/biz/ - Business & Finance

You should sell, yes. When did you buy? ICO?

>>20844871
yeah bought at ICO with BTC and im down 90%, i know im a retard for not selling the top a couple years ago, but fuck me. it just hurts so bad
thinking about just cutting my losses and throwing it all into AMPL or something

I heard Conensys threatened to sue bancor after running the code.

fudder here. i just got a 400% in a day with tendies (tend) and dumped at top 0.80 cents made $100k. kek

fuck it, ive just been sitting here waiting for so long to make my money back and it never happens. i fell for the hold meme
im just gonna sell it all tonight and hopefully theres something i can make some money back with next week

>>20844969
yup its true. the v2 code has trojans in it that fucked up their whole network

t. insider

>>20844912
Definitely time to sell then, OP. 90% loss isn't so bad and I'm sure AMPL is primed to pump again.

>>20845071
dude. gonna seel right before potential release!?
at least save half just in case. if it does release tomorrow you're going to be waaay more upset

>>20844847
delayed sauce?

>>20845347
buy the rumor, sell the news. When v2 launches it's going to tank, and if institutional liquidity providers come on board it will tank even more. This is the tope.

>>20845307
Why am I not surprised. This shitcoin needs to be delisted to stop anybody else being scammed

>>20845386
>if institutional liquidity providers come on board it will tank even
why would that be the case?


>>20845405
lol

yall are fake fudders. im the only insider. audits failed. v2 delayed until q4

>>20844847
>>20844871
>>20844969
>>20845339
>>20845386
>>20845405
>>20845459
>>20845485
I appreciate your concern for my financial wellbeing.

>>20845459
Because if institutional buyers are staking billions on the platform and earning huge fees they have to dump the fees to balance the pools.
The more adoption Bancor gets the lower the price goes. It's an interesting thought experiment but a terrible investment. DYOR.

>>20845631
But the fees arn't necessarily given as BNT. infact the inflation rate of BNT is initially set to zero. I assume fees will be in the form of whatever is being traded eth/link for example.

so that makes you're point moot.

No delay- just fud.

>>20845631
>>20845824
>the more money that comes in, the cheaper the token.
Fuck. That's insane, who would build such a thing. Just sold 100k.

faggots

>>20845824
imagine trying to make actual arguments when im being a super retard

You're all a bunch of cunts. I'm excited too.

>>20846052
well you know what. fuck trolls. I'm just over here trying to helps some poor /biz/ers make it and you're over here just being a dick

>>20846389
Anon, he said,
>dump the fees
That doesn't even mean anything. And that whole post was clearly retarded nonsense. You should have spotted it.

>>20846568
i know i know, just but hurt that i got trolled

>>20846707
Bless your heart anon. How many bnt are you sitting on?

we need flags man, this is getting out of hand, these telegram/discord groups fucking hell

>>20847237
There's literally one Bancor thread, dipshit, it's probably the least pajeet group on /biz/. Nobody ITT is even jeetposting like "I'm loading up to the moon" it's just anons bored fudding. Just use filters if it upsets you so much.

oh boy, i hope they sold, watch this move

>>20847305
im talking about few of these fudders are in a group fudding in this thread, if u cant see it, then u're a blind bitch

>>20847348
it's bored BNT holders being retards to pass the time. welcome to /biz/.

>>20844847
Gentlemen...we have price movement.

>>20844847
>FAKE FUDDERS GET THE ROPE
>Entire thread is one suicidal cuck talking to himself

Code is perfect. Audits clean. V2 releases tomorrow. Last chance to buy before sperg-tier FOMO.

>>20844847
i'm sorry fag, but you got priced out

>>20848745
>Savage x2 ID
BNT is about to pull a x2.

Just picked up 5k.

I'M FUCKING READY

>>20848805
this, it's clearly the best buy right now. only threads popping up on biz are 1-2 of these fud threads, subreddit is dead, it hasn't pumped enough compared to all the other defi platforms, only some videos on youtube with 50 views - while they are the ones that pioneered liquidity pools and if what they are about to release works out, it would fucking revolutionize the whole space. of course it's still a gamble, but it's one of the best ones out there right now. this is when you buy. but you guys will buy in once it's plastered on biz like peak euphoria scamplefilth. at least get a moonbag, best case this pulls a liquidity black hole and ushers in the golden bull ruin with a 10x to 40x, worst case it goes down 80% from here

So it's 2:25 AM in Tel Aviv. Are they going to be announcing early in the day there or...?

>>20848950
whenever i created bancor threads over the last few days, they died with 0 replies. so you know these ones here are organized groups

>>20844847
"i lost so much money already"

LMFAO WE'RE ONLY -13% FROM LOCAL ATH

you fucking faggot liar

>>20848950
I'm personally not that interested in shilling it until I've staked all my BNT in LPs. The pools are capped at launch there's no need to increase the hype now.
Mind you I think in Bancor's case you don't really need to hype it at all, I think once it starts pulling real volume it will speak for itself.

>>20849016
yeah, and we all think like this, hence the silence. i'll also shut up now, maybe a few anons get it

>>20848950
There's nothing shilled on biz organically except link. BNT is going to appear to "come out of nowhere" but that's only because smart biz has been accumulating and pajeets can't pump it.

>>20848967
I wouldn't expect an annoucement today, anon. The "How to integrate LEND" talk is August 4 and it will be "one of the first pools" so I would say the date is some undefined point between now and then. But that's only a month away so idgaf

>>20849085
you know that august starts tomorrow, right

>>20849016
What are the expected returns for LP?

>>20848989


We're all quiet because this fucking coin is the truth. A real fucking legit make-it coin. No need to hype, just silently accumulate.

>>20849114
holy fuck kek im losing my goddamn mind. isolation has gone on too long
>>20849115
nobody knows. asking for price predictions is boring.

>>20848845
I wish I had more.

>>20849608
How much do you hold?

should i buy 10k BNT

>>20849646
5k

>>20849700
You can give them to me if you like.

>>20849700
You should DYOR and make your own decisions, starting with the Chainlink blog post about AMMs and then Bancor's blog.

Thanks for the support everyone, it looks like i made the right choice selling earlier. It's done nothing but go down, there haven't been any developments in months
I just feel so stupid for falling for another project that is all hype and no delivery

>>20849752
Don't want to be that guy but have you thought about scenarios where BNT doesn't work out like you hope?

>inb4 more hack fud

>>20849971
Thats why I'm 80% LINK, 20% BNT. Worst case scenario I lose 20%, best case I get to pump up my LINK stack while maintaining a long term position earning fees through BNT.

>>20850085
>80% LINK, 20% BNT, using BNT to increase LINK stack and stake some for passive income long term
are you literally me, unbelievably based anon. quite literally my exact distribution and strategy

>>20850152
I would hazard a guess we're both going to make it, anon.

>>20850085
>>20850152
Good luck anons.

I went all in with my poverty stack.

>>20845541
I recognize this poster. How did AMPL work out for you, friendo? :^)

I'm getting pretty hyped. Saw some good gains, but have been a bit impatient with this recent crabbing. It's such a big deal though that it's worth it. I haven't dared tried to swing.

>>20851137
Would be good if biz had more quiet threads on other coins akin to BNT. Line up 3-5 different coins like this per year and the wealth generation would be better than working for a dollar anywhere.

i don't see any info on the bancor blog for whether arbitrageurs can be faster than the oracle updates. maybe there will be some average "oracle loss". also, isn't chainlink still stuck/wrong sometimes, in that case pool liquidity provider would get fucked by arbitrageurs exploiting it. but whoever gets this working correctly, it is definitely the future. Let us just hope bancor does not fuck it up and gets overtaken by competition cloning it again.

>>20851548
i'm also not knowledgeable on how chainlink works exactly. aren't eth transactions involved, so who pays for the fees for the ongoing oracle updates? does it go out of the liquidity providers
' pockets?

>>20851548
on front-running oracles. per the June 29th community call

>>20851591
a significant amount of chainlink price feeds are subsidized at the moment by sponsors (and will be for a while), as for long term i dont know

>>20851925
thank you based anon

>>20849752
i tried but i can't understand how bnt will mitigate impermanent loss. i watched the interview with chainlink and studied the slides. it makes no sense to me. i know that people will meme it to new heights regardless, but i want to know how the fuck it works. can you throw a brainlet a bone?

Looks like BNT is about to moon. I wonder if I fucked up at selling at $1.69. shiiiiiiiIIIIIIITT

>>20852056
honestly anon, if you read all the articles and looked at the pretty pictures, and still can't understand it.
then no, nobody here will be able to explain it to you. i mean that, im sorry. its really not that difficult of a concept, they rebalance pool %'s based on value of assets as a result of having LINK oracles .
meaning they dont have to weight the pools at 50/50 always.

>>20852056
https://blog.chain.link/challenges-in-defi-how-to-bring-more-capital-and-less-risk-to-automated-market-maker-dexs/

take the 10 minutes

sucks if you bought at 10$ i guess lol

>>20852078
thanks for selling your bag to me

>>20852056
let me try it this way: impermanent loss occurs because arbitrageurs swoop in when prices of coins change on the outside (other exchanges than the pool) and steal that profit from the liquidity providers. pool gets worth less and less over time as arbitrageurs take these profits out.

now with v2, chainlink oracles constantly monitor the price of the tokens on the outside world exchanges and adjust this arbitrage opportunity away before arbitrageurs can take it, the theoretical "profit" that could have been taken simply stays in the pool.

>>20852285
what you're describing is not impermanent loss, my misinformed fren
impermanent loss occurs as a result of an asset moving up in value, and with traditional liquidity pools you (as one supplying liquidity) begin accruing the OTHER asset in the pool, the one that is not going up a lot.

aka, if the pool is LINK/ETH, and LINK goes from $4->$8, you're going to be left with more ETH than LINK, and because LINK went up 2x, and ETH did not, you have achieved impermanent loss. and likely made less money than you would have by just holding LINK

>>20850962
You've got the wrong man. I'm 75 link 25 bnt.

>>20852100
>>20852285
ok i think i understand. B V2 adjusts the MM "spread" to match the market at large instead of adjusting "spread" to maintain a fixed pool ratio. so it mostly prevents loss in ranging price action. i guess i was too focused on edge cases (trending markets) to understand the excitement.
thank you for taking the time to explain

>>20852433
okay okay you are correct. i looked at impermanent loss in depth but i am still retarded especially with the terminology.

i'm looking into it now and share your opinion, it's not so simple that we can explain it better than them, and it starts around here and takes around 10 minutes in total: https://youtu.be/HeIsh8AVXhM?t=693

>>20852638
>B V2 adjusts the MM "spread" to match the market at large instead of adjusting "spread" to maintain a fixed pool ratio.
yes. im happy for you anon. this has been a major issue in holding people away from providing liquidity on DEXes, i know its the #1 reason i never have myself.
the thought of providing liquidity with my LINK, and then selling that LINK slowly as a result of impermanent loss on the way up during a moon mission makes me want to vomit

>>20852701
so are you a fudder or shilling it now or wtf exactly??, somebody explain me this schizo shit here please

>>20852838
welcome to /biz/. now get the fuck out and never come back

>>20852701
won't one side of the pool still experience impermanent loss in a strong trend though? even "real" market makers have to live with the fact that they will have differing counts of asset A and asset B after a big move, there is no way a block time dependent smart contract can fix that

>>20852914
been here longer than u kid, way before when u were struggling to come out of ur mom's vagina with ur fat fucking head

>>20852838
i guess OP bought recently at 0.007 eth a piece

>>20852977
my thought aswell, an absolute state of a retard, baka

>>20852954
they always choose the word "mitigating"

>>20852954
the general idea is that this is solved by both liquidity amplification, and the fact that the fees of each pool are split 50/50 between each side, regardless of the "actual" pool ratio at the moment.
this of course incentivizes people to bring the pool back to equilibrium.
if one side gets too imbalanced, all the sudden you can start earning extra money by putting in less liquidity on the draining side.

so if LINK is mooning and the pool starts getting wiped, there is huge incentive to go in and provide more LINK to rebalance the pool, as they are still entitled to their share of the LINK side of the pools 50% of the fees.
and with deep enough liquidity, it never becomes an issue for a single liquidity provider to pull out their initial share of liquidity.

from the first page of the official docs

you can already see how some idiots will pool their deflationary pajeet scam tokens and crypto media will report the "hack". not that i care but calling it

>>20852914
lmao based

>>20853010
>been here longer than you
>doesn't know about s m h filter

>>20853094
what do you mean by liquidity amplification?
the rest makes sense, the drained side of the pool has better opportunity to race potential loss with fees. it will be interesting to see it play out

>>20853660
Bancor doesn't put the liquidity in each pool on a linear spread, it "amplifies" the liquidity around the price point to reduce slippage.
Read more:
>https://blog.bancor.network/amplified-liquidity-designing-capital-efficient-automated-market-makers-in-bancor-v2-3cec8891c3a1

>>20853660
https://blog.bancor.network/amplified-liquidity-designing-capital-efficient-automated-market-makers-in-bancor-v2-3cec8891c3a1
Bancor explains it best. It reduces slippage while at the same time making it exponentially more expensive to try and drain one side of the pool.

>>20844847
im so glad i sold this piece of shit for link in 2017

>>20853748
I should note that my use of the word "more" here is misleading, of course it isn't more expensive to attempt to deplete a V2 pool vs a V1 pool, because at some point in a V1 pool you would be paying infinity.
But the article i posted outlines what i mean by this.

well this has been fun, excited to go to bed tonight. i truly hope i can get some sleep. no matter what happens tomorrow, thanks for everything these past 3 years niggers

>>20853736
>>20853748
thank you for sharing your research anons