/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>15610918
Died after bitgrail. It’s a reddit scam

>>15610918
yes

>>15610918
For the last time NO
Stop making these fucking threads. You lost your money, get over it.

>>15610971
give me a real answer other then 'lawl nanofags were scamed'

Yes, 0 fees, instant transfer.

>>15610994
Currency coins are worthless. It's been explained by many people on this board everytime this coin comes up.
If a coin like IOTA or ETH, something that has an actual use in their network, they become more of a commodity like oil and will have a value due to their usefulness.
Nano and other pure currency coins will be an unnecessary third layer payment system, basically paypal but cheaper. Completely uselss i'm afraid.

>>15611066
>explained by many people on this board
as everyone here knows, always do the opposite /biz/ says.

>>15611050
^
Once you understand inflation, you start to understand nano

>>15611134
People talk shit on biz yes. I would like to hear sound reasoning as to why this won't be the case because i cannot see why it wouldn't be.

>>15611189
you already got rekt last time...
use =! value

>>15610971
>>15610994

>>15611175
Silly comment. Nano does not have an ecosystem backing it. It will not escape the effects of inflation because all it can be used for is purchasing goods that will be priced through a system that is effected by inflation.
>>15611226
I assume you've met this point of view in another thread? Use very much does provide a stability to value. Gas would have no value if it had no use, unless you are suggesting that nano gains its value from some sort of collectible or nostalgic market like pokemon cards or pogs then it is worthless i'm afraid.

Nano is ok. Only crypto with an actual use case.

The future of NANO is it bleeding to zero. Now go back

>>15611307
what's the use of art?

and btw. nano has an use. easy, instant and free payments. but anyways, your point is still invalid.

>>15611358
Art is widely known as essentially a money laundering/tax evasion scheme at best it is a form of investment if thd painting has historical or cultural significance. Lower priced Art is i suppose only decorative. But are you really trying say that, what you are hoping to be, the next step in financial evolution will have the same basis of value as a low skilled/insignificant painting.
Not a strong argument.

>>15611445
no, what i'm saying is that your argument that value only exists with use is factually wrong.

>>15611567
Still not proved me wrong in any meaningful sense, only a trivial example of people buying decorations.
Infact all you've proven is NANO would be more legitimate if it was backed by Pokemon cards.

>>15611703

of course i have. your problem is not understanding it. if use would define value there would be no reason having different brands for the same product. why is a 60 year old scotch more worth than 5 year old? for obvious reasons but has the same use.

that's why you were called a commie last time, you retard.

>>15611066
ETH can't scale and IOTA is a centralized scam.

>>15611817
Serving two different audiences (cheap whiskey drinkers and wealthy connoisseurs) is actually 2 different uses in the sense of running a business, your example is retarded, doesn't apply here, and you are an idiot

>>15611858
it's the same use, don't get retarded, retard.

>>15611858
>>15611869
What gives something value is utility + scarcity. It's called The Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility.

NANO has both utility and scarcity,

>>15611869
>comparing whiskey to cryptography
i-d-i-o-t

>>15611915
where did i compare it?

only linktards can be this retarded

No incentives to run a node and it's WAY behind all the other pure currency coins in terms of branding.

>>15611955
It's only behind Bitcoin in branding. Maybe Dash.
And what I don't get is what the fuck is the incentive to run a Lightning Network node? Nothing.

>>15611817
Too stupid to argue with. You have obviously argued the point with someone else and i'm sure they think you're as much of a tit as i do.
Your examples stray away from any actual discussion about how there is no ecosytem that NANO is providing use to, therefore it cannot compete with a useful token that is soughtafter and needed, yet will perform the same function.
You are free to believe the contrary but i think you'd be daft to do so.
>>15611855
I'm sorry you went all in on LIT

>>15611904
It has a userped utility. It is going down with paypal and all other 3rd party payment processers

>>15612386
>let's call him stupid because i have no more arguments after getting rekt once again

use =! value

fact.

your marxist economics is a proven failure, just accept it.

>>15612364
Retard. It's way behind Litecoin to.

>>15610918

Its created out of thin air, what do you expect.

Every BTC in circulation has at least its POW backed value behind it ( energy and hardware cost )

>>15612502
Boring moron. Lose weight, have sex.

>>15612364
Literally even fucking dogecoin is more used than nano and has a bigger brand than nano. It's way behind more than just bitcoin and litecoin. Even DGB is more known than nano and it's below it at the moment in marketcap.

>>15612517
>>15612583
Why did you respond twice? I think once would have been enough...you know, consolidate?

Sure, I guess Litecoin - I'll give you that...I keep forgetting about that shit. And Monero is cool.

If crypto is here to stay (at least for the next 20 years. BTC will most likely be king. It will only ever be used as a store of value or very large transactions. So maybe crypto will only ever be used as a store of value and then a few other applications that like Eth and Link could be used for, who knows.

But if a crypto is ever going to be used as a currency, something like Nano must exist. Maybe it'll be something else, newer, down the line. But sure as hell won't be Litecoin, or Monero or DGB or any of the other shit out there right now. That's why I'm putting (some of) my money on Nano.

Hey if I lose that money, whatever. I still think Nano and Link outpace anything else in the current top 100 in the next few years.

>>15612789
Kek. This post reeks of the most obvious cope and no research done at all over the bear market until now.

>>15612884
Cope of what?

>>15612789
To be fair man, if this is your alley, go all in XRP and forget about it. Nano is just straight garbage at this point. Why? We already know who the winners are essentially, go pick them up while they are cheap.

But literally, XRP is the technically superior coin with real adoption (being used by actual big companies to save cost and settle currencies), top 3 forever, and will likely retain its dominance for the foreseeable future. Nano was a 2017 community pump and dump, no real companies or institutions worth a penny would even consider such a coin.

Let me know if you need anything else

>>15612999
>>15612999
XRP? Really? I don't see this ever outperforming BTC.

Hey, Nano is just a bet for me. Might be a bad bet, I don't care.

The only sure bet in this market is to swing trade and increase your BTC stack. I did well in the past 5 months on Vidt, Bomb, Dusk, Vid. I fucked up with Fantom, should've sold after the Binance listing - and Link, should've sold after CB.

That's okay though. I gotta learn when to sell.

Otherwise, I won't really touch the top 100. Maybe Eth or XMR.

>>15612999
>XRP

found the newfag

>>15612999

All you have to say is XRP and we all know your full of shit. XRP has nothing going for it and if you're better on XRP you should lose all your money.

>>15613099
Just telling you how it is.

>>15613103
>>15613172
Classic biz, never learn. The fact you said xrp has nothing going for it tells me you know jack shit. But that’s okay, it’s quite simple, there are leaders and followers. You two are followers.