/biz/ - Business & Finance

>BNB ~$100B valuation
>XRP ~$30B valuation
>DOGE ~$25B valuatio
This can be applied to any crypto. I think $18B for an infrastructure project like Chainlink is unfair considering other useless cryptos being valued much higher.

I think $18 billion is a reasonable valuation for LINK.
I'll probably sell a few LINK when they get to $15 billion, though, buy a country somewhere.

>>58562166
Please refer back to my post:
>I'm NOT saying any of the following:
>>other crypto tokens should be worth more than chainlink

>>58562152
AGRS is the future of smart contracts and DAOs, thanks to Tau Net. Get with the program.

>>58562169
They are already worth $18B (FDV)

>>58562171
Chainlink at $18B is undervalued considering its TVS is ~$27B.

>>58562193
Why should its worth be equal to its TVS? Nothing else is valued this way.

>>58562208
How do you value Link?

>>58562152
>I'm NOT saying other crypto tokens should be worth more than chainlink

But they are. Regardless of total crypto MC, Chainlink obviously belongs in the top 3.

>>58562224
I gave one example in the OP (DCF model, the most traditional valuation method for stocks). Another valuation method could be net asset value, but I don't think this makes sense for chainlink.
>>58562226
Maybe DOGE should really be worth $25M instead of $25B. I don't care.

>>58562152
>if you discounted all the future cash flows
That's dumb, the market is always forward looking.

No one is investing into an asset according to current worth, you invest based on what you expect for it to be worth in the future. Speculation > fundamentals always and forever.

>>58562241
Yes, you discount the expected future (forward) cash flows. That involves projection into the future. This is basic finance.

>>58562152
Nice pilpul shlomo

>>58562152
what about fees from quadrillions to node operators is not understandable for you
how can you still claim this bullshit as statements after the last months

>>58562193
Are you using the same method of valuation applicable to the stock in link?

What makes you think it will, considering the inflation rate?

>>58562244
NVIDIA is valued at near 3 trillion right now. Do you think that's based on current actual worth?

>>58562241
I doubt if Oracle still has the flare to emerge as a big trend. I'm looking at DePIN and RWA as emerging big trends.

>>58562255
What percent of the quadrillions will chainlink earn as fees, and what percent of that percent should LINK token holders expect to make?

>>58562186
I mean per LINK

>>58562260
You're saying the same thing as me. Yes NVDA's current market cap is based on the present value of its future net cash flows. People expect it to grow a lot more in the future, so its forward P/E ratio is very high.

idk whats worse 7 years holders barely x100 their money or 7 year fuddies making the same shitty questions

>>58562236
>>58562244
>>58562273
Chainlink the company isn't supposed to earn any fees or cash flow at all.

>>58562273
My finger in the air assumptions:

- 40% of the quadrillions will generate fees.
- Fees will on average be 0.035%.
- The operating profit for fee receiving entities will be around 30% (fees minus operating expenses)

Potential operating profit per year = $2.5Q * 40% * 30% * 0.035% = $105B
at a 20x EPS, that's a potential valuation of $2T.

Of course that's potential, not current.
Being at 1% of the potential ($20B vs $2T) seems undervalued to me.

>>58562152
It's overvalued because the token has pretty much 0 demand outside of speculation

it's undervalued compared to all the other shitcoins by cryptostandards

>>58562424
- 40% will generate fees
Exceedingly conservative
>fees will be 0.035%
again, on the conservative side but still realistic

>>58562488
Cool. You can use your own assumptions on your own valuation. Please do.

My point was to encourage sharing actual numbers.
The thread is about CL's valuation, yet nobody has posted any calculations that arrive at a number.

>>58562424
>>58562488
>>58562511
It's also DTCC only, and without collateralization.
But it'll do for the purposes of this thread.

>that's potential, not current
Potential is exactly what OP wanted.

you have to listen to the FUD he's NOT making

>>58562511
Here's a number for you:
DTCC processes $2.5Q / year.
If LINK recieves a 0.01% fee from aiding in those transactions, this is $250B / year. For 1B tokens this gives a price increase of $250 per token per year (fully diluted).

This does not include many of the other uses nor speculative changes in value for LINK.
This does not include tokenization.
This does not include data feeds for human consumption.
This does not include real time training for AI/ML without the need for humans to tediously, manually verify batches of data fed to, e.g., an LLM.

I am not complaining about the current valuation. I hope it remains low for a while longer so I can accumulate more. There has never been a bigger guarantee of a free ride in crypto or anywhere else.

>>58562169
based

>>58562672
>you have to listen to the FUD he's NOT making
this. its just like the green hotdog

>>58562691
And thats only from DTCC. This is ignoring 90-95% of LINKS potential use case and the likelihood of 90% of tokens being locked up at any one time.

>>58562691
Put a smile on my face. How long until this happens though? I have no problem waiting a decade.

>>58562826
Yep.

18 decimals.

>>58562903
>tfw the only liquid LINK market is comprised of a few billion juels

>>58562900
That is anyone's guess. I think the main problem facing CLL is regulatory clarity; with Asian markets beginning to provide such clarity, the West will have to follow very soon or be left behind. Already both of the main US presidential candidates have come out in support of crypto, which is huge. Bringing these topics further into the collective consciousness will facilitate action on the part of Congress. Maybe we can finally stop hearing nonsensical crowing from that charmless Warren woman...

>>58563058
>both of the main US presidential candidates have come out in support of crypto
lmao the democrat pro-crypto performance lasted less than a week. As soon as Trump got convicted "Biden" vetoed SAB121.

>>58562424
at least this guy made an attempt, albeit hilarious assumptions
>protocol did $900 of revenue yesterday
>his model predicts trillions

>>58562439
/thread
this is what the cult can't seem to grasp. "Mommy mommy what about the other coins" is not an investment thesis

>>58562691
>I hope it remains low for a while longer so I can accumulate more

every cult investment since the invention of internet forums have had regulars who say this on a daily basis

>>58563058
>dude once the entire world writes new banking laws, then MY ALTCOIN can moon

lmao

>>58563058
>Already both of the main US presidential candidates have come out in support of crypto
check again

>>58562260
>NVDA

maybe overvalued at a 60+ pe ratio, but you do realize they are cash flowing $28B right? What is Link's net cash flow? I'd say probably negative $200M annualized, with hardly any revenue

>>58562166
REEEEEE

>>58563373
>>his model predicts trillions
Well yes, that's what happens when a giant like DTCC gets involved.

>>58563582
>that's what happens
but... that isn't happening in reality (just your fantasy)

>>58563727
OP was talking specifically about the future. Not right now.

Token not needed

>>58563735
right, I'm aware of the various valuation methods. My point is it's an outrageous assumption for a company making less than $1,000 a day to build a trillion dollars into their model. You'd get laughed out of the room pitching that

Back to the OP's point, $18B for a company that might do something one day but currently only has an experiment and maybe some other secret revenues (we don't know bc no transparency and even if they exist there's no clear understanding of how that flows back to the token) is about as much as you can ask for. If anything, it's grossly overvalued

Also re CCIP fees - when someone says "Link receives 0.01% of the fees" or whatever, by Link does that mean Chainlink Labs? Or if that means the nodes, don't they just sell that off immediately, leaving us back at net zero buying pressure on the token

>>58564126
>My point is it's an outrageous assumption for a company making less than $1,000 a day to build a trillion dollars into their model.

It's outrageous not to make that assumption.

>>58562255
Checked.
OP ignored this. I wonder why.

>>58564126
obviously the current token value represents speculation about future demand for staking as collateral, that's were the real deman will come from, but ok, alright le'ts say it's gorssly overvalued according to you, but by this metric everything else in crypto is 10x more overvalued so are you shorting the entire market? or just sitting on the sidelines complaining in fear that you will actually miss out and get left behind? or maybe there are some better risk/reward plays in crypto right now that you want to tell us about?

>>58564159
>pilot
you missed the biggest part of the screen shot.

>>58564464
A TV Pilot still airs

>>58564544
the station still doesnt make money from it

>>58564566
The actors do.

>pilot
kek
no gainz then
period
the market is NOT giving link the benefit of the doubt. period. you either show us a REAL integration of a REAL tradfi company, or SHUT THE FUCK UP

>>58564606
so chainlinkgod,fishy faggot and null packets are making money dumping on everyone?

>>58564645
Those are the people you think of when actors come to mind?

>>58564754
do you like just asking questions instead of acknowledging what i said? you type like that faggot tokinized

>>58562691
Why should settlement be based on some percentage like the current infrastructure? Things in web3 are based on state change, not value.

>>58564126
Chainlink charges millions of dollars to plug their services into your chain Anon....

>>58564784
Ive only asked one question.

>>58564544
not a question
>>58564606
also not a question

Seems like youre scrutinizing the word "pilot" and dont actually know what it means.

>>58564900
checked. Seems like you're a perma bull baggie who cant see what the truth is. Thank you for your service marine, i have been dumping on you for 8 years now

>>58564159
Again, Chainlink charges millions of dollars per chain integration. The fact that CCIP even makes $1k per day is a lot considering that there is literally no interchain world at this point. Either the world's financial systems will be built to use this technology for settlement, transfer, and custody, or it won't. But the fact that it doesn't currently doesn't mean much.

So we will either remain in a world where a few retards are using CCIP to send AVAX to Polygon to swap on Niggerswap...or we're going to enter a world where financial entities keep their entire records on blockchains and they use CCIP to interact REAL value with each other. The latter is the global vision that linkies have invested in since 2017 and it is an enormous undertaking and you're right, we're not there yet after 7 years. No one here bought Link in 2017/2018 because they wanted to sell their OMG tokens on Aion or because they wanted to buy BTC on Ethereum. They did because of the Swift connection and the dream of Chainlink being the bedrock of the future of finance and capitalizing off of it.

>>58564618
This is basically it. You have purple haired faggots that want a utopian world of homosex where they use their NFTs as proof of participation in some homosex commune where they achieve sustenance off of c00m and s0i and play video games and watch cartoons all day...or you have people with the view of Chainlink where the global financial system will be some deterministic model where everyone is given a global ID number and everything is known about you and there is massive top down control.

The former don't want to invest in the latter because they're afraid that the men in suits won't let them chop off their dicks. Chainlink isn't really an investment that is going to moon based off of some tranny on tik tok giving financial advice.

>>58564909
t. Based September of 2025 fudposter who got rich shorting chainlink from $0.11 to $52 and then richer shorting it from $52 down.

>>58564606
If we are counting pilots and shit then chain won't do as much as you think, QNT and XRP will be covering 90% of payments.

>>58565078
Show me these QNT and XRP pilots lmao

>>58565095
Pretty much anything connected to CBDCs, I'm phone posting at work so I don't have links,
Project Rosalind is one I can think of off the top of my head.

>>58565095
https://u.today/ripple-client-volante-technologies-joins-fed-reserves-fednow-payments-pilot

>>58565095
https://www.finextra.com/newsarticle/31484/japanese-and-korean-banks-to-test-ripplenet-for-cross-border-funds-transfers
If you have the internet you can search for yourself.
Most tests and pilots are meaningless.

>>58565137
Volante isn't Ripple, Ripple uses Volante.

>>58565140
This pilot was done by Ripple itself.

>>58565164
I'm saying don't count your chickens before they hatch. I'm not arguing the legitimacy of the ones I posted.

>>58565190
Show me a major player doing a pilot with Ripple or Quant.

>>58565207
Nevermind mate you're missing the point.

>>58565220
Ripple and Quant have never had anything close to what Chainlink has, by any metric.
Comparing them is absolutely pointless.

>>58565128
>>58565137
This was an experiment done by ripple only, they have no association with Fednow.

>Project rosalind
not a pilot and very far from, see pic

>>58563373
>this is what the cult can't seem to grasp. "Mommy mommy what about the other coins" is not an investment thesis
If you truly believe this, there is no point in investing in crypto at large. Since only a fraction of us here on /biz/ post in /SMG/ or /PMG/, I'd say it is more likely you're being dishonest than a true believer of that statement.

Chainlink bad because crypto bad will never a be a good argument if you intend to specifically call Chainlink out. Same goes for OP, it's a moot point.

>>58562691
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z4-WRmZ8j8

>>58565207
Palau - https://www.cryptopolitan.com/palaus-successful-pilot-ripple-stablecoin/

Georgia - https://cryptonews.com/news/georgia-national-bank-partners-with-ripple-to-host-new-digital-lari-cbdc-pilot-adoption-on-the-rise.htm

Bhutan - https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/09/23/ripple-to-pilot-bhutans-cbdc-using-private-ledger/

Hong Kong - https://www.hkma.gov.hk/media/eng/doc/key-information/press-release/2023/20231030e3a1.pdf

SBI Holdings - https://www.finextra.com/pressarticle/65374/mizuho-pilots-ripple-for-cross-border-payments

Citi - https://www.metaco.com/press-release/citi-partners-with-metaco-to-develop-institutional-digital-asset-custody-capabilities/

HSBC - https://cryptonews.com.au/news/ripple-owned-metaco-and-hsbc-unveil-plans-for-digital-asset-custody-service-111822/

>>58564159
>exploration
Only in a cult could people claim an experiment valued at $18B is “undervalued” hahaha god what a joke

>>58565304
> If you truly believe this, there is no point in investing in crypto at large

Nah theres lots of money to be made gambling on memes and riding the 4 year cycle for btc/eth and new shitcoins. Until that stops Ill be around. The lowest returns are made by cults that fall in love with past cycle alts w horrible tokenomics, ie Link


> Chainlink bad because crypto bad will never a be a good argument if you intend to specifically call Chainlink out.

Youre getting mixed up between technology and valuation. The latter of which is the only important thing. This is a business board. The goal is to make money, not fund some faggot “revolution”or whatever cryptos latest tagline is

Speaking of, anyone else find it funny that 5 years ago, crypto bros larped so hard as libertarians. Fast forward to today and theyre all begging tradfi to enter the space

>>58565439
Thats pretty funny. Apparently Link wont have that problem bc they are projecting 100% market share of every transaction banks do

>token price: -3%

>>58567467
>Nah theres lots of money to be made gambling on memes
no there isn't, if you're saying this unironically you're either a newfag who's never sniffed 6 figs, a dev of a scamcoin, or a devs friend. nobody makes money on memecoins, its a zero sum game that insiders use to steal your btc/eth

note this is also why link gets so much hate from the rest of crypto, if link succeeds the meme casino will become what penny stocks are to the stock market

>>58567494
also for those stupid enough to fall for gambling on memecoins, understand the low marketcap ones (the ones you'd need to get rich) have liquidity so low you'd rocket the price if you made any significant buy (ie the amount you'd need to actually "make it" on a memecoin), and the ones with significant marketcaps are tapped out for gains and just exist for the devs to try to milk retail on the way down. if you don't understand what liquidity is you probably shouldn't even be investing or trading in the first place.

>>58566580
>Palau
>Georgia
>Bhutan
lol

>Hong Kong
This report is only mentioning a pilot Ripple did with a single small bank (17 branches): Fubon bank.

>SBI Holdings
Ripple bought into SBI Remit. Whatever pilot they do, it's actually Ripple themselves doing it.

>Citi
LMAO
Citi was working with Metaco on that one, not Ripple.
Ripple bought Metaco a year after this pilot, and Citi is reconsidering ending its partnership with Metaco BECAUSE it's now connected to Ripple.

>HSBC
Again, Metaco.
This one is slightly more bullish because the pilot was launched after Ripple bought Metaco, but Ripple/XRP isn't actually involved in any way.

Ripple's pilots are a complete and utter joke compared to what Chainlink is doing.

>>58568291
>Ripple bought into SBI Remit. Whatever pilot they do, it's actually Ripple themselves doing it.
SBI CEO: ‘Every Bank In Japan Will Use Ripple’s XRP By 2025’
https://www.coinspeaker.com/sbi-bank-japan-ripples-xrp/

Sounds like they want to use Ripple and XRP

>LMAO
Citi was working with Metaco on that one, not Ripple.
Ripple bought Metaco a year after this pilot, and Citi is reconsidering ending its partnership with Metaco BECAUSE it's now connected to Ripple.
So your saying that just because there is a pilot things don't actually work out. Hmmm Maybe wait until SWIFT is actually using link before you get to excited.

>>58568462
>SBI CEO: ‘Every Bank In Japan Will Use Ripple’s XRP By 2025’
Yes, because Ripple bought a massive voting share of SBI Remit. Like 40%.
Dumbass.

>So your saying that just because there is a pilot things don't actually work out.
No, I'm saying this pilot never involved Ripple.
And as soon as Ripple got connected (even very remotely), Citi instantly withdrew because of it.

>>58567494
>no there isn't, if you're saying this unironically you're either a newfag who's never sniffed 6 figs, a dev of a scamcoin, or a devs friend. nobody makes money on memecoins, its a zero sum game that insiders use to steal your btc/eth
this
I love when retards pretend and force the narrative that everyone is making 2-10x's with memecoins left and right, it's either newfags sitting on the sidelines watching scammers on twitter post their fake PNL screenshots or those that gambled their $100 portfolio on some solana meme and got away with a lucky pump

Memecoins are the most predatory PvP market in crypto, unless you're the dev or insider your chances are so slim it's just retarded

>>58568762
as opposed to retarded link baggies trying to force the narrative that nobody makes money in crypto apart from their bagholding cult
the absolute state of stinkers in 2017+7

>>58568934
>link baggies trying to force the narrative that nobody makes money in crypto apart from their bagholding cult

That's probably the most retarded strawman I'll read all week.

>>58567467
>Youre getting mixed up between technology and valuation
No. I'm talking purely about valuation compared to other crypto projects. What you're saying here:
> "Mommy mommy what about the other coins" is not an investment thesis
Is a brainlet take.

-If you believe Chainlink is undervalued compared to the rest of the crypto market, and you think the crypto market is going to continue to grow, LINK is a good buy.
-If you believe LINK is undervalued or fairly valued compared to the rest of the crypto market, but you think the crypto market is not going to grow, then you should probably not buy it, which is a fair assessment. Not really a strong argument specifically against LINK though.
-If you believe LINK is overvalued compared to the rest of the crypto market, and you think the crypto market as a whole is going to continue to grow, well, you'd be retarded.

I'm not saying there aren't other good reasons not to buy LINK. I'm just saying that judging LINK's value compared to other crypto is fair because how else will you valuate a retarded market like crypto?

>>58567494
>no there isn't, if you're saying this unironically you're either a newfag who's never sniffed 6 figs, a dev of a scamcoin, or a devs friend. nobody makes money on memecoins


hahaha man you are completely lost. This is why you can't invest with a cult mindset. You have tunnel vision, and it's costing you

>>58568762
your jealousy and ignorance is holding you back. When someone tells me something can't be done... "I can't, therefore I must"

>>58568934
exactly. They're mentally stuck in 2020


>>58569165
>No. I'm talking purely about valuation compared to other crypto projects
"mommy...."
>Is a brainlet take.
reality begs to differ

Every dead altcoin with a sizeable following has a group of bagholders on the internet talking about how their coin is "undervalued" compared to "x". I bet there's a group of IOTA holders talking about that right now.

Just to recap for anyone scrolling through: there are people who think a company making $1k a day in revenues and with what is most likely a $100M+ net operating loss is undervalued at $10.5B market cap

>>58569306
it's not jealousy because I know that the average crypto schmuck is losing on memes, I did my 2x on Pepe, but the whole meme market right now is getting squeezed dry

>>58569313
people already told you but you ignore those posts. By your metric the entire crypto market is even more overvalued so you're either shorting or sitting on the sidelines

>>58562691
Tell us when faggot

>>58562691
Tell us when the ascent starts faggot.

>>58569306
>I bet there's a group of IOTA holders talking about that right now.
Let's see Iota's pilots with Swift and DTCC

In the chance any one of you retarded CT influenzas are out there, that "Unified Golden Record" was a winner and should stay in some form as a marketing device. The concept of a product (Chainlink) creating a unified blockchain paid to access using LINK is absolutely "it" as a message to market imo. Great phrase.

>>58569483
It sure is.
There's no doubt that Chainlink will at some point roll out that BBCA DAG thing as a "unified golden record" of all Chainlink-related activity on all chains.
No more need to keep track of what source and destination chains specific transactions used.

>>58569306
>reality begs to differ
Not at all. Investing is about spotting undervalued assets. If the top 15 is full of crap projects that are objectively worse off than Chainlink, it's not a wild speculation to think Chainlink will climb ranks in the near future. Therefore it's a good buy - if you think crypto's market cap will continue to increase as well.

>Every dead altcoin with a sizeable following has a group of bagholders on the internet talking about how their coin is "undervalued" compared to "x".
Sure, but that is not the point. If they believe IOTA is undervalued compared to the tokens above it, they should invest. I'm not convinced though. Chainlink on the other hand does seem to be in a much better position than it's peers in the top 15.

My point is that you should be arguing why Chainlink is NOT undervalued compared to these tokens if you want to disprove this line of thinking, instead of using "mommy they are comparing valuations again!" as a cheap cop out.

>>58562169
This guy fucks.

>>58569502
>It sure is.
>There's no doubt that Chainlink will at some point roll out that BBC
Stopped reading right there. Link baggots are mentally ill cucks. Disgusting

>>58569628
>you should be arguing why Chainlink is NOT undervalued compared to these tokens
because it's a shitcoin
/thread

>>58569437
>Pilot

lmao... only 7 more years until you get test version 0.1.

>>58569407
his thesis revolves around the entire banking system paying a Russian for an altcoin he printed out of thin air... You're going to be waiting a while

>>58569483
you've inadvertently discovered the business model in altcoins. They are essentially an exercise in marketing. Golden record does have a nice ring to it, and will help Sergey sell another 500M tokens at a premium price to naive investors, netting him billions

>>58569628
>undervalued assets
no such thing anymore, the world is headed for hyperinflation. Modern day investing is about being in on the right ponzi

> If the top 15 is full of crap projects that are objectively worse off than Chainlink
projects? what is this high school

It's going to be funny when Pepe flips link to join Shib/Doge. Unironically all 3 are inherently more honest because than Link because they don't promise to do anything, whereas Link promises some revolutionary banking utopia that's always 5-10 years off meanwhile diluting the hell out of current hodlers. Also they don't have hundreds of millions of annual operating costs to fund monthly company parties and hundreds of employees around the world

And yes I'll say it again, reality does beg to differ. The "mommy it isn't fair" investment thesis has taken you from rank 5 a few years ago to 15.


>>58569972
lol

>>58569306
you know its true and you're lying and probably a scammer yourself, nobody makes money on memecoins, they're just scams with paid jeets 24/7, the fact you're shilling them in a link thread makes you a likely streetshitter yourself
difference between link and shitcoins, i will tell you you probably won't make money for a long time with link, in fact i might even fud you out cause fuck if i care about your lunch money, meanwhile you will desperately claim that your shitcoin of the week will make you rich, "stay poor stay poor" fucking lol

I'm old enough to remember when email verification was required and these bicker threads completely disappeared.