I am following what I said I would do. There are no surprises at the formulas. If NXT price goes up, the NAV will go up. If I tried to price fix things at any specific price like 0.01, this would endanger SuperNET and that is something I will not do. Do you want me to do fractional reserve price peg that endangers the solvency of SuperNET so that the buywall is fixed at 0.01? What about when the NAV is at 0.015? You will probably not like it if the buywall was pegged at 0.01!
The NAV is the NAV is the NAV. It is based on market price fluctuations and anybody that tries to impose an artificial price peg will end up bankrupt. This has been proven over and over. My job is to ensure SuperNET is protected and grows. This means NAV is NAV and not some price peg that is not 100% backed. i do not believe in fractional reserve. or leveraged crypto.
If my doing what I said I would do is feeding trolls, then there will be a lot of troll feeding as I always do what I say I will. I said there will be a NAV based buywall according to the formulas described. I never promised an asset NAV buywall. I never promised any put option at ICO price.
Any such things would be materially different than existing spending authority and would need to be put up for a SuperNET vote. I will actively campaign against such onerous financial obligations. Do you want to put it up for a vote?
James
Maybe you're right and it's too complicated for me to understand, but I don't get why the price in BTC depends on the price in Nxt. I don't know what the TOKEN price was on Nxt AE, only on Bter. Let's say min IPO price on Nxt AE was 130 Nxt. Then set a buy wall at 130 Nxt. And it was 0.01 Btc on Bter, so set it on 0.01. But again, maybe I'm wrong, so I'm not arguing about it, just shared my thoughts.