@canesin Recently I was promoting Nash link by my LinkedIn Profile and got a few questions. Maybe someone of the team can help me answering. I was asked if one has to pay the high transaction fees when paying by BTC. As I assumed you don’t have to pay it when using the Nash App and got BTC in a Nash channel. Am I right here?
Furthermore in a video Kellog Fairbank mentioned that Nash Link is supposed to be Wallet agnostic. So my question is, would a user doing an order by Nash Link have to pay the BTC transaction fee when using a third party wallet?
I have a question as well. How does NashLink handle the conversion between different currencies for Europe where the currency is not euro. Let’s say it is Bulgaria and it is in BGN (bulgarian leva or BGN), does the merchant receives the payment in euro or BGN ? I have friends with small shops, would love to pitch them the idea for their customers to be able to make a payment with Bitcoin.
In the above post, I said “slow” which is somewhat wrong: Nash uses risk management to accept the transaction upon detection, which makes it quite fast (a couple minutes only). Still far from instant though.
@Oldsport Thanks for the information! So, when I understand you correct, given, the L2 is working, a payment by Nash Link would only be without transaction fees if you use the Nash wallet, means paying from Nash channel?. But for third party wallets everything stays the same?
When Nash link uses risk management as you say and doesn’t wait for finalization, could it be possible, that someone who pays from a third party wallet adjusts the transaction fee very low without risking that the payment takes for hours?
As it is currently Nash Link uses Bitcoin on-chain transactions, so one sending the payment has to pay the Bitcoin network fees. Important to note this are a simple transaction fee, not major script like on channels transactions so fees are much lower.
Ok, I got this. Thx for the answers! I was confronted with another question: Someone told me, what Nash Link does, Bitpay was doing already since 10 years. So what is the major difference, respectively what makes Nash link better than Bitpay?
Well, this I`ve already seen The point is, Bitpay started 10 years ago. In the meanwhile they built a reputation and took a big market share in their niche. There must be more than just a 1% price advantage to convince B2B customers to implement a totally new solution wich has no track record yet. If Bitpay could build a payment solution like Nash Link already 10 years ago, what is the point of rebuilding it now and believe it can grow a substantial market share if their is no other advantages?
in general, the year does not say anything. if you start in the wrong year, a few years later others with the same idea will make billions. bitcoin and co are unsuitable for paying for things. only stable coins are suitable. otherwise, e.g. keep steam btc.
a layer 1 solution with 1% may work for a while. however, layer 2 solutions are generally required.
no idea whether bitpay offers a layer 2 solution
Much more interesting than btc, for example, is that nash takes along and offers the facebook coin. in the nash link story.
I was confronted with another question: Someone told me, what Nash Link does, Bitpay was doing already since 10 years. So what is the major difference, respectively what makes Nash link better than Bitpay?
The point is, Bitpay started 10 years ago. In the meanwhile they built a reputation and took a big market share in their niche. There must be more than just a 1% price advantage to convince B2B customers to implement a totally new solution wich has no track record yet. If Bitpay could build a payment solution like Nash Link already 10 years ago, what is the point of rebuilding it now and believe it can grow a substantial market share if their is no other advantages?