Here’s how I’d do a calculation of the NAV of funds at exchange. If you want to know the NAV of funds at exchange, you calculate the value of the assets and subtract the liabilities. As the liabilities are negative amounts, you effecitvely add up the assets and the liabilities
For the sake of simplicity we ignore the spread.
NBT are valued in USD, so you calculate the USD value. Say you have m NBT at exchange.
When trading NBT/BTC with x BTC on exchange this means
x BTC * y USD/BTC = z USD m NBT * 1 USD/NBT = m USD NAV = z + m
If you start trading with 10,000 NBT in the NBT/BTC pair, you should soon have a NAV of over $10,000 if you really make money from the tiny spread.
BTC volatility and the trend of customers to sell NBT when BTC rises and buy NBT when BTC falls, leads me to the conclusion that the NAV declines.
You can only know for sure if you do calculations, but the failure of decentralized liquidity provision through pools in times of high BTC volatility speaks volumes. It was for economical reasons that the pooled liquidity providers pulled funds from liquidity provision. They could calculate.
Without a spread big enough to compensate the BTC volatility caused trading and the exchange default risk, Nu loses money at exchanges.
To remind people of the numbers. The potential may be at scale. The present is looking differently. Focussing only on the potential without looking at the presence is shady. My version would read like this
But I’d like to add a condition: only if Nu manages to get transactions on the blockchain or adjust the spread when trading at exchanges.
My point is that you talk about ventures like they were available on a road map. They aren’t. But they should be.
Sorry for having never replied. I thought it’d be obvious and you had it in mind as you were talking about ventures shareholders pursue. And I beg your fogiveness for not scanning once again through the forum for all the proposals that have been made.
Off the top of my head Nu should try to make money from pretty much any business traditional banks are involved in
- lending business
- buying selling products at a spread
In addition there have been proposals like my QGM-ETF.
Be aware that I’m no paid supporter and I don’t have any reason to contribute anything. Yet I do contribute for the minuscule hope that Nu could wake up and turn around.
I’m seriously not trying to bring Nu down.
If I wanted to, I’d not do it in the forum, but by exploiting its flaws.
Please keep that in mind if you find my comments harsh or nagging.