I’m interested in starting the discussion of creating a NuEuro. I think the crypto development space is much more friendly here, and the ability to use cryto is far more common than other markets outside of the USA. I’m hoping that creating a local asset would interest more European developers to take a look, and see more use of the network.
I would also like to see the trustless liquidity pools attract more attention and use before implementation of managing a second peg. I don’t think we’re quite ready yet, but by the time details and development arises for this new asset we could be there.
I think another aspect people need to consider is the immediate globalization of the project. With creating an asset that targets a specific nation (or group of nations in the case of NuEuro) there will be a great need for people to support projects, services, and people who would want to use that asset. If someone doesn’t speak English and submits a proposal will there be enough users to translate and assist all other shareholders in deciding if it should pass? Even though American NuShares holders would probably never have an interest or need for a NuEuro, all of a sudden their network needs are of great concern in maintaining a foreign peg.
Does China also suffer from the “we’re a large country with one language, so who needs to learn another one?” mentality that blankets much of the USA? I’m not familiar with the language dynamics there. I’ve found it uncommon to meet a European who speaks less than three languages in at least a light conversational level. English being a core.
I think we may have access to more users and developers that will have an easier time collaborating through the pivotal event of launching a new pegged asset for NuNet by starting with a NuEuro. If everything goes well and liquidity can continue to be supported I think launching a NuCNY or other pegged currencies would be rather easy.
There can be many hidden traps in adopting CNY. It’s an active market, but just last month the Chinese government made up some accusations to prosecute short-selling, and forbade many funds from simply selling, in an attempt to save the tanking stock market. They are ready to flush any pretense of due process down the drain, at all levels of government, in situations where even Uncle Sam wouldn’t consider measures that are nearly as drastic.
Not yet, but a 50% target is a good level for the economic fork when it happens
Basically, I’m going to reiterate @CoinGame that we aren’t ready yet. We need B&C and Nu 2.0 to settle down a tad. It’s good to talk about and even pass a motion for, but it should not be high on the priority list.
I am worried that we have too many units of account. NBT, NSR, BKS, BKC are core, then BTC and PPC are distribution coins. This close to the B&C fork, all 6 of those coins are wrapped up in this one ball of crypto beauty. We need to give the community a moment to digest it.
I like the foresight of having another currency being issued by Nu.
But I share @CoinGame’s and @Nagalim’s view.
It’s not the right point of time.
The dev team is busy with BCE. Nu 2.0 is not productive. NBT is mainly used for hedging. I doubt that Nu wants to pay even more than it already does by issuing another currency and reaching out to new markets with new exchanges.
I’d rather see Nu being mainly supporting NBT/USD (or maybe USD/fiat) pairs before another currency is introduced and makes things more complicated.
I think NBT need to have reached the status currency (and not only hedging instrument) before creating another token.
I am not quite in favor of a Nu currency pegged to CNY because I highly doubt if it will be appreciated. The PRC government has offcially announced it illegal to use cryptocurrrencies such as bitcoin as a currency. No business can legally accept BTC as a payment. The Chinese society is still a largely “cash society”. Cash is often more anonymous than cryptocurrencies. Financial institutions are forbidden to deal with cryptoexchanges. Exchanges can still trade cryptocurrencies in the legal sense as if they are trading stamps. This situation makes it impossible for Nu to offer a useful cryptocurrency to be used as if it is the Yuan.
Ironically it’s very easy to deposit/withdraw Yuan to/from cryptoexchanges via a very active and convenient third party (the user and the bank being the first and the second party) payment network ecosystem. The Yuan can flow in and out of exchanges faster than the confirmation times of Nubits. NuYuan is unlikely able to compete with the Yuan for hedging purposes.
BTC and LTC have high trading volume in Chinese exchanges simply because there are limited investment channels for the new Chinese riches, which consequently seek all sort of speculation/investment venues – from realestate to jade to stamps to commodities, to antiques, to cryptocurrencies. This kind of smart money don’t particularly like cryptocurrencies more than gem stones.
However I tend to leave the choices to the market.
So I have the questiion, what is the cost of creating another currency like Nubits, not counting pegging operations cost? Why can’t we create both NuEuro and NuYuan and let the LPCs and traders and merchants and end users decide? After three months we review the situation and close the weaker one?
As for the inflation adjusted currency, it will certainly be ground breaking. However it will push down the price of NSR at the rate of inflation (think the relation between pool C and D of NuLagoon.)
Yes, we should eventually evolve this business to a second peg. I’m not in favor of a CNY pair, mainly because of the reasons presented by @mhps.
An inflation resilient basket of goods is a brilliant idea, but I’m not sure there are enough consumers (yet.)
My first choice would be NuEuro but, as many mentioned before, not now.
Maybe we’re going a bit off topic here but, what would you like to see here?
Higher liquidity targets? Lower liquidity targets?
Higher rates? Lower rates?
More users = more spread of liquidity providers?
To my mind, BTC pairs are pretty well used already, so we gained some traction there in the past 4 months.
As for fiat pairs: I know that in terms of liquidity cost and risks this is our place to be, but the users don’t seem too fond of them or the exchanges on which those pairs are traded. CCEDKs USD/NBT pair looks quite good though.
Speaking to Fiat Pairs…I agree this is where we need to be. But more people need to use CCEDK. We provide the liquidity, but there is little volume on the rest of the exchange.
Example, I provide the majority of the liquidity for the EUR/NBT pair. So people often sell their NBT and I’m left holding a bunch of EUR. Now I can’t exchange my EUR for NBT because I’m the only one buying. I can’t exchange my EUR for BTC without a 5-8% loss because there’s no market for it.
So, while all the liquidity looks good - there number of adopters and overall market is still small.
Nothing specific on that end. I just think our community is rather small and the liquidity pools would be better supported if there was more exposure. Given that people can move in and out of them like PoW mining there are benefits and drawbacks.
As a chinese, my cryptocurrency investment rule is "keep away from chinese element ". A too powerful Government, a too speculating trading atmosphere and fake exchange trade volume(perhaps except btc-china and btc38). All these are harmful/poisonous.
I am a long term value investor.
I strongly suggest to promote BKC as an anti-infaltion currency. When B&C in operation, we destroy BKC every day, this give us ability to slowly raise the buying back price of BKC.
Perhaps BKC transaction may occupy blochchain size which is designed for B&C trading information. But a BKC cloud wallet on B&C is ultimate resolution.
An anti infaltion curerency can be loose pegged, long term BKC holders DON’T care the 1.2$buy to 1.3$ sell wall gap in 2020. And a “proper” infaltion rate is not the most accurate but should be the most welcomed rate on free market, this is business, you know what I mean.
In this way, we can still keep system simple and robust.
The anti inflation currency, BKC is here. LOL Without any burden on Nu. Since BKS anti infaltion, buy-sell wall spread accepted, and that’s the revenue resource for BKC LPCs.
BKC, a profitable company(B&C) issued anti inflation money.
I am going to become BKC LPC without demand for a single penny, IF BKS holders decide to loose peg BKC, anti infaltion.
I’ll operate from 0.9 to 1.0$ with 5000USD liquidity in the first month and see the result.
Hope it is from NuDroid users spending coins. If that is indeed the case a NuEuro currency would be more profitable in the short term. It is hard to tie that demand to NuDroid though. Maybe it is just someone getting rid of their Euros
BTW Most likely the addition of some liquidity on the CCEDK NBT/BTC pair in the next 48 hours would help to create some more trading opportunities to keep the fiat pair balanced.
I am not sure what it means for a currency B pegged to currency A to be A-inflation-adjusted while the sizes of the economies of A and B are not comparable.
However, it is true that cryptocoin enthusiasts believe that NBT is unstable because of the dollar (example: pic below)
So I would be interested in tackling the inflation issue.
I have pasted a typical conversation of what I encounter often in facebook crypto related groups:
It happens. On bter, my nbt often sells for cny. Then, I just use the cny to buy btc or other crypto, send to another exchange, and sell back for nbt eventually. On CCEDK this is difficult, as the EUR markets are so thin.
One big point here is that if the target and spread are big enough, Nu is effectively just paying to keep a big EUR buy side because the provider will just sit with their EUR. This isn’t terrible if we can keep the rates down.
