Forced to use other exchange/services

Yesterday I decided to add some more NEX to my stack.

This is how I do it

Fiat (carbon)–Buy NEO------use Nash Pkey-----Deposit NEO to Switcheo Contract---- Trade NEO/NEX-------Withdraw NEX to NASH wallet.


  • As I started the process, carbon gave me error—“Insufficient funds in the treasury”
  • Decided to Buy USDC or ETH instead-- Error 3D mapping error

Raised Support Ticket—Still waiting for the reply

Forced to use fiat ramp of another exchange. Got ETH in 2 minutes with lesser fee. Transferred it to Nash Eth wallet.


  • Transferred ETH from trading to personal wallet—continuously getting blockchain syncing error

  • Fount out no liquidity/thin orders for the volume I was trying to trade.

  • Transferred some neo and untraded eth back to personal wallet- again blockchain syncing error.

consumed almost 10-12 hours by now, still not able to do what I wanted (To get few NEX)


Finally when I managed to get ETH back in my personal Wallet, using my ETH and NEO pvt key logged in Switcheo, did a ETH- NEO swap and Traded NEO for NEX and withdrawn to my NAsh NEX wallet all in 5 Minutes.


  • Fiat Ramps error: Insufficient treasurey/ 3D error(Carbon) forced me to use another exchange’s ramp
  • Exchange: blockchain syncing issues/ thin order book and low liquidity forced me to use switcheo for NEO/ETH trade.

End result: Exchange and ramps are not ready for BTC. I am an experienced trader/Hodler and it was way too painful for me. For new users it would be a mess. I would come back and use fiat ramps/exchange again as I am invested in NEX. New users would never return.

Note: This post is to tell devs/founders what issues we are facing as a trader and most motivated users of Nash. We expect solution to these problem which would be in the best interest of everyone. I hope new users never face these problems when BTC trading starts


i wonder if this issue will be fixed before the end of Q1. Would be nice, it’s bugging quite some people.

I agree with you totally. Even I had to face the same issues.

The exchange matching engine is super smooth, but the state channel formation is a big issue. Nash needs to look into this on priority.

Totally agree with the blockchain syncing issues


Thanks for the feedback. I think Nash team appreciates having detailed stories of how their user are using (or trying to use) Nash exchange. :+1:

That being said, I am convinced the team have their priorities in order and know that such primitive features must be working flawlessly for GA to be even considered. This is even more important than BTC pairs!


It’s a pity to have to read this post. Hopefully these issues can be fixed. With regard to the trading, I’m afraid to trade any large amount on Nash. It seems like I’ll just get a very bad price . I have not tried any fiat ramps yet as I am continually reading bad reports.
But I’m hopeful for the future. I’ve been following Nash since it was first mentioned. I’d prefer not to have to get upset about it now

1 Like

I bought some NEX yesterday, for me it looked like this:

  • Checked which pairs had best liquidity on Nash exchange (it was NEO/ETH today; a few days earlier it was LINK/USDC).
  • No AUD price on carbon, so I just used coinbase for ETH on-ramp (instead of obtaining exchange rate from my bank and then trying to estimate AUD:USD, and risking overdrawing bank acc - which I leave empty - by a few cents). I tried carbon a few weeks(?) ago, and it worked fine back then.
  • Sent ETH from coinbase to Nash Personal Wallet -> Nash Contract.
  • Traded ETH for NEO.
  • Sent NEO from Nash Contract -> Nash Personal Wallet -> disposable NeonWallet address.
  • connected NeonWallet to Switcheo using private key.
  • Sent neo from NeonWallet to Switcheo Contract (it’s really quick, they must cut a lot of corners?) -> Bought NEX -> Sent nex back to NeonWallet address -> Sent NEX to Nash Wallet.

There’s a lot more steps than desired, but I’ve done that dozens of times over the past year and never once ran into a problem.

That’s exactly why it’s important for the company to not expend resources on marketing too early. Hopefully all those people who were nagging for increased marketing efforts last year have come to realize this.

When you receive the “still syncing to the blockchain” message, it’d be nice to have some data or visual feedback so we can see or try to estimate when we should try again (like some centralized exchanges require X/Y confirmations following a deposit before they allow you to trade).

Sometimes I’ve made 3-4 attempts over the course of ~5 minutes before it works; a few times I’ve just logged out and stepped away for 15-30 minutes before trying again), and most of the time it works on the second attempt after waiting for ~30-60 seconds. I’m fine with waiting, but it feels like a blind guessing game, and I wish that it didn’t - “Will it work in 30 seconds? Or will it be 4 minutes and I have enough time to walk around and grab a drink first? What would be the most productive use of my time?”

In its current state, you do need to check liquidity ahead of purchasing tokens if you intend to trade on Nash.

Liquidity shouldn’t be a problem later on though, especially if there’s a user-friendly maker & taker bot that’s somewhat plug & play, which community members can leave running. So long as the bot roughly breaks even, and isn’t more complicated than profit trailer (3-4 config files), I’d leave it running 24/7, allowing it to use the dividends to make trades. I didn’t try the current bot, but others seemed to like it.

I’ve experienced the blockchain syncing issue as well with Ethereum, it was never resolved had to trade to another coin. I’m hoping a lot of these issues are resolved when the exchange moves to GA.

I’m really wondering about this as well. Usually takes around 10 seconds in my experience. Moreover, it never fails. Could someone from the technical team - @LucianoEngel maybe? - explain if this is something Nash could achieve at some point or if there is a technical impossibility?

Sure, for now. But imagine with Nash’s own fiat ramp and the token you want to trade being traded on Nash. It would cut that number down and the experience would be incredible.

I strongly agree with this.


should be fixed right now, and the team said to have put “an alarm” in place to prevent it from happening again. they didnt describe it as a bug, thus im not sure it wont happen again…

i also agree on no efforts on marketing before the exchange goes to GA. but this is already being done, so no complaints there. I just hope everything can work well, plus btc, plus new site, plus liquidity providers and maybe even traders who were waiting. Seems a lot to ask for to complete in Q1 now, but we can hope.

Let me clear a point over here. Trading experience is super smooth on Nash.


Unless and until, NASH does not solve this problem it will be very difficult attract and retain users.

I think a solution to NASH transfer friction from the trading contract to personal wallet would be to allow a list of known wallets, registered by the user in the exchange, to send and receive funds. It would still allow a high security of our funds. But I ignore the technical feasability…

Thanks for the feedback, we are aware of the transfer UX issues from interviews and support. We have already mapped a solution and assigned a dedicated engineer to it.


One more small thing ill point out is that ethereum contract are comparatively less painful, however neo is very painful. One has to attempt 5-6 times atleast before Neo contract is a success.

one more small thing fabio, it is very demeaning for us to compare Nash to switcheo, but switcheo offers really smooth funds transfer experience. If something on those lines is done, it will be great for Nash.

BTW, ill like to mention here that funds transfer experience outside Nash is incomparable. It is the best managed funds management part. I super like it.

More so, the contacts page is so good that it cannot be compared to any other multi-currency wallet. All thumbs up to contacts page.


Yes at least for NEO and ETH transfers. It is not only smooth but also very intuitive. There is no harm in seeing how its been done elsewhere.

Maybe now that engineers are working on it, we might get a better solution.