According to feedback some prospective bidders have been solely interested in BlockShares.
Others might have been interested in both BKS and NSR, though.
While the original proposal would have provided successful bidders with shares of something that already exists and runs successful for months now (NSR) and BKS only after B&C would have been developed, it's quite clear that the only way of getting BKS by owning and holding NSR did scare some from placing a bid.
The security provided by getting ownership of something real was dwarfed by the consequences for people who wanted to invest in B&C.
That makes me think that some of those who have been scared by that proposal want to make a quick buck with B&C Exchange.
BKS are not an asset like so many other assets in the area of "crypto currencies".
With holding BKS comes a responsibility as those who hold BKS are those who own BKS.
BKS holders need to do certain things to make sure B&C runs well (e.g. mint, participate in motions - either by manual configuration or by registering to a feed).
The partial ownership of BKS (50% of BKS will be issued to NSR holders) helps bootstrapping the B&C business - after all it's (besides the architect and the development team) the NSR holders that brought Nu to where it is now, that transformed Nu to what it is now!
So I feel confident that B&C has a good chance.
And it factors that B&C is an offspring of Nu.
Some might consider it unfair that NSR holders receive BKS without paying for them.
Others might consider it unfair that BKS investors reap dividends from those who invested in the ground on which B&C will be built upon (Peershares template, Nu).
Both Nu and B&C are businesses.
Invest in what you prefer!
And that's what I like about the new proposal: it allows different parties to get what they want - those who primarily wanted NSR can buy the NSR at the market or wait for the
next NSR auction to take place.
And those who only want to bid for BKS can do so.
The new proposal offers a chance to diversify the investment into buying NSR and BKS according to one's taste.
Based on a calculation
a few posts ago, one might consider this investment:
Under the old plan:
1) Example: Invest $5,000 at the minimum bid of 0.002 USD per NSR
2) Receive 2,500,000 NSR
3) Receive approximately 0.27% of the B&C Exchange shares (2,500,000 / 913,000,000)
Under the new proposed plan:
1) Invest $2,500 at the minimum price of $5 per share
2) Receive approximately 0.31% of the B&C Exchange shares (500 / 162,000)
3) Invest $2,500 at a rate of 0.0025 USD per NSR (by placing a bid at "Day 1" - assuming that the motion passes in the current version)4
4) Receive approximately 0.05% of the B&C Exchange shares (0.5 * 1,000,000 / 913,000,000)
That totals to approximately 0.36% of the B&C Exchange shares.
Comparing old an new proposal (investing $5,000): you could have approximately one third more percentage of BKS(0.36% compared to 0.27%), while still getting approximately 40% of the NSR (1,000,000 NSR compared to 2,500,000 NSR).
If you were interested in maximizing the amount of NSR
1 while still receiving 0,27% of BKS, you should perhaps try to get 317 BKS (at $5 each; 317/162,000=0.00195) and 1,366,000 NSR (at $0.0025 each;0.5*1,366,000/913,000,000=0.00075). Adding up 0.00195 and 0.00075 equals to 0.0027=0.27% of BKS.
Between investing all in BKS and investing all in NSR everything is possible.
I think the current proposal addresses the feedback very well and offers much more flexibility than the old one.
Reducing the numbers by a factor of 10,000 makes the numbers indeed much better manageable, although I'd sincerely hope that someone who were going to invest in something into B&C were able to handle (big) numbers
1by investing $5,000; according to new proposal and assuming successful participation in the
next NSR auction that is yet to be voted on
