/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>49850665
>chainlink unlisted a recent post of a fireside chat with Mark Richardson of bancor. (that means you wont see it if you go to Chainlink Youtube).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2mVaPFFdoE
>pending link withdrawals 4.3m LINK
https://etherscan.io/token/0x516c164a879892a156920a215855c3416616c46e?a=0x857eb0eb2572f7092c417cd386ba82e45eba9b8a
>pending ETH withdrawals: 24k ETH
>https://etherscan.io/token/0x256ed1d83e3e4efdda977389a5389c3433137dda?a=0x857eb0eb2572f7092c417cd386ba82e45eba9b8a
ETH WHALE took a $4m hit to get his ETH off bancor, pic related

I staked my shit with them a day before this shitshow began, have 6 days left to withdraw. How fucked am I? I shouldn't have suffered too much IL considering LINK price has been fairly stable.

>>49850777
Do you pity the bancor crowd? I do, bancor slipped in and pretended to be on team Link/arbitrum while everyone else dunked on link. I don’t feel anything for the Celcius and Nexo victims

>>49850832
time will tell, but in order to manage your expectations i would say if you are definitely withdrawing than prepare to receive 50% of your stack, and nothing else. tomorrow and wednesday are when a huge portion of the pending withdrawals become able to withdraw, so you'll probably have a better idea by the weekend. good luck fren

>>49850832
You’ll be fine if 216 isn’t significant. I think it will be because arbitrum announced their odyssey for that date and they’re obviously going to be largest PGP on staking release

>>49850918
kek arbitrum

>>49850777
checked

All of these Defi staking schemes are ponzis and these exuberant retards ignored all warnings without any preparedness on the day of reckoning

>>49850859
100% agreed. this just fucking sucks and im not losing anything but i know some bros are.

>>49850918
oh good call i didnt know anything arbitrum related was happening tomorrow.
>https://medium.com/offchainlabs/the-arbitrum-odyssey-87d6e11171d5
two month long initiative to get people used to arbitrum it seems

>>49851117
https://twitter.com/Banclord/status/1538945943407538176

>>49851117
>>49851145
kek
>bancor changed the rules to avoid paying out one of their liquidity providers
>and thats a good thing
ahhh these fucking twitter faggots my goodness

>>49851117
again, this is a narrative that bancor is trying to push
>bad celsius
>good bancor
however here's a few facts
>bancor took knowingly celsius onboard as a big liquidity provider, mark even boasts in his previous community call how he is personal friends with the celsius staff
>celsius has all the right to pull their liquidity, as does any user of the platform
>zero proof of the alleged shorting has been shown, and the books in ftx bnt-perps are not thick enough for celsius do any significant profit by shorting
stop it already and give people their linkies back

>>49851353
>stop it already and give people their linkies back
Sorry, already gone. Though it's a bit of a miracle that there's even any IL on link with the current price action. At what price did celsius even start staking then?

>>49850859
>Do you pity the bancor crowd?
Fuck them. Just like the greedy terraluna fags they knew there was a chance of a death spiral caused by a faulty design and chose to ignore it.
>oh it will never happen
they said
>lmao if it dropped that low I would sell my house to go all in on BNT
they said
just like the Terra fags
fuck em
fuck em
run them off the space

>>49851353
their short is on FTX, its the 2nd largest on the exchange.

>>49851188
This is not a simple case of a liquidity provider pulling out, this is a whale systematically exploiting their BNT payouts to fuel their short of BNT to send it into a death spiral. theyre purposely trying to LUNA the BNT token and Bancor has a right to stop that exploitation.

>>49850665
Enjoy your worthless bags, suckers!

>>49851188
it's good for the people trying to escape behind celsius who will get something rather than zero. when all is said and done i will at least be grateful for that.

>>49851419
>theyre purposely trying to LUNA the BNT token
GOOD
Why are you shilling to keep that shit going?
Its broken by design, it should die.

>>49851419
>this is a whale systematically exploiting their BNT payouts to fuel their short of BNT
If you're building in DeFi and you can't handle an "edge case" where your whale LP withdraws then you fucked up.
I am getting rekt by this too but this is 100% on Bancor protocol design, not Celsius just acting in their own financial interests.

>>49850665
Celsius trannies eat a bag of dicks your attempt to bring down Bancor to your level has backfired and your true face has been shown to the whole crypto community with these countless Bancor FUD posts.

Have a nice day.

>>49851465
its not, under normal circumstances Bancor has been stable and safe for the past 5 years.

>>49851419
>This is not a simple case of a liquidity provider pulling out, this is a whale systematically exploiting their BNT payouts to fuel their short of BNT to send it into a death spiral. theyre purposely trying to LUNA the BNT token and Bancor has a right to stop that exploitation.
If a whale in a bear market can cause this much damage then your system is complete and utter shit and needs to be reworked from the ground up

>>49851474
Bancor will put protections in to prevent this from happening in the future, with each edge case comes a lesson and futureproofing. like you said, theyre building. v3 is like 1 month old. We should be hoping for this to work out in the end, not fail everyone.

>>49851419
>a whale
>systematically
>exploiting
>to fuel their short
>to send it into a death spiral
>purposely
>exploitation
Lmfao why are you even still here when bancor probably won't even have the cash to pay out this month's salary?

>>49851495
not reworked, just altered to prevent massive BNT printing all at once.

>>49851527
Bancor has over 200 million in Liquidity, they just dont want BNT to death spiral

>>49851493
>under normal circumstances
Holy fucking shit you retard. These are normal circumstances, its called a bear market. We need you jew parasites off the space ASAP. You only make everything worse.

btw the plan of bancor is becoming very clear
>take all the liquidity as hostage
>pray to god that btc pumps and the extremely thin spreads of bnt spot are dragged up by the bots that are the only trading now as people can't sell their assets
>pray to god that the pump starts liquidating the shorts that would push the price up even further
>pray to god that the people take this as a great strategy they had in order to "solve" the situation because the price went up

>>49851419
if its true then all Celcius is doing is exposing Bancor for the scam it is. its proof that BNT shouldnt exist, and impermanent loss is a made up concept that works only when the market is pumping
>>49851438
sure i guess but its really just proving bancor was not thoughtfully designed. a true DeFi protocol should be bulletproof, and certainly should allow instant withdrawals 24/7. Aave does.

>>49851145
https://etherscan.io/address/0xa337321a3b9909aec6e7053ef8e8fdb24e4614f2#tokentxns
Where is the evidence that this is Celsius? I looked through all transactions - no direct interaction with the major Celsius wallets. Intermediaries could be used, but none of these people have done even a shred of due diligence on these accusations.

>>49851553
I dont think you understand Bancor was around for the entirety of the last bear market.

>>49851565
thats a harsh conclusion. BNT could exist, just altered in it's printing to prevent this edge scenario

>>49851493
>under normal circumstances
These are normal circumstances. Someone simply wants to withdraw the liquidity they provided, which they are allowed to do and which nobody ever told them would be considered "hostile".
>>49851552
>they just dont want BNT to death spiral
Maybe they should've designed a better protocol then.

>>49851552
>decentralized finance is when some jew can freeze your money on a whim
YOUR
DESIGN
IS
BROKEN
GO
AWAY
YOU
JEWISH
PARASITE

>>49851525
I hope so, bro. If they can come back from here and build anything that gets adopted then I will be very impressed. But I'll also be watching from the sidelines.
I have no ill will towards the Bancor team, I think they tried to build something unique and "for the people".

But this wasn't even a hostile attack, it was just extreme market conditions like we get in crypto now and again. You have to do better than that in DeFi if you're tying to survive long term.

>>49851353
>>49851583
Reminder that Rick himself stated that Celsius had already moved the majority of their funds off Bancor before the IL pause
https://twitter.com/LinkSemper/status/1537754260871446529
https://twitter.com/LinkSemper/status/1537883478603145218
Is no one going to call him out on this?

>>49851591
How is it an edge scenario? It doesn't really matter that this time it's a single whale withdrawing its own stake. If it were thousands of small LPs wanting to withdraw their insurance would be underwater just as much. They're pretending all this time to have 100% solved IL but it's just a stopgap made by shuffling small amounts of cash between buckets, it only looks like it works as long as the amounts involved aren't too large. There is an enormous amount of impermanent loss that they will simply never be able to compensate.

>>49851659
they did, but they have 20k eth in v3 that theyre trying to remove now to fuel their short

>>49851678
>but they have 20k eth in v3 that theyre trying to remove now
Posting an etherscan link of the involved wallets would put all of this to rest instantly. Regarding the shorts, is this coming from insiders, or is it being inferred by the anonymous FTX margin book?

Who cares? Shorting is not forbidden. Activist shorting isn't even forbidden. I'd been wondering myself how to profit off bancor's shitty design but didn't really figure it out (esp since I don't have any money lel) but I'm glad someone is running them into the ground.

>>49851659
He already said it was the link marines' fault, not Celsius.

>>49851419
so are you telling me that a rich person figured out your protocol is inherently flawed and decided to bet against it? how is this somehow against the rules? again you haven't shown any proof that is celsius, neither does it doesn't matter. you're just trying to blame someone else from your own mistakes.
just give the people their linkies back

Precursor: I have $35k worth of ETH, $5k worth of LINK, and $10k worth of BNT in Bancor. Do I (a) start the withdrawal process and take the guaranteed loss and never look back, or (b) just leave it in and hope that they get bailed out and/or cook up a plan to pay restitution to LPs directly through the treasury?

>>49851743
https://twitter.com/MikeBurgersburg/status/1538694715767500806

https://twitter.com/Banclord/status/1538945943407538176

>>49851815
>marines
sometimes I forget this retarded meme is used seriously by normies outside 4chin

>>49851815
>pool is seeing IL due to withdrawal
That's not how IL works.

>>49851552
>Bancor has over 200 million in Liquidity, they just dont want BNT to death spiral
out of this 137 mil is bnt, so no they kinda don't

>>49851145
> "lmao we just decided to pay out less"

>>49851920
they prevented a death spiral that Celsius was trying to use as a life raft to cover their own fuck ups.

>>49851825
>just give the people their linkies back
They literally don't have them any more. When you stake your linkies you literally put them up for sale. The link that is now gone ("impermanent loss") is literally just already sold to someone else. You will only get it back (the "impermanent" part) when enough people decide to sell linkies back to you.

>>49851435
> initiate exit
> go do other things as the 7 day lock up passes
> "whoops should have followed our twitter sorry you get nothing back"

>>49851936
Funny how they/re trying to frame it as if the death spiral is someone else's doing when it's just inherent in their shitty protocol.

>>49851815
25k LINK in my own wallet

>>49851936
So? Unilaterally changing the agreement isn't acceptable regardless. Plus im sceptical of the "bros it's evil celsius!" cope. Sure they're exiting as they need to, so have loads of people.

>>49851967
its a massive chunk of their liquidity being massively sold and short in conjunction by a single bad actor, you call it whatever you want but Bancor has a right to protect themselves from it.

>>49851848
is it your whole stack?

>>49851967
this
so much this

>>49851419
they're not whales, they're venture capitol sharks and when there is blood in the water... anyone who though that venture capitolists are "supporting the defi revolution" is about to learn a valuable lesson in who these people really are

>>49852041
>>49851997

>>49851997
Proof of short?

>>49851117
>>49851145

These two tweets make it all very clear that Celsius doesn’t matter. The first one says they are selling to strengthen their short. The second one states that they didn’t receive their BNT (and that’s a good thing!). Simple case of “and further I’m of the opinion that Carthage should be destroyed”. Good for the masses to hear but it doesn’t affect the case people are discussing. The real conclusion is simple, Bancor looks like it is fucked and is buying time

>>49852063
https://ftx.com/spot-margin/lending
2nd largest position on the site

>>49851848
No, I have about 60 ETH and 4.7 BTC stuck in Celsius (lol). I also have 5 BTC, 6000 DOT, 60000 ALGO, and 2000 ICP in a Ledger.

>>49851997
>their liquidity
You mean Celsius' liquidity that they deposited because bancor opened themselves up to liquidity deposits under the condition that you can withdraw them whenever you want?
If they can't handle large withdrawals then set limits on them. If you can't handle IL insurance under extreme price movements then do it only within set limits. They got too greedy and are now paying the price.

>>49852084
Shorting is not "bad acting" you dipshit. The whole point is to make money, for every short that wins there has to be a long that loses and vice versa. It's how markets work and Celsius was playing the game according to the rules.

>>49852099
>If they can't handle large withdrawals then set limits on them. If you can't handle IL insurance under extreme price movements then do it only within set limits. They got too greedy and are now paying the price.
this. v3 might be doable but its gotta be re-designed. pausing IL protection with zero notice erodes faith in protocol

>>49852019
No, I also have about 60 ETH and 4.7 BTC stuck in Celsius (lol). I also have 5 BTC, 6000 DOT, 60000 ALGO, and 2000 ICP in a Ledger.

>>49852123
>It's how markets work and Celsius was playing the game according to the rules.
But we must be fair: you could also say that Bancor is playing by the rules, since the fact that they actually have the power to arbitrarily stop insurance payouts is built into their code for all to see too.

>>49851848
you can start the withdrawal anyways, you're not forced to take it out after 7 days if you decide not to.
However, it's getting pretty clear that bancor is going to be finished no matter how this turns out, and that they don't have enough assets in their treasury to give everyone their full amount. also, it's not like they will not be held responsible for not paying people their ILP, there will be class-action but it might take years.

honestly your best move is to init the withdrawal, you don't loose anything by doing it, and hope that bancor grows some spine, liquidates their shop and shares the proceeds with the LPs.

>>49851872
>https://twitter.com/MikeBurgersburg/status/1538694715767500806
Thanks, yes this is legit. Still no confirmation that the wallet that took the major Eth loss today was them though.

>>49851555
CHECKED. absolutely agreed, thats why there is zero timetable on a resolution of this
>>49851591
but if there is the ability to short the token, and the ability to know if you'll be printed fresh BNT before withdrawing, i dont see a resolution there. maybe bancor only works if the max deposit is like $10k? but even then people could just use multiple accounts. i dont see how it could work.
>>49851609
>You have to do better than that in DeFi if you're tying to survive long term.
agreed

Check this out
>>49850388
>>49850388
>>49851646
>>49851646
>>49852045
>>49852045
....

>>49852165
>We must be fair
Jesus Christ, how did you naive communist faggots make it this far into crypto? If you think financial derivatives markets have ever operated with altruism in mind or ever will then you're incomprehensibly stupid.

>>49852165
Yes, they played by their rules and we are arguing that their rules were kiked from the start. The protocol was always broken, the rules poorly designed and deceitfully marketed.

>>49852145
desu, I'd just leave it all on bancor and celcius and pray. you might just have to mentally prepare yourself for losing it all though, sorry. nobody really knows.p

>>49852281
I agree with all that.
>>49852255
Reading comprehension

>>49850777
Checked

>>49852293
>>49851555
>I'd just leave it all on bancor and celcius and pray
yeah i got 18k link on bancor. gonna pray. too late in the v3 queue anyway. might as well try to ride it out. jewing withdraws with no IL protection settles a lot of IL debt.

I have 50 AAVE in bancor v2, is there any way to withdraw without having to “migrate” it to v3? I’m fucked aren’t i..

>>49850665
>this crazy chemist tries defi at bancor. you won't believe what happens next

>>49852453
if it is any consolation, I sold 100k LINK at $2 like the big brain genius I am. luckily I still have 100k on my ledger.

Tried to make a thread about this but Jannie trannies deleted it. Check Chainlink’s twitter post from today…

Yeah I’m thinking THEY KNOW. What a ride this is

>>49852329
You're the one trying to invoke a moralistic argument. Crypto is a dog eat dog world so your appeal to "fairness" rings hollow considering an objective analysis of the situation would show that it's WAYY more fucked up to unilaterally renege on your promise to provide ILP to your liquidity providers than it is to engage in normal self-interested market behavior via shorting.
>>49852293
Is it possible to initiate the 7 day withdrawal period and just sit in limbo indefinitely without affirming or canceling the withdrawal?

>>49852474
They turned off withdraws from v2.1, which is possibly the most fucked up element to all this. You have to migrate to v3 if you want to be able to pull the assets, and you will not have IL.

>Impermanent loss protection

How can you dumb niggers not recognize something that is fragile at best and is likely a scam at worst?

>>49852504
its ok. Got 50k in ledger so i'm not sweating too bad. so glad i diversified into other shit and stocks lol

>>49852507
I'm not sure what happens if you don't confirm the tx after the cooldown. I would just leave it man. hope and pray it settles down

>people here are unironically trying to bet against jews
When will you learn

>>49852551
thats good brother. I've got a $2 mil house due to crypto, and comfy with my stack. no stocks or nowt though. you going to move everything to cold storage if you get it off cel/bancor?

>>49852507
I just said "we must be fair" as a figure of speech you absolute tard

>>49851815
Is Rick Barber a jew or just a shabbos goy?

>>49852590
yeah probably. writing it off completely in my mind currently but assessing the DAO etc. the gov forum is at least not filled with cringe ideas

>>49852453
I am probably going to do the same but I went ahead and initiated the withdrawals since there’s a fucking 7 day wait. At least I’ll be able to see how badly I’m fucked in 7 days and can either cancel or withdraw. Too bad all the transactions cost me $40 in fucking Eth and probably will cost more to cancel or withdraw on top of that.

>>49852590
>nowt

You British? you reckon Chainlink is still a worthwhile play if you only have around £10k.. I tethered up and thinking now might be a good time to get back in and just forget about things for a while

>>49851419
>their short is on FTX, its the 2nd largest on the exchange
proof? your pic has absolutely nothing to do with your claim that celsius is behind the short
i know you kikes don't really give a fuck, but spamming it non stop and avoiding the answer does not eventually make it true

where is the proof that celsius is behind the short on FTX?
yes we know that there is a short on FTX

>>49852165
ok, so we're talking about morals: what's the "fair" situation? that you choose your opinion of what's right over the hundreds of clients - with whose money you decided to take as hostage - that don't agree with you?
do you feel it's morally right to set up rules of the game agree about them with the other players, and then when you realise it's not going to your direction, to change them on the fly?
inb4
>i'm doing this for your own good

>>49852702
yeah I am. I've bet 90% of my net worth on it, but I'm also an idiot to some. its super high risk, but staking should keep the outlook sunny this year.

>>49852517
yes, yes it is
i was waiting in 2.1 to see how v3 would play out
did read some of the concerns being raised here and went and checked that i could withdraw immediately and was fine...
next day... they unilaterally suspend withdraws from 2.1... so fucked off
so much for the big "de"fi and dao game they talked. when it came to it they just come in and do that
have had to upgrade to v3 and now waiting a full week
who knows what will happen by then

>>49852646
if its written off mentally it'll be a nice surprise if some survives. sorry though, shitty situation.

average bancor user
0 sympathy when you lose everything. we will be laughing at you

well hmm. i dunno dun much about dem finances, but looks like the red side is winning the green side
ftx btn perps

Reminder to all anons, the rest of this space, including Bancor, Celsius, VC's, basically everyone, hates chainlink, and by extension hates you, because chainlink forces the space to grow up which directly cuts into their profit margins, which rely on the current ponzi and greater fool theory to play out over and over again.

Remember that while some anons are overconfident fud4fun autists who understand they can fud link because its going to succeed eventually anyways, there are definitely bad actors lurking here constantly who understand that early link buyers are some of the only actual successful retail in crypto, and they want your liquidity. DO NOT TRUST THEM. Put you fucking link in cold storage, or stake with chainlink nodes, period. Stop being taken for fools. If you have the time preference of a sub saharan african, eventually you'll have the net worth of on as well.

>>49852857
Thanks, yeah I'm hoping things will get better with staking/CCIP this year. lf I do this 50% of my NW would be in LINK with the rest in a HTB ISA, I won't take money out of it just because of the penalties if you don't use it for a house.

>>49852453
F

Linkbros....

OGs do you guys remember this meme kek. Crazy that it was foreshadowing

>>49852084
Wow 300% apy that’s crazy high. Guess the idea of the bnt team is to have a whale get so annoyed of not being able ti withdraw that they squeeze it. Bnt pumps 100-200% like cel and Snx did, IL is almost gone and they can open up withdrawals.

Maybe bancorcucks get to live another day after all

>>49852879
At least everything is one chain so you can see how hosed they are. they aren't that hosed but man some of these metrics aren't looking great. But possibly better than uniswap isn't the worst selling point during a bear.

>>49851145
Nice "defi"

>>49853027
how old are you? if you're in your 20s your risk tolerance should be huge, and you should go all in on high risk/reward projects. and focus on starting your own business - it's the only way to make it here.

>>49853130
Can you explain for the left side distribution plz

>>49853130
Is it the same as what this anon said

Honestly I hope everyone that takes part in this pseudo staking gets fucked. These fuckers use your LINK to short it and keep it suppressed you faggots are just insanely greedy at this point and hopefully it bites you in the ass.

>>49853130
yeah that's part of it, but doesn't look like it would be happening anytime soon. because the bancor market fuckery the derivates are starting to detach from spot. basically they're treating the spot as "closed market", which it basically is because bancor is holding the assets as their hostage. look at the spread >>49852993

>>49853184
Orderbooks are bullshit. Funding rate is all that matters. The daily borrowed bnt is 1M bnt. So each day someone borrows 1M bnt to dump and surpress the price. But one day they’ll have to buy back

>>49853228
Untrue. Bnt is 70% locked in the LPs if the market pumps bnt pumps with it.

>>49853259
Good thing for them is that bancor was minting millions of BNt per day before they turned off ILP, and if the ever turn it back on, it will be billions, if not more. I don't see any scenario where bancor survives this.

>>49850665
Faggots did laught at me when i said i use uniswap v3 for liquidity providing
Yes its degen liquidity providing and you need to speculate on the price movements but i made insane apr and it wont rug

>>49853302
It’s easy though. Just have the withdrawal be super slow build up. Allow speed up for liquidity release if you burn bnt. Adds buy pressure and you can pay to get out earlier. Tons of stuff to do. If nothing works they’ll probably do a bailout

>>49853178
I'm 25 so still fairly young. You're right on the risk/reward, the ISA is just a global index fund so not overly brave but I'm content just to leave it for now so I'm not completely on my arse if chainlink doesn't pan out. Will keep putting spare cash into crypto

Starting a business is correct too, I'm an accountant and 90% of the clients are all self-employed/inherited a family run business.

>>49853107
Still the absolute best crypto meme 5 years running

>>49850665
These faggots did laught at me when i said i use uniswap v3 for liquidity providing
Yes its degen liquidity providing and you need to speculate on the price movements but i made insane apr and it wont rug

>>49853383
I'm not saying it to swing by dick around (anon obv) but my pretax income this year was £270k, and I'm 33. none of that is crypto. I started my own business at 26 - prior to that I barely scraped up to £35k/year. its the only way to make it. you have to go to insane lengths with work ethic though. I also took out a 50k loan to buy chainlink in 2017, which panned out okay

>>49853372
They may not have 25% of the eth and link they owe their LPs, and people are already taking 50% haircuts to get out. Who is going to treat them after this, would you stake on bancor knowi what we know now?

>>49853372
without bailout they're fucked, because they simply don't have the assets. and who the fuck do you think would bail them out?

Fucking faggot niggers, when the fall out from this causes Link to dump below $1 I'll be there to lick up your nigger tears. Just remember it was all your own doing

>>49853490
It shouldn't impact the price of link much, right?

>>49853490
why in hell would this cause LINK to dump you retarded faggot

>>49853448
Fuck me, fair play you've done well there. Nevermind buying chainlink in 2017, taking out a loan to do it takes massive balls. Mind saying what industry your business is in?

>>49851555
Well they are in good terms with god being jewish and all.

>>49852503
well we know they know since they unlisted a youtube interview with Mark Richardson. see >>49850777
>>49852504
legend mate. you are a king
>>49852756
i havent seen any proof, and at this point since its all talk no proof then im starting to think its trickery
>>49852872
sorry fren
>>49852997
based
>>49853383
based link holding accountants. i was only a small time accountant for a ski resort for a few years though.
>>49853490
absolutely hilarious. nice try though, valiant effort and you have earned the respect of everyone in this thread for your thoughtful analysis of the situation. just kidding, get fucked bancor shill

>>49853560
it was stupid as fuck desu. could have gone so wrong. work in IT, started my own server hosting business. we are not huge, but manage to get it to a nice income I guess. now just need to figure out how to maintain the income which cruising and shitposting on biz while on holiday.

>>49853522
>>49853545
Ok you guys are literally fucking retarded. Look what happened to the entire market after Celsius did their thing. When the market wakes up to this it's the next leg down, hell I might be able to double my link stack at a dollar after all

>>49853606
Well, I hope you're right because I will sluuuuuurp that scrumptious dip with both hands and retire in two years.

>>49851419
>>49851936
Massive faggot. Death spiral is not prevented, it is only delayed.

>>49853606
this guy is the same guy from this thread >>49852923
same spitefulness, same narrative
he lost his money and is currently having a mental breakdown in bancor threads

>>49853463
If the apy is fat i might with a smaller position. 5k link maybe but the dao and the team gotta satisfy me

I have 10k LINK on Bancor, how fucked am I?

>>49853713
you now have 5k if you withdraw now with the possibility of 0 or 10,000 if you wait. how good were you at deal or no deal?

>>49853713
people who withdraw right now (who started the withdrawal process 168 hours ago) are getting 53.9% of their LINK back. i hope it works out for you fren, make sure to speak up during the next twitter spaces and tell mark richardson how you feel about this.

>>49853729
Hmmm… I’ll be alright if I lose it all so I’ll just hunker down and wait for this to all blow over.

>>49853669
>if the APY is fat
It won't be. APY was terrible since v3 got rid of LM rewards and relies only on paying out fees, which are awful since nobody uses the site to swap.

the jews have successfully convinced the goyim there are different teams of jews to love and hate and team bancor is scapegoating le evil team bancor. this is literally the no im the good jew he's the bad jew situation where they pretend to have a civil war while stealing all of your money. imagine being a paid twitter mouthpiece. congratulations on this, seriously

>>49853873
*team bancor is scapegoating le evil team celsius

>>49853490
No its you apy obsessed jew brained niggers who are responsible for all of this degenerate Ponzi overleveraging, youre the ones who bankroll and fund it.

>duuude lmao who cares if they dump and short all our coins 90% I made a nice 10% apy bro!!!

>>49853713
Depends on if you decide to take 5k link or 0 link

>>49853914
its literally crypto welfare.
>moon? no thanks bro I just want to pay my bills this month

>>49853785
I honestly can't believe that you don't realize how seriously fucked you are. You have two options:
1) take a 50% loss
2) or wait like a retard until it blows over
Pro tip: the longer you wait, the less LINK you'll receive. You'll be "compensated" with BNT instead of LINK. Now read: >>49853638 Just because this run on the bank is happening in slow motion doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Is there a point at which this thing devolves into "someone has to market buy a shit ton of LINKs to cover their debt"
Because that would be pretty cool

>>49853914
>What was weekly Sergey dumps?
Still fucking coping holy shit

>>49853785
Lmao Bancor plant. Oh I’ll just risk my make it stack and head down the Winchester for a pint til this all blows over. Get the fuck outta here.

>>49854001
https://twitter.com/PrimalGlenn/status/1538994776774787078?s=20&t=2N6Qq96Rt0IBJ1Unc2lH6w

>>49854070
kek

>>49854070
>>49854001
the ratio of bnt you receive shouldn't get any worse even if you're last outta the pool. per this thread at least:
https://twitter.com/PrimalGlenn/status/1538993150684954625?s=20&t=ej1th5Ey4E1X1qhYtKzr3w

>>49854194
So no one gets shit, thank you for clarifying mr bancor sir

>>49853713
You’re only fucked if you cash out. Bancor will make you whole if you stay in until ILP is unpaused.

>>49854256
You are clinically retarded if you seriously believe this. Bancor has no way of doing that.

>>49850777
checked ur a legend m8
how much eth and link are even available to withdraw from the pools?

>>49853873

>>49850665
>gets into crypto, a system designed to "unbank yourself"
>gives it to centralized funds and centralized funds larping as "decentralized"
>gives it to centralized funds and allows them to dump your investments into the dirt for pocket change
the most painful lesson for liquidity providers. not your keys not your crypto

>>49854194
LOL
LMAO
ΛΟΛ

>>49855154
based. from what i can see 7.6m LINK has been deposited on bancor, nearly 4.5m LINK pending withdrawal and 4.1m LINK in the Bancor Master Vault V3.
For ETH, 35k eth deposited, 24k eth pending withdrawal and 20.6k ETH in the master vault.

>>49854028
yea, probably. The big thing is that by killing off these lending protocols it makes it impossible reliably short link. If you borrow link from a LP it doesn't effect the buying pressure on exchanges, so you can just short link without consequences. If link's price starts moving upwards (it is) currently open shorts will start getting liquidated and they will be forced to buy back causing a cascade of buying pressure. With these liquidity pools operating as they have been, they could have just borrowed more link to dump the price when link started inching back up again. Now that they're dying off they can't do that, and it seems like the singularity is extremely fucking nigh. Its basically the GME short squeeze narrative, except, you know, actually real this time.

>>49854194
>https://twitter.com/PrimalGlenn/status/1538993150684954625
i don't think this is the full truth and we need some smarts anons on it
from what i can understand the token master vault will change based on tkn/bnt price
if the bnt price decreases then there is less tkn in the vault to withdraw
so basically.... pray that bnt holds its value... seven days is a long time

>>49853638
i can trade BNT for Eth/DAI/GUSD/whatever and then trade that for LINK

>>49856431
except you won't recieve any bnt when you withdraw because they turned that function off lol. I guess the solution to impermanent loss was always permanent loss lmao.

>>49856431
i really hope this isn't a serious comment....
you actually think bnt is going to have any value after this?
if you're not dumping in the first few blocks you won't be buying anything

Nothing ever happens

>>49856468
>>49856477
You need to take a moment to look at why BNT lost value in the first place and what theyre doing to recover it.
Even if BNT was 1 penny id get however much my link is worth in BNT at that time

>>49856513
Assuming there is any liquidity in the pool. What if nobody is willing to wager bnt/xy lps for fees and more bnt?

>>49856513
except as i already stated THEY ARE NO LONGER PAYING OUT BNT. And even if they were, do you think you'd be able to exchange it quickly enough that you wouldn't lose half or more of your value by the time the trade went through? Its a bank run and you're gloating about your credit card points lmao.

Thank you to all these anons who suddenly care about my financial well-being on Bancor but I still have no plans to withdraw any of my LP until the next bull market at the very least
Meanwhile I'll be collecting fees

>>49856636
you're misunderstanding something. We're not concerned with your financial well being, we're enjoying your collapse.

>>49856686
Cool
See you in a few years

>>49856686
>we're enjoying your collapse
Absolutely based. That nigger you replied to is straight up coping.

>>49856701

>>49856128
How soon is singularity?

I'm soo tired bros

>>49856775
feels soon

>>49854047
>how dare the owner of the project fund his project
Are you fucking retarded?
Without sergey you would have 0 link in the first place. If sergey doesnt have money to fund link development then the tokens are worthless for us, he sold towards the top, now that we got that out of the way and hes set for years and wont have to dump at the bottom.

A lot of alt devs are holding most of their funds in eth which is now worth 80% less. Sergeys war chest is in usd which means links finances werent effected by the crash

>>49856775
Only 2 more weeks to go now. God you dont even know how excited I am for us

>>49856877
On the eave of hippasus...

>>49851593
>which they are allowed to do and which nobody ever told them would be considered "hostile".
the hilarious thing is when the whale deposited all that at once, the BNT people probably cheered and laughed and danced
but now that same whale wants to withdraw all at once, they're screaming and crying and yelling

Why are the biggest sociopaths in the BNT threads?

Theres only 5m BNT pending withdrawal, which isn't much.

There are massive shorts on BNT currently, and Celcius is starting to get sweaty, as you can probably tell by the raids. The incentive is there to create massive hysteria and fear, but it seems to be weaning off.

LINK is fleeing the proctol, but the amount is actually decreasing over time, initiall it was 800k the first 12hrs now its another 400k since then.

Total in "pending withdrawal" is about 4.5m which is about half of the peak amount there was on there.

Its a bad situation, but not as bad as anticipated, theres still 4.5m LINK (27m) on there that hasn't budged.

This hinges on a couple things, but as >>49853212 mentioned, this is likley the plan.
If this liquidates the shorts, Bancor is saved and IL will probably be reinstated and Linkies will be made whole again. If Bitcoin dumps, the protocol will face maximum stress, it could die, or not, but your tokens will always be there ready for a haircut, assuming they dont do anything more drastic.

>>49852165
Just because they could technically do it doesn't mean it's within the ethos of defi, the rules of the game
Lesson of this is that however you can get fucked, you will get fucked eventually

>>49856636
Please go check the celsius reddit and see how theyre coping. Being overly optimistic despite the damning evidence, because in situations like this human nature is for people to have cognitive dissonance because they dont want to believe that they just lost all their money.
The cels are making up conspiracies about fud shills and the institutions that are fudding their noble celsius, they are coping so bad that they are trying to pump the price of cel collectively as if thats gonna get them out of insolvency.

I have no skin in this game, im simply watching the shitshow and my opinion is without any bias, id honestly like to see defi do well and bancor survive but this is a disaster, and very dangerous.

Ask yourself if you would seriouely deposit there again if you were able to withdraw, I know you are probably shitting bricks right now, you know the answer is no.
Nobody will risk substantial money in a protocol which has the ability to arbitrarily hold your funds hostage.
The fact that whales are willing to withdraw 10k eth at an instant 50% loss is quite telling of the sentiment right now

>>49856908
I STILL DONT KNOW WHAT IT MEANS
TELL ME WHAT IT MEANNNNNNS

>>49856908
Watery demise, you shall see chainlink in the skies!

>>49857085
The fuders just have positions in the other direction and need liquidity from panickers and opportunists to succeed
Its just a game and if nobody puts liquidity on the shorters side, they lose

>>49857093
Either hinting at a date or a metaphor for the mass liquidations (watery demise) that need to occur in order for chainlink to be ‘in the skies’

>>49856970
>Why are the biggest sociopaths in the BNT threads?
Look where you are lol. /biz/ is full of schizoid losers who just want to see others fail, and this is the biggest catastrophe at the moment they can harvest misery from. That doesn't really make them wrong though.

>>49857144
>metaphor for the mass liquidations (watery demise)
that's very clever, i dont remember reading that interpretation when we had all those threads for a while. very clever.

>>49857231
>t./biz/ user
Nice projection

>>49856970
>Why are the biggest sociopaths in the BNT threads?
Literally always were. It was a twitterfag (CLG, 42) op to get stinkies to shore up bancor through "native" marketing. Anyone who pointed this out got nothing but shit for it.
The fact that its falling apart now and blowing those assholes out is the best part of it. Its why they seethe so hard

>>49857252
>t.projecting psycho

>>49857280
>t. coping baggie

>>49857245
I don’t think that interpretation was discussed back then but i saw it mentioned the other day. It really is a great metaphor. Tomorrow is also 216, not that i think that means anything will happen

>>49856513
I can't believe people are coping to this degree, so much that they aren't allowing themselves to understand the situation. First, they've paused IL protection, so you're not getting BNT. Second, you have a seven day waiting period before you're able to dump BNT if you did get it. What do you think is going to happen to the price of BNT in those seven days with absolutely zero buying pressure?

>>49857378
at this point i would not be surprised at all if the singularity happened TONIGHT at midnight. Everything has a sense of unreality to it, like we're being carried along by forces beyond our control. You know what i mean? It like a movie narrative, not like real life.

>>49857246
And?

>>49857122
Still doesnt fix the fact that if they ever reactivate the ilp everyone will just rush to withdraw, which would create this same bankrun situation and the death spiral again.
Everyone who is currently stressed about this situation is trying to run for the door and never return.

>>49856128
Bancor isn't a lending protocol.

>>49857393
You don't even know how bancor works. This is just plain false. Your withdrawal is instant once started and you're se/nt your tokens to your wallet.

>>49857523
He was talking about v3, I clearly have no idea what u investing in. Jesus is this space scary or what

>>49857473
No liquidity supporting that position, no bank run and the manipulators truly suck at their jobs as this thread shows. Like the luna/terra attack, liquidity was a joke, nobody cares, and luna was an outright ponzi that collapsed

>>49857561
I'm talking about v3 too. When you initiate a withdrawal you enter a 7 day cooldown period during which nothing happens. After 7 days have passed you press the withdrawal button again and that's when IL is calculated and tokens sent to your wallet.
That guy is under the impression that you are sent BNT instantly and then you have to wait 7 days before you can trade it, which is false.

>>49857495
its a liquidity pool. How do you think they make money with their liquidity?

>>49857453
Yeah, everything is lining up so perfectly

>>49855254
based thank you anon

>>49857643
who is "they"?

>>49857523
>he thinks his funds are safu on v2.1
Kek, go ahead and try a withdraw for me.

>>49857495
Bancor used freshly minted BNT to pair with single sided tokens. That makes it more than a simple AMM like Uniswap or Sushiswap. It makes it a 1:1 collateralized LP position by minting and burning BNT tokens. Sound familiar? It’s the same seignorage model as LUNA but it’s not a stablecoin, it’s hiding as a regular DEX, but make no mistake, it’s a 1:1 collateralized LP and it doesn’t have enough collateral to repay depositors. It’s functionally insolvent in the same way as a lending platform would be, but obscured in the trappings of an AMM.

>>49857827
the lizard people obviously

>>49857523
>>49857840
this made me laugh out loud. Fuck that’s sad

>>49854194
lol no anon this is wrong. this would be true if trading was halted. this guy seems to think IL happens due to withdrawals, IL happens because trading causes the pool to get imbalanced. if we get a bear rally and bnt doesn't go up as much in price compared to other tokens then the IL gets worse.

>>49857495
It might as well be, someone is eating any and all impermanent loss. There is no free lunch.
>trade X for ETH
>X drops in price while ETH gains
>LPs want to withdraw their ETH
>have to get paid out in more and more BNT because the protocol lacks the ETH
>price of BNT plummets as there is tons of selling pressure but no reason to hold it

>>49858009
>>49858000
Impermanent loss is not the reason Bancor is insolvent. All tokens are paired with a valueless token (BNT), and as BNT mints accelerated the exogenous collateral (single sided deposits) in the system was redeemed. Bancor is undercollateralized, it’s the same thing as an insolvent lending protocol or a depegged stablecoin. There’s not enough hard assets to make everyone whole. It’s literally drained of liquidity you retards.

>>49858000
Checked and this is what I'm saying. Someone has to eat the IL. During a bull market when everything is white hot and there are few withdrawals, the BNT you get can mask the IL, but during a bear market when some things are tanking more than others (like BNT) and many withdrawals happen simultaneously, it gets exposed, ie impermanent loss.

>>49858114
Literally what I just wrote. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Otherwise this would be happening in forex.

>>49857955
Don't laugh, this guy's probably killing himself right now.

>>49857523
last i heard, to withdraw from v2.1 you now have to have it put into v3.0 which has that 7 day withdraw
that's one of the changes they made very recently due to the v3.0 pool

>>49858230
>>49857840
Jesus Christ where the fuck did I say anything about 2.1? Upgrade your script pajeets

Couldnt bancor be fixed if it was Just programmed to use the printed BNT to buy the rest of the lost tokens before giving it to you, instead of just giving you the BNT to you to make you whole?

>>49858162
No, you’re wrong about the insolvency being caused by impermanent loss. You’re wrong about the mechanism of liquidity draining entirely. Impermanent loss doesn’t explain redeeming collateral from newly minted BNT. Impermanent loss results from price differences, however Bancor is insolvent because it’s a collateralized LP protocol and the underlying assets were redeemed. That’s not impermanent loss, it’s undercollateralized debt that is incurred by Bancor to its depositors and Bancor’s method of repaying the debt it accrued is to use fees taken from LPs, but Bancor doesn’t have the hard assets to honor the withdrawals. This is a leveraged protocol breaking down before your eyes. The entire thing was a lie from the start, it’s a collateralized protocol not an AMM.

>>49858268
That would be just automating the selling of BNT on behalf of the user, nothing would change

>>49858268
this is what bancor does, sells BNT to make you whole in whatever token you lost money to impermanent loss.

The problem is nobody wants to buy BNT.

That has always been the problem

Token

Not

Needed

Bancies on suicide watch

>>49858268
It doesn’t matter how much BNT is minted, there’s not enough tokens in Bancor to swap BNT into your token no matter what.

There’s not enough tokens in the protocol. They accepted X deposits, and they have X/2 tokens left in the pools. The tokens are gone.

Question to anyone who currently has their stack held hostage on bancor, if they brought back IL protection and you successfully withdrew, would you ever use bancor again? be honest

>>49858265
>your withdrawal is instant
on v2.1 it was
now it has to go through v3.0, which has that 7 day delay
so, yes, v2.1 is relevant to the conversation

>>49858268
You guys are just assuming when you press sell for BNT there is someone who wants to buy it and at the price it's sold at. They've been printing millions of BNT since v3 and there is basically zero reason to buy and hold this coin since LM rewards were ended and the fees are shit.

>>49858265
You will have to wait seven days before you get any BNT, and you won't get any of it now that they paused ILP, but assuming you did, read my reply above. There has to be someone on the other end willing to buy.

>>49858288
That's what I wrote here >>49858009. It is most definitely a function of IL. Their collateral (the LPs provide) is leaving the system and that's the protocol working as intended. It can just be masked during a bull run because there are very few withdrawals and everything is going up together. It's not a coincidence that the wheels fell off this just a few weeks into a bear market.

>>49852872
I kept 5k link on v2.1 for the same reasons. Feels bad bro.

>>49858499
No, it’s not impermanent loss. Impermanent loss can be reversed if the token prices go back to what they were when you originally deposited (that’s why it’s called impermanent hurr durr). If BNT pumps it will change nothing, because that’s not the problem.

The problem is the same thing that happened to LUNA, but through complexity is hidden under an AMM context.

The seignorage token, BNT, was minting exponentially and the minter redeemed the underlying collateral from the LPs. The Bancor protocol lost nearly 50% of its users deposits before shutting off the minter. Bancor essentially got liquidated half their leveraged position.

This would never happen on Uni or Sushi, because they don’t pair deposits with minted tokens. In fact it’s impossible for Uni or Sushi to run this fractional reserve scam, because LPs provide two hard assets and don’t conjure half of their liquidity from the void ponzi.

If the market pumps Bancor is still insolvent. This isn’t impermanent loss because it can’t be reversed. The loss is real and permanent already.

>>49857854
Thank you anon, this is a great way to explain it.

>>49858778
Well if the market pumps the ponzi BNT token then Bancor would be saved... but chances of that happening are low since the death spiral already started. The way you explained it, this is basically Luna 2.0

>>49858778
We're saying the same thing essentially, anon. The one thing I would disagree with you is that if BNT pumped, it could be used to trade for the LP's native token and make them whole. Unfortunately that will not happen for the reasons I described above. It was a good idea on paper, but not in practice as we're seeing now.

>>49858883
The death spiral they're in is very similar to Luna. As soon as they turn ILP back on (assuming they do) the protocol will start printing billions of BNT which will end up being basically worthless unless they can come up with some way to save it. The fair thing to do wight now is to distribute all the value left in the system proportionally to the holders and let them walk. It's dead and the sooner they admit it the better.

>>49857453
I don’t think even He knows what’s going on down here

>>49858403
that's what i'd expect: when(if) they turn IL protection back on, why wouldn't most then try and rush out again, where likely they'd try and turn IL protection off again to prevent it

>>49858883
>>49858901
It all hinges on arb trades between Bancor and other exchanges then. Bancor has to gigapump its token to siphon liquidity from other exchanges to make itself whole. Could be that they’re playing the victim of Celsius trying to manipulate a short squeeze so they can pass of the loss onto other exchanges. The whole situation is fucked.

>>49859143
I'd assume that if they're still acting in good faith for their LPs (which is a big if) they will try to come up with a plan to prevent or mitigate this type of situation, the turn ILP back on once people have calmed down. The questions are, can the come up with such a plan and will people trust them after they did this?

>>49859228
They are definitely trying to play the victim and making Celsius the bad guys, but it was just a matter of time before they would have been exposed. They took a massive single sided position and exposed themselves to this risk without doing anything to mitigate it. Now they're making their loyal LPs pay the price. It's a fundamental flaw in their protocol that would have manifested eventually though.

>>49859333
seems things algorithmic, either stablecoins or liquidity pools, would both end up failing eventually

>>49855254
Just a reminder that TRUTH>TRUST.

>>49857618
>Your withdrawal is instant because you press the withdraw button after the 7 day wait period
This is just some bizarre dreidel spinning

v2.1 withdrawals are deactivated via the dashboard, but is it possible to withdraw by interacting directly with the v2.1 contract?

>>49859399
Gradually, I began to hate them.

>>49859427
Not that anyone has said. It looks like you now have to go to v3 and wait the seven days before you get access to your tokens.

>>49859427
according to discord you can't

>>49851474
They are handling it. This is how
>noo not decentralized enough
Cope

Has there even been any update from Bancor since this all started? Official or otherwise?

>>49860475
we all know they won't survive until the next sunset. Cope is right.

>>49860524
Not much of an update to deal with. Either
A) what they pull works, celsius pisses off, they restore IL protection, we see if people lost faith. I would argue they wouldn't provided everything works out okay but depends on how bearish the market is
B) they never turn it back on, protocol dies

Probably a BNT short squeeze is coming up if I was feeling risky. I'm thinking A) is going to be the likely scenario but I doubt we're gonna see anything interesting for a while. I'm really not negative on the bancor situation though if it's as they said. Celsius is absolutely FUCKED though.

>>49860866
the funniest part about your post is you think you're being reasonable. Its the big bad celsius ruining everything for your favorite ponzi scheme? Wake up you proud woman of color. They're both scams. Its all scams. Celsius will die just as surely as bancor will, just as surely as luna did. You need to learn from this or neck yourself if you can't.

>>49860866
are we on r eddit? what kind of simple post is this
>I'm really not negative on the bancor situation though if it's as they said.
the protocol is highly likely to collapse....
why would anyone trust them again after their whole model failed? after they intervened and broke their "de"fi and dao credentials
man..

>>49861138
>>49861190
shut up you niggers am i on /pol/ where everything has to be a happening or what? forgot that this shit is literally being jerked off by retarded linkies so that answers all my questions I need to know.

looking forward to the inevitable short squeeze though so thanks for your service

>>49861207
>retarded linkies

just say you're a tourist. This is a link board nigger, and you don't belong here. We joked around with you during the bull market, but now its link season and you need to either dissapear or get with the program.

>>49861380
Oh my mistake. I'm simply a humble newfag who decided not to hold all the way down "with the marines!!!" gomenasai, I'm the reason link didn't hit 1000 eoy

that's okay though, appreciate you really laying your credibility on the line for this one. Won't really go back and forth with you on this one, but feel free to keep seething behind your screen that you had life changing wealth and didn't sell at the top just like all the rest of us.

>>49861502
how butthurt are you? We've literally told you every day for almost 5 years all that you need to do to make it, and you didn't do it. What does that say about your judgement, about your mental acuity? Will you have the courage to kill yourself when everything comes to light this year, or will you pretend like you never had the chance to buy link because you never heard of it?

>>49861553
Oh so you did sell? where'd you sell? dont' be shy anon you seem pretty confident. You seem really smart so I know you didn't miss the gleaming red flag top that existed over all markets. I'm sorry, I thought you were one of those bagholders haha. You're right, you got in earlier before me to. Wow you must have locked in TONS of profit at the top.

You didn't really hold something that went down 85 percent against ETH...r-right?

>>49861588
we're talking about chainlink. are you a bot or haven't you looked at the charts lately?

>>49861712
damn, another 7-8x from here and you'll be at ATH. let's go marines! I'm rebuying right fucking now . Amazing how now that we're in a bear market, we're back to shit talking LINK can completely derail a thread. Hasn't been like this since 2019. You don't need to convince me of anything anon, but that's okay. You wanna whip out the tried and true "you missed out!" argument?

Anyways, thanks for the laughs. As mentioned, bancor will likely be okay but without a doubt we will see a massive liquidity exodus, but I'm not really convinced it's going to be a death spiral and only thing i think that's been made clear is they need to rethink their model. Hey, maybe this will work out better than the nexo exodus that linkies organized. Are you oldfag enough to remember that one? did you win, son? Lmao.

>>49861796
lmao, how much did you lose on bancor dude. Or do you own xrp?

>>49857453
>You know what i mean?
you mean you haven't taken your meds.

t. og linklet, dr;ns

BNT bros... Not like this...

>>49861588
recent lower price means i got to pick up another 1000 LINK last month
it's a godsend

>>49861796
>down 90% from ath
lmao nigger most things are down 80-90%, this isn't outside the norm

>>49856128
>GME short squeeze narrative, except, you know, actually real this time.
yeah cause that definitely wasn't real and the price of gme didn't go up at all
if there's one certain outcome out from all of this, it's that bnt price will go down

there's two ways this will play out.
>bancor is holding your assets as hostage and there are big shorts against bnt (wonder why anyone would want to short this ponzi…)


there is no liquidity so any price action of bnt is glued to btc at this point.
>btc goes up
eventually shorts will give up and the price of bnt rises momentarily
>btc goes down
users lose money and at some point there will be a crack when people realise that it's better to take the haircut than nothing at all. shorts make some money.

in either scenario what will happen in the long-term is that
>users will pay
bancor has no treasury, meaning that they didn't save any of their profits in case of a bad day such as this (speaks volumes of their operation, huh?).
bancor is already under and won't suddenly come up with more capital unless the token price appreciates. but the can only go up in the current situation where bnt follows btc.
even if this whole operation is painted as "fighting the evil shorters" and "doing this for your own good", in the end the problem is, and has always been, the protocol itself.
no matter of the short term outcome, whether up or down, in the end the protocol and its bnt is worthless, and the users will pay for the losses.

what find crazy about the situation is the complete lack of self-critisism from bancor, as if it’s the “evil celsius” and as if “they’re doing this to save you”, when it’s about their ego. they will rather take everyone down with them than admit that ok we have a problem with bnt and this is how much we can pay for you right now. “saving the protocol” really just means trying to save THEIR asses, but their asses are already fried.

the saddest part is that the owners will let bancor fold, users foot the bill and just start another company pre-next bullrun with a new name.

>>49863913
>what find crazy about the situation is the complete lack of self-critisism from bancor
Mark seems a nice guy and pretty intelligent but it seems nuts that they put so much faith into his bright ideas; all of the criticism pointed out here is valid and doesn't take much analysis to work out.
Bancor always smelt slightly fishy to me for this reason, the entire protocol was based on BNT being worth something and them magicking up more BNT from thin air (much like most of crypto tbf)

Price keeps going up lol, market doesn't care about the locked linkies

we will be saved!
don't worry!

>>49864187
tbf I think they did recognise this and was why the made the changes in v3 as the tokenomics of v2.1 were ridiculous, they have been hit by terrible timing launching it though and v3 now has a terrible name

People don't seem to get though that what they have done was voted through by the DAO previously, they didn't read the small print, sad

>>49857057
>Just because they could technically do it doesn't mean it's within the ethos of defi, the rules of the game
Disagree actually. If there's a backdoor you should assume it will be used against you. If you want to talk about the ethos of defi, that would be not having a backdoor at all.

Bancor Is Literally Unstoppable

>>49853729
>you now have 5k if you withdraw now with the possibility of 0 or 10,000 if you wait. how good were you at deal or no deal?
Isn't it the case that without IL protection bancor works exactly like any other AMM? So you'd get the same amount back that you would've gotten back from e.g. uniswap. Of course you run the risk that link moons and there's even more uncompensated IL.

Can I safely initiate my withdrawal now without receiving the haircut if they turn ILP back on later?

>>49856426
This thread from Bancor:
>https://twitter.com/PrimalGlenn/status/1538993150684954625
should not reassure anyone. Look at the key tweet:
>A misconception that keeps coming up is that those who leave first will be made whole while others that remain will be worse off. If a pool has a deficit of 25% and everyone were to leave at the exact same time, then everyone will have a 25% deficit in their TKN.
What they're trying to do is get you to sit tight. They're implying that you can't lose any more money at this point. This is wrong. They apparently paused IL-protection because of a combination of a mass-exodus out of the protocol combined with a large short on FTX. The problem is that the action of pausing IL-protection will cause a bigger mass-exodus out of the protocol once it's turned back on. Also, they've telegraphed to all of the degens in the world that at that moment you can short BNT for free money. If you wait in the protocol, you could get caught in the death-spiral for a second time. It's rational to take your money out now to mitigate that risk. Another rational course of action is to put in cycling withdrawal requests (which cost nothing) and hope that they coincide with when IL-protection is switched back on. What you shouldn't do is to sit tight and hope for the best. You could very easily end up JUSTed if you do this.

>>49864325
You can start the cool down and get in the que, when cool down ends you will be given a breakdown of what you will receive and have a choice to click withdraw or return to the pool. So starting it now doesn't mean you are locked in to receiving the current terms

>>49864325
yes

>>49861190
>why would anyone trust them again after their whole model failed?
Their whole model has always been retarded and yet people trusted them.

>>49857057
The DAO voted to give them the power to do it as they didn't previously have the capability to intervene like this

>>49864381
they will probably just start a new company later, and tards will buy into it, but bancor as a brand is finished.

>>49864324
no, so heres the problem with that. It isn't 1-1. the normal scenario is for them to have 50% of whatever your stack is on hand at any given time. so if you give them ten, they give you 5 back, plus five of whatever bnt is worth out of your stack. Now bnt isn't worth anything, so if you give them ten, you might get 5 back. That is, unless people who gave 10 thousand pull theirs out before you.

Its really bad dude. Everyone on bancor will lose most of their holdings.

>>49864187
>the entire protocol was based on BNT being worth something and them magicking up more BNT from thin air (much like most of crypto tbf)
Every pool has bnt as a counterpart so in theory that should give it quite some value. It's brilliant really
>ask people to put their real tokens up for sale against BNT
>this gives BNT value
>compensate people for selling their tokens by giving them BNT
Guess who ends up with all the real tokens in this scheme, and who ends up with the funny money?

>>49864392
plus, any other defi protocol would have a treasury as a backup. bancor has zero treasury because of their greed, so there goes that failsafe.

>>49864187
seems like he was against liquidity mining for while before they stopped it, but he is not the owner anyways, he is just a pawn. the owners have been skimming so much money from the protocol that they don't give a shit anymore, the only real thing in stake here is the rep of mark, and that is now gone because the ponzinomics are revealed.

>>49851117
>>49851145
>tw*tter accounts with pepe porfile images
What fucking cringe is this

>>49864392
>the normal scenario is for them to have 50% of whatever your stack is on hand at any given time. so if you give them ten, they give you 5 back
I don't think this is true from what I've read in their docs etc. If we assume a normal scenario without any price changes or trades happening it goes like this:
>deposit 10 TKN
>system mints 10 BNT (assuming TKN:BNT is 1:1 at that moment)
>system puts 10 TKN and 10 BNT into the pool
If you withdraw the system should give you 10 TKN back and burn the 10 BNT. Right?

Jesus fucking christ what the fuck is going on. Bancor this, Nexo that and Celsius and blockfuck... What do all these things mean? Why do people put their linkies on centralized entities so said entities can short link than exitscam making any 'rewards' you earnt worthless.
I swear a year and a bit ago I saw so many posts of 'people' saying they were 'staking' LINK on these exchanges, did people think that lending out your link to these entities was actual staking?

>>49852997
Based and redpilled

>>49863956
Nah regulations are coming. It is time for the real ponzi makers (backed by the full might of the US government to make crypto great again)

>>49864390
Bancor Classic incoming.

>>49864508
Bancor doesn't short LINK in the same way that NEXO and Celsius do. There is lots of completely legit fud of the Bancor design there is no need to make shit up.

>>49864508
Bancor doesnt short tokens retard its a dex. You don't ''lend'', you are a liquidity provider. Bancor fucked up yes but posts like this are just annoying as fuck and shows how many retards there are on biz.

>>49864683
>Bancor doesn't short LINK
Doesn't need to. If you put your LINK on there and lose half of it, someone else ends up with the other half. You effectively sold it without wanting to. This fuckery is another means by which LINK is transferred from NEETs to the suits.

>>49864502
this would be the case of a completely flat market situation. but where do you think those APY's are coming from? and how do you think they pay for the ILP?
>brrrrrrrrrrr

>>49864773
the link LPs lose go to people who bought it off the exchange, it doesn't go to the exchange itself. this is embarrassing.

>>49864814
I think you're missing the point

>>49864773
You have no idea how an AMM works.

>>49864840
>this is embarrassing
(you) are embarrassing. Yes. Bancor is broken and is leaking LINK. More liquidity was available at a lower price than it should have been as a result. Net effect: LINK sold to market = LINK short.

Some of the fud and ignorance in here is terrible. Bancor are in a terrible place and there are legit questions about their protocol design but loads of the posts are just people who don't understand how an AMM works, how the tokenomics work or didn't read up on the project at all and talking trash, makes it super confusing for people coming looking for genuine information

>>49864936
>put link in an amm
>price goes up
>you have now sold a portion of your link
you haven't "effectively" sold it or "virtually" sold it, you have simply and literally sold it
quite brilliant how many "liquidity providers" there are who just don't realize this

>>49864978
What is there to be confused?
It is a protocol to provide lp. Instead of providing liquidity against a pair, all assets are paired against bnt. When people deposit, bnt are burnt, when they exit, bnt are created. The worst case scenario is when everyone exit which create a hyperinflation environment, which is now. The worst part is now they turned off ilp which is essentially their selling point, basically no different to hodl mode

>>49864936
>>49864978
>You have no idea how an AMM works
All of the Bancor AMMs are BNT-pairs. When the supply of BNT increases rapidly and its value falls more rapidly, the other sides of all the pairs can be lost from the protocol. That's why they switched the IL-protection off. It was leaking, as I said.

>>49865050
ah you're actually right, there's massive IL on the tkns simply from tkn staying stable and bnt getting cheaper

>>49865036
>basically no different to hodl mode
except that IT CAN GET MUCH WORSE as soon as IL-protection is turned back on again. bigger exodus + more BNT shorts as soon as it's announced = more losses for those still in the protocol.

>>49865081
I'm obviously retarded as I put the price of link and bnt (3 months ago and now) into the il calculator and it only forecast a measly 5%... as opposed to the 50% some have been reporting

>>49865115
Yeah. But they're not going to be retarded enough to reinstate the instant il protection... right?

>>49865125
>as opposed to the 50% some have been reporting
probably got in earlier than 3 months ago

>>49865136
Catch 22. If they switch it on again, BNT value falls rapidly. If they keep it off forever, BNT-value falls slower, but it still falls, because it's not doing anything and the underlying protocol is broken. The problem is that there's not enough money in the protocol to cover investors' tokens. That only changes if more money is added to it, but who'll do that?

>>49865163
Maybe.. I've been in since early v2.1. Everything on 3 now since day 2. Might have to run the numbers again.

>>49865202
At the very least they can kill the shorters by just keeping ILP off indefinitely. Celsius already dumped their millions of BNT and expected to get millions and millions more, that now simply are not going to be created.
Don't get me wrong, Bancor is still dead, but they can easily kill the shorters by just doing nothing at this point.

>>49865202
I get that. But they need a way to stagger or randomise the withdrawal process. Also a return to incremental ilp seems non negotiable.

>>49865202
The only option is doing what hex does, provision of protection per month, this will slow the death

>>49865230
They set precedent, which tell people they are willing to fuck over the users, even though they said it’s to protect the user but celsius is a user

>>49865230
Are Celsius definitely out? Are there any large institutional investors left in? If not, the team should be able to come up with some proposals to put to the DAO for how they should proceed that won't just get voted down by self interest

>>49865230
>they can easily kill the shorters by just doing nothing at this point
But the moment they do do something, it'll get massively shorted again. Knowing this, why would anyone buy BNT prior to the inevitable?

>>49865273
I'm not defending them, their protocol failed under market conditions that weren't even specifically malicious, just relatively extreme. That's an F no matter how well written your contracts were.

>>49865273
What precedent did they set? What they did was powers given to them by users in a vote

>>49865290
Literally the only reason anyone would buy BNT would be in the very short term assuming that the megashorts on BNT are going to get squeezed, which I think would be retarded gambling and would not recommend.

>>49865298
Oh we all know dao is a meme, they controlled majority of the votes just like do kwon

>>49865314
Shorts exiting is probably what's supporting the price right now. They're not trapped unless they entered in the last three days.

>>49864310
> Bancor Is Literally Unstoppable
No BNT will ever be printed again.
That’s even better than BTC!

>>49865081
How is this the case?

Why are BNT withdrawals not suffering IL, wtf is this bullshit?

https://etherscan.io/token/0xAB05Cf7C6c3a288cd36326e4f7b8600e7268E344?a=0x857Eb0Eb2572F7092C417CD386BA82e45EbA9B8a

The BNT market seems to be very illiquid.
It probably wouldn't take more than a few millions to start a short squeeze.
What is going to trigger this?