Wall Observer - NuShares price movement tracking & discussion


#468

Another big dump price is very low, 572sats now


#469

Who is going to prepare the greeting cards for all the new shareholders?


#470

I am interested in buying some more


#471

It’s beyond my imagination that such a single post of a single person (like me) can have caused such a dump.
If that were true, I had to recommend those who panic easily, to do some due diligence before doing something as drastic as this.
Then again, if an NSR holder is so well-informed and clear-sighted to get panicked that easily, it might be better for Nu to get rid of this NSR holder and find someone more illuminated :wink:

I stick firmly to my assessment regarding the outlook (with an unchanged liquidity provision scheme!), but an informed reader should also be aware that Nu

  • is already on its way to reform the liquidity provision scheme1,
  • vastly reduces costs associated with it by using the parametric order book more consequently,
  • the new products that are already on the road map create (temporary) revenue and finally
  • B&C Exchange will create demand for US-NBT (and future products) and increase the number of transactions (to generate final revenue)

Nu is far from being in danger. Once the NSR buybacks are replaced by NSR sales (to remove NBT), it will start to look less brightly. But at the moment Nu is in a good position to do the necessary adjustments, cut costs and get along with the funds for a loooong time.


1 sell side gateways are partially in place, the trade volume provided by ALP/MLP with small spread will be reduced to save costs (e.g. at Poloniex), dual side bots (from different operators with cheap operating fees) are installed at Poloniex to support the peg beyond the volume ALP/MLP can serve (because Poloniex is currently one of the most important exchanges).


#472

buy buy and buy


#473

Bleh…I’m at the car dealership getting some things fixed and I just got a $1,100 bill. No cheap NuShares for me this week. :frowning:

Enjoy it everybody. :slight_smile:


#474

Would be a great time for buybacks, if only Nu had the reserves to do it…


#475

That is most possible reason for dumping, no short profit from buyback


#476

I think so, too.
Maybe somebody speculated on rising NSR price due to buybacks and now wants to get rid of them being aware that it might take some time until they continue.


#477

I cant help but doubt that. Today’s volume rivals volumes we had a year ago.


#478

What in particular do you doubt?


#479

That the seller bought during buybacks. The volume points to a year or more ago. Like IPO or something. Anyway, all speculation.


#480

I would just like to point out that despite the panic sell (which has the appearance of being a single seller), the most important metric for the success of NuBits is the growth or contraction of the number of NuBits in circulation. At the moment, the total number of NuBits in circulation is at an all time high at 805,282. If you look back through the buyback calculation thread you will see on February 6th the circulating supply was reported to be 810,143. However, after February 6th the method of calculation was corrected (this was discussed in the calculation thread) to exclude funds at BT9AWq9r1i6kghZc6LtrvNb2wRFh7JLCdP. That address had 20,547 USNBT in it on February 6th, so a corrected and revised total supply for February 6th would be 789,596.

This means total USNBT in circulation has risen 1.99% since February 6th. This is still an annualised rate of 13.97%. And these are the bad times. While I don’t have specific dates and numbers in front of me, I recall that our total supply was no more than 350,000 about a year ago. So over the last year the number of circulating NuBits has more than doubled.

We need to continue focusing on increasing demand for NuBits, but our growth has been quite robust and the number of NuBits in circulation is currently at an all time high.


#481

Regarding increased amount of US-NBT in circulation: a lot of demand for US-NBT was created by the funding of B$C Exchange, right?
I mean, BKS buyers either paid with NBT or BTC, which then were traded for NBT.
Sooner or later some of those NBT that are in circulation, but currently in “development reserve” of B&C Exchange will hit the market, because devs will get paid with them, etc. and the US-NBT will be converted to USD, BTC, whatever.
It would be great to create even more demand for US-NBT by a working B&C Exchange, soon (to create a counterbalance for the declining demand by releasing B&C Exchange US-NBT funds) :wink:


#482

Indeed. This has been the plan for nearly a year. The prospect of B&C Exchange NuBits being sold in the open market was an even bigger concern six months ago. What actually happened was there were significant share buybacks. Sale of B&C Exchange NuBits is one variable among many that will have an impact on the total number of NuBits in circulation. There are 165,700 USNBT held in the B&C Exchange development fund. Some contractors are getting paid in BlockShares, so that figure should not be confused with the size of the B&C Development fund, which is about $205,000.

One thing we have learned in the last few months is an asset that is guaranteed to not increase in value such as NuBits does not do well in a blockchain asset bull market. That shouldn’t be a surprise. We did remarkably well when Bitcoin was plummeting in January 2015. That is cold comfort when most blockchain assets are rising in value while NuShares are not. But lets keep in mind that the pattern we are seeing is confirming the previously discussed hypothesis that NuShares will tend to benefit from a blockchain asset bear market while remaining relatively inactive during a bull market. But we don’t only want a bear market. We want a bear market that starts from very high valuations. In other words, NuShare holders want a sharp and strong blockchain asset bull market first, followed by a bear market. The bull market isn’t much fun for us, but it positions us for what we do want: a blockchain asset bear market that starts from very high valuations.


#483

I said it in Peercointalk chat, but one of the biggest reasons why B&C could be such a boon to our network is because we will no longer be competing against USD. On centralized exchanges NuBits are competing with people trading Bitcoin with real USD. It may be less risky in people’s minds to use USD, rather than a pegged currency like NuBits, which could possibly fail. USD can’t exist on decentralized exchanges though, so NuBits will have no competition on B&C.

I think the security of a decentralized exchange like B&C will likely have a bigger draw than the risk of using NuBits to trade. If people want the security of B&C, then they’ll be forced into relying on NuBits as synthetic USD. NuBits could potentially become the USD of decentralized exchanges as long as B&C is successful. If Nu can handle the pressure of this new demand well, it will raise the confidence level people have in our peg and we could possibly see more support and use of NuBits outside of decentralized exchanges.

But for all of this to happen, we must create a situation where people need to rely solely on NuBits as synthetic USD, and that’s what B&C gives us. It will give the Nu Network an opportunity to shine.


#484

That assumes no competition. We shouldn’t be leaning backward and be ready for competition from Tether, Dai and possibly even BITUSD. B&C ignoring them might not be in the best interest of B&C shareholders. NuBits will have to compete in the market and need to ensure that it is seen as a solid, trusted and competitive product.


#485

Tether can’t happen on B&C cause of kyc. BitUSD would not be worth the signers, it’s a dead project. Dai doesnt exist yet. So yah, nbt is looking pretty good.


#486

If there are signers willing to do all the KYC/AML stuff, well…
In the end Tether isn’t feasible…

bitUSD has no volume, but at least the price is somewhat closer to 1 USD than before.
What would happen with more trading volume?
Do you come to the conclusion it’s dead, because of the volume?


#487

have you been watching BitUSD on polo? The CMC value is distorted by their internal exchange, which is basically just pseudo-trading bitshares. If you quickly buy and sell just 50 BitUSD on polo right now you’d take a 10% loss. I just can’t imagine paying signers to support an unused BitUSD market when there are so many other good cryptos out there to support.

Then again, maybe it wouldn’t cost much to add BitUSD if we already have BTS. I don’t really know exactly how that works, are all the txns recorded on the same blockchain?

Tether i suppose is possible, but every tether signer would need KYC/AML and we’d have to figure out their multisig stuff, which I haven’t had much luck doing. Their support staff isn’t very responsive.