/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>55609926
Thanks anon I’ll sell my stack

>twitter normie pump
Top is absolutely in

Even 10.5M sounds very little annual revenue. Can you pay 500 people with that? At 20k a year I guess.

>>55609944
this number will ramp up very quickly one more users are boarded. rumor is 25 clients ready to go today and then public testnet opens. there's also price feed payments that are done behind the scenes until staking is moved to the next model.

>>55609926
Fuck didn't see that. I'm selling.

>>55609991
>ramp
>rapid
>users
this is chainlink sinking ship hundreds of HR fatties not a real company anon Sergey is selling all the profits ahead of revenue

>>55609926
Short signal?

fudnigger cope

>>55609926
The truth is that the value of these glorified API calls is miniscule.
As in basically zero. MAYBE .000000000000000001 is what they are worth.

Meanwhile XRP saves 3% on basically all money sent in the world and allows for even more money to be sent.
PayPal - 2.8%-3.2%
Major CCs - 2.5%-3.2%
Wire TX - Varies wildly but too pricey to even consider sending under $500

XRP - .0000000001
The savings are massive and the adoption will be massive.

LINKIES...LAST WARNING...what you are holding...IS...NOT...VALUABLE.
It does NOT marginally improve any operations.
It does NOT cost less than alternatives.
It does NOT add value.

Please. I'm begging you. Give up and buy XRP.
I made money on the big LINK run up and then realized this and got out at $15.
I missed the top but at least I didn't lose all my money.

Don't lose all your money. THINK about it.

>>55609926
wait so you're telling me the technology all the fudders said didn't exist is ONLY projected to make $1.6 million this year based on 2 days of early access revenue? i feel so betrayed

>>55610193
When I think about it, it seems XRP has no real reason to appreciate in price if the transactions are so cheap. How does it work?

>>55610241
I'm a hillibilly in a town of 10,000 people in the middle of nowhere and I'll run 3 million this year.
Also it's revenue, not profits.

LINK is worse than me, a fucking retard, running a hardware store in nowheresville.
KEK

>>55610247
This is actually correct and I've been telling XSG this for years too.
It will have a run up for adoption as people have to have bags filled to use it. But then it's too efficient to really have incredible price appreciation.
A single XRP can be sent back and forth 17,000x a day.

The main issue is that XRP has not had a link run up.
>inb4 2017
That was a low volume scam pump for publicity.

>>55609926
cope

>>55610247
Actually I read you wrong. The reason for ANY price movement will be because it's so cheap.
Every company in the USA stands to save 3% just by switching.

The issue I described is that it's capped because at even $7 the XRPL is efficient enough to transfer every dollar in the world 5 times a day.
Obviously that's pointless and unnecessary.

So there will be an adoption pump and then it will just be saving people money.
Long long long term (2030-2035) you will see the burn become appreciable and more price movement from there.

>>55609926
Nobody cares about "revenue" you moron. Bitcoin never had any revenue.

>>55610303
I haven't seen you mention the dUNL once, do you think it's a threat to decentralization?

>>55609926
doing god's work OP, sold my stack and will rebuy during the unstaking dump

This was hilarious. Link culties are so desperate for good news they all immediately latched on to his first number.

>oh heh heh sorry guys I was off 85%

Fucking amateur hour. Then a few posts later, he says he doesnt know something but just ask Chainlinkgod. Fucking grifter

>>55609926
More cope by seething unhinged fudniggers kek

Linkies are going to be so fucking rich its unreal.
Fudsissies will continue to claw their nails into their crotch in despair, knowing that the ship sailed and none of them got aboard

>>55609926
Running out of copium

Thank you all for looking after my financial well being, that said
I'm not selling

>>55610303
The average balance transfer cost is only 3%. So is it 3% of the cost, or is it literally feeless?

uhh guys why is link not dumping? the speech is over it should be dumping. why the fuck is it not dumping?

>>55609991
>crypto
>users
nobody uses this shit retard. except for gambling on centralized exchanges.

>>55610444
>balance transfer
Are we talking about the same thing here?
You can go one balance to another within one bank for free. But if you are doing bank to bank or INTL transfer then you are eating 3% every time or more.
This is an enormous cost to every business that exists CURRENTLY.
Not some speculative "in the future oracles will..." thing.
Literally RIGHT NOW a company that takes 1,000,000 in cc tx pays $30,000 for the pleasure.

So if you sell a million and make 100,000 off of that, which is a reasonable amount in real, average person business, then moving to XRP gives you a 30% raise immediately.
You now made $130,000 on a million.
It's a huge and enormous step for any regular business.

Hell, some people take 100,000 in cc payments an year and only profit $30k. Now they profit $33k.
This is tangible immediate and obvious.

>>55610743
>moving to XRP gives you a 30% raise immediately
Moving to any L1 does that.

>>55610382
>dUNL
I'm sorry, Im just a humble businessman. This is not an abbreviation I'm familiar with and it comes up nowhere even if I type in "ledger" "link" "payments" or etc. with it.
Explain and I'll explain.

>>55610755
No it doesn't.
You think people are stupid? ETH tx costs a buck at least rendering ALL small not worth bothering and BTC is even worse.

The point of XRP (and XLM) for that matter is that you can take a $5 payment this way. 98% of tx is under $15 dude.
If you use BTC or ETH for that you are OVER 3%.

>>55610777
Solana, Nano, Iota, Ada, ... are at least as cheap or cheaper. And the private chains banks use are way cheaper.
Collating transactions off-chain through oracles is vastly cheaper still.

>>55610247
Xrp dummies think banks and institutions will use the xrp token for transfer even though they have already said that is not what they want to do. The writing is on the wall anons. You just have to read it.

>>55610905
Their plan is to transfer tokenized real-world assets, not any L1 coin.
They already have L1 coins coming out the ass and they want to move away from them.

>>55610987
Bingo

>>55610193
Business might use Ripple services but no one is going to purchase XRP for anything other than penny stock speculation

>>55610777
checked and wow this seems to be a huge problem. i bet everyone is really rushing to start using the new solution called xrp and ---
>XRP launched in June 2012

>>55610878
No it's not. You also forgot about the liquidity part which is the most important.
>collating
lmao
That's not settlement and is just another middle man and can't conceivably be cheaper given the multiple steps involved.

>>55610777
that seems a far cry from "le banks are gonna use le xrp"

>>55610777
Brainlet tier thinking

>>55611024
Those that don't use it will lose out to those that do. Slowly and steadily.
I transfer large sums of money. It's costly.
I'm a real business person importing millions of dollars of stuff over 2-3 years.
Incels seething at home have no actual business experience.
We aren't using SOL or ADA, we are going to use a registered US corporation and their services like all other businesses do for everything else they do.
>>55611048
I have been taking PayPal since 1999. It took at least 15 years for them to get adopted and accepted on a large majority of ecommerce websites.

It's hilarious how the biz forum has so many never done business bizlets with literally ZERO experience.

>>55611058
>No it's not.
Yes it is.
Ripple is in no way the fastest or cheapest L1.

>That's not settlement
Institutions don't want to settle in L1 coins. In fact, their adoption largely depends on crypto settlement moving away from L1 coins and towards tokenized real-world assets.

>>55611101
just seems so strange that there is an obvious solution to save billions and yet no one is interested... very peculiar, but i'm sure if we just wait two more weeks it will happen but for real this time

>>55611070
The banks thing was always retard fud and I've never made that claim.
My claim is that it's the best option for peer to peer payments and international settlement.
Why do I need banks?
>>55611072
I'm a literal genius by any definition and run a muilti million dollar business.
Currently sitting in a corner office in a large building I own.

I run an ecommerce store and pick and pack with massive inventories.
I make sales all day. Average order is $58.
A BTC tx at that size is nearly 10%.
An ETH tx at that size is around 3% = to the cc and PP fees.
An XRP tx is .00001% of that.

Get over the fact that btc is not a peer to peer payments system and neither is ETH. IT doesn't work, it's a horrible money.
You can say it's good for other things but it's a horrible and expensive "money."

>>55610273
>The main issue is that XRP has not had a link run up.

XRP has 10x the marketcap of LINK you brainrot cultist, xrp is the biggest midwit trap ever created

>>55611104
Yup. They want to use interconnected permissioned chains and have final settlement on the most secure l1 permissionless chain which is currently ethereum but will probably become btc at some point once supported...but they do not want to settle in the native l1 token.

>>55611101
Are you having trouble getting conversation going in xrp threads so you come to a link thread to strip up discussion instead?

>>55611104
>tokenized real world assets
lmao
That's literally the XRPL endgame and is already happening.

For the retards out there.
There will not be one coin that rules everything. The actual decentralization that matters is VARIETY and THE FREEDOM TO CHOOSE.

I will gladly use the other options if they are usable with widespread adoption. Whatever makes my fees go to zero.
But right now XRP is the front runner for that with XLM right behind.
Sorry.
You aren't talking to a faggog with no money or business. You are talking to a faggot that has a large business and a fairly sizable amount of money.

>>55610759
It's a part of XRP, not LINK. Its critical for the cheap operation of XRP, but it's also a distinct point of centralization for the network.
How the fuck can you be an XRP shill and not even know how it works, what the fuck?

>>55611147
Nigger we're talking about institution to institution settlement. Not your little $3m ecommerce business

>>55611148
I already profited massively off of LINK and sold at double the current price over 2 years ago.
Less than a week ago my XRP value nearly doubled.
I'm doing quite alright.

I was in btc at $3.
Try listening son.

>>55611180
Nigger dUNL is a part of XRP

>>55609926
Haha ya

>>55611194
you are fundamentally retarded

>>55611180
>im talking about what I want but responding to you
Faggot.

I'm telling you what is actually valuable to large number of people. This is what makes adoption. Large numbers of people have to adopt it and they won't adopt it if it doesn't benefit them.

There is not tangible real world use for BTC or ETH to average people.
But there is for XRP. It saves them 3% on EVERYTHING.

>>55611213
>if they use ripple's centralized node list

>>55611178
I'm not a shill, I'm a real person explaining business to you.
>centralization
See, this is where you fail. I DON'T CARE.
I want cheap tx. I am a business. Not a lolbert faggot.

The decentralization that is important is the VARIETY AND AVAILABILITY of a thousand chains.
There is nothing fully decentralized and never will be.
ALL, I repeat ALL, chains are run and adminstered by a group that holds more tokens than 99.999% of users and has more money and power than 99.999% of users.

Decentralization isn't a Domino's in every town you moron. It's the millions of local joints across the country.
Get a clue.

>>55610193
>he thinks PayPal/Visa COST to transfer money is 2-3%
the absolute state of shitcoiners

>>55611211
Again. I'm rich. Run a business.
You are a loser online.

>>55611236
>The decentralization that is important is the VARIETY AND AVAILABILITY of a thousand chains.
CCIP shill lmao

>>55611235
>uses the internet
OH NO WHAT A CENTRALIZED SCAM.
This is you.
Stay poor.
>>55611239
For business it does. I literally paid nearly $100,000 in tx fees last year.
Just because they'll "graciously" let poor faggots send each other a few bucks doesn't mean that's how BUSINESS operates dude.

If you buy something online, 3% goes to PayPal or Visa. EVERY TIME.

>>55611279
Oracles aren't needed at all in this scenario.
Choice and variety is decentralization. Everything running on CL "oracles" is about the worst thing that could happen to that decentralization.

But again, decent for the sake of decent doesn' really help anyone.

>>55611177
I recognize you, you've been doing this "I transfer a lot of money so I use XRP" spiel probably for years now.
And it just does not add up.
Even the few actual users XRP had (Moneygram etc.) found that Ripple was MORE expensive.
pic very related

>>55611292
Ripple Co will probably put some workers on getting XRP some CCIP ramps and then there might be some value moving TXs to your chain for cheap transfers.
As far as the multichain world goes, there's billions of dollars that your walled garden can't and won't access without it.

>>55610743
Welp, Nano is even cheaper and also faster, so fuck your pajeet curry smelling centralized pre-mined shitcoin kekekek

>>55610743
>Literally RIGHT NOW a company that takes 1,000,000 in cc tx pays $30,000 for the pleasure.
you dumb nigger, they aren't paying to transfer money, they are paying Visa/MC for use of their network, the ability to accept CCs, debit cards already have vastly lower fees, how many merchants are debit only? You think the world is going to switch to XRP as money so jimbob the mechanic can save 3% on CC merchant fees?

The. Absolute. State. Of. Shitcoiners.

>>55611340
Indeed, and I recognize you, you're the Chainlink shill with 50pbtid arguing in circles with nuances, you use the same posting format as CLG so people tend to confuse you with Zach, you also post the BTC suppression screencaps a lot, and your favorite roast is:
>you
>also you
cringe, pot meet kettle

>>55611375
>Indeed, and I recognize you
Wait, why did you switch IDs?
Also no you don't.

>>55611400
I didn't, I'm not him, I just recognized him as well as you

>>55611407
You claim to recognize both but you only lash out at me lol
Also, you have mental issues.

>>55611407
Sure thing same fag

>>55611340
Nano is the only one that works as intended, what Ripple was supposed to be but never was.

>>55610777
L2s little shitcoiner, but even after BTC replaces all the worlds fiat, Visa will persist, a revolving line of credit is convenient and buyer protection of CCs is obviously much better than crypto

>>55611420
so what? that's you, and I find it extremely ironic how you call out other losers, when you're arguably the biggest one of them
>>55611425
kek, take meds

>>55611372
This.

>>55611446
>so what?
So the cripplet is the only one actually doing what makes them identifiable.
All I've done itt is talk about ripple, yet somehow you "recognize" how I supposedly post so much about Chainlink.
It makes zero sense.

You switched IDs and are looking for a bogeyman of yours to settle some kind of score.

Not just that, but I think the volume is artificial. There is no way it produced that much revenue in one day without the organization manipulating the volume.

>>55611446
No, you.

>>55611340
I transfer a lot of money and I hold XRP. Right now one really takes XRP and my bags are speculative. I see the benefits because I do transfer a lot of money and take a lot of payments.
>moneygram
Again, this is not the same as business to business payments and sales over the internet. No online stores can use Moneygram as a payment.
I've use and tried probably 30 different payment options over the years.
>>55611352
Again, this is about business. I don't need XRP price appreciation. I just need to be able to use it. Using it immediately benefits me.
Nothing else AT ALL comes close to be benefiting me as a real world business.
I've been in crypto since $3 btc. I've seen it all.
Nothing helps average businesses but tokens that relieve them of the tx fees they suffer from.
I see XRP and XLM as the most likely and safest bets for that to occur.
>>55611372
Another bizlet that's never done business.
You make money at the end of EVERYTHING, all expenses and COG and everything included.
This 3% isn't just 3%. It's 3% OFF THE TOP. It's all profit in your pocket if you keep it.
Yes, jimbob wants to switch.
Tell me you are a worthless loser with less words next time.

>>55611471
kek, I'm not him, I'm simply a lurker
you are who I believe you are though
>All I've done itt is talk about ripple,
this is a LINK thread, you're always in every LINK thread justifying every little misstep the team does and arguing endlessly with other deranged losers
I don't understand why you're getting so triggered, just own it up you little fag

>>55611460
>this
lmao
Tell me what you do RIGHT NOW.
Have you EVER taken a credit card payment?

>>55611499
>you're always in every LINK thread justifying every little misstep the team does
Pretty much all I've done itt is talk about Ripple. Go for a walk or something.

>>55611517
that's why you couldn't dismiss my "false" allegation and you keep replying, like you always do
come on dude, you can dish it but you can't take it
what a pussy

>>55611536
What a bizarre turn of events. Anyway, have fun with your XRP bag.

>>55611546
I'm not him dude, you can't even accept the fact that a lurker with no stakes in this would call you out huh
what a fag, unironically
you might be CLG after all lol

>>55611514
You're not special because you use a payment processor. Everybody knows that shit. Quit acting like it's some secret knowledge.

>>55611280
YOU pay 3% TO Visa/PP. For you to save 3% I the consumer would need to use your shitcoin. 'No'. I the consumer will continue to use Visa, I the consumer will continue enjoying revolving credit & buyer protection, I the consumer will continue to be cut-in by Visa on this transaction via cash back (2/3rds of that 3% directly to me). After BTCs accession, I the consumer will continue to use Visa, and continue to be cut-in (2% BTC back on every purchase). Cry. Seethe. Dilate.

>>55611575
I'm not doing that all.
There are OTHERS, who you don't confront, downplaying the 3% cost to business that processors get on nearly every dime transferred.

Paypal is actually a PER TX fee and then a percentage on top.
Many small PayPal tx are upwards of 6-7% because of this.
This is not trivial and these obvious discrepancies is what will lead to actual adoption. With the resolution of the "XRP" case this means businesses are now free to use it with no legal liability.
Will they? That's the question.
Being a business person I think they will.

>>55611632
Again, I was in btc at $3.
I'm not coping with anything. I'm talking about business use case.
>cashback
lamo
You are for sure consooomer and not a producer. I'll give you that.

CHAINLINK GONGO DOWN

>>55611375
Everyone that displays a modicum of knowledge on decentralized oracles and doesn't type like a nigger is confused with (or rather accused of being) Zach. Just a cheap cop out.

>>55610193
>Please. I'm begging you. buy XRP.
no

>>55611869
>overpays like good goy
Fair enough.

>>55611194
Nice doge.
Claiming that XRP hasn't had a runup while it's 10x the MC makes you either retarded or an empty shill. That fact wouldn't change even if you had more money than Musk and Faceberg combined

>>55611996
Listen. Please read and ingest.
You are a degen moron with no actual business experience.

This isn't about price appreciation for no reason. This is about price appreciation because of massive incentive.
There are TEN MILLION privately owned businesses in the US that all use some form of payment processor that are ALL getting ripped off for 3% on EVERYTHING.

The price of XRP doesn't need to go up at all for these companies to benefit from them. They aren't buying and holding for speculation.
They are IMMEDIATELY SAVING 3%.

If you think they will eschew this for much longer then that is fine. I'm telling you they won't.
This anon here makes the fairest point >>55611632 as current processors will continue to do this type of thing to keep consoomers using their scam.
However the wind is already blowing. The businesses are the final say in what processor they use.
I posit they'll start moving to cheaper options and pass on lower prices and perks to customers themselves.
We shall see. But it's not about speculation. It's about immediate and blatant benefit.
From my experience there is no stopping immediate and obvious benefit.

>>55612082
Firstly, my point stands about your comment being ridiculous.

The 3% that credit cards charge is basically a scam as is. It doesn't cost them more to do a large transaction than a small one. But why hasn't an honest company supplanted them by charging a flat fee instead of a percentage?

>>55611799
i GeT tA BtaCeee a TreSsss $3 buH aI hErE sHaiLLingLing CRippLeOhh ummmhaa

Toasting in an epic eggs are pee bread. Just bought a bag cause of the really good shilling. Ok boys, ive boarded the rocket. Lets goooo

>link thread
>actually, a 'pajeets shilling their shitcoins plus link" thread
This board is never going to be what it was before shitskins from telegram invaded huh.

>>55612264
>honest company
Ripple is about to do that.

>>55612344
To me that makes sense.
BTC is a failed peer to peer payment method given it's VERY HIGH cost for small transactions. Almost all plebs are making small transactions. They literally can't afford bitcoin.

>>55610439
Sell that shit and for XMR and RAIL.

>>55612538
“They literally can't afford bitcoin.”

That’s why it’s so valuaDUHble.

>>55612854
Also, BTC is not being discussed here. Did you lose track or something? Try to keep up Ranjesh. BTC already won, it’s the king asset, it is the magic, noone is gonna argue that.

Cripple, on the other hand, is shit. Centralized, pre-mined, etc. Everyone knows that too.

I’ll stick to credit cards and consumer protection while making purchases anywhere and everywhere.

Now, when it comes to peer to peer payments and transfers, I’d rather use Nano as it's a real cryptocurrency that offers secure, instant and also fee-less transfers and payments.

>>55612082
>I posit they'll start moving to cheaper options and pass on lower prices and perks to customers themselves.
The maximum net savings is 1% for consumers, are you going to give me revolving credit and buyer protection for free and cut your prices by 1% and cover all fees related to using a shitcoin? No, of course not. I will continue to use Visa.

>>55609926
>my answer was only 90% off, just like the price of chainlink
LMFFAOO retards cant even do basic math