Righting the ship

[smooth]

I’ve been a lurker here for a long time as I have a general interest in decentralized pegged cryptocurrncies. With the right implementation I view this as a huge market opportunity. There are some things about NuShares/NuBits that I like, and some things that are obviously a massive and utter fail.

Clearly, the direction taken here has not been working. What is needed is precisely massive dilution of legacy NuShares holders, who have once again failed to deliver a working product in an increasingly competitive market.

If you want to attract the new capital needed to get NuBits back to $1 and get this project going anywhere, existing holders will need to accept being nearly wiped out, and existing leaders who have used their holdings as a vehicle to voting themselves continued self-enrichment need to be voted out by the new investors with their newly-dominant stake and a clear interest in moving beyond the past. I’m prepared to invest significantly in this project, but only under a heavily-dilutive model that gets rid of the baggage.

In addition:

1. The reserve target should be significantly increased to at least 80-90%. This is necessary to restore confidence, and frankly also necessary since there is no visible revenue model which would support a leveraged system. Once there is a revenue model at some point in the future, then leverage can be increased. For the time being there is zero short term prospects for a revenue model since there is zero rational reason for people to pay to use a system that doesn’t even work.
2. Park rates should not be further increased and parking is absolutely the wrong approach to be taken in a failing/failed system. In the short term it should be wound down and deemphasized. It would have a role to play long term, but at this point it is only contributing to the instability by paying very high interest (possibly to the same self-enrichers discussed above), further increasing the unsustainable balance of underreserved NuBits outstanding.
3. A portion of reserves should be held in stable assets, not only volatile cryptos such as BTC and ETH.

Will this happen? I don’t know. Existing NuShares holders need to decide whether to accept some token residual stake (say 5-10%) in order to facilitate a fresh start, or not. I’m only a modest existing holder so I have only a small vote, and I’m not willing to throw good money after bad. As I indicated earlier I’m willing to invest substantially to the extent it is sufficiently dilutive of those responsible for previous failures, but not otherwise.

[marvin]

As a modest existing shareholder, is it possible to submit a proposal for a one time sale of x nushares for y btc? Put your potential investment in escrow somewhere, post your nushare wallet address, and set a deadline?

[DavidMc0]

Very interesting thoughts.

I agree reserves need to be significantly higher, parking needs to be parked, and holding some stable reserves is wise.

I also think that clear revenue models should be an essential part of any re-launch of Nu, even if not operational on day 1. I have ideas around lending that I believe could lead to very lucrative business models that I’ve hinted at before.

Regarding dilution of shareholders & refreshed leadership, I don’t think it’s likely that Nu will regain trust on a large scale without this.

I hope that shareholders would consider such a dilution if a strong proposal, leadership team, and resources were available, because its far better to have 10% of something great than 100% of something broken.

Of course, whether a strong proposal, team, and resources are forthcoming are very big questions.

[gesite]

This is supposed to be an open, globally operating system. Protecting old shareholders from being diluted sounds like stone age. What is this? The competition should be running on all fronts, meaning that incentives should be provided to buy Nubits and Nushares. The roles of leadership in such a system should be up for debate every single day through the process of voting, thereby creating an incredibly competitive environment that will force the leaders to take actions that serve the public and not themselves. The public are the customers, and they will stop buying if Nu again turns into a self-enriching scheme like it did now. @jooize and @Phoenix will buy up Nushares at discounted prices at a slow rate without providing any transparency whatsoever. There is no way to know when those orders have been placed privately and no way to engage in the bidding process competitively.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to open up Nu to massive competition for voting leadership. That is what provides incentives to large investors to get in.

@jooize you are talking about “investors” who are willing to purchase Nushares privately. Remove your dilution restriction, open a public spreadsheet and let’s how interested people really are in this project. Provide a clear deadlines for submission of offers. This is a shady game you play. How old is Nu? 5 years? And you still need to action off small amounts privately to refill your buy side?

Open up the system and put this project to the test. If you want Nu to become resilient, do it. I know you are afraid to lose your well paid low quality work position. However, it is the only way to see whether Nu can come closer to what you envision (I hope you have a vision for Nu, and not so much for yourself when it comes Nu). Nu is the priority, not you. Nu is about customers, not about you. You failed, now let the market decide what they want and remove those dumb restrictions.

By the way, the market tells you what they want. They come here every day and complain and ask you to sell more Nushares. And you respond with weird stuff like “we need to protect voting integrity”. It’s crap what you talk. Ever thought about why Nu is literally worthless?