/biz/ - Business & Finance

https://twitter.com/chainlink/status/1616150412045713440?s=61&t=RqJnNKlloboDHth1DdZbHQ

Seems like a stretch, we’re nearly half way through the year already

>off-chain computation
They also completely outdid the jew scam and yet the üprice is going down

>>53351725
???

>>53351737
my truebitties stay super shitty $10 eoy

Bought more otc and there’s nothing you can do about it.

>hurrdurr everybody left link!!!

ChainlinkGod is still here supporting us

>>53351712
>>53351708
>p-please don’t sell the blogpost

>>53351725

>>53351882
who's selling?

>>53351708
Not gonna lie, my faith in link is pretty low by now. If link ever goes anywhere I'll be shocked, but I'm not counting on it. I even bought a bunch of xrp on my last crypto buy because at this point link and xrp seem pretty much on par.

>>53351981
Anyone with a brain

Wake me up when it reaches $20. Its the clown of crypto rn
>6$ haha

>>53351810
This. More transparency means less regulation. Only proves how retarded LINK fudders truly are. Too busy trading short-term. They're always the ones who miss the big picture. Even jamie dimon can't deny he likes blockchain tech because of how fast it is even when he's shitting on btc

OG linker here, I can't explain it but I can sense a massive sustained Link pump/bull run imminent, I had the same feeling in 2019, can anyone else sense it?

>>53351725
These are the reasons I click on Chainlink threads. Not for posts like these, but to see those who take em seriously. Top tier fren, top tier, trust.

>>53351708
HOLY SHIT IS THEY A PRO CHAINLINK POST ON CHAINLINK’S OFFICIAL TWITTER FEED?! HOLY SH*T!

>>53352845
This, it'll happen and this board will be wild

>>53352845
100% the disbelief has worn off just like it did back then and I know I'm about to make millions AGAIN... but this time more millions. Fuck yes.

>>53351708
Is $100 really the expectation for this year? I keep seeing it. Objectively completely ridiculous, look at it.

>>53352845
yes and there are many reasons for it

>>53353183
If we get another bull run I'd sure hope LINK can do more than a pathetic 2x on its previous ATH, even ETH which is a much larger cap did around a 3.5x from its 2017 ATH to its 2021 ATH

>>53352845

For me its the complete obvious turn around in sentiment from fudders who were definitely shillers before.
Look at twitter comments for LINK, its now a cesspool but not a cringe cesspool like before, those same cringe losers are not hating on sergey and chainlink hardcore and circle-jerking about it. They are fudders now.
God knows how many lost their stacks on leverage, in cefi, bancor, linkpool etc.

The sentiment spin from 2020 is one of the harshest i have ever seen, and its so strong they dont even care they are a meme. I have literally made threads explaining that their hatred is a buy sign and they will prove me right by fudding and they cant help but fud.

The only thing close i have seen was ETH sentiment in mid to late 2019

>>53352845

>>53353255
Well either way, that wouldn't happen this year.

Honestly, half the issue with LINK sentiment is baggies hyping their expectations to absurdly retarded levels, inevitably disappointing themselves and losing their minds and turning to bitter shitposting and fudding. $6-$100 requites a 17x over the year. Even 2020 was only an 11x to the highs. It would have to exceed even 16x 2019 return when market cap was $171MM, 5% of today's. It's just pure retarded baggie cope. I don't know why they do it to themselves. Even just hitting ATH again would be an amazing performance this year and definite bragging rights.

At this point in my life, I’m not bothered anymore. Every link I earn from staking, is another link that will never be sold. Get it? Because we can unstake or claim rewards. Jokes aside, I consider this money to be lost money. If it goes up great, if it goes down, it can’t get worse can it? Because you literally can’t sell.

>>53351725
Based logarithmic calendar anon. Few understand.

>>53353304
>>53352845
I don't know.
The only thing I feel is that the manipulation of the price since the FTX crash has been perfectly orchestrated to cause max despair.
But then again the staking release was a bad event which could partially explain the sentiment.
Sergey rug pulling on his initial release announcement and not even making a comment on the delay but letting a low level employee announce his failure secretly on a discord channel.
Johnny rug pulling Linkpool investors on the day of staking who were hoping for the happiest day in the year and instead got the opposite of most horrible.
No roadmap to estimate future features.

I remember feeling doubt from the heavy fud in 2018 and 2019 when I didn't know anything and all we had were breadcrumbs, but now my main problem is not if Chainlink is successful, but if that makes the token valuable.
I was ignorant and used a really bad model to predict the profitability of the network and the effect of staking.
The more features were released to decrease the costs, the more those became invalidated and made me bearish on the future of the project.

Now I am left with no justification to expect a high market cap in the trillions even with a successful adoption and my initial investment plan and time frame are coming to an end soon.

I was considering re-balancing my investments to drastically reduce my exposition to Chainlink.

>>53353436

Manipulation or not, id say it makes sense that its a post staking capitulation from the last retards and hence the dramatic state of things now.

>>53353436

No offence but if you got it so wrong in your assumption before why the fuck do you think you are any more capable now? You are also ahowing strong bottom sentiment

>>53353370
I'm talking about the next bull run, getting back to ATH within this year is fine if that's not the top, any coin worth something goes to new highs (see BTC, ETH)

>>53351810
ChainlinkGod, do I need to post the allegations you never denied of pump and dumping on your fans?

>>53353454
It looked like an ABC correction wave pattern following the FTX crash, but the C line went below the expected support and remaining in a psychologically difficult area for a longer time. It was at $5.9 for some time before going lower for example for the maximum psychological effect of being $1 lower.

>>53353467
I have real data of the network now to make a more realistic assumption and the Linkpool rug pull gives a lot of information about the real profitability and future expectations of the network.
For example SDL takes a 20% cut without providing any service like slashing insurance and is owned by the node operators.
This means that staking is a burden to node operators and they want to recover some of the fees they are paying and are expecting to behave like a cartel in the future.

I am well aware that my emotions reflect the global holder sentiment, but I also learned to become independent since that time and don't need Chainlink anymore for my future.
What I wanted was freedom, and I will never get it as long as I remain chained to this project and don't reduce my exposition to less than 10% of my capital no matter how good the project is.

I found many good people and good projects in the bear market, which only serves to magnify the difference with being a holder of Chainlink.
When you are in a relation which doesn't fit you anymore the answer is to leave and find something better.
Everyone changed in the last 5 years and I stopped calling myself a LINK marine 2 years ago.
Had I not done that I would be suffering a lot more from the bear market.

It doesn't mean I won't arbitrage my stack for the best exit, but you won't see me parade in the SmartCon like the BTC and ETH holders are doing after becoming mainstream.
The time has come for me to go on a new path which diverges from Chainlink.

>>53352028

>>53353478
I know, just clarifying my point and OP's was specifically about this year. The further out you go, the murkier predictions get. For this year however I find a $100 prediction ludicrous. That's the extent of my point.

>>53352845
>fudders btfo
>bulgarians btfo
>market bottomed
>everyone bearish af
>exchanges imploding left and right
>ccip release imminent
a run is coming for sure, the question is how high will we go? i feel like entering the top 3 is feasible but there's a lot of room between rank 2 and rank 4. at the same time i feel like a big announcement, like swift confirming they will use ccip, could get us above eth. after all, even xrp flipped eth for a bit. i'll probably end up playing it too safe, but fuck it i can't afford to hold for another round trip.

>>53352845
I’m unironically going to make it if it runs, but I won’t leave this place. I’ll still be around for moral support and future runs

>>53353436
>>53353701
Sergey is missing deadlines for products that only a minority of blockchain professionals can even apprehend in a meaningful way. All this fucking bean counting and busybody commiseration about token value and betrayal, the complete dissolution of any ability to see a bigger picture, to see what is simply inevitable to any thinking person well versed in this subsection of an obscure technology sector - it's pathetic.

>>53353819
He's missing deadlines because they do not have any engineering staffers only HR roasties and twitterfags resharing his blog. Who the fuck knows solidity and dreams of defeating the banking kikes? No one that's who. So he has to recruit new talent from universities around the world and indoctrinate them with his discourses on truth>trust. That's the big fucking problem .They have enough ideas eggheads to sink a ship but they are seriously lacking real people who write real code and do real work not fake HR roastie woke shit

>>53351725
>>53351758
>>53351896
>>53352908
>>53353411
Elite/NWO calendar starts on 9/11

>>53351708
>Macro as bad as it is
>complete lack of meaningful successes
>100 United states dollars per stinky
I did incredibly well with this shit and even I can't see much a reason to hold. The Singularity that we were hoping for is a lie. It might shoot up at some point, but that point is nowhere soon.

>>53353695
To be fair they're not allegations it's all proven on chain and on twitter

>>53352845
I don't know if it's a link bullrrun but lately I have been feeling super comfy in general. I mean irl, nothing related with crypto,.even when link got to $5 I kept having this *everything is gonna be alright* vibe. And when 2023bstarted I started feeling the opposite of dread despite we shouldnt expect anything good from this year from a global macroeconomics perspective.
It's just weird.

>>53354475
I don't know how its rational. I feel the same way, and have. Like the armor of christ is giving me strength when I don't know I need it? I've felt fine, but ALSO a sense of uplift when all should be FUD.

>>53354475
>>53354512
I was thinking this the other day too. The price action has been so flat, in such a tight channel. $5 - $9 since May last year.

>19 months since ATH
>8 month uptrend vs BTC and ETH
>sentiment at ATL
>only source of innovation / progress in the entire space
>CCIP / monetization this year
>Entire market will need a new narrative to pump, same as DeFi summer in 2019 (Brought to you by Chainlink©)

>>53354694
>8 month uptrend vs BTC and ETH
Wow. Flagrant bullshit.

LINK has gone -30% over the past two months versus BTC and is trading where it closed 8 months ago you absolute liar. In other words, fully retraced over that time. Same point but even worse for ETH because it's trading where it opened 8 months ago. Clown. Do you think people can't just pull up a chart and see you're full of shit?

>53351737
>53351774


i’m accumulating. at these prices it’s impossible not to

>>53354694
It's Q-narrative level meta, we're just conditioned at /bizraeli/ to an implicitly adversarial universe. Everything that already happened we're noticing sooner because we're immune to bullshit due to the Pajeet:Paradigm
>all evolution ends in streetshitting because eventually sales teams default to animal-clone gangs with 1-800 numbers
Obviously this is the place you'd see the most consequential asset ever created FUDed as
>token not needed

>>53354299
Did you guys unironically believe in some singularity? It was just a silly meme. Ofc its a slow process just like said in the WP. The latest WEF panel with the SWIFT and banks gives some idea: SWIFT is bullish, some are still unsure etc. There are so many players in the financial system so the rollout will take huge amount of time and resources. It will only attract the big boys if the interoperability works. The initial hype is now gone and now we are actually seeing if this shit works at all. But it will be implemented in phases so it won't be a crypto moonshot and if anything goes wrong..

>>53354475
>>53354512
feeling the same bros. we have made it already, 3d just needs to catch up

>>53354475
>>53354512
>>53354694
same. also everyone in the broader space being incredibly bearish only serves to reinforce my conviction, although I would probably not feel the same had I not taken profits during 21/22

>>53355109
>Thinks a Swift announcement that 11,000 will be paying fees to Link stakers for the next half century won't cause an uptick in the Link price
You're probably right. Just sold all my Link.

>>53355163
*11,000 banks*

>>53355163
Might cause pump but there wont be any singularity meme. Bad scenario is that they will be testing with banks for 5 years and XRP and Quant spambots can keep their narrative going while Link crabs.

>>53355191
((They)) want CBDCs out pronto and if you think they're 5 years out then I completely disagree.
Remember that the BIS likely want a mCBDC solution to interoperability

>>53355158
It's like I'm a part of a secret club of retards and don't want to admit I'm a retard so I don't know what genius I'm witnessing while I'm trying not to look retarded...
>poops

$100? We would be lucky to get back to $20.

>>53355217
I hope so but they also want it to work flawlessly and the rollout is probably slower than our most bullish visions

check this out:
https://www.weforum.org/events/world-economic-forum-annual-meeting-2023/sessions/in-the-face-of-fragility-central-bank-digital-currencies
24 min forward

>>53351708
It will reach 5 dollars in 24hours.

>>53355217
>>53355308
I'm also in this camp. I think at an earliest stage we are getting CBDCs three years from now, and in a realistic stage its around 2030. By then, if they are going for the whole great reset narrative, they need to achieve a lot of pretty hard societal shifts, such as:
- digital ID
- crackdown on cash transactions
- onboarding of banks/legacy structures (who have strong initiatives to sidestep the central banks and issue their own private digital currency, see National Bank of Australia)
- robustness in their infrastructure, outages due to central points of failure are guaranteed and would too great of a backlash
- a fitting psyop to convince the cattle that all of this is needed and for their greater good

judging from how much the covid narrative got bungled by the timely omicron release, I'm not very confident that they will be succesfull in their plans, but nonetheless they will not let the fiat zombie die without trying their hardest

>>53355377
>crackdown on cash transactions
I don't think they are gonna do that though. People will just use it less because they are good goys

>>53355405
It won't come down in time for their timeline

>>53351725
It do be like that sometimes

>>53355217
>>53355308
>>53355377

It's already happening
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdIooHrQeK8

>>53355418
>we think will be deployable
>we've been talking about it for 12 years too and very little has been done
yeah sounds like two more weeks

>>53355418
of course a bank CEO fears a decentralized alternative to his whole business model, repeating ancient 2011 FUD "how do you know its going to stop at 21 Million" lmao

>>53353701
Can you share sone if the coins you have accumulated?

>>53355109
the singularity happens when us btc whales dump all our btc for link, or nazarov moves his 1m btc stack and we’re forced to expedite the process. We’ve been suppressing the price for 6 years with ease while fudding. There will be a coordinated day this happens and our bots are waiting to flashcrash btc for link if nazaroz moves first. Cap this.

>>53355438
>>53355450
0:29
"...blockchain is a technology ledger system that we use to move information... we've used it to do overnight repos...intra day repos...We've used it to, we're gonna use it, we've used it to move money. So that is a ledger. That is a technology ledger type of thing that we think is gonna be deployable. But remember we've been talking about that for 12 years too, and very little has been done."

>>53355308
>>53355377
>https://www.weforum.org/events/world-economic-forum-annual-meeting-2023/sessions/in-the-face-of-fragility-central-bank-digital-currencies
Good post, thanks. Yes, Javier talks about having 75% of cross border payments completed within an hour by 2027, according to their roadmap. Not sure if you were implying that we don't see any action until then, but I would think we would.
At 29m35s he obvs talks (in everything but name) about CCIP being in place for CBDC releases to quickly connect to the world. I wonder if CCIP would be used by Swift for purposes other than this, and before CBDCs? Perhaps making stablecoin payments, since we now see National banks releasing those?

>>53355377
All of those shifts are in action

>>53355543
internal bank infrastructure is very different from a CBDC

>>53355550
this will be an ongoing transformation. CCIP will be used in one way or another, the question is what will be the reserve asset and the role of central banks moving forward? private banks will try to retain and gain power as the system changes, issuing their own stablecoins and frontrunning CBDCs can be a part of that strategy
>>53355652
in action yes, but how near functional completion? Just look at the chaos that went down in Nigeria when they tried to implement the eNaira - 35% of the population owns and uses bitcoin, after a year less than 1% use the cbdc. They have to start at the periphery because those economies have the most to gain from a monetary system outside of their incompetent governments control

>>53355308
>>53355550
also can we get a fucking physiognomy check on that panel, its possible to see who represents the private sector and who are bureaucrats in less than a second

>>53355543
it just shows they are in no hurry unless bitcoin or other crypto projects are a threat to them. they have tried DLT and seen there is potential but they don't really need to deploy it

>>53355302


yes after the 100 to buy cheap

>>53351708
A $100 is based for Link, because it's web3 token, and web3 is the future, another web3 token to look out for is the ORE

>>53355377
It's going to be a tough fight. Privacy protocols are growing fast and blockchain is meant to be decentralized. I don't see a need for CBDCs. Self custody is key at this time.

>>53355890
Bringing CBDCs into blockchain? That's not something you will want to happen.The govt wants to crack down on your freedom on every sides. I'm already using privacy protocols that enables ZKPs.

>>53356206
>>53356243
begone pajeets

>>53355550
>Not sure if you were implying that we don't see any action until then
I believe it will be used for other stuff first. Most likely only crypto projects first. That's already good and bullish imo, but hyping about 11,000 banks using it this year is gonna just end up in another disappointment

>>53352845
we're overdue for one

>>53353411
top kek based

>>53351708
>$100
Not in this life linkies

I don't know anything about what LINK was doing the last 5 years but I just bought a small stacklet of 100 LINK recently for around $6 due to all the attention it's getting, what am I in for?

>>53355308
Not just link but any crypto projections have always revealed the fanbases to be teenagers or browns. Nothing moves quickly in government let alone when governments work with other governments. If a council decides to put new vending machines in a public swimming pool they won't be there for 2 years. If a government wants to rechange core finance systems it will take a decade without untested tech involved. With untested tech god help you, don't make any time frames.

We're 10 years into blockchain and there is no actual industry use yet, including private industry. Ill wait until i see a single proper legacy corporation using blockchain in a serious way and then ill say maybe 2/3 until a government use.

>>53355308
i find it funny that the globalists constantly wargame how CBDC will work and are very serious about implementing it while at the same time fudding normies out of digital assets.

>>53356243
I think with the fucking ZKPs, the government will come to term with privacy protocols using this tech.

>>53356655
It’s actually very consistent in their philosophy of fucking them over

>>53356622
I should add that you don't want government to move faster either. All the stages, committees and regulations are designed to take individual thought out of governance which is needed when government increasingly becomes inept.

Anyone who is asking for international clearance or bank transfers to be moved onto blockchain next year wiuld be insane if they weren't obviously just stupid instead.

>>53355964
the french hag basically saying what we've been saying since 2017: if the old system can interop with the new DLT one then and only then it can work.
>>53356622
Indeed there was a reason Schmidt warned about the regulators. Interesting to reflect how it went with the derivatives: https://youtu.be/T2IaJwkqgPk?t=1407

>>53356665
But not all the fucking privacy has this features, what will happen to those

>>53356708
>Anyone who is asking for international clearance or bank transfers to be moved onto blockchain next year wiuld be insane if they weren't obviously just stupid instead.
really?
https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/01/19/national-australia-bank-becomes-second-australian-bank-to-build-stablecoin/
https://www.ledgerinsights.com/monei-digital-euro-stablecoin-bank-of-spain/

How do you think these stablecoins will be transferred between banks?

>>53351708
itt: bots talking to each other

>>53354742
LINK is still up significantly on the June lows against BTC

>>53356925
>Flagrant bullshit
>absolute liar
>Clown
>you're full of shit

Think he's having a nice time? I think he just needs a cuddle. I admire his giving the word 'clown' its own sentence. Very inventive. Clearly someone we'd all like to have in our lives.

>>53356868
If you can remember, tornado cash was sanctioned due to this reason, any privacy with no auditing features like this may not last the test of time.

>>53353411
kek

>>53356925
>>53357118
Saying LINKBTC and LINKETH has been in an 8 month uptrend is literally flagrant bullshit. Cheap shill spin on-par with dumb misleading FUD. It's like on biz now numbers and facts are up for debate. They are not.

>>53358073
There's no need to get so angry about it, anon. We all know what the price action is. You're not some wizard with deep insight just because you base your entire investment strategy on buying whatever is going up at any given time

>>53353840
I remember about 3 years ago there was talk that staking was being delayed as they wanted to work out the market dynamic issues of staking, ie how to avoid centralization of nodes. Then after several years they show their work of a single feed, permissioned nodes pretend staking where all tokens go to a single contract managed by the team.

They honestly do the shit i do where i throw out excuses of complexity to cover falling behind and then years later show some shitty half done thing and hope everyone forgets.

>>53353819
Complete drivel. The token isn’t fucking needed, unironically. The network usage can dominate and it clearly doesn’t mean shit for LINK tokens. Why do you think they’re switching their payment model up, you think that’s bullish? It’s horrible news, it means they have no clear path towards getting hodlers any money and are literally just trying random shit at this point

>>53356877
Banks can all have access to the chain, you realize most money now is already "digital" and transferred between banks absolutely fine.

However as for CBDCs, yes they are being researched. Doesn't mean they're coming out this year. Though from my reading CBDC ≠ stablecoins as we think, most are scarcely even blockchain in any proper sense.

>>53358179
Way to evade the core point. It's anti-fact retards like you and the other imbecile who lower the iq of the board. I'll call out misleading bullshit every time I see it.
>omg he used a bad word!!
>on 4CHANNEL!!!
Grow the fuck up cunt

>>53358217
We can only assume you're not invested in Link, then? Imagine how you'll feel when you discover you were wrong and you missed the investment opportunity of a lifetime. That'll be fun.
In the meantime, I guess you can just keep hanging around Link threads and telling us how you're right and we're wrong.

>>53358254
I was referring to stablecoins, not CBDCs. You're trying to obfuscate that you clearly stated that bank s would not use blockchains, yet I clearly and explicitly showed you that they are about to, in the form of stablecoins. The natural course of events after that is for those stablecoins to be replaced by CBDCs. Of course, I'm just stupid or insane kek

The fact that the token is $6 and Sergey said the network is responsible for securing $6T— oh and btw we are going to try some other random shit to hopefully get more value to token holders but no guarantees— should be the most bearish thing any of you have ever heard with regard to this entire project. I’m fucking pissed, they clearly do not need their token holders to capture any value, fucking look at the situation ffs anons. How can anyone be bullish here??

>>53358351
If the network can secure THIS MUCH VALUE flawlessly during a crypto apocalypse and the token is trading at $6, how the fuck is ANYONE bullish??????

>>53358254
>most money now is already "digital" and transferred between banks absolutely fine.
wait...are you saying that bank stablecoins will be transferred using existing bank transfer methods and not blockchains? Oh pleeeease tell me that's what you're saying so i can rip the absolute piss out of you. I beg you

Bottom line is you fags can do whatever you want but I personally am buying as much ETH as possible because there is no way in hell I am gonna roundtrip 100% in LINK this next cycle. Fuck that

>>53356616
boredom

>>53358292
I have a make it stack but used to have a lot more and frankly it keeps reducing both in absolute terms and in proportion of everything. It has almost never been a bad move whenever i made a decision to move away from it. I think no matter what happens I will hold onto 4k.

>>53358326
This is already answered, so little point responding again.

>>53358270
Nobody ever gets this angry when they exaggerate links price action to the downside, and its done constantly on here. There is something wrong with you.
Objectively, link/btc had a 7 month uptrend broken recently. But both the btc and eth pairs are holding at an 8 month support level, with the eth pair looking like a blatant accumulation range. The btc pair would actually probably look the same if btc dumps weren’t required to temper link movement. So you’re looking at 30-45k sats and 0.004-0.006 gwei, if it breaks to the upside on either you’re probably looking at a link run, downside and you could see a 50% move further down.

>>53358511
>already answered
Holy fuck, you're a piece of work. You were shown to be 100% wrong in your assertion that banks won't use blockchains; then, you doubled down on your idiocy by claiming that banks transfer digitally already (fucking kek) and now you try to just bury your head in the sand by stating
>This is already answered, so little point responding again
You're a weak individual and it has likely already held you back. It will continue to unless you do something about it.

>>53358511
You do know a make it stack is 100k?

>>53358573
Looks like you're actually going to have to refer back to my post rather than allowing your spiking estrogen to shut down comprehension.

>>53358652
>Looks like you're actually going to have to refer back to my post
I already have, and my point stands. What are you referring to, or is your gameplan now to pretend you made a point i'm not addressing? That sounds like something you'd do, and i've only experienced you for a short time

>>53358561
>The btc pair would actually probably look the same if btc dumps weren’t required to temper link movement.
Kek, here we go.
Nice word salad to defend a provable falsehood intentionally designed to mislead people. Sorry I'm not captain fucking truthdefender who can catch every instance of you roaming packs of idiots spewing your retarded shit easily dismantled by pulling up a chart or calculator, there are a lot of you, but at least I got that bullshit. Completely deserved to be called out and always should be.

>>53358936
Absolutely seething

>>53359012
Real original, faggot. Yeah let's all celebrate the complete loss of brainpower across biz over the last few years. Calling out a bullshit lie which is factually inaccurate designed to shill someone's failing shittoken? Boo!! Get out of here with that!!!

>>53355522
Checked and saved. Selling bitcoin for link would explain why the price of bitcoin keeps on dumping, and the fud/memory holing of link would explain why link isn't rising in price as you would expect from this.

>>53359041
Still seething

Link Holder here. If the link token will be used, then why aren't all the execs and developers of the 11K banks accumulating right now...and their families? Buying tokens of internet money does not break any insider trading laws. Please somebody tell me. I am a past 50 loser with bad health.I cannot wait too much.

>>53359341
They are, it's just that retards like you (who are in the majority) are selling at $6

>>53359408
bullshit, with this low volume, all that buying from those highly paid people would be noticed.

>>53352845
If link god candles to say $1,400. And you have a 10k stack worth 14 million now. Do you think if you walked outside and walked up to the first woman you see in obvious disbelief and say I just made 14 million dollars today. Do you want to have sex? What are the odds she would?

>>53359551
0. You have to stop by the Mercedes shop, the barber, and the rich people clothing stores first.

>>53359341
If the token would capture the huge network effect they would have fomoed and insider bought the shit out of this

>>53359580
And thus the price should be higher if those insiders knew the token is needed, right?

Not a fudder, just a desperate brainlet here, how do linkers justify nobody seems to be buying our tokens?

>>53359455
They aren’t in a hurry to accumulate because they’re already wealthy. For them its all a game, they are low time preference, you are high. They can strategically time and stagger their buys, plebs have no strategy typically for selling beyond “this shits not moving I’m dumping it.”

>>53359341
How do you think link stayed at 5$-9$ while everyhing was crashing and burning. Ftx crash literally did not effect link price at all. Whales dont market buy like smol retail. Bulks and limit orders without spooking the fomo crowd.

Also why bankers would give away so easily those profits? I did not see this answered in the 2018 threads

>>53359727
Exactly. If you’re already wealthy the markets are like a game, fomo isn’t a thing.

>>53355522
why wouldn't you do that now that prices are low. are you saying you're all going to wait until the BTC/LINK is higher and therefore get less link for your BTC. sounds kinda dumb.

>>53359752
The “profits” go to third party clearing houses not directly affiliated with the banks. What they’re actually doing is dumping one middle man for a cheaper and more efficient one.

>>53359727
Bullshit.....many of those insiders would be brand new in this space and just market buy a bag before the big announcement.....you would do the same.

>>53359753
Those execs and developers are well off but not wealthy just well paid salarymen

>>53359752
You think it is easy lmao. Painlink. You are in a echo chamber of weirdos and outcasts who found link 5 years ago at 0.17 cents. Average twatter normies have no ability to think without shitty influencers. Ultimate black/redpill is that jews are right about goyim being a retarded cattle. Banks will cut their costs half with implementing automated DLT protocols. One click secure private (DECO) money transfer options. No need for customer call services. No need for excess software developers who demand 500k a year. Reduced overll HR and operating costs.

>>53359820
Read up on manipulation of stocks, understand that nothing about this behavior is new and if anything should be expected in an almost entirely unregulated market.

>>53359869
>One click secure private (DECO) money transfer options. No need for customer call services. No need for excess software developers who demand 500k a year. Reduced overll HR and operating costs.

We are close… the jabbed are starting to die.

>>53359667
Yes token not needed is not a meme

>>53352025
>xrp
Is there like some specific psychological archetype or something that draws certain people to specific coins?
I really notice distinct groups who seem to be quite different. Like think about the eth degen nerd type, btc 'set in stone ideas/ideals' type, link/xrp/etc $n eoy hopium breadcrumbs type etc...

>>53359940
Seems so....still not selling....as son as I sell it will moon.

>>53359943
Without chainlink there is no DEFI. Without XRP nothing changes. SEC leaked e-mails/files show that XRP higher ups were contacting market maker whales to prop up the price with supposed good news. Timing and trapping people while pump and dumping their own tokens. XRP is literally not needed. XRP, ADA Solana is literally normie traps. They do nothing ADA does nothing. Remove ADA, XRP, Solana today and nothing changes fundamentally about crypto space.

explain why chainlink will ever be worth more than $50 in todays dollars in the future? its still just a shitty add on to an altcoin in a sea of 10,000 altcoins

>>53360205
Update the 2017 fud pls

>>53352845
I feel it too brotha

>>53360796
You have been saying the same in other instances of zero morale and still waiting for the wunderpump

>>53360592
k i wont buy then

>>53359727
Lmao 9 down to 5 is almost 50% drop, but yeah dude muh secret whales helded. Holy shit this place is retarded

>>53360205
>I may be arguing in bad faith but I still need you to spoon feed me on a coin that’s been out since 2017!

>>53361132
We were all wrong about chainlink though. Our 2017 conceptions have been shattered.

>>53359720
So youre saying price isnt going up anytime soon

Our only hope now is that the token is somewhat needed, and that the market is retarded and the insiders of the 11K banks are too conservative to dabble in crypto and/or have not understood the value capture of link.

I am not fully stupid, I sold a portion of the run up to 50 staggering my sells, but I was hoping to unload till $300.

Let's assume the worst, Link will do well but the token will not capture all the value you think. Is there hope it will capture *some value*, say with the BUILD program? I have accepted that my 20K will not make me a millionaire but is there some hope to get some yield from staking? even if is only a few tens of thousands per year? Please tell me or at least lie to me convincingly, let me dream. Any link bull still on this board?

>>53361277
>20k LINK won't make you a millionaire
kek

>>53361277
>my 20K
you hold other assets right? you earn six figures right? you are not relying on link to be successful right why are you so concerned?

>>53353183
that doesn't even look that ridiculous lol

>>53361607
what does that have to do with the project turning to shit and sergey sabotaging it

>>53361277
Nigger everyone is bullish on Link thats why were all not talking about it yet still arguing with fudders. Take the hint bro everyone is buying this range and you should be too. You are still early but that won’t be the case forever.

>>53361628
Check the y axis.

>>53361795
The price is rangebound, or going down, who is selling? the team isn't. Can you prove me anybody new is buying? We have thousands of well-off insiders, many of them tech-savvy but not sophisticated whales, no laws against insider trading that apply? why the heck they are not buying and moving the price to at least double digits? sorry to be a a broken record but nobody has given me a satisfactory answer or at least a soothing lie.

>>53361893
what is 24h volume also you overestimate how many are involved and info asymmetry.

>>53358385
Because the tokens value is pegged to the speculation associated with the whole of crypto. Once the value of the token is pegged to the value of the network and the data secured, it’ll be worth more.

>>53361795
you said that at 30 dollars and 40 dollars and double digit IQ retards bought the token and are bagholding and fudding. Maybe it's not that we're early anymore but that it's over.

>>53361946
ok, fair enough, let's hope you schizos are smarter than those insiders. Not selling ever, I will sink with the ship.

>>53353436
why is it sergay's fault that some completely unrelated project rugpulled its investors

>>53361893
this dears...show me the prove
whats that, you have no prove??
hshahagaga

>>53361122

During the time since the channel the other guy is talking about has been painted the liquidity has been relatively low comparatively to other time periods. It doesn't take much money to pump the price to $9 from $5. This is how whales create new sellers. Constantly pump and dump the price in that range so they can accumulate at an average of around $7.

This how it works. They have to create price action to garner short term interest. They also use futures to hedge positions and use less capital to manipulate price.

>>53361122
nigger this is crypto. 50% is an unusually flat range for most coins, but especially link vs how its behaved historically

>>53361116
Still not quite my tempo. Check discord for better material

>>53361122
90% of cryptos painted a new record lows after FTX crash. Link did not broke the channel. If an exchange collapse does not paint a new low i dont know what will. Not even counting the FTX hacker probably SBF sold 3.5 million link at once.

>>53359869
This. We're in a clown market that is highly manipulated via social media, telegram groups, etc. Most of crypto is a joke, so normies just automatically assume ALL of crypto is, when there are hidden gems such as link. Forget about link and crypto and find something else to do in the mean time.

>>53362808
>Link did not broke the channel.
Wasn't the uptrend on the btc and eth pair broken? IIRC, link broke a very long downtrend on the btc and eth pairing before the ftx fiasco.

>>53362902

>>53362243
Do you not understand that the network already secures TRILLIONS of dollars without issue? Why exactly does the value of the token need to be pegged to the network for the network to function? This should be terrifying to everyone itt

>>53361277
> I have accepted that my 20K will not make me a millionaire
20k LINK at the peak in 2021 was already $1m+, and that while LINK performed notoriously bad during that bull run. It can be beneficial to temper expectations but LINK not cracking previous ATH in the coming decade would be extremely disappointing.

>>53363142
>in the coming decade
kys

>>53363058
Because right now link nodes could report wrong about price feeds and face no penalty besides possibly daddy Sergey slapping them on the wrist. Defi is fine with this as its all a bunch of ponzis anyways and they’d rather exist than not, the nodes still do a good job because they are incentivized to attract real customers that would demand staking to have the network secured with collateral (swift).

>>53363179
I don't know what his time horizon is. Before 2030 seems like a safe bet, nigger.

>>53351708
He said LINK would reach 1k in 2022.

>>53363262
I rarely fud but when I do its because of “wen moon” niggers.

>>53359720
>>53359408
MASSIVE cope, they ain't buying shit dumbass and you know it.

>>53363601
Unfortunately I don’t know it, and neither do you, or you wouldn’t waste your time in a 200 post link thread.

yeah im thinking we're back

>>53351708
2023 link ath will be higher than 100$. And the market won't pump that much

Every 20c that LINK goes up, I make $5000.
Isn't that just crazy?

>>53360205
It's not a shitty add-on, it is THE add-on to the number one smart contracts platform in the world.

>>53365131
shit man me too, never thought of it that way.

>>53365193
Nice stack, king. I wish I had that much.

>>53352845
Been buying since 2017, something feels off, it's probably what you're talking about

Catalina Wine Mixer.

can someone post the schizo infographic how crypto will be used in the future

You are completely wrong.
Staking is a fool's trap that creates even more inflation. Staking rewards is money created out of thin air.
The share collected by fees is minimal in the redistribution.

The token link is only used to pay the oracle fees. That's all.
Whatever the value of the token, the result will be the same.

It's had it's wave of speculation. Whether it is $50 or $0.1 does not change the use of the network in any way.

Link is largely overvalued, the strong use of its oracles does not justify its price. Even less the 50$ top which was an aberration.

And like any chain, Link's business needs money and the only way to make it, is through partnerships and token sales.

People who still invest in link have understood nothing. And don't understand economics at all.
Link is like an ultra diluted corporate stock.
Ultimately, it is road to 0$ even with heavy use.

Link was a good choice in 2019 for the novelty aspect, and because the token had not yet reached a bottom price.

>>53365379
Staking rewards (won't be) created out of thin air, they come from user fees. That's the whole point.

>>53365379
>whatcha doin' Friday?
>I'm staying in to try to convince people online their investment is bad
>Cool! Can I come over and watch?
>No.

>>53365379
All this text, and meanwhile tokens that do literally nothing are at 7B+ valuations

>>53365379
>Being this full of shit
kek you're so out of the loop it's painful to see

Yep I was calling $100/link this year even at the bottom.

>>53365556
100 per link in 2023? What would link price be during the halving and mania years of 2024/2025 then? 100 per link in 2024 seems more believable.

>>53352932
That's half the reason why I want it to pump hard.

This board is incredible when Link is doing well.
Some of the funniest shit I ever read was during the 2020 pump.

>>53351708
Lets all stroke each others cock for decentalized blockchain tech and get global corporate buy-in then take all of the computation "off chain" to AWS and GPC.
This is the state of defi

Long live Polygon. Fuck LINK Fuck SDL Fuck Johnee Fuck Sirgay Fuck me.

>>53365608
literally $1000
There's a shit load of pressure building and once it pops, there won't be much stopping it because people will be desperate to buy in to a winner in this market.
Just be ready to sell if you have the stomach for a good swing because there's going to be a mania phase followed by a pretty serious correction before the halving.

Link will never surpass 50$ again.

>>53351708
Stop right there

>>53363218
>the nodes still do a good job because they are incentivized to attract real customers that would demand staking to have the network secured with collateral (swift).
now this is something interesting that i've never seen stated in these terms before. talk about implicit staking.

>>53365977
Checked. Wagmi.

>>53354377
true, wrong choice of words on my part.

>>53365977
Started reading BOTNS because of this image.

>>53363142
Most successful pump and dump alts get their one ath and never return. Youd be naive to think Link is different

>>53363639
Like he said, monster cope. Youre delusional or dishonest or in massive denial, or some combination of all.

>>53351725
fucking kek

>>53365131
So when it dropped from 50 to 5, you lost $1.1M because you got scammed by a cult. And youre bragging about this!?!

>>53351708
Token not needed

>>53365608
Delusion. $35 at best by ‘24. But realisticslly $12

>>53366580
Well its common sense, game theory dictates node operators will have a lot more to gain servicing tradfi rather than skimming off the top of defi before staking/slashing is implemented and killing the golden goose before its even started laying eggs. Or to think of it another way, if the nodes felt it was never going to happen you’d have seen some bad actors by now, taking advantage.

>>53367200
Checked and I’ll say the same to you, if you knew what would happen you’d be done wasting time in link threads and moved on to something of value. Too easy to read.

>>53367520
no, i don't think cryptoeconomic game theory that implicitly incentivizes honest actors, who themselves need to understand the long term effects and goals of the network they're participating in, especially when sybill attacks are an omnipresent danger, is exactly what I would call common sense, which is why I pointed out that I had never seen the idea presented in exactly those terms.

>>53367595
Maybe the fact I’m looking at it as common sense is because of all the time we waste on here discussing these systems, but I would think anyone who actually logically thinks about how these systems would work would eventually reach the same conclusions. Or maybe they wouldn’t and that’s why link can barely muster speculative price action, what do I know.

>>53367664
oh, you actually just don't understand what the term common sense means.

>>53353840
>Who the fuck knows solidity and dreams of defeating the banking kikes?
Actual real insider here, and its a lot larger of a proportion of the engineering org here than you’d think.
All it took was a few of us to make that an unspoken requirement for getting hired as an engineer.
We want what you want, we just can’t talk about it publicly because otherwise we’d end up like the tornado cash developers.

>>53368628
They did nothing wrong. It's fucked how bad things have been made to be. the old kikes still aound and their descendants deserve the worst.