yes plz. Fees>0.0002 plz
I don’t think @Dhume is authrized to send the btc to anyone other than flot 3HikFkS2Zinab1TJq7dqp6wSPyLu7i7bhe . however i am good if he sends 20 btc to the tube.
I think you get reduced tube fees with a registered address so I’l make a Tx afterwards for 20 or 30 BTC to send BTC from our multisig to the tube.
Thank you for your NuSafe service, which proved to be the last resort with regard to reserve Nu had in the last days.
Without it, we’d barely have had funds for the gateways, which are the last resort with regard to liquidity.
Now that you fulfilled your contract, it’s about time to send the collateral back.
Sorry for coming up with it that late. I was rather busy with other things…
I suppose the address from where you sent the BKS is appropriate to receive them back?
Can you please confirm?
This approach would keep your BKS safe from theft, even if your forum account were hijacked.
NuSafe working as intended hopefully can set a precedent for similar operations in the future. I will post a report tomorrow about the proceedings and what the next steps should be in my opinion.
@Dhume, would you feel comfortable to have FLOT keep your collateral a bit longer?
Just in case BTC were about to nosedive, Nu were to sell NBT and had BTC to be put into NuSafe again?
I can even imagine oversubscribing NuSafe.
By that I mean putting more BTC into NuSafe than is backed by collateral, because even if you ran with the funds, Nu might be better of with that than trying to sell NSR.
Let’s see what the outcome of the NSR sale is.
100% NBT reserve and elastic NSR supply
[Withdrawn] Make Firing and Replacing Incompetent Liquidity Providers Our Top Priority
Fine in principle to me. Do it early in a bear phase is good. Do it in a bear trap is not good.
Like a few days?
@Dhume didn’t ask for getting it back so far.
I didn’t have a number of days in my mind when I asked that.
I was just wanting to know whether @Dhume is ok with it.
NuSafe plays a crucial role for what rattles through my head.
It depends on the terms, if we’re still supposed to still pay interest then it wouldn’t be unfair for us to keep it. Otherwise it should be given back to @dhume.
We might need to negotiate an amendment, because what I have in my mind might create more efforts for @Dhume than the recent NuSafe did.
An additional compensation for this efforts is appropriate.
I already know that we provoke basically justified questions of FLOT being a “board of directors unleashed”.
Once again I urge shareholders: make a motion. Vote for it. Stop it, if you don’t want it.
…if you think you can do better at the moment.
Now is the time for action - for both FLOT and shareholders.
I’m okay with the collateral remaining in FLOT for a bit longer. Also I hope to see NuSafe refilled at some point, I’m still comfortable holding up to 50k USD (as in my original proposal) for Nu. My expectation is that when BTC nosedives we will start selling a lot of Nubits and gain a lot of BTC. The more of that “expensive” BTC we can convert to USD in the early phases the less we lose due to a BTC devaluation.
I’m interested in your proposal MoD.
It’s not yet a complete proposal.
Here’s what I have in my mind.
The only chance for Nu to receive an immense number of BTC soon would be a severe nosedive of BTC. Even if the trading gets revived, a big increase of demand for NBT is not in sight without a BTC nosedive.
But with that nosedive came the issue that the BTC that are received lose value.
In the following I’m speaking about the NuOwned gateways.
I imagine trading an overflow of BTC (leaning on this scheme) for USD, USDT or other USD stable currencies.
But if BTC makes a severe nosedive - I’m not saying it will do that, I’m just planning for if it does - there will be lots of “USD” on an exchange.
This poses a default risk. We’ve learned that lesson already.
During not so volatile times the “USD” would be traded to BTC, sent to you, @Dhume, converted to USD and put in NuSafe.
As that creates extra efforts on your side for each deposit to NuSafe, you should receive a compensation for that on top of the operating fee.
We can just make it a flat fee until NuSafe is at $30,000 again and continue your compensation, because with less funds in it, you have less risk to bear.
Either from @30,000 on or before that, you should make an offer for a compensation per deposit (fixed price preferred).
Does that make sense?
How about a 100 Nubit fee per month for unlimited deposits?(I suspect constant deposits won’t take more than a month and obviously the 100 NBT fee doesn’t start until the first deposit) Compensation for NuSafe held funds are 1% of deposited USD a month, so Nu is only paying for the funds that are actually stored (aka 0 funds and thus 0 fee right now). Also I’m still willing to increase NuSafe to 50k USD as per my original proposal.
What about the compensation for the collateral FLOT holds?
Shouldn’t opportunity costs be a part of the calculation?
I’m more worried about the cost of not minting with them, but I havent figuered out how much I’m missing out on by not minting trying to run some tests at the moment.
That’d be a part of the opportunity costs then
So I’ve been running the numbers and estimating conservatively at the moment roughly 1k BKS mints you about 0.31 BKS a day (0.0132 per hour) so that’s 0.31 x 30 = 9.3 BKS a month. Using those numbers the 7500 BKS would mint for about 9.3 x 7,5 = 69,75 BKS a month. If we say the value is roughly 6$ a piece that means not minting with the 7500 BKS currently in collateral is costing me about 69,75 x 6 = 418.50$ dollar a month. Recently I’ve begun minting full time to support the protocol changes and was amazed by how much BKS I was minting.
So this is an obvious problem and I’m not sure what the solution might be seeing as everything I can think off has obvious drawbacks for Nu. Would like to know what other shareholders think off this.