I too missed seeing james make an appearance, as I had wished to finally hear an official detailed account of this deal that has changed soooo many times as well as more about why vrc should want to have anything to do with supernet, what he envisions vrc actually doing as part of supernet, and how that will provide any actual value for vrc from his own mouth.
Also I agree that it is painfully apparent that the new forums is an attempt to censor anyone that is not a so deemed cheerleader. However, I do like the new Vericoin only forums and think it is a good idea, BUT it must be open to anyone to post anything other than spam like that which was posted on veritalk. Vericoin does not need to go the way of Zeta creating private/limited/closed boards like that phony nobs.is. With that said, I as an investor with multiple top 100 wallets am not happy I have had my account deleted more than three times already from the new forums.
As for the age old Money Transmitter Licensing issue plaguing the now coined "BitVeri" process, the corporate support that I had spoken of had that issue solved. A few friends whom work for a MAJOR company that already dominates this aspect of the industry with bitcoin were more then willing to help. Now, not so much.
And Barabbas you give too much credit to JL777 for price. The price is not in the hundreds b/c we have not sold any VRC and left yet. Not b/c of his buy support or his sell walls. For you see, we have been "persuaded" to stay in the market by some friends whom are still tied up in Vericoin. B/c of this we have decided to not just sell and "give" our substantial holdings away, though no more buy support will come from us. So for now, vrc will not follow in the footsteps of CGA, EFL, EMC2, or any of the other coins whos market we crashed by cashing out of.
So I will sum up by saying obviously I feel that joining supernet under these terms was a bad move and not the way to go. Control of 10% of VRC would do SO much more for VRC if given to/obtained by a major company such as apple OR BitPay as opposed to an anonymous figure with the purpose of giving credibility to his supernet idea.
oh and the new wallet is cool too, I suppose.
I have to disagree with you on several points, of course. Nothing new. ALL the credit for the price sustainability, 100% of it, should go to James and James alone. Sorry but it is a fact. NOT SELLING -as you imply- did not stop VRC to crash 8000 sat. Staking at the level of 20+ million, did neither. Now, with the staking at less than 1/3, still maintains the price. And people is not selling, in spite of a practical double since. That is James and James alone. Nothing else. Credit where credit is due.
I cant believe you though, when you say that the Money Transmitter License is -or was- NOT an issue. Patrick Nosker very clearly stated here that it was... only because the project did not have the $150-200,000 needed to get the license. Should "your" group have that ability and will, this was way before James, it would have been implemented within a couple of weeks if offered. It never was. And I for one believe that you or your group lack that capability altogether.
See? It isn't a matter of people selling or not... enough people sold to bring the price under 8000 sat, before James came in, and enough people would have run for the exits to have it now in the hundreds if James would not have come into the picture... whatever you may want to choose to believe.
I believe I can answer your questions regarding what VRC will do for the Supernet and why James in so interested: He, being anonymous, needs a coin that will be a transparent and believable entry door to the Supernet and it's riches. Our 3 devs are still the "good guys" of crypto, so they will fit ideally the image that James wants the Supernet to project while he remains in the shadows and quite away from the US authorities, which is a main objective for him now that he is in the money big time. That's basically the value VRC brings to the Supernet.
The value that VRC gets from the Supernet is enormous. First as an investor in it, of considerable proportions. But, more importantly, it will have the tech wherewithal to be among the leaders in the digital currencies world, therefore reinforcing its intrinsic value in a comparatively significant way since we were, before James, at the bottom of the barrel with no objective possibilities of technical progression. In other words, it is a win-win and then win situation for both.
You also have, as far as my assumptions go -and they are quite punctual-, quite wrong the concept of exchange between the Supernet and it's core coins -of which we hope VRC will be one-. While the Supernet will INVEST in VRC to the tune of getting 2.7 million VRC, it is my understanding that VRC will invest whatever those 2.7 VRC are worth at the time in Supernet units. So Supernet will own 10% of VRC (purchased, not given), while VRC will own whatever % of Supernet can be bought with a similar amount of BTC than the one paid for the 10% of VRC. No one is "giving" up anything. It's a swap. Fair and square. I just questioned the details and timetable of such swap operation.
Of course I do not know -or care- who "persuades" you of not selling. But I am quite convinced that whether you choose to sell or not is quite irrelevant to the fluctuations of the price at this stage. What is this stage? One in which a very credible individual, James, is in full support mode of a coin that he needs for his overall project. The community (of VRC) and of crypto alts in general, has responded and continues responding very positively to that fact. And THAT and only THAT is what's keeping the price stable.