/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>55907250
that counter is 40 inches from the ground

This movie is about Sergei, his business model and ethics, and his six-sided blue jew token: Chainlink. He wants to leave me in Antarctica until the dogs tear me apart and he figured out some way to monetize that. They aren't tearing me apart, however, and his coin is not performing.

Don't lay it on too thick anon. Linkcels may be retarded but even they will sniff this obvious bait out and start crying again about how all threads shitting up this board are fud threads.

>>55907250
look at this regarding the Chainlink revenue
https://dune.com/ericwallach

>>55907295
>IQ1 ID
lmao

>>55907300
I am looking for the split of link coming from paying customers vs from the uncirculating supply (supposedly)

>>55907250
Don't know about the Chainlink stats, but pic is Bitcoin for today.

Basically around 3% of Bitcoin mining rewards come from actual paying customers.
The rest (97%) is inflation/subsidizing/bootstrapping/...

>>55907300
Checked. Eric Wall is a known LINK fudster

>>55907496
lmao OP better delete his little thread

>>55907516
You realize that isnt Eric Wall right? There are two people with similar names. I know that’s hard to understand

>>55907556
midwit detected. Erica Wall is her real name desu

>>55907300
eric wallach is a coward and a liar. he would never show his face at smartcon

>>55907601
this. if Erica Wall was a real lady she would come to SmartCon. Sir Gay is practically giving free money away according to the fudders. She would be stupid not to flash her fat tits on stage bro

>>55907621
>She would be stupid not to flash her fat tits on stage bro
fuckin' ey man love me some fat tits

>>55907639
this

>>55907621
>>55907639
>>55907639
*police sirens*
bro you just did a samefag. it is forbidden to samefag on fourchannel.org

>>55907621
fat tits on stage does sound pretty dope ngl

>>55907359
Anyone? I really want to show how the fudders are lying

>>55907696
The fudders are wrong from the get-go: see >>55907496

>>55907717
Bitcoin never claimed to be a utility token not sure what this proves

>>55907752
>Bitcoin never claimed to be a utility token
wat

>>55907752
this. it ackually claimed to be THE pet rock coin not a utility token as fudders have misled you into believing

>>55907766
>>55907769
So yeah let's show these fudders Chainlink has paying customers and theyre the ones paying for the network, it's not entirely subsidised by marines. Can you point me to these numbers?

>>55907300
kek if you subtract gas fees chainfuck barely makes any money. now i see why nobody wants to buy this scam

>>55907784
>>55907752
If Bitcoin doesn't need this, why does Chainlink?

>>55907792
I think you're missing the point of what a pet rock is

>>55907752
>Bitcoin never claimed to be a utility token
Bitcoin is described in the whitepaper as a chain of digital signatures.
The entire Bitcoin system revolves around the coin and its functionality purely in the cryptographic sense.
You are literally braindead.

>>55907792
Because Chainlink is a utility token, it provides a service to customers willing to pay. It is important to show that there are customers willing to pay for this service, it isn't an inflation ponzi, see picrel, how new are you? You should read on bitcoin but it is absolutely not the same principle, it is a store of value providing the qualities needed for a store of value, people buy it for this, miners it is true are incentivised by inflation which arguably could lead to issues when inflation stops (it is halved at each halving) anyway Im not here to teach you all the basics just do some reading

>>55907818
>Bitcoin is described in the whitepaper as a chain of digital signatures
woah woah woah let's not get ahead of ourselves the primary purpose of BTC is to provide as little "utility" as possible to avoid network bloat. Treating usage as a DDOS attack makes sense because you do not want your pet rock doing anything

>>55907831
>Because Chainlink is a utility token
lmao, and Bitcoin isn't?

>>55907844
No, this was decided a long time ago I'm not recounting the block wars to you just do some reading it's quite crazy to see how little you guys know about crypto

>>55907936
>Bitcoin has no utility
>also Bitcoin has almost no actual paying customers (3%)

Why are you even mentioning Chainlink if this is how you feel about crypto as a whole?

>>55907962
Because I love Chainlink and it has utility and paying customers I want to prove fudders wrong

>>55907992
Why would "having few paying customers" even be fud when Bitcoin itself only has 3% paying customers and 97% bootstrapping subsidies?

LINKETH
LINKBTC
LINKUSD

>>55908002
Why do you keep asking retarded questions and derailing the tread though?

>>55908102
>retarded question
Your whole premise in OP is that "few paying customers bad".
But apparently it isn't.
Bitcoin, ETH, Solana, ... all have very low percentages of "actual paying customers" vs over 90% inflationary rewards. And yet look at their ranking.

>>55908227
The point is
> stats showing the revenue from paying customers
The interpretation of this data is then left to the anon reader. Nobody needs your whataboutism or opinions, just the numbers

>>55908252
97% of the Bitcoin network is currently being subsidized by Bitcoin holders.
Do you really think it's going to be that much worse for Chainlink?

>>55908281
Again. Don't care about your opinion. I can form my own. But care about the data. Last (you)

>>55908312
It's not my opinion; 97% of Bitcoin rewards consist of inflation. You can look it up for yourself.

basically, chainlink avocados want to convince (You) that LINK doesn't need "fundamentals", "customers" or "revenue" in order to pump, because BTC didn't need them either
so, since BTC has mooned and LINK hasn't, it is safe to assume it will simply never moon

>>55908002
Bitcoin is digital gold and has billions in trading volume. What does chainlink have? Also you claim LInk nodes don't need to be paid because bitcoin also barely has paying customers. So what's the value proposition for LINK?

>>55908969
>Bitcoin is digital gold
kek

>what's the value proposition for LINK?
Probably similar to the rest of crypto.

>>55909009
BTC marketcap: 500 billion'
LINK marketcap: 3 billion

Lol

>>55909038
And BTC did that without whatever OP is crying about.
In fact, so did most of cryptos

>>55909061
I thought linkies claimed LINK was special and had superior tokenomics? Now I gather from this thread that link doesn't need paying customers, it will just go up by itself just like BTC?

>>55907267
and?

>>55909080
everyine here bought link at .23 cents so of course biz is biased.

t og 10,000 make it stack link holder since 2017.


most people have have been better pff just buying btc the last few years.

>>55909080
It is special, and it’s also bootstrapped like most cryptos.

>>55909061
I am tired of this "all crypto is shit so it's OK for chainlink to be shit" whataboutism.
Share the data asked if you have any insights, stfu otherwise

>>55909217
All of crypto isn’t shit.
Bitcoin’s mining rewards system is genius.

>>55909088
Those crates are 18 inches tall.
So.
Sergey is 58 inches from the ground wearing 1 inch thick sneakers.

>>55907496
/thread

>$5.99
>$5.99
>$5.99

>6 years
Kek i would hate to be a link baggie

ITT: NPC (No Paying Customers)

>>55907250
Link bag holders did pay for this. If this were a tech company, the funding would’ve already cut and run. Truth>trust my ass. Fuck you CLG and Sergey for pushing propaganda to keep bag holders holding.

>>55912419
Let’s say he’s a total scammer- he’s still going and talking about Sibos in a few weeks. Do you realize the size of the scam if you’re right? The unfortunate reality is that they don’t control the market and their token is subject to market forces just like any other. They’re solving a chicken and egg problem launching the network. Like they say, sell half on a double. Shrug.

>Sergey Nazarov
>net worth: $600m and one blue plaid shirt

>>55912470
tfw the shirt is worth more

>>55907250
is he really going to eat all that by himself?

>wonder why people keep posting food truck/food stand memes
>just realized it's because it's one of the main business in developing worlds of which /biz/ posters are a part of
>everything they post is through the lens of being from a 3rd world country
so you really are all indians (aka Jeets.)

NPC

>>55912451
They have failed at every vertical they had except for price feeds. Layer Zero is being shoved down the throat of every portfolio company of every VC who is balls deep in that fucking scam. CCIP is a year late and only used by 2 count em 2 protocols. Gelato beat them on automation and mixicles. Theres nothing left but bullshit academic white papers for theoretical computer science shit that is decades out. Even Ari grew bored and fucked off to write a gay book. It's over.

>>55913635
Even price feeds they failed at, they've deprecated 200+ different feeds after spending tens if not hundreds of millions to bootstrap them into existence, and the remaining ones still require heavy subsidisation. It's been an absolute disaster.

>>55913679
Ok so given this…where are the lawsuits. You cant just steal $2Billion and claim it all went to a whitepaper

>>55913679
They stopped letting parasite dapps steal from them. I don't hate this move. Fuck you pay me.

>>55913769
So the price feeds are paying customers only now? Strange as community advocates were saying the opposite in this very thread

>>55913846
Imagine taking advice from someone who works for free. Yeah so AAVE pays for price feeds as does compound and every other scam bullshit pawn shop in DeFi. Probably not market rate but they send Sergey tendy money.

>>55913900
Ah so they give some money to Sergey, he puts it in his pocket, and proceeds to give nodes some of his preminted tokens in exchange. Geez what a scam. Why don't customers buy link on the open market like they do for eth and btc?

>>55913936
they do buy off exchanges. they give the tokens the buy to sergeys team who add more tokens to the mix and give them to nops. the nops have to make sure their costs are covered so they immediately take the tokens they receive and dump them for stables. so any demand is immediately undone by more sell pressure. without staking the nops have no reason to hoard tokens so they don't.

>>55907250
Can anyone please let me know what’s left to make link pump? No, seriously…

They said mainnet was going to make it pump, it didn’t happen

They said Adelyn was going to make it pump, it didn’t happen (and she got fired)

They said deco was going to make it pump, it didn’t happen

They said mixicles was going to make it pump, it didn’t happen

They said a bullrun was going to make it pump, Sergey sold millions of link with all his might to make it dump

They said staking was going to make it pump, it didn’t happen

They said CCIP was going to make it pump, it didn’t happen

What’s left? Shills only have caps from 2019 and retarded hopium. Every time you ask they basically come up with retarded riddles and post articles from huge institutions where chainlink is not mentioned even once.

Fuck shills man

>>55913979
>they do buy off exchanges

Why do you lie? Chainlink asks for fiat

Do fud fags really believe retail was/is able to "subsidise the network"? Lol. Lmao even.

>>55914053
They don't, jeet. Customers ask to pay in whatever bullshit they can send. SirGay does actually make them pay him in LINK.

>>55914084
No he doesn't.

>>55914069
Sadly it's true, the network is funded through the dumps of the uncirculating supply that is gobbled up by retail. Community advocates in this thread were arguing that it's normal so I don't know

>>55914123
Do you unironically believe retail poured billions of dollars into Chainlink? Are fucking retarded?

>>55914104
Cool story. As much as I want to punch Sergey in his fat fucking stomach, I know he forces payment in LINK. Congrats on lying though. Really cool, anon.

>>55907250
HODL and buy more.

also, i am busy trolling financial lolcows Chamo's Castle who are subsequently Bone Zoners

>>55914523
>I know he forces payment in Link

Waoh I will totally believe a Chainlink shill that doesn't provide any evidence this has worked so well in the past

>>55914140
Who paid for it? Is it another secret?

>>55915709
It's like the Sergey's forced payments in link and more generally the customers payments it's all a big secret but it's huge keep accumulating institutions are doing it to do you know the new Zealand bank?

>>55915613
Whoa you’re a fucking retard. How am I a link shill when I state in this post the tokenomics of link are cancer.
>>55913979

>>55907250
SN=SN

>>55907496
so the bitcoin ceo lied and the partnerships aren't profitable at all? i'm calling the police

>>55907661
you don't need to try to save face on 4chan after failing to switch ids. just move on, it only highlights your embarrassing mistake when you do

>>55914523
sergey just offers terrible exchange rates for other crypto, it's like these sketchy currency exchange shacks

>>55907301
u r soi ID tho

>>55907784
Blatant

OP itt

>>55907496
Thread ended here.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

>>55916739
Link marines in 2023
> link doesn't have paying customers and it's absolutely normal

How low have you guys fallen I feel a bit sad for you

>>55916777
Hi OP
Apparently Bitcoin doesn't have any paying customers either after 14 years.
And checked lol

>>55916792
It's not true though, institutions buy bitcoin to store value, see Saylor, JPM, El Salvador. Only retail buys link though

>>55916817
>It's not true though
On-chain metrics say it is literally true. Over 97% of the block rewards are subsidization.
See >>55907496

>>55916830
Yes miners compensation is boosted by inflation which decreases over time, but it works because on the other side institutions are buying it, whereas Chainlink only has the inflation bit. Anyway Chainlink is a utility token and not an investment vehicle you should read the white paper and Sergey made it pretty clear, I still remember his chat at smartcon 0 with the fantom guy when they criticised inflation based yield. The token value should derive from the value created by customers using it or hoarding it. Problem is it seems there's none for now

>>55916935
>Chainlink only has the inflation bit
No it doesn’t, we have tons of proof of price fees users paying Chainlink.
Not to mention users having to pay directly for things like VRF, keepers, CCIP, …

>>55916954
No Paying Customers

Sorry linkie

>>55917055
Why would you lie about something that takes 2 seconds of googling to debunk?

>>55917084
Feel free to post the stats OP has been asking for in this thread. No one was able to share them so advocates started coping by saying muh btc too has no one buying which is blatantly wrong. Please deboonk

>>55917084
100+ posts and nobody has answered this basic question

>>55917114
>>55917130
Is your Bing broken or something?
This shit has been posted thousands of times.

>>55917164
Apparently more people have difficulties finding these paying customers, as shown in this thread.

>>55907250
mmmh wein aus deutschen landen this man has a good taste

>>55917180
We've known for years that the partners are paying.
Pic related was for a single feed (ETH/USD iirc) back in 2019.

>>55917225
An old screenshot with some logos. The actual state of chainlink

>>55917470
Also
>DMM
>Linkpool
Known scams

And
>openlaw
Has cut ties with chainlink

And the rest are literally who except aave

>>55917225
Thanks. I'm buying more stinkers. This shit is undervalued when looking at the rest of top 30.

>>55917470
>>55917484
Seething.
"No paying customers" hasn't been true since 2019, it's time to cope.

btw if that pic is from 2019, then there will be hundreds of additional sponsors paying for price feeds today.
And then there's Scale, Build, direct user payments, ...

>>55917641
>then there will be hundreds of additional sponsors paying for price feeds today.

Ah that's great. Source on that?

>>55917225
People want to see metrics, not a screenshot with logos lmao

>>55917840
>>55918015
Ask the paying users themselves.
Surely if Chainlink were lying they would’ve spoken up about it by now.

>>55918102
Well anon above claimed it was a quick google search. It's funny that nobody still is able to provide any metrics whatsoever

>>55918110
For things like VRF where you have to pay yourself with the tokens, you can look it up on-chain.
For the feeds users can pay Sergey in whatever they want pretty much, so it’s impossible to track.
We can see on chain exactly how much Sergey is dumping to support the project and network.

>>55918153
>We can see on chain exactly how much Sergey is dumping to support the project and network.
Which is more than we can say for Satoshi lol

>>55913936
>Why don't customers buy link on the open market like they do for eth and btc?
They do. And if they don't, their shit gets converted to Link anyway.

>>55918179
Nope not used

>payments made in alternative assets will be withdrawn to separate maintenance pools and replaced within the CCIP contracts with LINK based on the exchange rate at the time of payment

Link still coming from the premint, not bought on the open market

>>55918162
What does this even mean btc is actually trustless, there's no central authority whitelisting miners, the tokenomics were coded from the start and everyone can see everything, you don't have people sending cash to satoshi to pay for their transactions lol

>>55918231
>Link still coming from the premint
If they're paying in assets other than Link, maybe.
But they're paying a penalty for doing that. It's cheaper to buy Link on the open market and use that.

>What does this even mean
It means we have no idea how much Bitcoin Satoshi has. We never did.
Every few days there's a scare about "possible Satoshi wallet is moving coins!!!". Oftentimes the news even makes Bitcoin dump.

What the fuck this thread is still up and there's still no proof of paying customers? What are the advocates doing?

>>55918153
Why is everything such a black box secret? Can someone just post a link with some metrics

>>55918309
Hi OP

>>55918309
>still no proof of paying customers
There's been plenty, you just keep twisting and squirming.

>>55918339
Who is the customer in this picture and how much did they pay? My screen is just showing buzz words

>>55918401
Those are instructions, retard.

>>55918414
how many customers follow these instructions?

>>55918430
Literally everyone using keepers

>>55918436
how many customers are using keepers?

let's assume zero for keepers then. what about price feeds, paying is optional for those, but since chainlink got developed with donations from the general public, they are probably publishing statistics in the name of transparency and truth. please link them here

>>55918521
>let's assume zero for keepers then
lol

>price feeds, paying is optional for those
nope

>>55918521
I think the point is this isn't a publicly traded company. They don't actually have to prove anything.

https://vrf.chain.link/mainnet
https://automation.chain.link/mainnet
https://data.chain.link/ethereum/mainnet/reserves
https://ccip.chain.link/

And currently in beta; https://chain.link/functions

Scroll through the different chains on top right.

Adem, you now move goalposts because you are too low iq to extract the data from a webpage. Learn2code shitskin

https://dune.com/ericwallach/chainlink-ccip-revenue

>>55918558
>Would like Compound to pay
it's not a secret, data feeds can be consumed without paying anything. you essentially rely on chainlink not wanting bad press
https://docs.chain.link/data-feeds/using-data-feeds

>>55919690
Yeah I’m sure Chainlink made new custom price feeds for Compound after they refused to pay up.

>>55918558
how many keepers customers are there, then? apparently you have some sources, just post them here, no need to summarize

>>55907250
>Could someone point me in the direction of the stats showing the revenue from paying customers

LOL
Lmao even

>>55919715
Four posts above you my guy.

>>55919690
This is false and malicious. Try harder shitskin.

>>55918179
The link comes from the 35% "network incentivization stack" sergey has. Its just another way for sergey to turn his premined chuck e cheese tokens into usd

Pic related proves that the token is not needed and users do not need to buy the link tokens.
If the token was needed and used the demand and thus price would go up with the growth of adoption and partnerships. But it doesnt.

>>55920803
yep. Sergey obviously pays shills to defend link here. Anyone holding 1k link from the top lost almost fifty grand. There's no way he hasn't had to hire security for dumping on neets

>>55920723
Only if they want to pay 10% extra.
If they want to save money, they'll buy Link on the open market and use that.

>>55920803

>tfw you realize this thread is basically just a few impotent fudcucks samefagging and posting back and forth at each other, clearly getting angry because of the lack of genuine (you)s they get now which basically = no payment for their many hours of tryimg to fud

lmfao
m
f
a
o

all fields