[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 347 KB, 500x500, 1515587566128.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9033804 No.9033804 [Reply] [Original]

>why would companies go on Binance to buy this token?
Sergey has 650M locked up to give to companies in order to incentivise usage of the network. That doesn't mean they won't, however. I'll explain it later.
>if Sergey will just give out tokens, adoption doesn't mean moon right?
Besides the fact that crypto is incredibly speculative, which means that it simply being adopted may call for a pump, usage in the network is still priced in a fixed fiat amount, as you've seen in various threads regarding node payout and "capturing the API economy". This means that the if Sergey gives, for example, Tesla, Uber, and SWIFT 100M tokens each when the price of LINK is at $1, and assuming that each usage of the ChainLINK network is worth a cent each, this means that they are limited to 10 billion uses each if they decide not to buy anymore.
>but wait, if usage is priced in fiat, what is the token for? Why not pay in dollars? or in ETH?
Because the network only accepts LINK as payment. I won't even mention the technicals because it's largely irrelevant. ERC667, penalty payments, node collaterals, etc., doesn't matter. The network only accepts LINK, as Sergey said. Which means if the price of LINK is at a dollar a pop, and the usage of the network costs a cent each, you'll be paying .01 LINK each time you use the network. It doesn't matter how expensive (or cheap) LINK would be because 18 fucking decimals.

>> No.9033817

>>9033804
>If it doesn't matter how expensive or cheap it is, how will this shitcoin moon then?
With that in mind, Tesla, Uber, and SWIFT are incentivized to not only pump the price so the amount of times they can use the network increases, but also prop the price up, establishing a new floor so that the value of their free tokens from Sergey wouldn't go to waste. I think it is an easy assumption that it's far cheaper to pump/prop up the price than the potential losses as the cost of LINK drops a cent or so. Pumping an illiquid token that has a low marketcap such as LINK would be inexpensive, I imagine. BTCP for example moved 10 spots up in CMC because someone supposedly fat-fingered on some shit exchange. To these big companies and institutions, even BTC has thin as fuck orderbooks. If they pump it from $1 to $100, they unironically just saved 10 billion dollars in expenses, minus the cost of pumping LINK. Keep in mind that it is in their collective benefit to pump it, not just a single company. Even if they don't actually go on Binance (or whatever the major exchange for LINK is at that time), they sure as shit would want to shill it because they now have a financial stake in it, assuming that they took those tokens because LINK would actually be used, that smart contracts are actually ubiquitous
>What about companies who want to use the network but aren't given free tokens?
Well, they'd buy our expensive bags. Expensive in the sense that it's probably some retarded amount like $100 or some shit but it won't matter to those companies because, again, usage is priced in fiat, that single LINK worth $100 would give them 10k uses if it costs a cent each.

>> No.9033829

>>9033817

>What about competitors?
Besides the fact that the ChainLINK team has a huge advantage regarding connections and clout over its competitors, and if we ignore any talk about technicals (because LINK's competitors are still far and away from a mainnet, or has no available code for scrutiny), I believe only LINK has a separate stack (a large one at that) in order to incentivise usage of the network. If we assume they would all be the same (they won't because LINK would be the best), a company doesn't care about what oracle network it's using as long as they reduce costs upon using it (we are comparing competitors so in this scenario we assume that utilising smart contracts would be profitable for a company). Just the free tokens, nevermind the pumping/shilling they could do, would allow them to save on expenses by a huge margin vs. possible competitors (unless they also have something similar to LINK).
>But again, what about companies who aren't given free tokens?
Who knows, all speculaton at this point but I have zero doubts that LINK will be the industry standard oracle network.

>> No.9033830

At least be more creative boy, we don't have much more time to buy.

>> No.9034146
File: 515 KB, 1440x2960, Screenshot_20180422-041106_Blockfolio.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9034146

>>9033804
>>SELL ALL YOUR LINK

No.

>> No.9034196

>>9034146
.01 ETH for gas, nice

>> No.9034353
File: 52 KB, 430x420, 1518964619251.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9034353

>>9033804
>>9033817
>>9033829
>mfw 10 years from now the normie media will be writing articles about how the single most important crypto in existence was discovered by a neet nazi anime forum