I’ve seen discussion about (present and future) revenue models here in the forum. I might not remember all, but I don’t remember making NBT being regarded as a source of revenue.
Possible opportunities are e.g.
Earning money from a spread at crypto trading pairs that is wider than double the exchange fee (although there’s the risk for loss of value of those cryptos) is possible, but redused liquidity, etc.
I came to the same conclusion as you in an earlier post, with one difference:
In a scenario where demand is decreasing and is forecasted to never again reach a new peak, the value of NuShares should be equal to its intangible assets (whatever the intrinsic value of its branding elements, the number of existing users as defined by Metcalfe’s Law, etc.). There shouldn’t be any additional value present in the price because future dividends would be expected to be zero.
Basically, there will be some value in the Nu project even if future revenues were projected to be zero, simply because we will have built up an existing user base, brand equity, and tools (websites, applications, etc.) that would appeal to speculators.
In Jordan’s thread about fractional reserve within the Nu system I also stated that there would be additional value present in NuShares if other Nu products (currency, applications, or others) exist or will be expected to exist in the future. A scenario where one Nu currency fails introduces an interesting game theory decision: NSR holders will decide whether supporting one failing currency at a loss is a rational choice to maintain the reputation and functionality of other Nu products.