[ANN] SuperNET NXT asset 12071612744977229797, SUPERNET KMD assetchain in summer

[From Above]

SUPERJAMES !!!!!

how many lattes did u have to day man. do u like muffins too ?

~CfA~

[1714832055]

1714832055

[1714832055]

1714832055

[1714832055]

1714832055

[1714832055]

1714832055

[jl777]

crypto_zoidberg has agreed to be on of the Trustees

James

[From Above]

crypto_zoidberg has agreed to be on of the Trustees

James

isnt that some kind of insider scamming if u have a coins dude participating in dem supernetz on ur trustee board?

~CfA~

[sussex]

crypto_zoidberg has agreed to be on of the Trustees

James

isnt that some kind of insider scamming if u have a coins dude participating in dem supernetz on ur trustee board?

~CfA~

I think he's trying to say isn't there a potential conflict of interest there? 

[chairoverflow]

When NXT first cam out it was criticized by some people too but look where it is now.Who knows SuperNet could be the next big thing.

[torshammer]

crypto_zoidberg has agreed to be on of the Trustees

James

isnt that some kind of insider scamming if u have a coins dude participating in dem supernetz on ur trustee board?

~CfA~

for chrissake if you are going to endlessly spam and fud this thread can you drop your fake ghetto language. it is pathetic. shows your insecurity in just expressing yourself.

[From Above]

crypto_zoidberg has agreed to be on of the Trustees

James

isnt that some kind of insider scamming if u have a coins dude participating in dem supernetz on ur trustee board?

~CfA~

for chrissake if you are going to endlessly spam and fud this thread can you drop your fake ghetto language. it is pathetic. shows your insecurity in just expressing yourself.

if u cant answer a simple question u r already amateur.  if u r a pro like James u dont fucking care about the language but the meaning behind it.  u have long way to go nifty boy!

pS where is endless fud and spam?  one question hits u so hard ?

all I ask is : is it good if a participating coin's dev is a trustee ?

~CfA~

[jl777]

crypto_zoidberg has agreed to be on of the Trustees

James

isnt that some kind of insider scamming if u have a coins dude participating in dem supernetz on ur trustee board?

~CfA~

for chrissake if you are going to endlessly spam and fud this thread can you drop your fake ghetto language. it is pathetic. shows your insecurity in just expressing yourself.

if u cant answer a simple question u r already amateur.  if u r a pro like James u dont fucking care about the language but the meaning behind it.  u have long way to go nifty boy!

pS where is endless fud and spam?  one question hits u so hard ?

all I ask is : is it good if a participating coin's dev is a trustee ?

~CfA~

The Trustees do not have the power to decide on spending authorization. Their obligation is to keep the funds safe and to properly and timely respond to authorized spendings. The authorization is done by the Authorization Committee of 7 and requires majority to approve a spending.

In what part of this do you see any conflict?

James

P.S. none of the Authorization Committee members will be coin devs, but they will probably own some amounts of various related crypto.

[jl777]

crypto_zoidberg has agreed to be on of the Trustees

James

isnt that some kind of insider scamming if u have a coins dude participating in dem supernetz on ur trustee board?

~CfA~

I think he's trying to say isn't there a potential conflict of interest there? 

To avoid any conflict of interest or even the appearance of conflict of interest, I separated the power to decide on the spending from the ability to spend. Further the Trustees will likely setup M of N multisig.

Do you see any conflict of interest?

James

[Cassius]

If anybody has any other ideas for voting, just post. The specifics will all depend on how much is raised, so I cannot know the exact things to propose, but the questions of the amount of core assets and whether to have some extra assets that can be used to raise working capital are ones that I feel are important to address before trading begins.

Suggestions for voting. Assuming c. 5,000 BTC collected and a goal of 10,000 total:
Temporary upweighting of SuperTraders' fund to 20%. Fund would keep some % of profits and return some to core reserves, especially BTC.
Upweight core asset fund to 15-20%, again temporarily. When 10,000 target was reached these could be reduced accordingly.
I would be prepared to forgo dividends for a while to ensure the strength of the project. Could additional shares be created at launch, which could only be bought using reinvested dividends? The preferential price paid for these would reflect early participation and deferred gains. My guess is that some HODLers would go for this. Others who want instant returns would not. Hence it probably needs to be optional.
Thus the early period would be riskier to some extent, in various ways, but would place SuperNET on a stronger long-term footing.

[From Above]

The Trustees do not have the power to decide on spending authorization. Their obligation is to keep the funds safe and to properly and timely respond to authorized spendings. The authorization is done by the Authorization Committee of 7 and requires majority to approve a spending.

In what part of this do you see any conflict?

I assume u enforce this by doing legal contracts with the real identities of the trustees right? I mean otherwise  they could easily peasily run off with the millions he she it takes care of right ? i mean investors wouldnt feel save if this wasnt legally bound

~CfA~

[pikuchato]

How many BTC's (include NXT and BTCD and everything else) were raised until now?

Is there a website that shows this information?

thanks

[jl777]

The Trustees do not have the power to decide on spending authorization. Their obligation is to keep the funds safe and to properly and timely respond to authorized spendings. The authorization is done by the Authorization Committee of 7 and requires majority to approve a spending.

In what part of this do you see any conflict?

I assume u enforce this by doing legal contracts with the real identities of the trustees right? I mean otherwise  they could easily peasily run off with the millions he she it takes care of right ? i mean investors wouldnt feel save if this wasnt legally bound

~CfA~

M of N multisig between trusted peoples is something I trust more than words on paper enforced with a potentially corrupt and definitely inefficient legal system.

contracts are broken and violated all the time. lawsuits are expensive and not even guaranteed to get the desired result.

if you do not feel safe with technology to secure the funds without a fiat world contract, then I suggest you to sell all your cryptos and put it into a fiat bank.

We are all trusting the coin devs with the value of the crypto. If you cannot trust the people that are creating the coins, then you should not own any crypto.

James

P.S. The NXT community seems to feel quite comfortable with me holding the 22 million NXT. I have total control of this account and the only thing stopping me from running away with it is my honor. Not sure if can understand this.

[jl777]

How many BTC's (include NXT and BTCD and everything else) were raised until now?

Is there a website that shows this information?

thanks

I am posting daily updates

as of this morning:

2014-09-10-14:00:01-GMT SOLD 202996.8564554 TOKEN,

 GOT 880.91744776 BTC, 8618489.29284713 + 22'235'801.54286195  NXT, 17648.81074836 BTCD, 597716.23386411 CNY

I dont have time to convert to BTC
A lot of weakhands are selling so there is churning and the net sales are slowed. I expect this will stabilize

[jl777]

bter confirms that they can conduct voting after funding is closed and before trading

when we are 48 hours away, I will start posting more details

James

[jibble]

Someone does need to write a document explaining more precisely what this is about. I am a seasoned BTC, NXT and asset exchange user, but it took me nearly five hours last night to begin to understand what this is about - and I'm still unclear on A LOT.

I imagine most potential investors are staggered at the amount you are aiming to raise and the moment it becomes clear to them that this is not a normal coin investment, they fuck off - they can't be bothered to wade through all this meandering thread trying to get a grip on it when they can put their money in another, more familiar investment.

I for one am standing back from this one until things become more clear, it's just too vague at the moment.

For those wanting to find out more, I found this to be the most useful document to launch my research from:

http://209.126.70.170/SuperNET.pdf

SuperNet is identical to a hedge fund ETF in the stockmarket world.  

An ETF holds assets, usually commodities or stock, from similar industries, using the investor funds to acquire more.  The ETFs earn income from user fees, which are deducted from the inventory every quarter.  Common ETFs include physical gold, silver, oil, and DowJones100s.  

except there is no quarterly fee
and there are the revenues generated from the user base
and the advertising inventory that is sold to websites
and the NXTventure incubating of income producing casino game asset companies
and the SuperTraders who are managing 1000 BTC 7x24 using a hybrid team/individual approach
and whatever other good ideas are approved by the SuperNET owners

If it is not clear to people, this is my fault. I will try to summarize. SuperNET is like an integrated financial/software/advertising company with a clear plan for growing the userbase and ways to monetize this userbase. Without fixed overhead. All the potential of this operating company is available at close to book value. When trading starts there will be a buywall at NAV to provide liquidity.

At current pace, we are at the low ends of the expected funding, but still enough to be doing quite well. My concern is that 10% cap of my contribution will limit the core assets that SuperNET has, which reduces some of its revenue potential. this can always be corrected by voting to approve increasing this 10% cap. What I am saying is that even at current levels getting more funds is going to increase the value per asset.

We are still in the antidilutive stage for additional funding. The more funding comes in the less risk as it will have more "weight", and since the expected revenue per asset is growing during the antidilutive stage, more funding is an advantage to all the investors. At the 5000 BTC level, then this is not optimum to have 500 BTC for the SuperTraders and 500BTC of core assets. So I would suggest boosting these ratios, but this will increase the theoretical worst case scenarios. Due to this, the decision will be up to the assetholders as to the desired funding level for the core assets. The SuperTraders can certainly start with the 500 BTC bankroll. One solution is for the assetholders to authorize to have some unsold assets.

For example, we can approve the issuing of 10% more assets than was sold. This would not actually be a dilution as it would be in the SuperNET acct and would only be spent to increase the value of SuperNET. This can then be used for working capital or investments. Protections from hurting the market price will of course need to be specified. I think it will be best to hold these votings after the close of funding and before the official SuperNET asset is created.

If anybody has any other ideas for voting, just post. The specifics will all depend on how much is raised, so I cannot know the exact things to propose, but the questions of the amount of core assets and whether to have some extra assets that can be used to raise working capital are ones that I feel are important to address before trading begins.

James

I know you might not like the idea of it, but a proven method of increasing volume is to be a precise end date.

It has been shown with almost every other IPO, there is an influx of volume at the very beginning and right at the end, Having a cut off time that isn't to specific prevents those kinds of things happening, but having a precise cut off gives those people who wish to jump in right at the end their chance.

putting an exact cut off date could give a huge pump of a thousand btc in the few days running upto the cut off date.

(unless i have completely missed where it says there is a exact cut off time, aint seen it myself)

[jl777]

Someone does need to write a document explaining more precisely what this is about. I am a seasoned BTC, NXT and asset exchange user, but it took me nearly five hours last night to begin to understand what this is about - and I'm still unclear on A LOT.

I imagine most potential investors are staggered at the amount you are aiming to raise and the moment it becomes clear to them that this is not a normal coin investment, they fuck off - they can't be bothered to wade through all this meandering thread trying to get a grip on it when they can put their money in another, more familiar investment.

I for one am standing back from this one until things become more clear, it's just too vague at the moment.

For those wanting to find out more, I found this to be the most useful document to launch my research from:

http://209.126.70.170/SuperNET.pdf

SuperNet is identical to a hedge fund ETF in the stockmarket world.  

An ETF holds assets, usually commodities or stock, from similar industries, using the investor funds to acquire more.  The ETFs earn income from user fees, which are deducted from the inventory every quarter.  Common ETFs include physical gold, silver, oil, and DowJones100s.  

except there is no quarterly fee
and there are the revenues generated from the user base
and the advertising inventory that is sold to websites
and the NXTventure incubating of income producing casino game asset companies
and the SuperTraders who are managing 1000 BTC 7x24 using a hybrid team/individual approach
and whatever other good ideas are approved by the SuperNET owners

If it is not clear to people, this is my fault. I will try to summarize. SuperNET is like an integrated financial/software/advertising company with a clear plan for growing the userbase and ways to monetize this userbase. Without fixed overhead. All the potential of this operating company is available at close to book value. When trading starts there will be a buywall at NAV to provide liquidity.

At current pace, we are at the low ends of the expected funding, but still enough to be doing quite well. My concern is that 10% cap of my contribution will limit the core assets that SuperNET has, which reduces some of its revenue potential. this can always be corrected by voting to approve increasing this 10% cap. What I am saying is that even at current levels getting more funds is going to increase the value per asset.

We are still in the antidilutive stage for additional funding. The more funding comes in the less risk as it will have more "weight", and since the expected revenue per asset is growing during the antidilutive stage, more funding is an advantage to all the investors. At the 5000 BTC level, then this is not optimum to have 500 BTC for the SuperTraders and 500BTC of core assets. So I would suggest boosting these ratios, but this will increase the theoretical worst case scenarios. Due to this, the decision will be up to the assetholders as to the desired funding level for the core assets. The SuperTraders can certainly start with the 500 BTC bankroll. One solution is for the assetholders to authorize to have some unsold assets.

For example, we can approve the issuing of 10% more assets than was sold. This would not actually be a dilution as it would be in the SuperNET acct and would only be spent to increase the value of SuperNET. This can then be used for working capital or investments. Protections from hurting the market price will of course need to be specified. I think it will be best to hold these votings after the close of funding and before the official SuperNET asset is created.

If anybody has any other ideas for voting, just post. The specifics will all depend on how much is raised, so I cannot know the exact things to propose, but the questions of the amount of core assets and whether to have some extra assets that can be used to raise working capital are ones that I feel are important to address before trading begins.

James

I know you might not like the idea of it, but a proven method of increasing volume is to be a precise end date.

It has been shown with almost every other IPO, there is an influx of volume at the very beginning and right at the end, Having a cut off time that isn't to specific prevents those kinds of things happening, but having a precise cut off gives those people who wish to jump in right at the end their chance.

putting an exact cut off date could give a huge pump of a thousand btc in the few days running upto the cut off date.

(unless i have completely missed where it says there is a exact cut off time, aint seen it myself)

as soon as any day after the 14th brings in less than 3%, the funding is closed 2 days later
so we wont know until this threshold is triggered but as soon as it is, we will know the end time
max is 28 days

[hilgi]

James, will the conversion of Tokens for Unity be 1-1 or will we get more unity per token? I am sure this was somewhere but I missed it.

Thanks!

[EvilDave]

The Trustees do not have the power to decide on spending authorization. Their obligation is to keep the funds safe and to properly and timely respond to authorized spendings. The authorization is done by the Authorization Committee of 7 and requires majority to approve a spending.

In what part of this do you see any conflict?

I assume u enforce this by doing legal contracts with the real identities of the trustees right? I mean otherwise  they could easily peasily run off with the millions he she it takes care of right ? i mean investors wouldnt feel save if this wasnt legally bound

~CfA~

M of N multisig between trusted peoples is something I trust more than words on paper enforced with a potentially corrupt and definitely inefficient legal system.

contracts are broken and violated all the time. lawsuits are expensive and not even guaranteed to get the desired result.

if you do not feel safe with technology to secure the funds without a fiat world contract, then I suggest you to sell all your cryptos and put it into a fiat bank.

We are all trusting the coin devs with the value of the crypto. If you cannot trust the people that are creating the coins, then you should not own any crypto.

James

P.S. The NXT community seems to feel quite comfortable with me holding the 22 million NXT. I have total control of this account and the only thing stopping me from running away with it is my honor. Not sure if can understand this.

Not sure if I do, either. 
My momma always said to me "Dave, whatever else you do, never give 10% of your entire crypto holdings to a random stranger you met on tha Interwebz"

But I do trust James. I've seen how he rolls, how he envisages way-out stuff that no-one understands at first but that work amazingly well, like his asset structures.
He's got a solid track record here, and more than that: he embodies the old-school Satoshi idea of crypto, the idea that we can create a technology that will completely free our financial lives from the need to have government and law involved. The blockchain shouldn't need to be enforced by legal contracts, but by the technology itself.

Just for disclosure: I'm on the nominees list for the Authorisation Committee, anyone else want to volunteer:
https://nxtforum.org/unity/unity-funding-authorization-committee/

Last bit: don't just think about the financial/trading aspects of SuperNET, but try thinking of the technological implications as well.
Once a SuperNET wallet is working, allowing access to and control of all coins within SuperNET, this, in combination with the NXT-based Asset Exchange and MultiGateWay will allow all of the coins within SuperNET to access the functions of all the other coins within SuperNET. Its not called UNITY for nothing......you then have a unifying crypto-system that can do pretty much anything. This is why every coin to be included in UNITY has to have one good, working, unique feature.

I know people have said this before, but this could be the biggest advance in crypto-currency since Bitcoin itself.
Co-operation is the future, it's the only way to take crypto mainstream and when that happens, we will all win. Everyone. You, me, James, the guys behind RobotSexNickels, everyone, even C-f-A........

[jl777]

James, will the conversion of Tokens for Unity be 1-1 or will we get more unity per token? I am sure this was somewhere but I missed it.

Thanks!

1:1