Even at 3 times the current price i feel it would still be a bargain.
I was certainly enjoying snapping some up.
Where are most folks trading now that BTER probably might be a bit risky.
My guess is that speculators search for patterns in all coins and does what they do to maximize profit. When they see a down trend momentum with thin volume they give it a hard kick and ride it.
After double side (NBT and NSR) burning is implemented, NSR will be a leveraged asset and will probably fluctuate more wildly, hopefully mostly upward in the next few years as Nu is just starting.
Yeah that would definitely be cool. So, instead of distributing peercoins as dividends, we would buy nushares from the open market and burn them? Any reason why this wasn’t implemented in the first place because it seems as if the current dividend distribution method is not going to be used after nushares burning.
1 Like
From what I understand, the dividend mechanism will still be used, but only after Nu really starts to make money. When we’re in the part of our economic cycle where NuBits demand is high, the money made from selling newly created NuBits will be used to buy back shares and burn them. That money should never be used for dividends though because that doesn’t exactly qualify as profit. Once Nu starts to earn profit from real business, then the dividend mechanism can start being used again. Until then, shareholders have a lot of work to do to figure out how to actually earn profit for the network. Does anyone else share this view?
My vision of distributions is that they are used when NSR price is high and the NBT buy wall is strong. Basically, we create NSR and sell it for ppc which we distribute. Conversely, when NSR price is low and the NBT buy wall is weak, we institute high park rates.
These mechanisms allow Nu to speculate on its own market. Burning simply allows this process to be more fluid, it does not replace these mechanisms. In my opinion (which I’m sure some are tired of hearing) is that burning should be decentralized and done daily while park rates and distributions take care of things on the month to month scale.
On a side note, y’all know this dip was because skullandheadphones sold 3.5m shares right?
1 Like
So we would inflate our shares to distribute dividends. This is just getting weird, no offense intended. I keep thinking this is just moving money from one pocket to another and hoping the market doesn’t notice, whenever you bring the NuShare market into this discussion of your vision. Sometimes even pulling the money out of thin air and putting it into our pocket.
Yes, we should inflate shares to distribute dividends, that is why it is done when the NSR price is high. Some of the people that sell their PPC for NSR will burn the NSR for NBT and drop it on the peg and some will hold, it’s best to let the market find the new equilibrium. @Sentinelrv proposes we inflate the NBT supply to drop on the peg for the ppc, but what do you think will happen when the peg is in trouble again while NSR price is high? We burn the NBT for NSR and NSR supply gets inflated anyway. I’m just cutting out the middleman so Nu is the one that profits, not traders.
A distribution imposes inflation on the network no matter how you look at it. This is done intentionally during a time when we have inflation to spare.
I think you are misunderstanding the relationship PPC has with Nu. There is no peg. It could fall to $0.01 and it has no effect on any of the currencies on our blockchain.
The NBT/USD peg, so you can buy the ppc with USD cause there’s no PPC/NBT market.
The point is, Sentinelrv’s concept has NBT inflation. How is that any better than my concept of NSR inflation?
I am so lost right now. PPC isn’t bought for dividends with NBT so there is no NBT inflation at all resulting from it. I don’t think @Sentinelrv was proposing that there was, though.
so where does the money for ppc distributions come from?
Profits, when they exist. Either BTC or USD profit from custodial operations that net one.
Though, at this time shareholders have expressed that they would prefer to instruct a custodian to buy and burn NuShares on the open market.
I see distributions as being on the opposite end of the tool spectrum as park rates. I see burning as a way to deal with daily business operations for custodians. I don’t really see Nu making additional money, because Nu’s business is adoption, not earning USD. We are making a way to translate fiat into crypto, so we can channel all profit and all inflation into one market: the NSR market. That must be where we take our distributions from and call it a profit of the system; we must be exceedingly smart about how we do it and only do it when we can afford the inflation.
I know I’m being loud about this and I plan on being more quiet in the future, as I believe people have heard me out at this point. Thank you, @GreatScott in particular for taking time to have this conversation.
I must say I differ here. We are going to make a profit if this is going to be considered a success, we just haven’t made the right relationships or realized enough adoption to achieve this yet.
It will be much harder to make these relationships if we inflate the NSR market without abandon, I feel. NSR is our bargaining chip for such partners, just like any other business.
Thanks for being loud like me! I tried the quiet route after my dividend motion didn’t net any votes, but then you came along. It’s good to bounce these things off each other. Your vision, while I still disagree with a lot of points, has caused me to appreciate what we have today a bit more. I still feel we need to be really conservative with printing NuShares, though.
See, cause with a statement like that I feel like we’re on exactly the same page.
I deeply agree, that’s why distributions should be done with extreme caution.
I’m arguing for a heavier link between the NSR price and Nu’s success, so that we can truly tout a high price as a true bargaining chip. I actually consider it to be a transparency issue, believe it or not.
Yes, I very much agree, but what I want the network to realize is that printing NBT when the NSR/NBT ratio is low is equivalent to printing a lot of NSR. The only thing it would take to realize this is a burn motion at the low NSR/NBT price point. If we are banking on shareholders not passing such a motion, then we are hedging the market. Eventually there will be a panic break and a black swan situation and low NSR/NBT burns to reduce NBT inflation will be passed.
I feel the price of the shares should be solely set by the free market without much interference beyond inflation for clearly beneficial partnerships or emergency funding to maintain the NuBits peg. I am talking break the glass to use the fire extinguisher emergencies. This is where we collide.
But then you’ll always have the worst nsr/nbt pricepoint for auctions or however burns happen in your model.
Individual and public bids seem to be the way these will take place going forward. We cannot expect to have a good price when we are desperately selling shares, just as someone just recently found out on their own.