/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>11635803
It revolves around the idea of staking and tokens being taken into nodes

>>11635803
Link is shit

microsoft made computers usable for everyone, chainlink will make blockchain usable for everyone. is it really such a stretch?

>>11635819
So each of their 5% will be used to stake nodes? What is to keep them from exiting with their link after it moons? Doesn't this require us to trust the founders to not exit scam?

>>11635842
This makes me feel better and sort of what I was thinking.

People thought Gates and Jobs were jokes based on their ideas and appearance. Same with Google, FB, amazon, etc. So why not Sergey and the others

>>11635843
God you are dumb read the white paper newfag

>>11635803
Vitalik sold a lot of ethereum when it was worth like 10.
This is a non issue. They would likey sell a lot of their link to have liquidity. And it wont hit 1000

>>11635933
So what's the ATH price you expect?

>>11635803
Who do you think is richer: Jeff Bezos or Tim Berners Lee?

>>11635803
They will not all hold their link and never cash out any OP. The number of Link holders will dramatically increase. As was the case with Bitcoin and Ethereum and others as the prices increased - many sold when it doubled, tripled, and 10x and then when it 50x, and so on. It would take an incredibly confident Anon to hold billions in Link and never cash out any to another asset or currency. Hopefully you can understand now and others will understand as well.

>>11635803
If LINK reaches Eth's peak mcap that would be $100 per token.
There is no reason to assume that there will ever be a crypto bullrun like 2017 again, that WAS the mania phase. Even with huge adoption the public are now too traumatised after getting raped by media shills.
$100 is the absolute top. $3 would be a success.

>>11635803
you really think a serious business owner would sell all his company assets?

no they wont...

>>11635843
Why doesn't Jeff Bezos just sell all his Amazon stock? What is stopping him from just calling it quits since it already mooned?

>>11636037
chainlink isn't in any way limited to the crypto market or ethereum though.

>>11635803
>$1000 per link seems likely after mainnet

what connection to the derivatives market?

>>11635977
Checked !

>>11636215
You’re right. He should have said “certain”, not likely.

>>11636074
Your point is well taken, but it's imporant for brainlets to realzie the network value model is completely different than evaluating traditional assets. Chainlink is completely uncharted waters.

The only question is whether or not it gains mainstream adoption, which no crypto has done before. LINK looks to be primed and ready to deliver on this, and if it does, it's valuation will be off the charts. The network will have trillions of dollars flowing through it every single day, with each entity that creates a smart contract paying a fee to the guys who are currently shitposting on this board every day. It's not going to happen overnight, but should Chainlink actually work in the real world, even poorfags with sub 100 LINK stacks are going to be very well off.

>>11636179
Of course it's limited to the crypto market, you can't just declare yourself not a crypto.
Listen, mcaps mean nothing, the calculations are broken. If someone buys one link for 10k does that make serg the richest guy in history? No. But last year was peak public delusion, so it stands to reason that that's about the bounds of valuation.

>>11636037
Hard to take advice from someone who can't do basic arithmetic. ETH peak mcap would be the equivalent of $400 in chainlink and it would be ~$1000 for the BTC mcap. If you ever looked at the size of BTC to the ENTIRE derivative market you would realize that ALL of peak BTC is a drop in the bucket for the market that chainlink is growing into. Why do you post so confidently when you don't even know the basics?

>>11635803
think xrp founders during bullrun anon

Chainlink won't be higher than $5 EVER.

>>11636810
>>11636810
Yea I'm sure $5/LINK will be more than enough as sufficient collateral for the quadrillion dollar derivatives market lmao

>>11636603
This.

>>11636471
This guy is a brainlet that can't do math. Look at the derivatives chart for some perspective if you thought this past year was the "peak". the bubble burst but this is the beginning sort of like the mid 90s with the internet.

>>11636810
How are you this stupid?

See:
>>11636895
>>11636603

>>11635803
>I hodl chainlink and looking at the market, $1000 per link seems likely after mainnet

literally everything dumps after mainnet release. this will be especially true for chainlink, since the founder has no programmin backround.
link 0,01$ after mainnet.

>>11637050
>the founder has no programmin backround

bullish as fuck

>>11635803
>I hodl chainlink and looking at the market, $1000 per link seems likely

Kys brainlet, its basic mathematics, why people do crypto when they can't even get a degree?

1000$ link= 1 trillion market cap, wtf you are literally retarded

>>11637050
Steve Jobs had no programming background.

>>11637083
This. It's mathetically impossible for X to reach Y marketcap because it's just unthinkable.

Didn't the SEC suggest crypto could be worth almost 10 trillion by 2020? It will be like smartphones all over again...market share will explode

>>11637083
I should ignore this brainlet post. Do some math, you lesser being and talk to me when you have some form of an education.

>>11637083
$300-$400 billion (also the BTC mcap peak) you absolute brainlet. (Available, not total supply)

its this simple retards:
if the network fails its worthless
if it launches and is used for hobby shit, link drops
if it launches and is used for 10% of the overall vision, links are worth $10-100 each
if it launches and does everything theyve set out to do the networks worth will be measured in the trillions by the time they onboard all of those use cases

none of you idiots have been down this road before
big hard problems with smart hardworking people taking them on
youre lucky you get to be a part
sit back, relax and enjoy the show

holy shit i hold link too but the delusion that you guys are showing is beyond me. guess we already attracted some moon boys like people that think ripple will hit 1000$ per coin. mother fuckers can you even think ? stop deluding yourselfs

>>11637555
>he still doesn't understand what chainlink does

comfy as fuck desu and won't ever fuckin sell

>>11635828
THIS!!
FUCK YOU LINKIES RRREEEE

>>11637555
You only give away you're own stupidity.

Let's play a game...What do you think is a realistic peak for chainlink?

>>11637617
If (IF!!) LINK truly moons I expect it to reach $5. It is impossible for a link token to be worth more than that. We have whales on biz with more than 2 million link. Do you really think one guy from biz will have 2000000 x $1000? Absolutely deluded.

>>11637360
point #3 is incorrect. at 10% market share of even derivatives it would easily surpass $100. Otherwise yes, most of us are betting they will succeed on their vision outlined in the whitepaper

>>11636238
Look into the ISDA and Wall Street Blockchain Alliance connections to chainlink.

>>11637667
Do I think someone on /biz/ who spent ~500k to 1mill dollars in chainlink will be worth 2 billion? Yes. That seems very possible considering there are only ~3000 wallets that will become multimillionaires and this is consistent with what has happened with BTC and ETH. Keep in mind that 3000 people becoming multimillionaires overnight across the world is not unrealistic at all. Money breeds money and someone who can throw away 500K USD on internet monopoly money is not far off from being worth 2 billion in 5-10 years.

>>11637695
just more stupidity that doesnt understand how the real world works
if derivatives are onboarded as a use case, it will be one of the last ones
high value transactions value security over speed or margin
the truly high value transactions wont think of basing their execution on even 1000 nodes input unless the network has been up and running flawlessly for a few years

>>11635803
Link is a good investment however there was a runup 5x (ETH) in Price since August. I sold here and wait to reenter at 0.25$

>>11635828
Your a fuckin loser

>>11637740
Agreed, meaning that mainnet launches, and multiple platforms have successfully worked with chainlink and it the derivatives market invests 1% into chainlink YEARS down the road.

I am not saying any of this is certain, I am saying it is possible and not unlikely either. I am also saying this will take time. People who think they are going to wake up and chainlink will be $1000 EOY without any of these things happening seem delusional, but the same is true to believe that it is impossible for chainlink to reach $1000 in 5-10 years if all the check boxes are met. Meaning that the risk/benefit ratio favors investing and hodling to see what happens...

>>11637667
Once again, BTC peak mcap was $300 BILLION and it is still 1/1,000,000 of the the entire derivatives market. THIS PEAK MCAP WILL CONTINUE TO GROW INTO THE DERIVATIVE MARKET.

Chainlink is currently at ~$150-$200 MILLION mcap. IF chainlink delivers then we are talking about 1000x to get to just the measly peak mcap of BTC in 1/2018 when it was still ONE MILLIONTH the total derivatives market. Chainlink/smart contracts/middleware with decentralized, trustless, insured oracles will expand into that market. It is currently ONE BILLIONTH of the total derivatives market.

What makes you think that (if everything actually works) that getting to 1/1000000 of the market ($500-$1000 per chainlink) would be "impossible"? It seems likely but it will simply take time (~5-10 years).

>>11635947
not OP, but LINK will be worth between 50 to 200 dollars, depending on things. i expect a quick run to ~100 dollars on release of mainnet, hopefully in the next 6 months.

>>11637617
honestly i hope i am wrong. i’d be glad. nah man i don’t want to make random guesses on the price before mainnet is up and we have any clues who is gonna use the network it’s just guessing without further information

>>11637667
You keep saying that but in order to be satisfactory collateral wouldn't it have to be valued based on value being transacted through the smart contracts

>>11637581
you don't understand what chainlink does either, you've just read bullshit napkin valuations scribbled up by larpers and have taken it as fact

>>11637740
What are the use cases that will come before the financial sector? Isn't conditional logic easier to code than something based on real world events that are more complicated like paying insurance via smart contract? I.E. smart contract selling or buying a bond when it hits a certain price?

>>11636810
>>11636895
>>11637013
>>11637083
>>11637137
>>11637315
>>11637667

The mainnet will not be able to serve giantic financial markets without a high token price.

There are many reasons why LINK will succeed but the one that really seals the deal for me is the notion of collateral. The token price will be proportional to the amount of collateral needed across the system. A simplified example would be, say there are only 50,000 LINK tokens in existence (forget the 1 billion tokens, this is a simplification), each worth $1. There are 100 smart contracts each worth $10,000 each on mainnet, so $1,000,000. They want 10% of that as collateral, so that's $100,000. But the total mcap of Chainlink is only $50,000 in this example. The token value must rise to $2 to make up the difference.

Now if you consider the kind of numbers financial markets are dealing with, in the trillions and quadrillions, even tiny fractions of a percent of that being shifted onto a smart contract system, and thus requiring collateral in LINK, gives insane valuations to the LINK token.

Pre-empting responses I've seen to this reasoning before, you might say "but how would the price rise to meet the demand? what mechanism?" it's a stupid question because it's exactly the same as any other coin, simply supply and demand.
Pre-empting another question, yes, it's simplified because we're not taking into account different time frames, but that's the kind of thing you would need to build a mathematical model to account for, and that doesn't make the simplified model invalid at all.
Pic related.

When will mainnet become reality?

I want a bedtime story!

>>11638570
you can zoom in and out of the past performance of eth and imagine it being LINK, or hit random numbers in your calculator and multiply them with your stack. that should keep you busy for the next couple of months

>>11638385
the use case for bonds is bond insurance not bonds themselves
also btc or any crypto of choice can be put up as collateral

>value of total transactions=value of total collateral
I don't even know where you pull this retarded shit from

fuck off with your napkin valuations, stupid ass shill

Just win baby

>>11638385
was this from the teeka larp? that was a fun read

>>11638612
>the use case for bonds is bond insurance not bonds themselves
doesn't matter, the point is that financial markets are absolutely enormous. Bonds, derivatives, whatever.

>also btc or any crypto of choice can be put up as collateral
Wtf? that's not even true, read the wp, educate yourself.

>value of total transactions=value of total collateral
>I don't even know where you pull this retarded shit from
That's an assumption used to simplify the explanation you autistic faggot. You'll notice it was preceded with "IF". The example then goes on to what 10% or 1% of the value as collateral would mean. Obviously a certain percentage of the value of the smart contracts will be required as collateral. If that is 100% then it means the smart contract creator risks absolutely nothing, something that would be very attractive for sure. If it's 50% or 10% they could still lose money if something goes wrong. The point of the worked example is to demonstrate high token valuations based on the size of financial markeys.

Retarded autistic faggots always pick on tiny details and think that makes the whole picture fall apart, but fail to see the bigger picture.

>>11638687
nah its from biz I believe

>>11637879
>i expect a quick run to ~100 dollars on release of mainnet

>>11636603
>>11636994
>link's mcap is 350M
Linkies who can't even read. Unsurprising.

>>11635803
Bill Gates changed business at the DNA level. Sergey plans to do the same. Not that hard to imagine Sergey being that rich if hes successful

>>11637879
>source: your asshole
Nobody knows how to value this shit. Anyone who says LINK will be worth $X is a fucking mouth breather faggot regurgitating nonsense they read on biz when they got here 2 months ago.

>>11635803
Argh serious guys, every link marine who say only 1% of the deravative market should be shot. Its like saying Link will be worth 1% of the total gold market because it can request an API that returns the gold price.

How much is external information input for your smart contract worth.

How much clearing costs do you pay for a deravative. How much is related to price related input.

You don't know so stop calling it


.t 150k linkholder.

>>11638570
Did you know that Joshua Klayman, legal chair of the Wall Street Blockchain Alliance, which is partnered with the freight consortium BiTA and just recently joined the Accord Project to focus on the role of oracles, is also involved with ic3, has talked alongside Ari Juels but is also connecting strong ties to both current and former JP Morgan heads of blockchain, the former having recently attended devcon with her team, where one member showed strong interest in a certain oracle network, and the later having launched her own company which implements a certain ic3 project recently merged and acquisitioned by aforementioned oracle network, but even more interestingly said person is also involved with the legal section of another consortium called the ISDA which represents the interests of an industry which start with q, is worth 1.2 quadrillion usd? Good night fren.

Assblaster and Drunkanon always said expect the price to be $100
Keep accumulating marines, 10k is not enough to make it.

t.110k linkmarine here

This is my biggest concern.
It has been revealed that Chainlink will most likely be working with Digital Assets. See Blythe Masters connection.
Digital Assets is a company that utilizes DLTs, distributed ledger technologies.
If Smart contracts are able to capture 0.1-1% of, for example, the derivatives market, why in the world would companies like Digital Assets just sit there with a thumb up their ass and watch us LINKies scoop up all the profits?
This is my biggest concern. How exactly do the profits made from utilizing blockchain technology going to spill over to companies like digital assets?

>>11639148
People have been theorizing that a lot of the reserve tokens will be given to major partners like swift. Digital asset is a part of this. I think they've been partners from the start but I'm on another level of delusion.

>>11639148
Where the fuck has that been revealed mate. Only some breadcrumbs.
If DA is working with link the pressure from using the network will be huge

Any upcoming conferences or events for LINK, other than the singularity?

>>11638467
soon^tm

>>11639199
https://www.initc3.org/partners.html

also this:
chrome-extension://oemmndcbldboiebfnladdacbdfmadadm/https://www.r3.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Top_Ten_Obstacles_R3.pdf

control+F
town crier

>>11639148
>why in the world would companies like Digital Assets just sit there with a thumb up their ass and watch us LINKies scoop up all the profits?

i have an friend at a big bank who is not allowed to even own cryptos, of any kind, in order to work there. He knows i am involved and changes the subject anytime they are brought up. I think they are all being super careful about insider trading, which is why i am not worried
also >>11639176

The rise of Linkies will be the greatest redistribution of wealth modern society has ever known.

Stay stinky or get LOST, normalfags.

And to even compare Sergey and Bezos is a great insult to the Big Mac king.

$1.00 end of year
$10.00 end of next year
$10,000.00 by 2025

A company's worth doesnt equate to the CEO's net worth fyi. Just because google is a trillion dollar company doesnt mean that the ceo is worth a trillion dollars.

>>11639297
it does in a crypto where the CEO holds 65% of the supply and no obligation to follow through on what he's only hinted at verbally

>>11636895
But how can chainlink rise in price to fulfil the collateral for the NOTIONAL value of all these derivatives contracts? Where will this non existent money required to increase the price come from?

>>11639268
>i have an friend at a big bank who is not allowed to even own cryptos

Man, imagine when LINK moons and your friend gets cucked cause of his wageslave job.

>>11639386
People will buy chainlink either to utilize the oracle for their smartcontracts or in order to stake link in their own nodes, you dunce.

>>11638612
> any crypto can be put up as collateral
Well, technically this is true if a contract is written like this. But an equal dollar value amount of link has to serve as the medium for the exchange.

>>11638932
>thinks total supply=available supply
>nolinkers are illiterate

Colormesurprised.png

>>11635803
why would a company even pay $1000 for a contract lol they can just stick to what there doing now

>>11639104
BULLISH

>>11639148
What is white labeling
What is hosting their own node/pool

>>11639268
Why wouldn't they just open an online bank account to use with crypto?

>>11639617
>company
>$1000 for a contract

We aren't talking about small businesses. We are talking about the derivatives market that uses digital assets. Imagine making a contract for multiple "shmoo" at $100 million. How do you transfer this money digitally, securely, efficiently, without lawyers/middlemen, across the world to another country? Especially if the contract is based upon an "if..then..." statement where a certain condition must be met for the money to be transferred? $1000 is nothing for this.

>>11639690
true but someone said they will use their own derivative token instead of link is there evidence of this?

>>11639753
I could see this. After all chainlink is just a json parser and if you just have an ethereum fork and use the same code as chainlink then you could do it yourself for free.

The only thing chainlink could have is that it would already be established and adopted since it will have been the first.

Sort of like, why doesn't Apple own a copper mine to mine and produce their own copper wholesale since it is cheaper? This is VERY oversimplified but it is inconvenient and it is easier to simply make a deal with people that have experience and the setup for copper mining and processing, etc.

>>11637555
Ha, who the fuck ever said ripple would get to $1000?

>>11638878
it does matter because it entirely ruins any valuation based on "capturing a portion of the bond market"

>>11638612

Omg, no wonder why people like you stay poor. You have no idea of what your talking about. Read the CL whitepaper.

Jeezus, why is the "collateral value" so hard for people to understand.

>>11639246
>https://www.r3.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Top_Ten_Obstacles_R3.pdf

thats fucking massive!

>>11639104

Muhahahahaha yeeeesss!

Where you there at Devcon?

>>11639148
anon you seriously own this much link and can't think abstractly enough to answer your own question? here's your connection:
> https://www.hyperledger.org/about/leadership
> https://youtu.be/X7KU4JOebKk

>>11635803
the richest in the world are (((rothschilds))), no one else is even close to the hundreds of trillions they have.

making billions from new technology is so common the past 20 years, there are hundreds of examples, why is it hard to believe that will continue?

>>11639135
1mil before taxes is pretty legit. no reason you still couldn't raise a family on that, not work, and solely live off interest returns, dividends etc

>>11639832
Well also chainlink will have a highly decentralized network, if someone forks they have to rely on tons of nodes or risk Sybil attacks

>>11639386
From nodes fighting for these smartcontracts to use them.

Part of the tokenomics is that smartcontract creators will not only choose how many nodes, how much LINK collateral and also PAY out these nodes for their sevices. It is the Oracle economy which is unfolding.

I know, its a bit hard to grasp. But to keep it simple. If there is a way for node ownders to make money they will do it. If they need to stack their nodes with 500k to 1M LINK for collateral value to handle smartcontracts of that worth. They will do it.

>>11635803
>why aren't the founders of BTC and Vitalik also worth close to Gates and Buffet?
Why aren't the inventors of the computer and the internet worth as much as Gates and Bezos?
>>11635842
this.

>>11640034
I like it, keep updating and posting it, Marine!

>>11640034
we need an updated version.

After the Town Crier buyout a lot of those unofficial connections are now Official connections. Digital Assets and Microsoft Azure being some of them.

>>11641046
>Digital Assets and Microsoft Azure being some of them
Brainlet here...how are those connections official?

>>11637879
No shot. I’ll be absolutely shocked if link goes above $20 end of 2019

>>11641178

Announced at DevCon4, Chainlink acquires Town Crier.

All of Town Crier tech is now Chainlink proprietary tech. All of Town Crier partners are now Chainlink partners.

This was bigger then most people know. We will hear more about it this month.

>>11641687
This announcement was bigger than Coinbase saying they’re listing link and I don’t think the market understood. My biggest fear is that chainlink might be such an esoteric concept that it stays under the radar forever

>>11635842
This is the reality. Chainlink and Smartcontract.com is another Microsoft, Apple, or Google. Using Chainlink will be a standard protocol for businesses and developers. It will be the oracle solution for at least 3 decades - possibly even longer assuming no reasonable competitor emerges. The system Sergey has engineered could theoretically last for even 100 years or until new tech makes it obsolete. Doesn't really matter tho, the tech will be a viable standard solution to the Oracle Problem in the here and now, and that alone is well worth 10 trillion dollars.

>>11641687
Ic3 isn’t town crier...

>>11641825
No, but Town Crier is an IC3 project.

>>11641731
esoteric concepts tend to stay under normies radar but nothing is too esoteric for big business if it "just werks"

>>11638960
this, shit like >>11638385 's pic related is retarded, and if you don't understand why, so are you.

>>11635803
The Tick says Link will be $115 November 2019

>>11641731
>Chainlink needs a bunch of reddit faggots and twitter niggers to moon
just Stop with this retardation.

>tfw only 5k LINK but don't care; it'll be more than enough to support a family.

>>11642766
You don't want to birth kids with our country being invaded by spics.

The last thing in the world I would want is a daughter getting gangbanged by spics or dating a black dude

>>11637617
10k usd per token

>>11635828
Shut up looser

>>11642766
christcuck breeder AND stinky linky

true darwinism

>>11640058
No it doesn’t matter you autistic retard. You’re getting caught up in irrelevant details. The point is that financial markets are enormous. You can take any subsection of that - bonds, bond insurance, derivatives, whatever - the point is that these numbers are in the trillions and quadrillions. Your nitpicking doesn’t make the overall idea invalid. Replace the word “bond” with “bond insurance” if you think that matters so much.
The point of this valuation is that financial markets are huge and even a small percent of the value of smart contracts dealing with huge sums of money being required as collateral gives insane valuations to the token.