Radical ideas for liquidity

[gamey]

You are being hypocritical. Bitshares also prints BTS out of thin air for worker proposals and delegate dilution...

You are comparing aplles to oranges. Nubits have no max cap in their printing presses and they also make the claim that their "token" will not devalue.

Hard forks happen all the time around here. You are kidding yourself if you think Bitshares has a hard cap on its printing press. The rules in Bitshares are final until they are changed. Bitshares... its marketing, and its users, claim SmartCoins are safe investments without hardly mentioning the risks involved. "Safer" than Nubits while sweeping the vulnerabilities and flaws under the rug left and right. Smartcoins are "backed" by a cryptocurrency that was printed out of thin air.... HELLO... A cryptocurrency that has lost value for almost 2 years straight with no signs of giving up. There is no way SmartCoins will ever become valueless, right?

You guys will keep diluting for useless features, because there are a bunch of idiots in control, and refuse to dilute for the things that are actually important. Important things like.... gasp.... liquidity on a cryptocurrency exchange. You guys wouldn't dilute for privacy, yet you are about to dilute to change flat fees to percentage based fees. As if that is going to be Bitshares' savior from this two year downtrend. No, it is the referral systems fault... we obviously need to tweak it. All of you "solutions" involving liquidity that don't involve dilution will not work, yet you guys are too thick to realize it. At the end of the day I  have little at stake here and have little to zero faith in the people that seem to be in control around here. So, I will peacefully bow out of here, sell my stake, and move on to another project. I suggest you guys get off this sinking ship while you still can. Sayonara

It is a bit absurd you are so hurt because a couple of guys disagree with you that dilution and the backing of smart assets have tiers in what is preferred.  BitShares has a hugely preferable method to what NuBits/NuShares is ... if only they can get liquidity. Which is the point of this thread.

edit - Thinking about this a bit further, there is a difference between diluting directly for the market's needs and diluting to pay other parties some sort of bonus system to incentivize them to be market makers. I always thought NuBits/Nushares had the first, but I suppose the 2nd is acceptable to me personally.

 Nubits/Nushares always seemed a bit odd to me .. They get away from transparency but use crypto as a ledger. I have used Nubits before, but I never kept my USD in there long. Mainly just trying to avoid big BTC drops. It worked well and was available on the exchanges. Last time I checked to get out of BTC, it had a 10%ish spread when BTC was swinging down. I passed...

[tonyk]

You are being hypocritical. Bitshares also prints BTS out of thin air for worker proposals and delegate dilution...

You are comparing aplles to oranges. Nubits have no max cap in their printing presses and they also make the claim that their "token" will not devalue.

Hard forks happen all the time around here. You are kidding yourself if you think Bitshares has a hard cap on its printing press. The rules in Bitshares are final until they are changed. Bitshares... its marketing, and its users, claim SmartCoins are safe investments without hardly mentioning the risks involved. "Safer" than Nubits while sweeping the vulnerabilities and flaws under the rug left and right. Smartcoins are "backed" by a cryptocurrency that was printed out of thin air.... HELLO... A cryptocurrency that has lost value for almost 2 years straight with no signs of giving up. There is no way SmartCoins will ever become valueless, right?

You guys will keep diluting for useless features, because there are a bunch of idiots in control, and refuse to dilute for the things that are actually important. Important things like.... gasp.... liquidity on a cryptocurrency exchange. You guys wouldn't dilute for privacy, yet you are about to dilute to change flat fees to percentage based fees. As if that is going to be Bitshares' savior from this two year downtrend. No, it is the referral systems fault... we obviously need to tweak it. All of you "solutions" involving liquidity that don't involve dilution will not work, yet you guys are too thick to realize it. At the end of the day I  have little at stake here and have little to zero faith in the people that seem to be in control around here. So, I will peacefully bow out of here, sell my stake, and move on to another project. I suggest you guys get off this sinking ship while you still can. Sayonara

 
....yes per signature and
 per this in particular "All of you "solutions" involving liquidity that don't involve dilution will not work"

[CoinHoarder]

You are being hypocritical. Bitshares also prints BTS out of thin air for worker proposals and delegate dilution...

You are comparing aplles to oranges. Nubits have no max cap in their printing presses and they also make the claim that their "token" will not devalue.

Hard forks happen all the time around here. You are kidding yourself if you think Bitshares has a hard cap on its printing press. The rules in Bitshares are final until they are changed. Bitshares... its marketing, and its users, claim SmartCoins are safe investments without hardly mentioning the risks involved. "Safer" than Nubits while sweeping the vulnerabilities and flaws under the rug left and right. Smartcoins are "backed" by a cryptocurrency that was printed out of thin air.... HELLO... A cryptocurrency that has lost value for almost 2 years straight with no signs of giving up. There is no way SmartCoins will ever become valueless, right?

You guys will keep diluting for useless features, because there are a bunch of idiots in control, and refuse to dilute for the things that are actually important. Important things like.... gasp.... liquidity on a cryptocurrency exchange. You guys wouldn't dilute for privacy, yet you are about to dilute to change flat fees to percentage based fees. As if that is going to be Bitshares' savior from this two year downtrend. No, it is the referral systems fault... we obviously need to tweak it. All of you "solutions" involving liquidity that don't involve dilution will not work, yet you guys are too thick to realize it. At the end of the day I  have little at stake here and have little to zero faith in the people that seem to be in control around here. So, I will peacefully bow out of here, sell my stake, and move on to another project. I suggest you guys get off this sinking ship while you still can. Sayonara

[chryspano]

You are being hypocritical. Bitshares also prints BTS out of thin air for worker proposals and delegate dilution...

You are comparing aplles to oranges. Nubits have no max cap in their printing presses and they also make the claim that their "token" will not devalue.

I also do not agree that Nubits is operating on a fractional reserve. Nubits are backed by the value of Nushares, as that is what is diluted to pay for liquidity and a tight peg. The Nushares market capitalization is above 2.6 million and the Nubits market capitalization is approx 750k. As long as Nushares has sufficient value to provide incentive to liquidity providers, and there is reason to believe there will be demand for Nubits at some point in the future, then I think it is unlikely it will ever collapse.

What is really the "value" of something that has only 15 btc 8,65 btc 9,39 btc buy support and half of its trading volume are pumping money from their ponzi "revenue" scheme?
 
The last 3 months they had a total volume of 540 btc in BTER and 378 btc in Poloniex for a total of 918 btc, but 458 btc of that volume is their ponzi "revenue" money used to pump the prize https://discuss.nubits.com/t/nsr-buyback-19-week-of-february-1-2016/3462

Add to the picture the huge spread and the fact that only 0.25% of the nushares are in the exchanges for sale and you get the whole picture.

There is no demand for NuShares, there is only demand for a peged crypto, good luck to you if you try to defend the peg by giving away.... Nushares

[Empirical1.2]

Also demand for Nubits explodes when BTC is falling, which is expected so I don't think their volume is fake.

In this way they'll likely loss money..
When BTC is falling, people want to sell BTC for NB, so Nu's bots will have to buy (BTC) high.
When BTC is raising, people want to sell NB for BTC, so Nu's bots will have to sell (BTC) low.
I guess there is something missing?

Yes. It's possible they raise the premium at these times but I think they still lose money during these extremes.
I think they subsidize the liquidity providers.

I think it works because they are constantly selling NBT and receiving BTC but not all the NBT they sell are coming back.
People might lose/forget or keep their NBT for a long time.

I think they are operating on a extreme fractional reserve and if a lot of people all wanted to sell their NBT at the same time they would have a problem because they've used the proceeds of previous sales to pay dividends, fund development, marketing and pay liquidity providers. (Their argument is that they have some liquidity tiers, they can use parking and finally dilute NuShares holders if necessary but NuShares is so illiquid, I don't think this is realistic.)

However they've survived so far without even needing to use parking rates I think, so maybe they can keep it going for quite a while.

[abit]

Also demand for Nubits explodes when BTC is falling, which is expected so I don't think their volume is fake.

In this way they'll likely loss money..
When BTC is falling, people want to sell BTC for NB, so Nu's bots will have to buy (BTC) high.
When BTC is raising, people want to sell NB for BTC, so Nu's bots will have to sell (BTC) low.
I guess there is something missing?

[gamey]

People around here seem to hate Nubits because they print money, and then look the other way when it comes to BTS printing money (dilution).

Yes, but I'd guess 99%+ of all coins dilute in the same manner BitShares does.  BitShares does not dilute however to maintain their peg. There really is a large distinction although it may be meaningless to many users.

[CoinHoarder]

Unfortunately for them there's a grand total of 15 BTC of buy support for NuShares across all exchanges? Yay, $750 000 of Nubits are backed by $6000 of NuShares buy support.

https://poloniex.com/exchange#btc_nsr
https://bter.com/trade/nsr_btc

Which is literally nothing and that tiny buy support would evaporate if NuShares was having to dump to support NuBits.

I think they have a few levels of reserves and I think they can still offer interest on parked Nubits before they get to that stage.

I don't think market capitalization or value should be determined primarily by the amount of buy orders, but more as to the current price. There has been $6500 in volume on the NSR markets today, and there are a lot of holders in the NSR community. I am biased though.. I have been investing in NSR.

The post up-thread explaining all of the competitors to bitUSD, including their market capitalization and volume, sum up my thoughts on the matter perfectly. Bitshares should be neck and neck with its competitors considering it was the first to market. Bitshares was my original pick to be the market leader, but the lack of success has lead me to having to diversify my holdings for this crypto market (stable asset and DEX). It is time to take the bull by the horns and swallow our pride, as to the hatred for Nubits and their solution, and get this problem solved.

People around here seem to hate Nubits because they print money, and then look the other way when it comes to BTS printing money (dilution).

[Empirical1.2]

I only know about Nubits and they "print" more nubits out of thin air(this is very bad imo) in order to pay the liquidity providers with the 8% Coihoarder mentioned above, it seems to work until now but there is another problem with them, every time new suckers buy nubits, a large percentage of the suckers money are considered "Profits" and are used to pump their nushares  ponzishares. IF there is going to be a huge supply of nubits that threatens the peg, then and only then they will inflate their ponzishares supply (because every week they use lots of the sucker's BTC's as "profits"), despite all that it seems that they have a very good peg so far. If it works with them why not for us? 

Worst case scenario we will have to abord if we see that it does't  work, I think we will loose more time and energy than bts 

Disclaimer
I'm completly biased against nubits.

You are being hypocritical. Bitshares also prints BTS out of thin air for worker proposals and delegate dilution...

I also do not agree that Nubits is operating on a fractional reserve. Nubits are backed by the value of Nushares, as that is what is diluted to pay for liquidity and a tight peg. The Nushares market capitalization is above 2.6 million and the Nubits market capitalization is approx 750k. As long as Nushares has sufficient value to provide incentive to liquidity providers, and there is reason to believe there will be demand for Nubits at some point in the future, then I think it is unlikely it will ever collapse.

Nubits are backed by the value of Nushares,

Yes they say... https://docs.nubits.com/history/

If the NuShare market cap is 8 million NBT and there are 1 million NBT in circulation, the asset to liability ratio is 8, not counting any reserves that exist. This is a highly solvent state that doesn’t resemble anything like fractional reserve.

Unfortunately for them there's a grand total of 15 BTC of buy support for NuShares across all exchanges? Yay, $750 000 of Nubits are backed by $6000 of NuShares buy support.

https://poloniex.com/exchange#btc_nsr
https://bter.com/trade/nsr_btc

Which is literally nothing and that tiny buy support would evaporate if NuShares was having to dump to support NuBits.

I think they have a few levels of reserves and I think they can still offer interest on parked Nubits before they get to that stage.

[CoinHoarder]

I only know about Nubits and they "print" more nubits out of thin air(this is very bad imo) in order to pay the liquidity providers with the 8% Coihoarder mentioned above, it seems to work until now but there is another problem with them, every time new suckers buy nubits, a large percentage of the suckers money are considered "Profits" and are used to pump their nushares  ponzishares. IF there is going to be a huge supply of nubits that threatens the peg, then and only then they will inflate their ponzishares supply (because every week they use lots of the sucker's BTC's as "profits"), despite all that it seems that they have a very good peg so far. If it works with them why not for us? 

Worst case scenario we will have to abord if we see that it does't  work, I think we will loose more time and energy than bts 

Disclaimer
I'm completly biased against nubits.

You are being hypocritical. Bitshares also prints BTS out of thin air for worker proposals and delegate dilution...

I also do not agree that Nubits is operating on a fractional reserve. Nubits are backed by the value of Nushares, as that is what is diluted to pay for liquidity and a tight peg. The Nushares market capitalization is above 2.6 million and the Nubits market capitalization is approx 750k. As long as Nushares has sufficient value to provide incentive to liquidity providers, and there is reason to believe there will be demand for Nubits at some point in the future, then I think it is unlikely it will ever collapse.

[CoinHoarder]

To me it looks, the tradevolume is only the market maker who recieved a lot of funds in the beginning for free. thats all i see.

Most of that was burned and does not exist anymore. The info regarding that is on Nubits' forums.

[Empirical1.2]

@Empirical1.2

thats true, but as i stated, are you aware that most of this nubits are from the marketmaker and not from demand, so i think it is difficult to look into the trading volumen (because the market maker are exchanges and shuffling the nubits for free). i think a much better way would be to know how the nubits are allocated. On the nuexplorer you can find the 100 richest addresses https://blockexplorer.nu/topNBTaddresses/1

and i am confused, their should be 6-7 million Nubits bur coinmarketcap states 700.000 so why is the difference so huge?

Initially they had some crazy volume on bter but I don't think they are shuffling the Nubits for free anymore unless they have a deal with the exchanges to not pay the trading fee. Also demand for Nubits explodes when BTC is falling, which is expected so I don't think their volume is fake.

I think they sell Nubits to market makers when there is increased market demand possibly at a discount depending on how they subsidize them but I don't know & I also don't know why there is such a huge discrepancy.

Curiously can anyone give references to these sort of things working in the past?  I understand BitShares is a new product in many many ways so it is hard to find an example that fits very well, but I would think there should be something out there.

I wonder if the better solution could be more within education. I don't think education is a great idea, but I question whether paying liquidity providers will be enough to jumpstart the system ... and if it isn't (which seems likely) you have now spent your war chest.

I only know about Nubits and they "print" more nubits out of thin air(this is very bad imo) in order to pay the liquidity providers with the 8% Coihoarder mentioned above, it seems to work until now but there is another problem with them, every time new suckers buy nubits, a large percentage of the suckers money are considered "Profits" and are used to pump their nushares  ponzishares. IF there is going to be a huge supply of nubits that threatens the peg, then and only then they will inflate their ponzishares supply (because every week they use lots of the sucker's BTC's as "profits"), despite all that it seems that they have a very good peg so far. If it works with them why not for us? 

Imo those "Profits" should be "Revenues". What will happen if those bought nubits be sold back?

What's interesting is that they have a parking rate system that is supposed to pay people to park their Nubits in situations where lots of people want to sell Nubits but despite their super fractional reserve I don't think they've really had to use it yet. So it makes you think they could carry on with this system for quite a while..

[Shentist]

@Empirical1.2

thats true, but as i stated, are you aware that most of this nubits are from the marketmaker and not from demand, so i think it is difficult to look into the trading volumen (because the market maker are exchanges and shuffling the nubits for free). i think a much better way would be to know how the nubits are allocated. On the nuexplorer you can find the 100 richest addresses https://blockexplorer.nu/topNBTaddresses/1

and i am confused, their should be 6-7 million Nubits bur coinmarketcap states 700.000 so why is the difference so huge?

[abit]

Curiously can anyone give references to these sort of things working in the past?  I understand BitShares is a new product in many many ways so it is hard to find an example that fits very well, but I would think there should be something out there.

I wonder if the better solution could be more within education. I don't think education is a great idea, but I question whether paying liquidity providers will be enough to jumpstart the system ... and if it isn't (which seems likely) you have now spent your war chest.

I only know about Nubits and they "print" more nubits out of thin air(this is very bad imo) in order to pay the liquidity providers with the 8% Coihoarder mentioned above, it seems to work until now but there is another problem with them, every time new suckers buy nubits, a large percentage of the suckers money are considered "Profits" and are used to pump their nushares  ponzishares. IF there is going to be a huge supply of nubits that threatens the peg, then and only then they will inflate their ponzishares supply (because every week they use lots of the sucker's BTC's as "profits"), despite all that it seems that they have a very good peg so far. If it works with them why not for us? 

Imo those "Profits" should be "Revenues". What will happen if those bought nubits be sold back?

Worst case scenario we will have to abord if we see that it does't  work, I think we will loose more time and energy than bts 

Disclaimer
I'm completly biased against nubits.

[Empirical1.2]

Curiously can anyone give references to these sort of things working in the past?  I understand BitShares is a new product in many many ways so it is hard to find an example that fits very well, but I would think there should be something out there.

I wonder if the better solution could be more within education. I don't think education is a great idea, but I question whether paying liquidity providers will be enough to jumpstart the system ... and if it isn't (which seems likely) you have now spent your war chest.

Nubits despite being far more risky than BitUSD, and will probably fail, is much more popular through the use of liquidity providers.
They probably average >$1 million a month in volume and have much bigger market share.

https://uphold.com/ Uphold started after BTSX and offer centralized BitAssets which are much less appealing to Bitcoin users, however they offer a tight peg by being the liquidity providers themselves. As a result they are "supposedly" the fastest growing money platform in the world.

Part of the problem is that in these market conditions & with the added burden of forced settlement, shorts don't want to come close to the peg resulting in a very high premium, so long term this has to be addressed too, possibly by incentivizing shorts in BTS neutral/bear markets imo.

you are saying "Nubits have a much bigger market share" on which data is this assumtion based? To me it looks, the tradevolume is only the market maker who recieved a lot of funds in the beginning for free. thats all i see.

Last time I checked the amount of Nubits in circulation is much higher than BitUSD...

Uphold: $2.06 Million
Tether: $1.45 Million
Nubits: $0.76 Million
BituSD: $0.1  Million

So going by that I would say we only have 2.5% market share.  Their volume is also much, much higher than BitUSD.

Also even though they're created out of thin air, they're not given for free, otherwise they wouldn't have been able to distribute $400 000 in dividends in 2015 from the proceeds and fund the exchange they are currently building.

$409,811 have been distributed as dividends2 over the last year, most of which was as BlockShares. Given the current NuShare market cap of $1,628,335, that is a stunning 25.17% dividend yield.

https://discuss.nubits.com/t/how-many-dividend-distributions-has-nushares-had-will-there-be-any-more/2739/3