Engaging In Cryptonetworks

Ever since the first cryptonetwork, Bitcoin, was created, investors have had the opportunity to earn returns by engaging in the network. In Bitcoin’s case, that was done by mining the network, effectively powering it.

As the sector has grown, investors have largely turned their attention to buying and holding cryptoassets, and not that many of us are actively engaging in them.

But that is likely going to change for several reasons.

First, in proof of stake networks, asset holders will want to stake their tokens and earn the rewards of doing that, or risk being diluted/inflated. Conversely, those who do stake will earn rewards that will feel a bit like collecting interest or dividends on a bond or stock.

This technique of turning an idle asset into an incoming producing asset by engaging in the network is part of the design of many cryptonetworks and investors are going to increasingly want to do these things (staking, validating, governing, etc) to earn the rewards of that engagement.

There is another aspect to this, outlined by Tushar Jain of Multicoin earlier this week on their blog.

Tushar points out that asset holders can act with their capital to help bootstrap the network by providing storage on the Filecoin network or transcoding on the LivePeer network or creating DAIs on the Maker network.

The good news for investors is that there are a whole bunch of entrepreneurs setting up shop right now to help us do these things without each and every one of us becoming super technical about the ins and outs of each of these cryptonetworks. We will see (and are seeing) staking as a service, nodes as a service, and the like. These third parties will be like the proxy companies are in the stock markets.

I expect the custodians, like our portfolio company Coinbase, to offer many of these services, either as the provider themselves or the gateway to the third party provider, thereby making it even easier for us to engage in these networks.

It’s an exciting time to be a cryptoinvestor. A host of new cryptonetworks are starting to go live. The next 18 months will see many dreams come to fruition and with those dreams will come demands on the investors to engage instead of just hold. I am looking forward to doing that.


Comments (Archived):

  1. jason wright

    is the capitulation stage over?

    1. kenberger

      this was the best comment today, and i’m disappointed not to know the answer.Fred’s line “It’s an exciting time to be a cryptoinvestor” is something that *I* agree with, but it’s not a general public widely-held view, as of today.

      1. jason wright

        ERC-20;There’s letters sealed; and my two schoolfellows,Whom I will trust as I will adders fanged,They bear the mandate; they must sweep my wayAnd marshal me to knavery. Let it work,For ’tis the sport to have the enginerHoist with his own petard; and ’t shall go hardBut I will delve one yard below their minesAnd blow them at the moon. O, ’tis most sweetWhen in one line two crafts directly meet.— Prince Hamlet, in Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 4.[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…

        1. Richard

          Oh, the shadow of Bernie Madoff hovers in many a mirror of the bitcoin investor.

          1. jason wright

            ERC-20 was a bad thing. A ticking bomb now in a state of slow motion detonation, but the bomb’s makers gave themselves time to walk away unscathed. Ponzi.Bitcoin is different. not Ponzi.

        2. Lawrence Brass

          The deep relation english and anglo-american culture has with fire and explosives always get my attention. Its in hymns, laws, movies, everywhere.Even Shakespeare! 🙂

          1. jason wright

            yes, and we’ve got a good one coming up very soon;https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…Don’t you Remember,The Fifth of November,’Twas Gunpowder Treason Day,I let off my gun,And made’em all run.And Stole all their Bonfire away. (1742)[48]America’s explosive culture is all down to Loyalists vs Patriots. We lost, but we did burn the White House down in 1812 as a sharp reminder of our dissatisfaction, and they still have to keep half an eye on those monarchist Canadians. History is fascinating.

    2. Richard

      Ha! Somebody is paying attention!

      1. jason wright

        i try.

  2. LIAD

    am one of the first few testers of a cross-chain storage protocol out of china which I’m excited about.i’m surprised what a buzz it’s been over the past few weeks to see nodes spring up from all across the world.watching a network literally come to life before your eyes is awesome.plus it provides a huge dose of emotional lock-in. behavioural design at it’s finest. https://uploads.disquscdn.c

    1. PhilipSugar

      I love this, I always thought it would be great to have a network of hardware and software and use people’s internet, electric, and space to build a network. How do I get one get in. my name at the gmail service.

      1. LE

        Does the TOS allow that? I know that with Comcast you can’t share an internet connection among multiple businesses each business needs their own internet even in a shared office. [1] Same as you can’t have a TV in a bar and pay non bar rates. Of course you can get away with it but it’s not legit.The electric is probably non trivial for some applications. https://flightaware.com/adsb/ will send you a box so you can be on their network for free which seems cool (I am tempted to do this ‘just because’) but you pay the electric cost (Probably draws about 5w power is my guess)[1] Or you need to pay for a plan that allows that sharing.

        1. PhilipSugar

          I’m sure the TOS doesn’t allow that but it would be hard to tell, heck I think it is almost a prerequisite of a high flying software company to break TOS, think of Uber and Airbnb. Also people are bad at estimating the true cost of something, just look at Uber as an example.The electric could be non trivial. Not only do you have to count the electricity used which could be $1k a year and that doesn’t count cooling in the summer months (although it does heat in the winter months)

          1. LE

            it would be hard to tellSure but it restricts what you can advertise and tell someone to do. You can’t do it in a way that subverts someone’s contract or relationship with their customer (insert legal theory here which covers this if you know it). Hence it is not a good business idea to build on. Of course investors as we know don’t think that way and they think that a rising tide will float all boats and it will all work out in the end. (Uber/Airbnb). But irl it is not always like that. Not only do you have to count the electricity used which could be $1k a yearNoting that there are home users where electricity is included in the rent. I have one tenant in a residential condo where the building covers utilities as part of the condo fee. They would never know what is going on. But just the same I have another commercial rental where my sub tenants pay me and I cover the utilities. But I have the fear of god in them (and btw this works) where I allocate $x for utilities and cleaning and tell them if it runs over that amount they pay extra. That is enough to get them to not misuse the utilities. Previous landlord didn’t do this. Was a good idea if I may say so myself and it works. (Even if I don’t know who is turning it up they know themselves and will rat each other out.)I did some studies way back with an electric meter where I was surprised to find out how much a single 100w lightbulb costs in a year. IIrc it was between $80 and $120 per year. I did that when I was building a array industrial battery backup system for some servers in the 90’s.

          2. PhilipSugar

            Yes, I know what tortious interference is, go try and collect that in China, we won’t have to worry about global warming because even hell will have frozen over.Yup and that was my electric calculation. You are really charging them for electric if they go over, frankly you are reaping the economic marginal surplus if they don’t.I can’t imagine anybody doesn’t charge for electricity. In our last building where we were crammed in we literally ran heat two or three days a year.

          3. LE

            Legacy building often don’t have metering. At the office complex there are separate electric meters but not for water. One dentist says to me ‘yeah it’s great because I am a dentist and we use a lot of water!’. Well loose lips sink ships. So i take the issue up again with the board and the management company. ‘Why can’t we meter separately?’. Answer comes back ‘not practical we looked into it’. Now if it mattered to me I would look into it myself. But 55 units and I am busy so I pass and accept the answer. But yeah they built it in the 80’s like that. Ditto for putting HVAC on the roof. Major pain. Need crane to replace a unit (just had to get one done). Can’t fix in winter (easily) if snow on the roof. (This is not multi story roof where you have to do it that way either). I can’t even check what the repair man is saying. I am not going to climb the ladder to the roof. There is a hatch but I sealed that off (leaks). So not going to climb up there (you probably would though you are more hardy than I am.We just replaced all parking lot lighting with LED’s. They were replacing them as the existing high powered bulbs wore out. I said ‘well if we are saving money with LED’s what exactly is the point of waiting to replace?’. They said ‘oh yeah I guess that makes sense (Doctors on the board). So we paid and replaced all of them. Instant savings.

      2. Lawrence Brass

        Mesh networks at the edge. There aren’t any immediate economical incentives. It could happen and stay as a niche as ham radio did. Or, considering that it could be implemented on low cost hardware as the raspberry pi, it might explode in hand with a killer app. Light crypto something, why not?

        1. PhilipSugar

          Here is the thing. Yes ham radio is niche. BUT I remember as a ki using the 2meter band and repeaters. Precursor to cell phones? I’d say the same thing as Palm and the smart phone.

    2. LE

      What is it exactly that I am looking at in the picture?

      1. LIAD

        other than a work of art you are looking at a prototype mining rig for a new crypto protocol

      2. jason wright

        Raspberry Pi in a Grove case.

  3. William Mougayar

    Buying lots of tokens is like taking a board seat or a say in the governance of such networks.

    1. jason wright

      that’s a lot of seats William.

    2. kidmercury

      IMHO it will eventually come to be seen as buying government, and the same criticisms involving money in politics in nation-states will apply to blockchains as well. delegated proof of stake and ongoing iterations may help prevent blockchain oligarchies, in instances where such prevention is desired.

      1. Matt A. Myers

        Example being early on when Ethereum Ether owners lost/had stolen “$50mm” worth of crypto-assets, and they changed the code to reverse that – yet they didn’t do that for future people who had assets stolen, etc. Just highlights the centralization of it all.

  4. awaldstein

    Fascinated about the power of staking.Listened to Richard from Numerai on Unchained the other day and was really struck with the power of it.

    1. cavepainting

      Staking is a great idea, but works so much better when the network has critical mass. In the early days, staking seems to add significant friction for participants. (The not-so-great sales pitch to a staking node being “Not sure how much money you could make, if anything, but you need to lock a significant chunk of your money to have any say in how the network works”. )It makes a lot of sense to early investors to bootstrap networks by acting as key stakeholders on the network. Until something is live at scale, we are all speculating on crypto economic incentives and how they will actually work.

      1. awaldstein

        I’m a believer in its possibilities. About to announce a new advisory role with a project in the space.Regardless that the blockchain can handle the mechanical complexity of the contracts needed, the behavior is unproven and that groundwork for new behavior as the basis of the risk/reward is what fascinates me.No one knows anything about this in reality. Everything is hypothesis.

        1. cavepainting


  5. DJL

    I still think we have a long way to go regarding user-friendly tools for development. (I think Coinbase solved the retail investor issue nicely.)Just a couple of days ago I thought “By now I should be able to create a basic Etherium Contract using a an online GUI tool.” When I did my search, all I found was a list of technical steps that started with “Download the SDK.” I remember coding my own HTML pages and PHP server scripts in Web 1.0. I am still searching for the firm that is going to become the Microsoft of crypto development.

    1. LE

      I remember coding my own HTML pages and PHP server scriptsHah same but with PERL. In one case I did a loan amortization form for a bank that was an early customer. I had to buy an 800 page book at the technical bookstore to get the formula for the form. I then found an error in the forumula and other book errors and wrote to the author. Proof attached. Was on an SGI Indy I had at the office if anyone remembers those on a T1 connection.become the Microsoft of crypto developmentDo you mean maybe ‘wordpress’ of crypto development? Microsoft is a clusterfuck of complexity an entire eco system evolved around the difficulty of using anything they got involved in. [1][1] Not that I think they did it for that reason but it was really a smart way to go. You have a difficult product and an open market with no competition. The product requires various people that make money off of helping others use the product. Those people then have a vested interest in keeping the product difficult and obscure so they can remain in business and make money. This is similar to the way the security industry operates…. https://uploads.disquscdn.chttps://uploads.disquscdn.c

      1. sigmaalgebra

        Microsoft is a clusterfuck of complexity an entire eco system evolved around the difficulty of using anything they got involved in. [1]Yup. Eventually I had to conclude that.There continues to be a basic problem: The community of practical computer science is so poor at technical writing that they struggle to document their work at all well. This situation is all over computing.There has been some good writing in computing: Of course Knuth did very well. At times HP did well.

        1. LE

          It is the ‘precise engineering brain’. Fred does that by saying things like this on quite frankly a general interest blog:or transcoding on the LivePeer network or creating DAIs on the Maker networkYou do it as well (not that you are trying to sell anyone or it matters).I just ordered a Honeywell Lyric Thermostat and the setup process and inviting other people to have access is a complete and total mess. Way more involved and complicated it’s as if they didn’t show it to anyone outside the office cubicle. That is the engineering brain.Computer types as a generality like the fact that stupid normal users have to beg them for help with things. Makes them feel powerful. This honestly drives the entire industry even though not everyone practices this way.

          1. PhilipSugar

            I think there is something else at play, and I give credit to companies like SimpliSafe and Ring which are two examples of computers that are easy to use. (people will point out that Ring’s first attempt was so bad they had to change their name from doorbot)Engineers love solving the problem in a way they can use, but the little details are what take so much time and are boring but are critical to users.It really sucks to have somebody say: “I don’t understand, and then instead of just showing them and thinking in your brain: Dummy.But instead spend twice as much time and then twice as many iterations figuring out how to make it easy.I mean you even see this in the trades. The plumbers are the worst. (sorry plumbers)Plus you have management saying ship, ship, ship!I’ll admit I’m bad which is what makes me such a bad dry-waller and painter.p.s. I’d re-look at Microsoft.

          2. sigmaalgebra

            There is a LOT of quite good technical writing in engineering. But apparently the hacker culture has remained from inarticulate down to functionally illiterate.For Fred’sor transcoding on the LivePeer network or creating DAIs on the Maker networkit violates two standard rules of technical writing:(1) Jargon. A word not in a standard dictionary or a word in a standard dictionary but used with a meaning not in such a dictionary is jargon and, thus, must be defined, at least given a link to a definition, and hopefully defined with a precise definition and also with motivation, that is, why the heck do we need this term, with examples of where the term is used productively, connections with other terms and materials, etc. Also, to indicate that the word is jargon, on its first usage it should be in italics.(2) The TLA. So, right, a TLA is a “three letter acronym”. So a rule is always at first use of any acronym, except for something as common as USA, say what the acronym abbreviates, e.g., as I just did here for TLA.Posts at the Web site Hacker News are awash in violations of rules (1) and (2), and I regard this situation as evidence of poor writing skills of the hacker culture.While such rules are good, they are only one of the first steps in good technical writing. More generally the goal is not just to follow rules but to communicate information.I’ve written Microsoft too often telling them IMHO (right, on the Web, “in my humble opinion”) that bad technical writing, especially violations of rules (1) and (2) and failure more generally to do well communicating information, is, sorry about that, the most serious bottleneck in progress in the growth in usage of Microsoft’s products and in computing more generally. I’m not joking or knowingly exaggerating.For the expert consultants, IMHO given good technical information, plenty of people in the US and the more developed countries are fully capable of doing their own work plugging together a mid-tower computer, installing and configuring software, doing the usual system and network management tasks, e.g., backup and recovery, writing simple programs, e.g., editor macros or macros for D. Knuth’s mathematical word processing software TeX, building a Web site, installing, configuring, and using relational database, e.g., designing the tables, defining keys, learning programming language and other software tools, designing and writing software, etc.The biggest bottleneck in my startup was getting good documentation on Microsoft’s .NET, ASP.NET (“active server pages”, for writing Web pages), ADO.NET (“active data objects” for using relational database), and Visual Basic .NET (the programming language, with nearly as many features as Microsoft’s main compiled language C#, a plenty good way to the software objects in the Microsoft .NET Framework and also the CLR, “common language runtime” but with, IMHO, more traditional and easier to use syntax than that of C, C++, or C#).The effort involved finding, downloading, reading, indexing, and abstracting 5000+ Web pages from Microsoft’s documentation Web site MSDN (Microsoft data network or some such) plus some hundreds of Web pages from sites such as Stack Overflow and found via Google. At 10 or 20 such Web pages a day, that took a while.All the ideas were just dirt simple; the documentation had the words spelled correctly and did very well on some other rules but, still, just didn’t try very hard actually to communicate the relevant information. And there were more problems.Let’s see, for interest rate r per year, e.g., maybe r = 0.06 for 6%, and n compoundings per year, the value of $1 at the end of a year would be(1 + r/n)^n = ( (1 + r/n)^(n/r) )^rIn calculus, e.g., W. Rudin, Principles of Mathematical Analysis, any of the three editions (although the third edition is much the best in some respects), it is shown thatlim_{m –> infinity} (1 + 1/m)^m = e ~= 2.71828182846…Then with m = r/n we have thatlim_{n –> infinity} (1 + r/n)^n= lim_{n –> infinity}( (1 + r/n)^(n/r) )^r= e^rIf we start with amount A dollars, then at the end of one year we have for each of the A dollarse^rand for all A dollarsAe^rAt the end of 2 years we have(Ae^r)e^r = Ae^(2r)and more generally at the end of time t (years) we haveAe^(rt)So that’s continuously compounded interest and, thus, is closely connected with e, the base of the natural logarithm.

      2. Richard

        This was more of a typo in the answer than an error. As 4 approaches infinity (continuous compounding), take the Ln of both sides, and because (1+ interest rate/(large number of periods)) is about equal to a rate/large number of period, the greatest gift to mankind e to the rt, takes over!

        1. LE

          See that is the thing with me. I would fail the test which needs precision (digital) however I was able to get a bank to pay me money for a solution that in the end worked and gave the right answer. Note also the author (or editor) is lame and uncaring. This is after all the ’30th Edition’ zero excuse for why they couldn’t have proofed it and had no errors. Note that he points to a web page as if someone with the book (prior to the Internet say edition 28) would know to go there.I don’t make money by being precise other than with words or emotions in which case I am very precise.

          1. Richard

            Yes, rabbit holes are expensive. And avoiding them makes is smart. But if there were one proof that every adult should master, this would be it!

  6. Frank W. Miller

    I’ve talked about this before but the proof-of-xxx thing is a problem not a solution. Any proving that goes on in the blockchain provides an incentive to some actor(s) to abuse it.What is interesting to me in cc these days is to watch dollar backed (e.g. Tether) or asset backed (e.g. Naked) cc’s. These approaches are interesting because they address what is imho the most significant weakness with cc’s, the lack of their price being tied to an underlying valued asset. In these designs, the price of the token varies based on something else that can’t be controlled by anyone participating in the blockchain. The blockchain serves essentially as a virtual brokerage house or wire transfer service and that’s it.Of course, your discussion of your portfolio companies doing aggregation of distributed resources also flies in the face of these fully distributed systems. And that will be a natural tendency. No firm will want to be involved in these tokens (except maybe for governance) because they can’t make any money on them. And isn’t that the fundamental flaw in all of this? If user’s move to fully distributed solutions for asset and currency management, there’s no way for any centralized element to get rich off of it. Why would Morgan or Goldman or Coinbase or whomever setup systems that are inherently designed to eliminate them?Perhaps someone will setup a token backed by an asset or currency and in exchange for governing it, take a small fee per transaction? That would be a mini Schwab or Fidelity or Western Union without the 10s of thousands of employees making fat salaries. See why it hasn’t happened…

    1. sigmaalgebra

      Maybe the crucial point is that a lot of people guess that somehow there will be a lot of money to be made out of the chaos of crypto and no solid proof otherwise. Or, sure it’s foolish, but so were those Dutch tulips, much of the speculation in 1929, those CMOs on subprime loans to nude dancers in strip clubs on McMansions standing empty, etc., but in each of those cases some people did make money and got out before the crash or had a big short position before the crash and made money during the crash.Maybe sell 100% certified organic, no pesticides, no herbicides, no GMO, gluten-free, stone ground whole grain multi-grain, sweetened by 100% pure, all natural, clover flower honey, with 100% all natural sea salt, kneaded by hand by virgin teen women, baked in small quantities in brick ovens fueled by certified hardwood charcoal, carbon neutral, packaged in brown paper with no plastics, for $20 a loaf. Some people might buy it!

    2. Adam Sher

      Do you think it’s a requirement for a fledgling currency or store of value to be tethered to another asset (I.E, US gold standard) before becoming independent?

      1. Frank W. Miller

        I think its the lack of a peg to either a currency or an asset price that make cc’s a new type gambling game (like the lottery or roulette or blackjack) rather than an investment.

        1. Andrew Cashion

          Credit comes off as gambling to me. What isn’t gambling really?Learning could be gambling but in the end if one cannot learn something are they losing even if they can play again and again?I argue lottery/bingo isn’t gambling because it has “odds” same goes for blackjack.

    3. Richard

      Why does it feel like the govt will be the yahoo printing press of internet 1.0?

  7. LE

    asset holders will want to stake their tokens and earn the rewards of doing that, or risk being diluted/inflatedMore on what is meant by ‘staking’ which I didn’t fully understand in context.https://medium.com/@SamButl

  8. JLM

    .The analogy with feeling like interest on a bond or dividends on a stock highlights the biggest sticking point, there is no application (business) underneath that is generating income which is being used to pay interest or dividends.There is a ton of promise, but not an ounce of killer app or business engine.There is also a ton of brainpower and capital focused on this. That much brainpower is going to find the killer app or, at the very least, a great app.We are now a decade in since “bitcoin.org” was registered and almost a decade since the birth of “genesis block of bitcoin” – the beginning of it all.I don’t think 10 years is a huge hurdle, but neither is it nothing.Companies like Coinbase — the pick ax providers to the miners figuratively speaking – are going to do fine, but there has to be more.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

    1. JamesHRH

      This is also a fair assessment of the issue.

    2. cavepainting

      I think the trillion dollar question is if/how crypto economic networks that deliver utilities (not store of value) — like Livepeer video streaming or filecoin storage– can build critical mass and network liquidity.1.Can crypto economic incentives like staking and rewards really work in building a distributed organization to get work done? Can proof of stake be deployed securely (or) are we making these organizations overly political and thus vulnerable to abuse?2. Can this work be done faster, better, cheaper, and provide more value to the customer than existing centralized alternatives? (For instance, can LPT deliver better value than Facebook Live or Youtube Live on at least some dimensions, and if Filecoin > Dropbox for certain use cases)The truth is answers are TBD and we are all speculating. The early projects will hopefully show the way.

      1. ericxtang

        Absolutely. These crypto networks will need to have some unique value proposition in order to capture any value for their token holders. A lot of new projects are getting started, and it can be hard to understand how these networks will actually create a protocol that accrues value to the token AND creates real demand for the network.Speculation is definitely in the air, but token holders should REALLY do their homework to understand whether they should participate.Livepeer and Filecoin are building infrastructure layer solutions, so applications like Facebook Live, Youtube Live, and Dropbox can be built on top. In a sense, they are more like Elastic Transcoder and S3 competitors. One of the thesis of decentralization on this layer is to create more liquidity of computation, bandwidth, and storage through sharing common infrastructure. Economic participation in these networks provides cryptoeconomic security and bootstrap capital, and the value should theoretically be correlated to the size of the networks.

  9. JamesHRH

    Paragraph 5 is the crypto bet.I cannot think of an idle asset becoming a producing asset, without a limited supply.The web doesn’t limit supply well.So, …….. losing bet.

    1. jason wright

      NFTs may change that.

      1. JamesHRH

        NFT?TLAs ( Three Letter Acronyms ) are a communications curse.

        1. jason wright

          “The web doesn’t limit supply well”non fungible tokens (NFTs) may change that.

          1. JamesHRH


          2. jason wright

            The web doesn’t limit supply well because digital creation can be copied infinitely at near zero margin cost of distribution.Non-fungible tokens are used to create verifiable digital scarcity.

          3. Matt A. Myers

            Except then I can just create another non-fungible token, and so there’s no scarcity?

          4. jason wright

            but still a unique and enduring token, being non fungible. the market will decide if the token has value. its existence per se is not value. its qualities may, or are not be, of value, as ‘beauty’ (or whatever utility it unlocks) is in the eye of the beholder. you can create, but does it have value?a tangential example;https://observer.com/2018/1…did the buyer pay too much? one wonders, and one wonders who the buyer is. feels a little bit like a ‘jacked’ transaction for publicity.

          5. JamesHRH

            That is waaaaaaaaaay out there, re: definition of value.

          6. Matt A. Myers

            Okay, right, so the issue is – if the technology that makes a token have value can be reproduced and cheaper, then that token’s value will go down [save market manipulative, government interference etc]; and if tokens aren’t even required for a function/system, token systems which only lead to an increase in cost (among potentially letting bad actors work within the system without being in-check), then the token will have a $0 value.

  10. OurielOhayon

    so agree. i was about to write a blog about this and broaden that to an even more important topic: the future of ownership of crypto assets is not “trading” (eg buying on coinbase) but earning crypto (staking, salary,…)

  11. Paul Azous

    Good assessment, thanksPaul Azous, CEOProspectus.com

  12. Simon Wilson

    This not exactly what you had in mind Fred by enagagement, but interesting nonetheless. I just returned from a brief vacation in Fuerteventura. one of the Spanish Canary Islands. A circulating crypto currency called FuerteCoin was recently launched there, only for use on the island and through e-commerce with businesses registered on the island. I tried it out and used their phone app easily to purchase items in restaurants and shops. It works. Their challenge of course is volume of circulation: the number of businesses accepting it and the number of consumers buying and using the coins. Many people of course bought and held the coins so the danger is that it will die on the vine. Nonetheless I’m guessing this is a fairly unique example so far in the world today?

  13. Louis Kaptich

    Good to be here.. what the deal..