/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>49873969
>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 [Embed]
>pending link withdrawals 4.2m LINK
https://etherscan.io/token/0x516c164a879892a156920a215855c3416616c46e?a=0x857eb0eb2572f7092c417cd386ba82e45eba9b8a
>pending ETH withdrawals: 25k ETH
>https://etherscan.io/token/0x256ed1d83e3e4efdda977389a5389c3433137dda?a=0x857eb0eb2572f7092c417cd386ba82e45eba9b8a
a LINK liquidity provider with 400k LINK on bnt just withdrew and received 53% of his LINK back, and nothing else. ouch, pic related

>>49874019
good post from anon in the last thread

>>49874207
trust has been shattered. bancor cant actually recover from this

>>49874270
>it was a lie from the start

The funny thing is bnt is gonna moon by the end of the week.

>>49874354
no the party/ ponzi is over. only pain now for those involved

nice

>>49874396
There’s a very strong thesis for a BNT short squeeze, it has been talked about at length in the last 12 hours.

>>49874354
Anyone that buys into a protocol that freezes users' funds on a whim to protect price is retarded and deserve to lose everything.

>>49875903
They’re not buying it because they believe in the protocol. The squeeze thesis is that huge BNT shorts were entered in the pretext of a hyper inflationary spiral that has now been indefinitely postponed, and Celsius doesn’t have infinite time to wait.

>>49875903
based and agreed

If nothing else this will be a great test for risk tolerance. Some anons are bound to have 100% of the stack on there

>>49873969
>>49852486
>>49852486
>>49852486

>>49875954
>muh celcius
top kek. show proof its them or gtfo. NO ONE HAS PROVIDED ANY PROOF ITS THEM

Also I don't really understand the model here; basically the protocol takes some % as courtage on every trade and theoretically the accrued fees should be able to pay the IL entirely, and only in rare circumstances would BNT have to be minutes to cover IL. But in the case of v3, almost no protocol owned fees had been accrued and the IL had to be paid almost entirely in minted BNT. But what happened to the v2.1 fee pool? Can't that be merged with V3?

>>49876091
minted* ph*ne

>>49875897
Yeah cool except the whales playing those games can go in the other direction with leveraged longs and then just open up more shorts if bnt ever brings back ILP. Its over, and there isn't a winning play for the small fish, only the whales will get out with anything.

i lost 80 link on v3

>>49876215
If i could get out right now and only lose 80 link id fucking suck my own dick.

>>49876235
Yeah but he only has 160 or so most likely kek

>>49876215
I thought v3 has 100% loss protection on day 1?

>>49876091
>Can't that be merged with V3?
just recently they changed it so to exit v2.1 you have to deposit into v3 first before getting to start the 7 day withdraw window
so they've already been merged, in that regard

>>49876013
It’s whoever owns that FTX short at 650% LR, or the maxed out shorts on Binance. And it would make sense that it was Celsius considering they had the full expectation of receiving 10 million BNT in IL protection. If you knew your IL payout was going to kick off a death spiral, of course you would short as well, especially if you were in as much financial shit as Celsius is. It would almost be negligent not to.

>>49876156
I’m not suggesting otherwise, anon, I’m not defending Bancor at all. I’m just saying that the huge number of shorts that were entered into in the expectation of an ILP printing death spiral are now on thin ice, and Bancor can hold this position a lot longer than they can fund their shorts. Of course as soon as Bancor start up ILP again the same thing repeats, but in the short term it is much more likely that Bancor will squeeze these shorters from the sheer lack of remaining liquidity to dump. Everyone left on Bancor can’t even withdraw their BNT. They canceled ILP and the price didn’t move. There are no liquid sellers left right now except for the last few people getting out who already started their countdown.

>>49876363
you cant be serious. they turned off that feature with the click of a button a couple days ago
>>49876511
>It would almost be negligent not to.
agreed, and that shows a flaw in bancor more than anything else. so bnt pumps for a minute and them dumps into oblivion? im happy just watching that from the sidelines, not gonna buy BNT lol

>>49876382
I'm aware, but the protocol should own a lot of link earned from fees in v2.1 . I wonder where they are

I own 600 OCEAN. How fucked am I?

>>49876633
Yes I’m not shilling it or anything, more just working it over in my head to see if there are any holes in it. I suppose the biggest hole is that any time you feel certain about something in crypto the opposite happens. I’ll probably sit out too because I don’t like the risk, but if a short squeeze does happen I’ll be kicking myself and saying “I knew it”

>>49876838
fair enough, and definitely worth thinking about no doubt. one thing i noticed earlier was the link whale who withdrew 400k LINK and got back 213k LINK, he sent 2.5m BNT to binance earlier. idk if you can short bnt or not on binance, so i dont know if they were selling or shorting. the more i look at their transactions though, it could easily be a large entity. i guess they earned 3.3m BNT from staking the 400k LINK

>>49877370
It was just a dude on tg, I’m surprised he was even paid out bnt. Lucky him

>>49877527
as far as i can tell, the bnt seemed to be rewards earned not impermanent loss compensation but i agree, anything tangible you can get from bancor is a win

This could've very well happened to me if I had enough LINK to be worth staking.

I thought this was a bulletproof defi 'protocol' meaning, in my mind, just a piece of unchangeable code. I could've never imagined that a token could never be withdrawn from a platform again. I know celsius is a private platform, but bancor? How can it even call itself decentralized.

>>49879119
i think thats what many of us assumed, and thats what DeFi SHOULD be

>>49879119
You can withdraw your tokens, just not with IL protection

I wonder what's up with the coordinated fud from bancor the recent days.

>>49879718
Probably their one single feature they used to draw people in being turned off without notice causing people to lose half if not all of their net worth. But that's just a guess.

>>49879878
kek
>>49879718
'fud' was maybe, maaaybe, a valid criticism 4 days ago. now its just a sign of ignorance and nobody is falling for that shit. NO ONE WILL EVER PROVIDE LIQUIDITY TO BANCOR AGAIN after this

>>49879710
thanks Rick Barbor from bancor for this post

>>49877370
a dev admitted on tg yesterday that the LM rewards being withdrawn and sold off is the thing that kicked off the problem. They probably could have survived the market sell of of rewards which were ongoing since 2.1 stopped but they couldn't handle the continued selling of rewards and mega whale withdrawls...
It makes more sense in this context.
I have no idea how the protocol survives this honestly, unless they can just stall until there is a bull run on btc to inflate all the shitcoins...

>>49880030
that introduces another problem though. They're basically holding all their users hostage in order to try and ride this out. But if they successfully survive this, why would anyone provide them liquidity ever again? Normal people need access to their own liquidity too, not just whales and other defi protocols. Thats the very basis on which liquidity pools are made: people need liquidity. Right now bancor is holding a gun to their users heads and saying either keep your money with us or only take half your deposit back. How long is that going to go on for? another week? A month? Maybe there are users willing to hold on in the short term in order to try and be made whole, but what happens next week when people are still withdrawing at a 50% haircut? Those users who were willing to wait this week are not going to be as willing to wait next week, especially since they'll be able to watch the vaults empty out in real time.

Its over. Bancor is dead already, they just delayed it by fucking over their retail customers.

Someone give me an update on the Bancor situation, are we going to see blood or not?

>>49880167
Although retail would have been completely fucked if they'd kept IL rewards on too. Celsius would have been first out the door with something like around 10 million BNT in rewards, and it's unlikely there was even buy pressure to carry that in the first place, meaning that retail would have gotten zero even in the "leave IL protection on" scenario.

>>49880228
Hyperinflationary spiral is off the cards for now/postponed, megashorts are possibly going to get rekt and cause a squeeze, simply because nobody can sell and no new tokens are getting printed, faith in the protocol is pretty much fatally hit, so I would say it's all looking pretty grim.
Then again people bought LUNA 2.0 so who knows, maybe Bancor can keep its IL protection off for 6 months and then launch some sort of brand new 4.0 and bring people back, crypto crowd have short as fuck memories. My money isn't on it though.

>>49880242
the only fair thing to do for their users would be to liquidate their holdings completely and disburse them equally to their users. The fact that they haven't done that proves that retail is going to be left holding the bag at the end of this.

>>49880167
>a dev admitted on tg yesterday that the LM rewards being withdrawn and sold off is the thing that kicked off the problem. They probably could have survived the market sell of of rewards which were ongoing since 2.1 stopped but they couldn't handle the continued selling of rewards and mega whale withdrawls...
>It makes more sense in this context.
>I have no idea how the protocol survives this honestly, unless they can just stall until there is a bull run on btc to inflate all the shitcoins...
You can see it in the staked BNT percentage which is still over 60% even now, but this had been close to 90% just a few weeks ago..

>>49880228
its going to be catastrophic. Defi is this generation of investors MT Gox

>>49875897
>short squeeze
this might shock you, but sometimes people short because an asset is dogshit, its company is failing and they want to get money out of this situation

you people keep spamming "short squeese", but who the fuck is going to buy bancor?
the overwhelming majority of the supply is in bancor and what little rest can be found outside of bancor is constantly used for shorts
in binance you can't even short anymore due to the massive demand, and in ftx people who lend bnt to shorters were getting 600% apy at some point (might still be getting it)

the only use of BNT is to be staked at bancor pools (maybe governance too, unless v3 changed it to apply to all assets) and as a rewards mechanism/IL insurance for liquidity providers
but everyone is getting the fuck out of bancor and "ILP" has been cancelled

so
>most of the supply is in bancor
>any BNT that isn't already shorted can only be sold
>people who get out of bancor no longer get their stack intact, thus they sell their BNT
>bancor team cancelled BNT emissions (and thus most of minting) for that reason
>people getting out of bancor en masse, they would rather lose 50% than risk losing everything
what is the series of events in your brain that will result in a "short squeeze"? how will BNT suddenly get enough buying pressure to sustain a huge pump? or is your entire understanding of "short squeezes" based on le redditors defeating le GME shorters?
protip, some shorts are completely rational. a "short" isn't prone to getting squeezed just by being discovered

if ILP is not restored soon, BNT will soon become worthless, not because of hyperinflation but because its 2 main use cases (and entire justification for its existence) will disappear
but if ILP gets restored, it's hyperinflation
i suppose only scenario of BNT not going to 0 is through a miraculous BTC pump getting BNT to pump and killing the shorts. perhaps that's what bancor devs are waiting for (now that celsius is mostly out)

>>49873969
you mongoloid cunt celsius tranny faggot, there is already Bancor post here >>49860561
stop shitting on my board with your pathetic FUD

>>49880313
>the only fair thing to do for their users would be to liquidate their holdings completely and disburse them equally to their users. The fact that they haven't done that proves that retail is going to be left holding the bag at the end of this.
there is literally zero chance they would be standup moral agents and do this, none.
nice thought though.
They theoretically should have a pretty big treasury though I haven'T seen anyone go do the homework on where all the eth from the ico wallet went, they took in 390k ether...if they have even half that stack still, and I reckon they have that and alot more, they have 300-400m warchest stashed away somewhere.
bancor is going to live on in some form, they do not give af about anyone on there now, like every other shitcoin project it will just resprout because they have a mega bankroll to fall back on.
and who knows, if bullrun restarts, then maybe they could make people whole...

>>49880478
>i suppose only scenario of BNT not going to 0 is through a miraculous BTC pump getting BNT to pump and killing the shorts. perhaps that's what bancor devs are waiting for (now that celsius is mostly out)
this, have repeated multiple times... the only way seems to me is btc fucking launching to 50-60k, then all the protocol sell off leverage unwind goes away.
But bancor still has the same fatal flaw going forward, the only thing they could possibly do and it wouldn't even really work is to cap stakes so whales can't kick off a collapse the whole thing

>>49880644
Lol yeah bro, it's just the Celsius Jews making FUD threads. As if they aren't in exactly the same or worse position themselves lmao. It doesn't matter if you were tricked by Celsius Jews or Bancor Jews or any other one of these failing scams, you're all ultimately in the same boat. Save what you can of your stack while you still can.

>>49876683
Here it goes:
https://etherscan.io/address/0x8df51A9714aE6357a5B829CC8d677b43D7e8BD53
Maybe not a good idea upgrading from 2.1. Ah well have done it now.
But that's good. Maybe can see more LINK distributed in future.

>>49880651
people are already taking the 50% haircut on massive deposits. People in the industry and major whales have essentially been robbed by bancor. I'm sure they'll try to rebrand, but i don't know how that will go for them. Its one thing if you screw over retail, its another thing if you screw over real money. The meme about the bancor leadership fleeing to israel might actually happen. I wouldn't want to appear in public if I were them. How much cartel or other forms of black market funds do you think is going to evaporate in this snafu?

Cna someone do a tldr of what happened?

>>49880889
Bancor permanently lost everybody's funds.

>>49880889
Bancor turned off loss protection but not the seven day cool down so now people are either hoping they can get out with a fraction of their stack or wait it out until Bancor goes under and lose everything.

>>49880889
>lets play a game of monopoly where i'm the bank!
> lets make it more fun by introducing a new form of monopoly money, lets call it bnt!
>if you deposit your money with the bank, i'll use that money to make more money for us, together!
>you want to withdraw? Okay, heres half your deposit in monopoly money and half your deposit in bnt. Don't worry you can just sell your bnt and buy more monopoly money with it!
>you want to withdraw too? And you? A-and you too?
>i'm temporarily pausing all withdrawals and bnt issuance due to HOSTILE MARKET ENVIRONMENT
> you can withdraw your deposit in 7 days, but we'll only give you half your deposit and monopoly money and the other half in.... um... nothing!
>if you don't want to lose half your money you have to stick with us to defeat this HOSTILE MARKET ENVIRONMENT of people trying to get their deposits back from us.
>what do you mean bnt is going to zero?!?

>>49880862
Nice find
Yeah if they have suspended v2.1 withdrawals they might as well just merge the pools and alleviate IL

>>49880651
ICO wallet went to the Bancor foundation which is separate from the protocol, pays for the devs and marketing etc.

>>49880167
>Bancor is dead already, they just delayed it by fucking over their retail customers.
fax
>>49880242
>>49880298
glad you dont have anything in it, just kind of proves that its a flawed model. if a whale cant withdraw and cause an issue then it wasnt designed as a DeFi protocol but a ponzi scheme
>>49880313
the little guy always pays the price
>>49880478
bancor employees will never be seen in public again
>>49880644
kys, its not your board faggot. if people didnt care then the thread would be archived. yet here we are
>>49880727
with jews you lose

>>49881164
you imagine, just like the tezos scam, the "foundation" is some impentatrable separate thing.
what a joke.

Fuck these kikes, I'm not trusting DeFi after this shit, just lost like 450 LINK.

>>49881480
Only 450? Haha

fuck inbred pedokikes
6 trillion more

>>49881094
Yeah I wonder how that will work in future. People who have already withdrawn wouldn't be compensated now I guess. But you could make a very good argument that they should be.

>>49881480
sorry fren, expensive life lesson
>>49881799
fren, its good that you see humor in any situation but im not going to kick a man while he is down, as a result of kikery.
>>49881878
imagine the world if Aushwitz didnt have swimming pools, brothels, sports teams, a local currency. imagine if they actually did exterminate them.
>>49881094
>>49881944
the pools are basically merged since if you want to take any action, you have to migrate from v2 to v3. its just merged but requires the depositors to spend more money (gas) to complete the merge

>>49882125
But you can see that the withdrawals are coming from the V3 Master Vault:
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x992ffad940be0f4a28b11851091d9d99692a63b22978db36bebfcc0ee19ef9ad
It seems that the V2.1 LINK is not being touched. So you have people who were sitting in 2.1 who are forced to migrate to V3 to try and get their LINK out and yet are are getting LINK that they should be entitled to.
I think.

>>49882190
> try and get their LINK out and yet are are getting LINK that they should be entitled to.

Do you have a transaction to prove this?

My cooldown ends tomorrow and if the IL is still 50% that’s a 10,000 link loss if I withdraw
Should I do it guise

>>49882586
I'll be down 13k.. hurts bros.

>>49882440
Just look at the transaction above.
The LINK comes from the V3 Master Vault. My question is why can't the V2.1 holdings (which I have also linked) be used when people withdraw? People would be getting significantly more LINK than they would be currently as the 2.1 wallet has over 1m LINK.
This is all assuming that the V2.1 is now dead and that everyone will be forced to V3. Which it seems to be as you are forced to use V3 to withdraw.

>>49882650
>>49882586
Sorry guys. I will take a 1k hit and that hurts. Losing make it stacks is brutal.

>>49882650
You don’t think they’ll at least restore IL protection at some point? Is it really impossible? Wtf so many marines were on here they literally sold it at zero IL and yet I’m about to get hit with 50% this is fucking outrageous

>>49882769
It's tempting to believe the team. They are a bunch of highly arrogant self serious types who would genuinely Seethe about their failure for the rest of their lives. That said, gambling with 2x make it stacks at this point seems. Hard

>>49882769
The concern is a death spiral where the price of BNT collapses which will see less of the other asset being able to be withdrawn.

>>49882586
>>49882769
im sorry fren. no one can make that decision but you

>>49882586
10k is still a make it stack. Lower than that though and it's over.

So how is that groups like Bancor, Celcius, Solend, etc got into this mess? Was it through counter-party risk of their institutional grade borrowers? Was it that the the entire business model was flawed to begin with because essentially it requires BTC to be always up? Some combination of both, or something else?

I TOOK ALL OF MY MONEY OUT OF BANCOR LITERALLY ONE DAY BEFORE THIS HAPPENED

GOD IS WATCHING KINDLY UPON ME
HOLY FUCK I AM LUCKY

>>49882125
Appreciate the condolences, fren. Lesson learned.

>>49883333
Checked but not rekt

>>49883333
holy checked

>>49883333
Please tell me it was 100k LINK.

>>49883167
Its all this

>>49883333
You are truly blessed

What happened to bancor's UI? I have a fraction of an eth on there with BNT and I can't find it with their new UI.

>>49882586
Jesus fuck, that is hard to stomach. But 10k is batter than 0 which is a real possibility. I'd hate to make this call.

>>49883333
checked holy shit
also weren't a bunch of 7 day waiting periods supposed to end today? there's still almost 4.3 million link pending withdrawal.

>>49883333
>checked
go get a lotto ticket anon

where do i see the pending withdrawals

>>49873969
>all the weak hands are going to exit the pool so that bancor won't death spiral
thank you for your service marines

>>49885183
https://etherscan.io/token/0x516c164a879892a156920a215855c3416616c46e?a=0x857eb0eb2572f7092c417cd386ba82e45eba9b8a

>>49876314
Not even close kek, I have 65k spread out over 12 places

>>49881010
Probably the best summary but many have overlooked your post. Have a (you).

>>49881010
Isn't Celcius involved in this in a pretty scummy way though? You're leaving that part out. I think it has something to do with Celcius shorting BNT and then also looking to basically market sell their entire BNT position to cause the price to crater and profit off the short to make up for all of it.

So what’s going on with bancor? Is it the same situation as Celsius, they lock their users funds because they have them locked up in degen yield farms, are going to get liquidated, and need to post collateral? I know linkies can’t withdraw their funds without a huge loss and that’s it

So there's a 7 day wait to withdraw funds?

Doesn't that mean that anyone who isn't retarded would have withdrawn their funds by next week?