/biz/ - Business & Finance

somewhere between 10 cents and 1000 USD

You will probably sell at $5 or $10. $1000 EOY

>>10524917
Probably 50 cents.

>>10524917
Market cap as the only thing that influences price is a meme.

>>10524917
20 trillion by 2020.

Buying link was the best decision of my life

>>10524917

>>10524917
EVERY coin that had it's mainnet released dumped.

LINK fags believe their coin is different. Explain yourselves

>chainlink

OH NO NO NO

>still floundering around at 30 cents

BAHAHAHAHAHA

>>10524961

LINK mainnet will have companies like SWIFT, Salesforce, Accord project, ready to run API's and providing data and using smart contracts, also anyone else on the planet can now run oracles for their smart contracts on any blockchain/program.
Other main-nets had no one using them.

We're talking 3.5 billion dollars, minimum.

You people don't understand the sheer power of what we're dealing with here.

>>10524940

>>10524952
Yikes!

>>10524952

do you think there will be something similar to linkpool for burgers?

>>10524929
correct. marketcap is downstream of price, not price downstream of MC. MC is the right hand side of the equation, the outcome if you will, of the function, not the function itself.

>>10524963
price doubled like in the space of 2 weeks in july. that is what the beginning of a singularity looks like.

Was Sergey in davos? Was he 'the person'? That's a pretty big leap of faith.

If chainlink was #3 coin above XRP it would only be 18$

someone fucked up the math when they said chainlink could reach 1000$

>>10525512
and only 6$ if it was as big as EOS number 5 coin

Probably a bump to 1-2usd if they release in the current bear market. Mainnet by itself won't make it moon. It'll be the partnership annoucements after it. If that coincides with the next bull run then you may find yourself on the moon.

>>10525528
>small bump of $2

>would literally be a top 10 coin already without doing anything at that price

>>10525512
Lol what? Do you even math?
Given both the circulating supply of XRP and LINK, chainlink would be worth ~$50 given XRP's 17b cap.

>>10525221
Sure they will lmao
>he thinks some of the most reputable companies in the world will start to run smart contracts on day 1 of some experimental meme network that is ran on top off another experimental network
>it won't dump, this mainnet release is different!!

>>10524952

This is dumb because revenue does not equal valuation - companies are valued much higher than that in speculative markets. That picture is actually clever FUD disguised as bullish propaganda.

>>10524917

>Sergey Navarov was asked on a podcast who was most interested in his technology at panels/discussions
>insurance and derivatives was his answer

trillions are coming.

>>10525512
Chainlink solves a real problem, unlike XRP and EOS which is basically vaporware. You're underestimating how much money there is in the world.

similar to ripple. not when its released but after a while.

>>10524917
Top 3 for absolute certain. Depending on the market that's either a shitton of money, or a metric fucking shitton of money.

>>10525557
what podcast?

>>10525547
circulating supply isnt the real supply all those coins will creep their way into the market whenever the fuck they get released

the supply is 1 billion whether you like it or not

>>10525558
well then people are banking on something which is like a double moonshot to be worth more than bitcoin

its not really reasonable

its actually quite sad how far chainlink has to go for all of us to make it its unreasonably too much

2.50$ eoy and we are all shy of making it forever from there it remains a top 10 coin and nothing happens

The conference was crypto hq, there's no info about him being there. It could be mulesoft people or whoever for all we know. What are the confirmed links with Salesforce besides a couple of employees following on Twitter, who probably also follow other projects?

>>10525549
>revenue does not equal valuation
>companies are valued much higher than that in speculative markets
Exactly.
So many people have been trying to calculate the price of the Link token based on the value of the markets that Link would tap into.
This is all bunk, because the ONLY thing that will ever determine the price of Link is the speculative marketplace; i.e. supply and demand.

>>10525548
>he thinks some of the most reputable companies in the world will start to run smart contracts on day 1
no-one's saying that
>>10525548
>it won't dump, this mainnet release is different!!
no-one's saying that

never-LINKs are getting desperate. 1000 eoy!!

>>10525589
its not. its the supply is 350m. READ THE WHITEPAPER.

>>10524961
Every other coin signals the release of their mainnet long in advance, invariably after having missed a few deadlines.
Chainlink's mainnet is going to come out of nowhere, as will any news related to partners and users and other developments.

>>10525589
Then don't compare the circulating supply from xrp versus the total supply from link. XRP has nearly the same ratio circulating supply/total supply. 40/100 for xrp and 35/100 for link.

>>10525642
>muh muh 50 eoy
>muh only until they release the rest of the coins then >18$ eoy at #3 coin

HAHAHAHAHAHHA

>>10525642
Not only is he comparing XRP's circulating supply to Link's total supply, but he's also doing it at the bottom of the latest 7-month bear trend.

XRP's top MC from the beginning of the year would equal 426 USD per Link.

>>10525691
> Telling someone to math
> Can't even do math himself
> Mad because he's wrong
> React in the most childish way possible

Well done. I don't even hold link myself.

>>10525642
>>10525735
chainlink is so pathetic that people have to dump tens of thousands of dollars into it to hopefully make it when it reaches $2.50 eoy

"is 500k link enough???"

theres people with 50 grand in this

bitcoin you could buy for peanuts and made millions chainlink is a joke

>>10525691
The same is true for any top coin, BTC, XRP, ETH, ...
They all have a ton of coins/tokens still to be released.

>>10525588

didnt save the link. found the link in a comment on reddit in link trader.

>>10525756
People were buying thousands of ETH two years ago too.
Most of them sold at something like $10 or $30.

>>10524929
You sound like the biggest schizo ever

>>10525548
Never said anything about day 1 ... keep moving the goalposts though.

>>10525691
>only until they release the rest of the coins
they wont be releasing the rest of the coins you fucking moron. they do straight to industrial partners for staking you mong.

>>10525784
you sound like the kinda retart pajeet what forgets his favorite toilet seat on the street and gets ran over by an elephant stampede and spends all night crying about it. waaa. waaaaaa.

>>10525512
...

>>10525756
You're assuming the whole crypto marketcap doesn't move from now until mainnet also. Please kys and stop lowering the collective IQ of biz.

>>10525780
the difference is eth can actually reach 500

chainlink can not in the current crypto market

its impossible.

>>10525821
People said that about eth too, dingus

>>10525821
>the difference is eth can actually reach 500
Thanks, captain hindsight.

>chainlink can not
Thanks, captain trenchbrain.

>>10525810
nodes dont require any link to operate the whole coin is a fabrication

>>10525832
just look at the numbers yourself

this chart was made during the bubble and were way below that now

>>10524917
>>10525755

>>10525845
Sure you can run nodes without Link, but you're not getting any of the contracts that require staking.

>>10525512
>>10525519
>>10525546
>>10525589
>>10525691
>>10525756
>>10525821
Please do not respond to the obvious homo in this thread

>>10524917
It's been confirmed time and time again by people on the team, that it takes no LINK to run a node, so the idea that 'most LINK will be locked up in nodes' is not true. If anything it'll be the opposite, with LINK constantly hitting the market as node operators get payout.

So it seems safe to say that the total supply will actually be pretty similar to the circulating supply. Even throwing LINKies a bone and saying circulating supply is 750 million, that means to reach just $10 it would need a market cap of 7.5 billion dollars, aka a x75 of value. Generous growth in any market, impossible in a bear market. $100? 75 BILLION DOLLARS. The same currently as ETH, XRP, BCASH, and EOS put together.

As for $1000 EOY? Now that is the saddest story of all. Conjured up by little LINK corporals that want to be multi millionaires, and little Linklets that want to be any kind of millionaire. There's no other reason to dream of such a ludicrous price that only a handful of coins could even reach during the greatest crypto bullrun of our times, let alone one with such a huge supply. The only coin I've named with a similar supply to LINK is EOS, which barely broke $20 at it's peak. Enough for the whales of /biz/ to turn a nice profit (assuming even that happens), but gives just scraps for all the Linklets they've deluded along the way. If you aren't following the math by now, it's a 750 billion marketcap by the way. Just shy of a trillion dollars by itself, not even including the rest of the crypto market. Worth almost as much as Apple... Jesus christ this would be sad if it weren't so FUNNY

>>10525870
nobody is going to magically pick up a contract from a serious business its all going to be run by companies running their own nodes

they dont need you

>>10525845
>that meme chart

>>10525896

>>10525755

>>10525906
>companies running their own nodes
So they're going to engage in smart contracts with themselves?

>>10525756
Your grammatical tenses don’t match Sanjay.

>>10525845
>nodes dont require any link to operate
>nobody is going to magically pick up a contract from a serious business its all going to be run by companies running their own nodes

you have no idea of how this thing is going to be implemented. if youre gonna fud, at least educate yourself to entry-level pajeet tier.

>>10525896
>hurrrr you can run nodes without Link so it's useless
You can walk around without shoes too, but you're not going to go everywhere people with shoes can go.

>>10525935
1kEOY checkem 9s

>>10525948
buying chainlink is like buying apple stock today

the market cap is already so huge that youre only looking at a small amount of gains at best

its like buying bitcoin right now. it might reach 10,000 but that would only be a 20% gain

thats why you have people throwing tens of thousands of dollars in chainlink for a chance at making it because you have to

$2.50 eoy you better have no less then 500k link to make it

>>10525811

>>10525996
>Chainlink
>huge market cap
Look at the top 100 and see all the literal shitcoins that outrank Chainlink.

You are delusional.

>>10526020
btw if you have enough money to buy 500k link youve already made it

so effectively chainlink is going to do absolutely nothing for anybody

>Look at the top 100 and see all the literal shitcoins that outrank Chainlink.

look how quick chainlink past all of them at ONLY .30 CENTS

can you imagine if it went to .50 cents it would probably be a top 10 coin and be at the absolute pinnacle

>>10525512
>>10525519
Both of these predictions I’m fine with. $2 would be cool and $3 would be insane.

>>10526055
ya because youre an idiot with like 100 grand invested

>>10526047
reddit spacing your fud. bullish af. 1000 eoy. we're all gon make it lads.

>>10525870
The client decides which nodes it will want to use, also a node can set up a price for it's usage. If, for example, a node with 0 LINK asks a fee of 2 cents, it's going to get way more contracts than a node with 20k LINK that asks a fee of 5 cents.

>>10526047
>btw if you have enough money to buy 500k link youve already made it
Well yes.
The more money you have in something, the sooner you actually make good money, and the sooner you're going to sell during a pump or general rally.

Very very very VERY few people with tens or hundreds of thousands of ETH from back in the day held most of their ETH all the way to $1200.
The overwhelming majority sold way earlier because they already made it much earlier.

>>10526104
ya but theres a cap

you cant just say hurr chainlink will keep going up forever till 1000

why not 80,000 then

well the truth is the cap is like 10$

>>10526047
>look how quick chainlink past all of them at >can you imagine if it went to .50 cents it would probably be a top 10 coin
Rank 56, actually.
And that's at the bottom of a 7-month general crypto crash.

>>10525906

They do if they want to avoid sybil attacks . Have you even read the whitepaper?

>>10524961
>EVERY coin that had it's mainnet released dumped.
Then you reply
>>10525221
>LINK mainnet will have companies like SWIFT, Salesforce, Accord project, ready to run API's
>ready to run API's
>Other main-nets had no one using them.
Literally implying that companies are ready to use Chainlink as soon as possible. Literally implying that this main net release is different than any other in the history of ICOs because there are big companies waiting for it - every other main net launch in crypto world was a dumping shitfest full of disappointment but Chainlink is different just because some larpers on anonymous forum said Fortune 500 companies are secretly involved with Chainlink.
>>10525792
Who's moving goal posts now nigger?
Nobody will use your piece of shit bagholding oracle network. Fuck off.

>>10526135
i was exaggerating but you get the point

by the time chainlink is worth a few bucks itll already be top 10

with no more room for growth. sadly.

>>10526139
>sybil attacks

omg im so scared!
sounds scary!

>>10526135
The bottom is yet to come. People are just throwing money on LINK right now as a safeguard because it's one of few coins in binance that's not bleeding to death.

>>10525493
Thank you for this. I'm astounded by the retards here who put mcap as the most important factor Worse is when they try to compare crypto mcaps to corporate mcaps.

>>10526098
>The client decides which nodes it will want to use
Well yes.
The client also decides how much Link nodes should put in escrow as guarantee.

>If, for example, a node with 0 LINK asks a fee of 2 cents, it's going to get way more contracts than a node with 20k LINK that asks a fee of 5 cents.
Bullshit.

>>10526177
all i know is that would be a highly unlikely meme if chainlink was above bitcoin or ethereum on coinmarketcap.com

so realistically under 50$ eoy and only 18$ if all the coins get released

market cap is a real estimate because it cant beat bitcoin at its own game really

>>10526104
it's people selling early that drives the price up over time. if there are people buying LINK at $3, their exit position becomes $30. then those buying at $30 have an exit position of $100 etc. people cashing out is a driver of inflation for a project with real world application (unlike btc, which is purely speculative).

>>10526136
>well the truth is the cap is like 10$
t. your ass

>>10526198
and thats implying everything goes to plan perfectly and chainlink doesnt just outright die

under 50 eoy 100% guaranteed

>>10526237
$49 eoy would be insane. LINK will be $100 Q2 2019, but probably sub-$10 eoy this year. people seem to forget how compound growth works.

>>10526256
when i say eoy i mean ever

i dont mean literally end of year


2.50 maximum for this year if everything is released

50$ is the max it can ever be

unless youre predicting the future and saying that coins are going to grow altogether

which why wouldnt you just long bitcoin then if you honestly believe that

>>10526197
>Bullshit.

Not really, we have no way of predicting the future yet but I'm sure most clients will set a very low maximum fee that high-LINK nodes won't accept.

>>10526256
This sort of thinking is a slippery slope to squatting over a toilet seat on a street in midtown mumbai on a Thursday afternoon during monsoon season.

>>10526163
>by the time chainlink is worth a few bucks itll already be top 10
>with no more room for growth. sadly.
Link has to be $7 to be rank 10.
To be rank 3 Link has to be $50.
To be rank 2 Link has to be $120.
You think there's "no room for growth" between $7 and $50?
Also, we're at the tail end of a 7-month bear market.

>>10526269
i just remembered; it's summer, and the kids are off school. my apologies.

>>10526205
Absolutely.

>>10526269
“Why wouldn’t you gamble your money away if you think the market in general will uptrend”
God you’re fucking retarded

>>10526287
theres room for growth but thats what ive been saying maximum 50$ ever for chainlink

if you have a prediction it can never be more than 50$ in any year

and thats if everything went flawlessly to plan everything went perfectly just as everyone on biz predicted and we reach #3 coin miraculously see >>10526269

>>10526146

Go take your medicine, you aren't even arguing in good faith. I don't need to imply it when LINK is on the IC3 website and being partnered with Accord project.

Plz come back before you KYS when LINK makes it.

>>10526340
>Plz come back before you KYS when LINK makes it.
this isnt even a joke. everyone should hold some LINK for suicide insurance. the pain will be real when LINK moons.

>>10526284
>clients will want to pay as little as possible
Wow, you're smart.

>that high-LINK nodes won't accept
Wow, you can see the future.

Link staked on contracts by nodes is refunded entirely at favorable completion.
What high-profile client is going to trust a node that is unwilling to temporarily escrow some money as a guarantee for their performance?

>>10524917
>>10526106

>>10526332
>maximum 50$ ever for chainlink
t. your ass

>>10526340
>Go take your medicine
Lay off the plebbit koolaid
>partnered with Accord project
They literally said any oracle project can apply and this is not an exclusive partnership. Same goes for any Hyperledger connections. This isn't some big news, anyone can join and contribute to the ecosystem of those projects.
Partnerships don't mean shit anymore, this isn't 2017 bull market. Let me know when some of these companies actually START USING the network.

>>10526286
It's how I wound up here, that's for sure.

>>10526426
>retard too stupid to connect the dots

Stay poor

>>10526426
>They literally said any oracle project can apply
Of course.
Any company will change suppliers if the deal is better, are you a brainlet or something?

The point is that Accord came out specifically saying they're going to be working with Chainlink.

>>10526444
>>10526446
>August 2017
>just connect the dots bro xD
>August 2018
>just connect the dots bro xD

>specifically saying they're going to be working with Chainlink.
Then afterwards specifically saying that this is a community project, and like you said yourself, could change suppliers if the deal is better.

I connected the dots in October and sold this meme token I bought in the presale right after SIBOS, you keep connecting those dots buddy. 30 cents EOY.

>>10526588
>he can‘t see the bigger picture
and thats why you will remain poor.

>>10524917
These fucking threads. It's going to be 1-10trillion, from eoy-2020

>>10526332
How would you capitalize on smart contract revolution? (How would you have capitalized on the internets revolution back in the day?) Dell was a startup one time if you put 10k in their iPo you’d have 10MM. What other companies would you invest in if you honestly believed smart contracts were the future?

>>10525916
>a table is a chart

>>10526588
>Then afterwards specifically saying that this is a community project
They said as much when they announced that they would be working with Chainlink:
"It is intended that this is one of many such collaborations to improve the process of bringing real-world data into legal contracts."

You're just a brainlet.

> like you said yourself, could change suppliers if the deal is better.
This came as a surprise to you?
It's how business works.

everyone stop asking the price of LINK. Stop doing research about what the price of LINK will be.

LINK will be $1000 end of year and kek proves it with these digits. This is all the proof you need.

>>10526619
>What other companies would you invest in if you honestly believed smart contracts were the future?
decent blockchain technology, some AI stuff (tho i feel AI in the crypto space is well under-realised at the moment)

>>10524917

>>10526651
None of this shit can work without decentralized trustless oracles.

Chainlink is the most important investment, from there on you move profits into bluechip cryptos that will grow thanks to chainlink.

>>10526608
>unironically replying with another "connect the dots"
Guess I expected too much from braindead bagholders

>>10526634
No, what came as a surprise is how you instantly equated those sentences with "they'll be using Chainlink 100%" while saying that there's a chance they might not use them at all
>Any company will change suppliers if the deal is better
>Accord came out specifically saying they're going to be working with Chainlink
Contradictory statement just one sentence later
Also
>working with in development phase /= using the finished product

>>10526703
>what came as a surprise is how you instantly equated those sentences with "they'll be using Chainlink 100%"
They literally said they were going to be using Chainlink.
Are you brain damaged?

>working with in development phase /= using the finished product
Oh I get it, you're just coping H A R D

Sorry about your trenchbrain.

>>10526703
building an oracle isnt like opening a fucking corner shop grocery. there isnt any competition to LINK, and wont be for a long time, if ever. and dont give me "mobius, sir", cos that just proves how shit the competition is.

the truth is crypto is a joke, excpet for LINK. it's the only project holding this entire edifice up. if you cant fathom this, i dont even know what youre doing here. srsly, this isnt for you if you dodnt see what LINK is doing.

>>10526703
You're probably going to disappear or something, so let me be crystal clear:

Accord literally said in the collaboration announcement that they were going to be using a "Chainlink Oracle", which obviously refers to them using the finished product.

>>10526714
>Due to these requirements, the Project is pleased to announce that ChainLink, a leading provider of secure oracle services, will develop support for the Accord Project specification. For example, standardized Accord Project service-level-agreements for a ChainLink oracle could be enforced by a smart legal contract using performance data from the source ledger. It is intended that this is one of many such collaborations to improve the process of bringing real-world data into legal contracts.

>will develop support for the Accord Project specification
>will develop support for specification
>It is intended that this is one of many such collaborations to improve the process of bringing real-world data into legal contracts.
>is one of many such collaborations to improve the process of bringing real-world data
Wow it really does sound like these guys put their faith into Chainlink one hundred percent. I bet they're counting the days until the mainnet is launched or else their project will fail without this crucial component.
It's literally the same as developing support for Hyperledger, it means jack shit, many projects have done it.

>>10526779
There is competition. It's just that you can't hoard meme tokens for those networks and thus you didn't do any research into it because you personally cannot profit from it.
>inb4 is it decentralized like chainlink???

>>10526832
>Wow it really does sound like these guys put their faith into Chainlink one hundred percent.
Enough to publicly announce that they'll be using Chainlink.

>There is competition.
No shit lol.
How does that change the fact that Accord said they'd be using Chainlink?

>>10526868
The people at Accord MUST have a ball park guess from CL team on when the project will go live.... Otherwise when even bother with the update that they will be using it.

>>10526868
>that they'll be using Chainlink.
>they were going to be using a "Chainlink Oracle"
CTRL + F Chainlink Oracle brings us to the paragraph I copy pasted above.
As I said, it's just about building support and an example of how it could potentially work. Then at the end of that same paragraph it says that this is one of many collaborations that improve the process of bringing real-world data.

Nowhere does it say that Chainlink will be a sure thing for their project in the future. Even if they supported Chainlink, it would be one of many options that customers could choose from to run their smart contracts on. Just like Hyperledger, just because they built support for it, doesn't mean that Hyperledger doesn't have 5 other solutions that can bring in real-world data.
It's literally a mediocre announcement at best and linkies are making a big deal out of it. Making screenshots of every single company logo that ever had any contact with Accord saying "look at these companies, they will all use Chainlink, $1000 EOY".
L M A O

>>10526981
>it's just about building support and an example of how it could potentially work
It's literally Accord giving an example of how they're going to be using Chainlink.

>b-b-but they didn't say it was a sure thing!
Me not fucking you up the colon after drugging your hot pockets tonight also isn't a sure thing.

>>10525821
Cringed and screencapped for future reference

>>10526332
>theres room for growth but thats what ive been saying maximum 50$ ever for chainlink
That's assuming that the market remains at current levels for the rest of eternity. If the market actually goes into the trillions like predicted and if chainlink does deliver big on its promises, it could easily hit over $100 or more.

$1000 END OF YEAR!