/biz/ - Business & Finance

Linkpool was a good buy at crowdsale, it's an insane gamble at 50ETH.

>>20846245
LP also entitles you to a cut of the fees the entire system generates. I think of the fees generated, linkpool collects 25% of that fee (while the staker/node collects the other 75%). Of that 25% fee though, that's then spread amongst LP holders.

That said, it's way too fucking pricey now to be worth it unless you have 25,000 link or more.

>>20846245
Your best bet is sending your LINK to AAVE and getting a loan to buy some LP. Then sell some LINK at the end of the year to pay off the loan.

Idk either. Got 18k LINKs and about $10k in shitcoins. If my shitcoins go 2x, I might buy half a LP. I'm hoping that at the smartcon some nodes will announce their staking plans.

>>20846572
I might actually do this
>>20846422
>>20846543
the benefits of having the token do seem nice, but yeah I would imagine holding LINK will have greater and more guaranteed profit

>>20846650
>I'm hoping that at the smartcon some nodes will announce their staking plans
good point
I spent so long thinking of what to say to this I give up lol

>>20846245
>do people think it's gonna be more profitable to stake right when it's launched
You are missing part of the point of owning LP shares and that is being entitled to a portion of all Linkpool revenue from market.link, NaaS, the staking pool fees, the eth staking fees and the pooled nodes fees

LP shares are tokenized shares of the LinkPool's company with dividends being shared twice a month.

45k link + 3 LP and im a very comfy boy.
With staking you're gonna want to be as early as possible to collect as many link as possible, because after this is done mooning you'll be collecting 50 link a month instead of 500.

>>20848243
I only have 1 LP for my 50k stinks is that enough LP to be comfy

>>20848348
I just figured staking 30k is better than 10k, but yes, you'll make it. be very comfy.

>>20846245
Sucks to be a US citizen.

>>20846245
BRUH the WHOLE defi scene is using chainlink oracles rn with linkpool being one of the nodes. i literally made .4 link staking in one round of distribution. if i bought link in the same time of the round ~4.30, i would have made WAY more fucking money. dont fall for the fucking meme. the most important part is stacking link because you will be able to stake in the dozens of staking services that are out there right now/going to be out there in the future. stupid fucking faggot.

maybe there will be a "yearn finance" for staking LINK? like it'll send your LINK to whichever nodes that offer the highest returns and transfer around according the the most jewish strategy. that would be cool.

>>20848348
More comfy than most. I had the same as you, but picked up one extra LP because I was holding ETH anyway, and figured LP would outgrow ETH over the next 12 months after staking goes live.

>>20846245
This is fucking retarded why not just buy something with a clear use case like VRA?

>>20848479
It's not that simple. How do they manage penalties if the node goes offline? If you keep that in mind staking LINK is way more riskier from a DeFi perspective

>>20848479
>thinking people will be giving up slots in the most profitable nodes
keep dreaming anon. this is going to be a flat out race to get into a good node... and you know who rims horses, right?

>>20848544
i'm not a doctor. someone will figure it out.

>>20848589
My point is that in DeFi you can use crypto assets as collateral so if you miscalculate and your health factor reaches a liquidation point, your collateral covers your debt, but the node operators don't give any collateral to a LINK liquidity pool.

>>20848455
You won't be able to stake your LINK unless you:

- Operate your node
- Get LP tokens
- Get into a node that accepts penalties from external users before it reaches its demand limit (if it reaches its deminishing point of returns, the ROI will be shit)

>>20846245
Imagine owning LINK and no LP. What do you plan on doing with it when staking goes live? Normies won't be able to stake for years after LP holders.

>>20848138
>>20848243
>>20848544
>>20848814
>>20849068
based on these responses I should get my hands on some LP
>>20848455
but this is pretty much why I'm hesitating, there is potentially a huge opportunity cost of not just putting it into LINK
that being said I think I will get some LP
>>20848421
I tricked you by spelling favor the american way

>>20846245
By the time LP isn't required for staking the rewards will be low by comparison. It makes more sense to buy LP and stake with priority while others have to wait and you continue to build your stack so you have a bigger piece of the pie with public staking

>>20848814
i imagined something along the lines of a platform that had permission to stake on certain high performance nodes and you have to own their token to be able to send LINK to that platform that stakes according to a high minded strategy. maybe the platform would own a number of LP tokens in order to stake on LinkPool? maybe there will be a pool that has access to pools and you get a token for that pool? pools will have pools. it will be glorious.

>>20849331
But anon, that's exactly what Linkpool is building, I suggest to read this article:
https://medium.com/linkpool/creating-trustless-pools-and-staking-for-all-266451277e3f

tl;dr: They will allow any node to become a staking pool using their contracts. You will be able to browse a list of stakeable nodes in market.link and it won't require to have LP shares, but every node will have to pay a fixed percentage of their income to Linkpool, which will be distributed among LP shareholders

I wouldn't be paying more than 38-40 ETH for a share of LinkPool and that is pushing it. The liquidity is shit and it jumps around from like 35-60 every couple of weeks, its fucking retarded. That being said its probably considering if you have at least 10K LINK already and probably essentially to have at least 1LP if you have 20K LINK or more. I imagine you will want to diversify the nodes you stake on as well in a worst case scenario incident. I suspect getting your LINK staked on a high value node will be invaluable in the early days. I can see your wealth compounding incredibly quick as it will be real competitive. You still own the private keys with LP as well and instead of SaaS that will be offered by exchanges and institutions.

The only reason I haven't pulled the trigger personally is because I'm American and highly concerned about how the IRS will respond if they find out. Honestly will they even be able to find out? If I'm selling portions of the dividend payout they will want to know where its coming from. Basically I don't want my LINK compromised by being attached to LP but I also really want to buy it. Thoughts?

>>20849494
good good. we're on the same page.

>>20849515
I don't think the IRS will be able to tell whether your linkies came from staking or from holding LP shares (technically LP shares don't appear in Etherscan because they don't fit any ERC token standards). But I see where you are coming from

>>20849526
I see

>>20849515
Fellow burger here, this is my concern.

>>20849687

That was my original thought as well. They probably won't be able to tell its coming from LP fees or staking attached to it and if I'm staking on other nodes maybe it can wash together somewhat depending on where I cash out for USD. I'm sure Gemini, Binance, and Coinbase will offer staking services too, probably AAVE as well. Basically anyone able to offer it probably will I don't see why they wouldn't.

>>20849792

Its frustrating because I'm like 90/10 in favor of this being the right move to maximize my gains in the coming year and bull run but that shadow of doubt is always creeping on me that it will somehow fuck me. Ha Either way I need to make a decision and pull the trigger soon. I'm a LINK maximalist now so I either buy the 1 LP or I just diversify a little into another 30 Million MCAP project I've been researching heavily.

>>20849687
>I don't think the IRS will be able to tell whether your linkies came from staking or from holding LP shares (technically LP shares don't appear in Etherscan because they don't fit any ERC token standards).
Technically they would, as each LINK distribution comes from an address marked as "LinkPool Owners Token". That would involve them knowing your ETH address and analysing it though. I wouldn't think they'd have the resources for that, you would simply just say you made income from staking, pay your tax, and it should be fine.

https://etherscan.io/address/0x182d4990bb0ff595b308b3efcb93313abad575e7#tokentxns

>>20850167
I see a problem with the reasoning there. Why would other companies that become Chainlink node operators share their rewards? Like T-Systems or Binance for example, why would they choose to ask their users for liquidity? They won't probably need the average Joe stack. It's not profitable to "open your node for public liquidity" unless you lack that liquidity in the first place.

>>20850409

I mean it won't be free. You will stake with their SaaS services and they will probably rape you for like 35% of the divdends or maybe more. Meanwhile if you bit the bullet and buy the LP now you don't pay to stake but they pay you instead network fees.

One time payment now for future staking rights or a large of chunk of the interest you accrue from other services.

I figure that there will be other staking services and they should be competitive or risk losing business. That said, I would wait.. but maybe someone here knows more on the subject.

Rather than buy very expensive LP, I just bought more link.

>>20850390
>>20850390

Honestly you'd think if I just make the attempt in good faith pay my taxes and do everything correctly it wouldn't be an issue. As you said I don't see how they will get my ETH address especially if I moving the divs to another account as well.

>>20850552
The IRS will tax staking as interest. Claim your staking rewards and pay the taxes according to whatever "interest" amounts to. Or find a higher rate that applies to something else and pay that. They aren't going to crawl up your ass if you're claiming it and paying taxes on it. Stop being a faggot.

>>20850681
>Stop being a faggot.

Yea suck my dick? Why wouldn't I be concerned about legal issues surrounding my fucking golden Willy Wonka ticket. We all only get one shot at this.

>>20850787
How worried about can you really be? You've had two years to call or email a tax professional and ask this question answered.

>>20851027

Yea I'm just going to call up a tax professional and tell them I want to buy an unregistered token that I'm not sure if it classifies as a security that even asks me if I American reminding me its not allowed upon visiting the website and see if he thinks its kosher? There is more nuance than that its mostly if they will hound me on the source of the dividends. How else can I prove its interest?

>>20850539
>Rather than buy very expensive LP, I just bought more link
And thats the reason why LP will always perform worse than Link.
People think Link is cheap at ~$8 despite having a total market cap of $8 billion and LP is expensive at ~$13k despite having a market cap of $50 million.
Market cap doesn't matter, all that matters is price. LP is at 0.7% of Chainlink's cap but its sooo overpriced. Come on dude.

>>20851380
>total market cap
retard

staking comes when there is enough network activity, Sergey said that before, so what you guys think is good enough activity for staking? Does DeFi price feeds need staking?