/biz/ - Business & Finance

It won't because it's a scam, the bigger the better. DO NOT BUY.
Instead for gains, consider SENT or XRP.

I just need $50.

Even a 10k stack would become 500k.

>>15278145

Exact same thread again?

>>15278145
this is links version of the hodl meme. stop questioning it retards.

>>15278145
It would require an insane adoption. Market cap is a meme, you're talking about an asset class which is new to the world and is essentially just a mechanism for money to flow through the product, so the market cap inherently should be equal to at minimum the amount of money flowing through & more likely some multiple of that based on staking returns and projected growth of usage.

I'd anticipate somewhere between a 3-10x multiple, so if you have $100B flowing through LINK nodes for smart contracts you could potentially have $1,000/token.

Here's the thing: $1,000/token is actually probably fud if LINK sees mainstream adoption, but the probability of mainstream adoption is incredibly low. It's a very high risk / high reward play. It's probably the best risk:reward ratio in crypto, though.

>>15278145
it happens in 5 years after everyone here already an heroed

>>15278145
Dude, 1k is the conservative estimate of Links price. The "insane levels of adoption" estimate for Link is over 10k. The math for derivatives, ISDA and insurance has already been done before you even knew what Link was faggot.

>>15278145
Linkies will bail at 20 anyway like >>15278170. LINK would need a 1T mcap, this would be possible if LINK becomes a blue chip and BTC reaches a mil per coin

>>15278214
Yes everyone is banking on mainnstream adoption and link being the pillar of the 4ir but unless we dont see some fucking big partnerships announced we're going to be holding our limp cocks anticipating singularity for a very long time. End of this year will give us a clearer picture of where link is headed heck I think we september is good enough to judge its future.

Alright linktards, stop pulling my fucking chain is it worth jumping in with $500-$1000 bucks on this or not. It’s all I’m willing to bet on this for the time being because swinging bitcoin is really doing well atm, but obviously I’m more than willing to buy back in at 3,4,5 even. I’ve seen a few of Sergeys presentations and it seems to me like this is the real deal, maybe I’m a complete brainlet but this shit sounds pretty remarkable. Somebody who is already balls deep in chainlink lmk why you yourself are in and I hope it’s not cause /biz/ told you to

>>15278252
Can somebody explain to me the value of a chainlink token? They’re needed to make the contracts work out correctly no? I’m not too sure on what the token means but what I got from sergey speaking about it was that it’s pretty much them distributing stock

As Blaster mentioned several individuals and Fintech firms were accumulating LINK by the millions more than a year and a half ago. Those are people we know about. Bizraelites own tens of millions of LINK and we’re just small fish. Now you add in major corporations, start ups, etc. who will be receiving 10s of millions of link directly from Sergey, and you also must consider that Sergey will be conservative distributing tokens so that the network remains Decentralized. Then you add in staking and a speculative bubble once the world figures out what smart contracts are. The circulating supply, whatever it is, will be chewed through pretty fast. I’m not saying it’s going to $1k anytime soon, but I expect triple digits in the next two years.

>>15278327
The token acts as collateral for the value passing through the contract.

>>15278297
>1k
Yes dump your lunch money in. Your not getting a personalized shill post just for 1k though kek.

Sometimes I just have to say something. Please, for your own good, compare the clients and partnerships that are confirmed and how much is under nda for chainlink and quant. Then decide for yourself who is on the verge of mass adoption. Then look at the marketcap and total supply and think for yourself, which is more likely to hit 1K in the future. I know it's a bit of work, and to whatever conclusion you come, you will be bombarded with fud. Just think for yourself.

>>15278327
For every data call there is a fee to pay that goes to the node operator. A node is stacked with collateral (which can vary), if it fucks up and delivers shitty data it has to pay a collateral.

>>15278252
this assumes that every token is on the open market, we have no idea how many will be tied up in staking and so forth. with 350M circulating like now you only need 350B mcap. Probably 75k BTC would do it if Link made it to the 2 or 3 spot and saw good adoption

I hold 10k link. But it will never be worth more than it is now. I will be poor forever. We will all be poor forever except for those that made it before us. Nobody will ever make it again. We all missed out on the last bull runs. The normie money and new money came and went. It's all gone and people are too scared to invest in crypto. BTC won't pump past 20k. Link will never break 5 dollars. We should all kms. Kys. I'm sad bros. My IQ is average and not good enough to do some random internet shit for 150 k a year like hi IQ people can. I have to wage slave for shekels forever until I do. Never to pursue any other Dreams.

Rip lads.

Dr;ns

>>15278482
Kill yourself so your Link becomes burned then faggot.

>>15278473
Yeah, my premise was the whole supply and that BTC stays market dominant. But if BTC reaches 75k at 50% dominance, that would mean LINK having 20% market dominance for 1k at 350mil supply, which would be neat but unlikely. There's still ETH, LTC etc.

>>15278549
remarkably similar figures to Asuka for both link and btc

>>15278267
if you're not willing to wait at least a couple more years, link is not for you

>>15278145
the answer is only the absolutely deranged mentally ill anons believe it, the others are saying it for the memes and to pump it by dumping on newfags.
link is a shitcoin like any other and will be gone from top 50 in a year.

>>15278145
Or it would require the USD to get 'Babwe'd

>>15278734
That's just an edit of the BTC prediction

>>15278145
FU;NS

pee pee poo poo

How the fuck could OP have sex?

That would require him to leave his mother's basement, for girls to find him attractive, etc.

>>15278927
I assumed that was probably the case but it's good hopium anyway

>>15278145
Btc has zero uses, and costs hundreds or thousands (and takes hours)per transaction if actually used.

SC will eliminate half of human jobs overnight. What has more value?

>>15278248
you people are truly delusional if you believe big institutions would use a highly volatile erc20 token basically completely controlled by a russian philosophy major as a collateral for multi-billion credit derivates

>>15279037
Google and Oracle have already expressed interest in using it you fucking moron.

>>15279069
And SWIFT

>>15279069
> muh google partnership
they (a developer, not the google CEO) made a blogpost about using it with bigquery. They didn't say they will use it for their multi-billion derivative swaps.

Speaking of LINK $1000, does that estimate take into account the growth of BTC too?

>>15279090
Okay thanks for trying to FUD Pajeet.

>>15279097
> can't refute
> starts to scream pajeet and fud
alright, prime specimen of a angry bagholder we got here

>>15279092
Nobody needs bitcoin. LINK on the other hand is needed if DLT find more adoption

>>15279113
Bought at 16 cents.

>>15279143
He is not wrong. There is no classic contractual partnership. But alphabet has also no partnership with the internet, neither has microsoft or oracle

>>15279133
thats bullshit. many people need bitcoin.

>>15279037
none of that will matter. When a CEO see the competition saving hundreds of millions annually using chainlink he'll say get us on that shit yesterday or you're fired. It only takes one. Sergey's own words.

>>15279272
We're gonna make it, like next month.

>>15278970
Its based on btc numbers predicted and market dominance as stated in the original asuka prophecy

I only invested for the camorardarie

>>15279272
I'll believe it when I see it. I just don't think any company would ever risk setting up a multi-billion contract which completely depends on that a API delivers correct results.

>>15278267
Partnerships are irrelevant. Any company can use Link without being a "partner". Network usage matters

>>15279272
>Sergey's own words.
kek he trusts Sergey's word when he literally been lying about a Swift partnership since 2016

>>15278167
>consider XRP
How the fuck could you make it?

>>15279372
imagine telling a ceo 25 years ago about moving hundreds of millions annually over the internet. they probably would have laughed too. technology changes. the market demands that businesses change with it or they get left in the dust

>>15279435
Kek. Get a load of this faggot