :smiley:

"Our governance model is absolutely superb. The governance model of Peershares (B&C Exchange is a Peershare) is better than all other blockchain governance models. All shareholders are true peers and there is no authority in our system other than the collective will of shareholders. Shareholders can choose to compensate developers or any one else with grants of BlockShares or BlockCredits in any amount. Shareholders can pass motions that set various rules of operation. For example, a completely decentralised vote to halt BlockShare sales was passed by shareholders some time ago. B&C Exchange’s governance is decentralised, flexible and powerful.

Peershares such as NuBits and B&C Exchange are the most advanced form of decentralised blockchain governance to date. The work I have already done establishes me as the leading innovator in decentralised blockchain governance." --> said the Chief Bird!

Particularly when you consider the RSOT motion and the Re-evaluation of RSOT motion. Everything is so hilarious.

@Phoenix, just in case you have overlooked that question:

What motion empowers you to do that?

And what motion empowered you to do that:

This motion is potentially going to pass as it has the majority of votes for more than a day by now, although the SDD is very high so it may change. Anyway it likely means that there is a majority of shares controlled by Phoenix or in his hands. Not so great.


Game over then.