/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>23006878
VC's will be the big whales getting most of the farmed liquidity tho

>>23006925

Im talking about the real underlying investors. They could have had it all, why did they allow him to introduce some shitty as fucking token which basically destroys their whole fucking investment.

>>23006878

Nobody knows jackshit? Gr8. so this fucker here with the VCs are planning potenatially on hte biggest 10000x and biz is in the dark. EXPLAIN

>>23006969
because the token doesn't actually represent very much ownership or control over uniswap. it was only created to get all of the liquidity back from sushiswap. you need at least 10 million UNI delegated to you to submit a governance proposal.. i recommend reading up on the UNI blog post again. the way UNI is designed, unfortunately, uniswap gaining volume and influence over the coming years will not necessarily mean that UNI is going to offer amazing returns.

sadly in the real world, centralized institutions are not going to allow an application that they invested millions of dollars into to just completely give up all ownership to the public. UNI is fake decentralization.

>>23007252
10000x? Great I will become a multi milionarie

>>23007350
Are you saying my UNIs will keep being 4$ forever? No sir this is over pls sir don’t tell me that sir

>>23007350
well, but the mechanism of having UNI is whats important now. I agree "muh voting token" is gaypilled, however lets look forward 2-5 years....as the defi space heats up, how do they dex-es keep their liquidity holders happy? ultimately by sharing more profits with them.
thats the importance of uni...at the moment your analysis is right, but once competition becomes more fierce it will become a tool to redistribute profits.
finally, the history of tech teaches us that almost all new tech winds up a duopoly: FB / Twit, Win / Mac, iOS / Android, etc etc. The real question is, will UNI become one of the two?

>>23007350

10M UNI is nothing at the current prices, You could get 10m uni for fucking a 100M total. Do you really think there arent investment groups out there that would push them out in a heartbeat?

What happens if an investment group decides to buy ALL of the fucking coins taht are upcoming and vote the VCs out?

What would happen if NOBODY buys the coins and the VCs go from having 1 billion dollars in UNI to having a measly tens of milions of dollars?

My point is: If you were the VC, why would you let Hayden introduce a coin which can take away returns from YOUR investment?

>>23007350
10 million is nothing on a 1 billion supply coin. And Uni holders will eventually get 100% of Uniswap profits. I don't get why your fudding the coin but bullish on the future of Uniswap. The coin has 10x the utility of BNB for example. That's the perfect example of people just needing an excuse to dump on retards.

To answer the OP question I'm pretty sure there was very little VC money invested. I was reading the post by the founder and it seems like it was mostly a solo project he made while living off crypto gains with grant funding from the ETH foundation and code optimization assistance from the top minds in blockchain development that loved the idea of the platform.

>>23006878
That's a ftm tranny.

>>23007507

It got 11M dollars in seed funding.

>>23007541
How far along was it at that point? If it already had a valuation of 100 million that's 11% ownership, which would earn a big fuck you when it comes to your say in how to run the operation. If the founder and Vitalik and other guys that already made it comfortably off BTC and ETH and are just in it for the idea of a decentralized economy wanted to give up their 80% or whatever that's how it's going to be. They had controlling interest and if they don't like it they can buy up their interest in the platform (Uni tokens) and vote to change it.

>>23007635

So are you saying that they willingfully invested money which is going to be dilluted?

Do you think the VCs run a fucking charity or what?

>>23007514
with surgery to add fake adams apple? very doubtful

>>23007635

You know what? IM A BIG VC THAT DOES A TRILLION OF DUE DILLIGENCE HA HA IM GONNA INVEST IN UNISWAP SO HAYDEN COULD DILLUTE ME INTO OBLIVION HA HA. BUT NO WORRIES, I GUESS I WILL JUST HAVE TO BUY SOME MORE UNI CAUSE HAYDEN JUST FUCKED ME HA HA.

This is not how they FUCKING OPERATE

will they give away more uni?
i started trading only september 2nd
feels so fucking bad

>>23007751

You wont be getting any more uni, you will be getting just dilluted thats all you are going to fucking get

>>23007484
uniswap isn't even worth 30MM by standard startup valuations. speculative crypto market cap is not real value
all vc business operates under the idea of growing at a loss until you gain enough market share to be a defacto monopoly, and that's when you dump. anything is worth getting to that goal. owning 15% of 10B beats owning 100% of 10MM. not to mention uni tokens aren't shares or anything serious

Op youre a moron if you think the vc invested in UNI and not Uniswap

>>23007758
Why would they do that, it makes no sense, UNI will be so big that coin circ. won’t even matter anymore

>>23007784

UNI tokens are the only way they are going to get any money out of this.

At the same time everyone is a moron if they think uniswap is valued at the UNI token mkcap value

>>23007820

They invested in Uniswap which created a coin delegating voting power over Uniswap via UNI tokens. That is why the VCs got a share of UNI which is going to get dilluted into oblivion.

>>23007685
>>23007725
What the fuck retard. Take a pill and read a book on investing. 17% of Uni tokens are reserved for investors. That must be how much the 11 million was worth, 17% of the platform when they invested. They weren't diluted at all. The founder gave away his share of ownership to the users of the platform, 60% The VCs will still have 17% controlling interest and 17% of any revenue.

VCs aren't some mythical creatures that come in with a checkbook to an already fully functioning platform and steal complete ownership of companies for pennies on the dollar. Fuck off.

>>23007841
Nobody gives 2 shits about UNI governance right now, or for the upcoming year

>>23007847

Yeah? So what would have been better for them you fucking retard?

Delegating voting power to everybody on the platform eating their fees + 2 % PERPETUAL INFLATION AFTER 4 YEARS.

Or having it all to themselves?

OF COURSE THEY ARE GETTING FUCKING DILLUTED YOU FUCKING MONKEY.

>>23007712
No it's a male to female trans, just not convincing, as expected. Have you ever seen a tranny before?

You seem to think the VC give a shit about uni governance, uniswap is a licensed business, trust me, if it were profitable on paper to dump the entirety of the UNI token theyd do it tomorrow

>>23007921

The second the fees switch turns on, they are insanely profitable. What´s your fucking point pajeet.

>>23007884
Holy shit you are a dense motherfucker. They never had total control of the platform and fees. They had 17% control of the platform and the fees. Hayden and others had the other 83% and distributed it all to the community. The VCs still have 17% voting power and 17% of revenue, which they would have with or without a token.

You think the guy worked for years developing the concept and platform with hundreds of thousands in grant money from Vitalik and help from other people in the community to sell out 100% to VCs for 11 million?

>>23007898
he said FTM

>>23007945

You are fucking a total retard arent you? So you are telling me Hayden just donated ADDITIONAL share of his voting power and revenue to teh VCs just because of what? Why wouldnt he give it all to the community.

They got their fucking share dilluted

>>23007986
Last time I'm wasting explaining this. VCs bought 17% of Uni for apparently 11 million going off your numbers, I don't know how much seed funding they got. That leaves the founder/team/Vitalik probably with 83% ownership. If you look at the breakdown 17% is set aside for investors, like 16% for team members, and the rest is given to users.

VCs still own 17%. The founder gave his tokens away because he's an idealistic unicorn loving faggot like Vitalik. VCs invest for ownership to provide development funding and resources so they can cash in during an IPO on investors. Even at $3 17% of 1 billion tokens is 510 million dollars. So their 11 million did a 50x in about a year. You really think they're pissed off right now? They'll dump them on the market as soon as they're unlocked and do it again and again.

>>23008083

Im going to say it one last time. The token has a 2 % annual inflation rate. They will NOT retain their 17 %

>>23008083


+ by the time they are able to cash out. UNI will be at 0,70 USD at the current mcap. The max they will be able to cash out will be tops 170m.....and it will go down and down

The real question is...why did they allow Hayden to create this abomination.

>>23008138
>>23008180
I see what your referencing. Notice the inflation doesn't kick in until year 4, when the last of their tokens will be unlocked. They'll be long gone by then. Took a screenshot but currently phone posting and image blocked.

https://uniswap.org/blog/uni/

They let him do it because he had controlling interest and could do what he wants. Also, like I said VCs only care about eventually going public so they can dump at a huge mark up and retail investors. They just saw their money 50x on paper. He did exactly what they wanted, and the dao probably helps release them from legal heat if the sec gets involved. It's a win/win/win for them. The only loser is Hayden who gave most of his tokens away for free but I'm sure even with the minor stake he retained he's set for life.

>>23008283

They cant sell for the next 4 years. They are stuck in a position where their share will go down in value as everybody else gets UNI

>>23008484

Nvm, my bad, they will get them unlocked only after 4 years, but still, after that time is done their investment value has dwindled significantly.

>>23008484
They are in the sense that they can't dump their 17% of the company when only 40% of it is in circulation, but not really. And they probably made so much dumping whatever they had unlocked on the run to $8 that they already have insane returns.

All crypto and stock IPOs are subject to lock up provisions to protect investors. If their entire 17% was unlocked right now they could and would dump it down to 12 fucking cents and still be at a 2x. Using the 11 million for 170 mill tokens. Consider the stock market returns 8% a year.

Don't worry, they're happy with this.

>>23008594

the only problem is that they havent sold

>>23008534
what tells you the market cap will remain the same and won't go up?

>>23008629

even if it goes up by 50 %, once the supply increases dramatically, the price impact is smaller.

>>23008645
Unless the DeFi market goes parabolic. Look at BNB market cap compared with UNI

>>23008628
If they haven't sold what they've had unlocked they're bullish on the platform, but I'm sure they sold whatever they had unlocked since they have so much vested.

I still think it will go higher as V3 launches and fees are paid out. Binance feels like Bittrex did in August 2017. It's already over. The only problem is it's easier to dethrone a DEX than a CEX.

>>23008672

BNB is something totally different from UNI.

>>23008714

But once again, why would the VCs accept this inferior proposal? They could have had WAY more return on their investment were it not for this fucking token. You are talking about getting multiples on their investment...they just forfeited billions.

>>23008738
17% is 17%. And like I said in a previous post, they're all just interested in dumping on public markets. Look at their alternatives.

1. Hold. Wait for fees to be implemented and hope you don't get dethroned and can make up the money in fees.

2. Hold until you have a steady cash flow and do an IPO. Tons more regulations, legal responsibilities of running a DEX. More critical investors than pajeets.

3. ICO where to can instantly dump your shares at a 50x markup, even if it's only a fraction of your shares. Eliminating all risk and still having a vested interest that will unlock over 4 years if it becomes more valuable.

I'm telling you this is exactly what they wanted and the best outcome for them. They don't give a fuck if Hayden gives away his ownership stake and they will have probably a full year to exit from when the last of their tokens get unlocked before inflation hits.

>>23008738
Look at all the VC money that held ICOs and did everything the traditional way like Req and QSM. You think those guys are thrilled or they'd rather have been a Uni VC? Lol. Uni was a grand slam for anyone lucky enough to get in.

>>23008860

so you think UNI will go where realistically?

Predictions for the 16th and 17th of this month? I'm getting real fucking tired of holding these bags.

>>23008987

4-5

>>23008996
Time to kill my self.

>>23008920
No idea. Will definitely hit at least $10 in the next year but could be dead money for a long time. I'm mostly in other projects but hoping it keeps dumping. If it goes under $3 I'd consider going all in.

>>23009083

Next year? The fuck

>>23007350
What you don't understand is that the vast majority of crypto investors don't give a shit about use case. They just treat it as a stock. Uniswap is extremely popular in crypto circles, and Uni has some of the best name recognition after btc eth and a couple others. You can't seriously base price predictions for a well known token like this on anything but mob mentality, and that says that Uni will go up.

>>23009140
If v3 comes out this year then we will reach 10$, otherwise I suggest swinging until then to increase your stack

>>23009140
It reminds me of Link as a high value project that's just gonna dump hard and crab for a year and then do a 100x but I guess if V3 launches it will be hard to suppress the price.

>>23009212

V3 wont be coming out so soon

>>23009207
>>23009212
is that possible when not even 20% of the supply is released yet?
They can dump the price to cents whenever they want it.

what should I do with my airdrop?

>>23009936

If they dumped it to recoup the investment, they are going to buy back in at lower prices. Makes the most sense