If you have ideas for additional profits, I would like to see you move forward with those. Of course I would support any reasonable plan to increase profits. What I remember about your proposal was that it burns US-NBT that customers paid money for, without their consent. I was opposed to that.
The question is whether you and other community members are going to take any action to make this happen rather than doing so much to prevent it from occurring, as has often been the case. What are you doing to help?[quote=“Cybnate, post:46, topic:4362”]
you failed to present a valid cost-benefit model which doesn’t involve creating more shares while keeping the peg in the long term. Anyone with some business acumen can see that there is a cost of holding a peg. If that is not offset with a charge to those who benefit from the peg the model will be unsustainable and always fail sooner or later.
[/quote]
Two points. First of all, the number of NuShares will certainly go down if there is even modest growth in demand for NuBits.
Second, many posters here seem to be in denial about the well demonstrated and proven capacity blockchain networks have to continuously dilute their coins or shares while enjoying robust price growth. More than 100 networks have demonstrated this in recent years. Bitcoin keeps creating Bitcoins from nothing to pay for network expenses, yet Bitcoins are very valuable and Bitcoin is not bankrupt. The same is true for nearly every other coin (there are only a few exceptions, such NXT). Why do people think our network works any differently? Of course we can create NuShares to pay for network expenses, and we can do so forever. If you apply @Cybnate’s argument to Bitcoin, you can see it is incorrect.
However, with proper management (which I am doing a lot to provide), I believe the likelihood is that we will see a huge reduction in the NuShare supply over time. That is my goal and expectation.