Building off my thoughts from above, this is a tough question to answer. And I get why people ask it - one they want to see some kind of return deeming that Nano being worth more than another currency (baseline) later is better. Long term, yes of course it would be. But then 99% of the coins out there today are crap. They’re meme coins that look fancy because they use fancy marketing/financial terms, and they have clear defined timelines of when we get this we’ll give you that. In those scenarios, they get your funding through various “marketing budget” burns, etc and then deliver something back into the echo chamber of just that token chain. No real new utility is derived and eventually you’ll see them collapse. What NF is aiming to do is to be an actual digital currency for users, best in class settlment option for merchants, and of most recent interest a financial exchange option which (if the tea leaves are being read correctly here) could revolutionize the transactions of currencies between institutions in a way they’ve never had before. The problem with those meme scenarios is it sets the wrong expectations for a real program. To do what I just shared requires actual EXTERNAL partnerships. And those partnerships do not want things openly discussed until they are finalized. There is significant risk to the investment of time and resources put in to making them happen. Sorry - i know this was a WAY Longer answer than I think you would have hoped but it built quite nicely off the previous point. With that in mind, I’ll carry on just a little further replying to one more ;)
@artalaatmin please see what I shared here recently regarding why you won’t see a roadmap here like you might with meme coins.
Обсуждают сегодня