-One person did the research in full and he is concern with the legislation part, he thinks that it will take too long for Nash to succeed.
-One person is day trading and the lack of education in crypto space is keeping him away.
-One person that is a programer is intrigued to find out more about Nash but because Nash doesn’t hav the option of automated investment every month he is just not ready to invest the time because of the work volume that he is doing.
-3 people invested only because I believe in you so much and they trust my judgment.
-24 people listened to my hour explanation on why Nash is the future and how the decentralized world would look like but no success yet to make them invest the time to research for themselves.
So overall a part of people that are not interested yet ware burned since 2017 mania and because Nash is not performing in price they are just watching what I am doing. A part of this people don’t really care about decentralization, another part is just thinking that crypto is nothing serious to consider. Other part is just investing in stocks and major crypto projects.
What is about me? I just believe in #Nash and I have such a level of certainty that Nash will succeed in realizing the dreams that I cant explain why I am so certain. I just follow and support you since ICO and will follow and support you all the way.
I bet we all had problems with it. It’s very hard to explain someone a value when he only see price in front of him. It’s hard to explain the vision because they are mainly motivated by price and short term. But eventually more and more people will understand at the end specially when regulations come to crypto much faster then we can see right now.
Thank you for sharing your experience with this great community
Thanks for the report Radu! Yes, crypto is still really small on the big picture and your numbers reflect - nice to hear about the 3 people that really believe in you, that is 10%!
Let’s get back to them again in a couple months. Maybe they should just try it, and we can give some incentive by that time.
I recommended Nash to some of my crypto trading friends (one of them is a pro and does about 500K $ per month) and they had various critiques mostly related to lack of altcoin trading pairs (but Nash is not about that and I don’t think we will ever compete with other exchanges on that front), but one of the most common complaints after they studied Nash website is that Nash is “just a non-custodial CEX basically”.
One of them even recommended a DEX similar to Nash (also relies on state channels and has real btc trading but it’s way behind in development) called Stakenet purely on the basis that they will not have any KYC/AML procedures
What are some good arguments against this other than the one I usually use about how regulatory compliance focus of Nash means it has much greater chance of integrating in mainstream economy (adoption) then those unregulated DEXes.
Should I concur with the centralized aspects of Nash or should I fight those arguments?
I guess they mean in a sense that aspects such as off chain ME, KYC/AML procedures, region locked services, and stuff like that are in their mind considered as CEX-like compare to the Wild West approach of Uniswap.
I think it is pretty simple, Nash is a company that offers a platform for digital finance that allows people to hold, trade and buy/sell staying in control being the only ones holding their keys.
Users should chose us because the products are good:
They value self-custody
We have a great wallet, web and mobile.
We have a great exchange, fast and cheap.
Our fiat ramps are fast and have zero-fees.
You said “they had various critiques” was this after trying the product?
I can’t be sure they actually tried the product but based on their critiques it is obvious they at least studied it. I will keep doing what I am doing (I am active in some crypto related FB groups that have a couple dozen thousand of members and I pitch Nash whenever possible). The thing is, I got to be smart about my approach and I know I only have one chance to pitch Nash to someone. For instance, I could pitch it to some average users that trade small amounts (this would not do much for volume but Nash could gain many more smaller-volume users) but I know those type of people and I am certain they would be averted from Nash if they can’t use their credit card to buy crypto. This is your typical conformist and low-informed small crypto trader. For this profile of users I would wait for this feature.
Moving USDC from trading contract (where the ramp deposits) to the main wallet is very expensive. Far more expensive than a simple transfer, and I foresee it being a real pain point with new users. I had mentioned this on telegram, but I referred a couple news users who shared their experience using the ramp. Everything was great, until they saw the fee required to get that USDC into their main wallet.
I think it’s not entirely fair to say Nash ramps have zero-fees, because eventually – at some point down the line – the user will be hit with that transfer fee. I’m not saying it’s 100% a bait-and-switch, but nowhere did these two referred users see a warning that they’d have to pay >$10 in ETH to get that USDC. I felt guilty when they returned with their reviews (two different users):
For the record, I had explained to that first user where the deposit will end up and how Nash operates with a main wallet & trading contract.
It reminds me of some fiat ramps we have here in Canada. They all boast fast transfers (they are super fast), zero deposit/withdrawal fees, and zero trading fees/commissions, but they all neglect to mention the giant spreads they trade with. Sure, zero fees…but you definitely ARE paying something somewhere. Thankfully, most of these companies came forward and admitted to padding their spreads.
Regardless of what we think about CEXs, they’re more transparent about stuff like this. I don’t think Nash does the best job of explaining the difference between a wallet & trading contract, and why those fees exist/why they’re so high. When a user creates their wallet, a short little animation visualizing their main wallet & the trading contract would go a long way I think. Especially if it explains potential transfer fees.
You raise a good point, I just have one question; when you buy USDC using Nash cash can you choose where the USDC will be sent, I mean choose between personal and trading acc?
I think it is fair of Nash to state zero fees but also put a disclaimer: blockchain fees will apply.
Btw. I haven’t used Nash Cash so far so sorry if I got something wrong.
I’m just an armchair crypto guy - my thoughts are it’s maybe more attractive to position Nash for the more advanced whale algo crypto users. Promote features like “your keys your crypto”, “high frequency algo trading”, “regulated by EU”
Nash has a lot of “annoyances” I think for the general user. I don’t like the idea of having to transfer funds around within my own account and incurring an ETH gas fee each time. But it’s spare change for whales.
Also the general user I think probably a “buy and hold” kinda person, so low added value to volume. We should probably not be focused on the general type user - they’re probably the investors but not the ideal target user.
Whereas say an institution is looking for a market to run an algo on, can’t get in because of trust issues with other exchanges, regulations, and custodial issues would probably find Nash pretty attractive and would generate way more volume than someone who’s in to buy and hold $1000 BTC every couple of months.
A few of those types of high volume trading guys onboarded for Nash would be great - and there is a massive market opening up over the next couple of years for institutions as the tide seems like starting to turn towards instos and regulations - where Nash is well placed.
I think it is very hard, time and resource consuming to get some of the current CEX whales to Nash. Yes, non-custodial aspect is great but their portfolio is 100% insured so they don’t stress about hacks or issues that could affect their portfolio and I am sure they have multi year contracts for trading at a particular CEX as well.
Best would be to target institutions that are considering entering crypto, because entering this Wild West of a market is done best when you do it through regulatory complied exchange, with KYC/AML and you have receipt for every one of your trades. This is the area I would focus Nash on. But also keep in mind that for large volume traders we need to have deep enough order books and I am not sure we are quite there yet.
No, you cannot. Funds go into your trading contract.
Perhaps. My opinion is that most users see the “trading contract” as the equivalent of a CEX layer where their funds are not safe, hence the urgent desire to withdraw them back to their personal account. The alternative is that they just want to use Nash for Nash Cash. For the latter, I would not spend any energy hold them back. For the former, I would try to change this feeling by reshaping both “personal account” and “trading contract” into a single account where some of your funds are idle and some are ready to be used for specific services (trading, paying via Nash Link, earning via Nash Savings,…): of course, this is just a paint job over the underlying state channel architecture, but I think it could help users feel more confortable with their funds being in state channels.
Thanks @pplvee for sharing your sharing experience - we will add the option to receive funds at their personal wallet in near future. As @gurmitra57 said it will have a “blockchain transfer fee will incur” disclaimer as there is nothing that can be done in that regard.
@Oldsport we have a new paintjob coming for that! I think you all are going to like it.
As @gurmitra57 said it will have a “blockchain transfer fee will incur” disclaimer as there is nothing that can be done in that regard.
It should be done in a way that the user is aware that at all times their funds are on blockchain. It is not a problem to have a fee if the user knows what he is getting in return. Yes, you are paying blockchain fee but your funds are always on the blockchain. You are paying for premium security, to have your funds safe on the exchange as safe as they are on your Ledger.
When you put it that way, basically just with having a note “your funds are always on the blockchain” users don’t mind the little fee because they perceive value from it.
Quick question here:
When your funds are in the trading contract and for some reason the exchange shuts down, are you still able to access your funds from there using your secret words?
If so, why would anyone prefer withdrawing from the trading contract to personal contract?
Yes, funds are retrievable at all the time, Nash is 100% non-custodial. Nash will release a toolkit how an average user can reach its funds at all times since currently to do so it takes a little programming knowledge
