Quote from: Lucius on August 06, 2018, 01:09:55 PM

Quote from: LemonAndFriesOne on August 03, 2018, 02:55:55 PM

I will say this now and will say it again like before:

Devs should have kept the name RaiBlocks. It was good, unique and catchy. Nano is just basic. Big mistake rebranding and not being consistent with rebranding everything related to RaiBlocks.

I can only say that RaiBlocks was unique name and I like it, Nano is as you say fairly simple, generic name and does not reflect anything unique - we have hardware wallet Ledger Nano and we have some Japanese American singer with the same name.

But I do not think that the reason for such low price is in the rebranding, main reason is BitGrail hack and fact that thousands have lost coins there and not only coins but trust in the project. Also we've seen the evidence that someone was selling large quantities of Nano in last few months, more supply then demand and current BTC price = we get what we have now.

Quote from: bruges on August 03, 2018, 09:56:21 PM

That's interesting. Nano is on coinbase custody radar. As I understand it is coinbase wallet?
https://twitter.com/nano/status/1025494624654249984?s=19

It is a service by Coinbase which offer safe storing of coins, and it is intended for institutional clients. Nano is just one of the coins which are under consideration. It has nothing to do with their exchange service or simply said Nano is not in the plan to be listed on Coinbase exchange for now.

You have very good points there, some of us got a lot of free Raiblocks during the faucet phase. Some even hired workers to do the clicking so it makes sense some of the coins will be dumped in phases during highs.