Any evidence on your side?
increased participation on website, liquidity pools, marketing projects we’ve done. Most crypto people know about nbt at this point, lots of people are watching. But no, trade volumes are still low (ish) and nsr price, while experiencing a good bit of volume, has been stagnant. I am still optimistic.
2 Likes
I believe the release of B&C will be the beginning of a turning point for Nu. As you said, many people know about us by now. What we need though is for these people to use NuBits. What we’ve created with B&C is an exchange where NuBits are a requirement to use if you want to trade in and out of the dollar. As long as people use B&C, people will have to use NuBits. They will then become accustomed to relying on it for various uses. Trust will be developed in our product and volume will increase both on B&C and off it. And since it’s an exchange, the people that will be using it are spread all over the crypto community, Bitcoin, Litecoin, Peercoin, Bitshares, Ethereum, etc… Nu will be targeting the entire crypto community with B&C.
1 Like
I am feeling a lot of minds trying to ignore the power of Nu…
I think so too because a currency needs a very secure distribution system (buying and selling), a very secure storing system (wallet without the fuss of downloading the blockchain) and a very secure place to keep a high level of liquidity (secure pool) in order to thrive.
Right now, Nu has none of them and that would be brought by B&C.
1 Like
I hear quite many sparse arguments on how BCEx will help Nu establish (btw, the original plan is for BCEx to provide the liquidity that has vanished for Nu to establish its peg) vs how Nu will help BCEx establish itself (by providing the synthetic stable dollar on markets), on the contrary.
Does anyone have a clear vision on what the true plan is, how things will turn out probably and their temporal order?
1 Like
I don’t know what the true plan is, but I have a vision.
As I understand it BCE and Nu have strong incentives to work together.
If the original funding plan would have worked, it would be even more clear than it is now.
It was planned to create BCE as a full subsidiary of Nu by distributing all BKS exclusively to NSR holders.
The interests of BCE and Nu would have been (at least initially) tied to each other with a 100% connection.
Even with the current funding model a large share of BCE is in the hands of NSR.
- 85,000 BKS have been distributed to NSR holders.
- 42,500 BKS have been distributed to seed funders (who most likely hold some NSR)
- 30,000 BKS (only approximately, but…) have been distributed to second-round funders
A total of 157,500 BKS1 has been distributed so far. 85,000 of them to NSR holders. The rest to people who more or less likely hold some NSR. If we take only the 85,000 BKS into account, this is already close to 54% of BCE being in the hands of NSR holders. We won’t find out, but it wouldn’t take me by surprise if the ownership of Nu and and BCE would overlap by more than 75% (at the moment).
So I think it’s legitimate to say that from a development perspective of BCE and Nu - even though they are different DACs - they can be seen as a unity.
Nu will benefit from BCE by having a cheaper (because more secure) way of liquidity providing.
BCE will benefit from Nu by being provided with liquidity in a stable crypto coin (NBT) that takes the place of USD at the exchange.
I’m not able to put that in any order. It mutually depends on each other.
And there might be more connections, but this is the most obvious one to me.
In my vision BCE and Nu will be developed to work well with each other.
I can’t imagine a development at Nu on the expense on BCE or vice versa, except the gain for one of them would dwarf the loss for the other as long as the ownership is so closely tied to each other.
In the future it might be different, but this does no harm to Nu nor to BCE.
By design Nu and BCE work well without each other.
- BCE could make use of a stable crypto different from NBT.
- Nu could reach out for other decentralized exchanges. MercuryEx can start its operation as soon as OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY is widely implemented in blockchain transactions.
At the moment (ok, once BCE will work as designed 
) they just work even better together than unconnectedly!
1 There are approximately 50,000 BKS left that haven’t been distributed. Let’s see what happens to them.
[BKS PASSED] Motion to stop sale of BKS is still on its way to pass.
2 Likes
You missed an important part: Nu provides BCE a user base which are familiar with minting, voting, custodian system, dual-token system, and have reputable members as potential signers.
2 Likes
This is an essential point - a peershare DAC is nothing without its decision making brains which provide new solutions, ingenuity and agility.
1 Like
Thank you for this elaboration.
Thank you so much for pointing that out!
I’ve become used to that to a degree that I simply take it for granted - which it isn’t.
People who contribute, follow and participate in discussions and make educated decisions when they mint with their NSR (custodians, parkrates, motions) are required to steer BCE successfully (the first motion is already running).
It’s a behaviour that needs to be learned by the individuals and stimulated by the community.
I think that Nu has mostly done a good job here so far.
It’s good to know that a big part of BKS holders is already familiar with this way to manage a corporation!
2 Likes
I don’t know how to sort the trading pairs by volume, but I’ve recognized that the (daily?) NSR/BTC volume is close to 10 BTC at bter and the rate is stable at 700 Satoshis something.
Ok, so I decided to buy some more NuShares since Cryptsy added us. I noticed the price on CMC was below $0.002, which I thought was a good deal. The problem is I transferred some Bitcoin to Poloniex and only now do I realize there’s no liquidity. My order sat all last night without filling. I haven’t had this issue before on Poloniex. Every time I placed an order in the past it filled.
So I need a little help. I figured I had to match one of the sell orders, so I looked to see what was there. For example I noticed somebody was selling 1328.89480693 NSR for a price of 0.00000736 BTC. So I tried matching that sell order by entering in a corresponding buy order using the same numbers. The problem is my order still didn’t fill and it’s just sitting there. Why wouldn’t my order fill if I’m putting in the same numbers listed on the sell side? Maybe I’m doing something wrong.
1 Like
I guess the order you saw had been taken, and somehow the display wasn;t updating.
The addition of a NuShares trading pair to Cryptsy should be great news for the price of NSR in the long-term.
4 Likes
BTC just flash-crashed to 211.00 USD on coinmarketcap.com. NSR dropped to 0.0016 USD as a result. Anyone know what happened?
Edit: “The first block by an XT miner was mined.” - /r/BitcoinMarkets
If that’s the source of panic, it makes me doubly happy that Nu has motions enabled. Financial markets do not like uncertainty.
2 Likes
I think this would be perfect timing to target bitcoiners and show off how motions are being used here. And also remind them that, yes, 1 nbt is still 1 $.
What can we do to reach out? Some media coverage / blog post will definitely help : “how nushare motion voting could have prevented the bitcoin consensus disaster”
2 Likes
While it’s absolutely correct to point that out it will make Bitcoiners not happy, because I can’t imagine motion voting to be included into the Bitcoin protocol in any meaningful way.
With PoW the miners have more say which way to go than those owning coins. The only way to “vote” is currently used - put the hash rate to the solution you want to “vote” for.
…but we could try to persuade them to join Nu
1 Like
Traders perceive the NSR price mainly related to BTC.
This rate has been constant for some time (between 0.000007 and 0.000008 BTC/NSR) while BTC price has taken a dive.
1 Like
Any prediction for BTC price with the fork mess?