/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.25121909]

Link will never be a security.

[Anonymous No.25121934]

>>25121909
Explain the dumps and token distribution. Operating expenses will be the topic at hand. Be careful out there.

[Anonymous No.25121935]

>>25121909
You re-worded the original wording of the Howey test. It is not led to believe, it is “reasonable expectation of profit.” Which doesn’t mean Sergey has to say it will go up for that box to tick. Anybody investing in Chainlink has a reasonable expectation of profit. You faggots have spammed this board for three years straight with your expectations.

Chainlink is undoubtedly a security if XRP is one.

Nice damage control attempt.

[Anonymous No.25121951]

>>>/b/

[Anonymous No.25121958]

>>25121909
COPE FAGGOT.
How much LINK does Sergey dump everyweek for personal gain?

[Anonymous No.25121976]

>>25121909
>chainlink never has shille-

oh shit

it was constant. for years.

[Anonymous No.25122004]

>>25121976
The faggots who flooded this board for three years with profit expectations are now trying to backpeddle and say there is no expectation of profit. LMAO

[Anonymous No.25122024]

>>25121935
>don’t discuss price
>translated by retard to mean: Which doesn’t mean Sergey has to say it will go up for that box to tick.


You’re ccp democrat, huh?

[Anonymous No.25122043]

>>25121935
>it is “reasonable expectation of profit.
No it's not.

"(...) and is led to expect profits"
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/328/293/

>Which doesn’t mean Sergey has to say it will go up for that box to tick
It literally does.

>>25121934
>>25121958
Sergey never alluded to future price increases;
- therefore he never led anyone to expect profits from simply holding Chainlink;
- therefore he passes the Howey test;
- therefore Link will NEVER be a security.

>>25121976
>Your honor, Sergey is guilty of leading people to expect profits; see these anonymous posts!
lmao

[Anonymous No.25122097]

>>25122043
oh sirgay, you're so deplorable. there are constant threads pointing as far as 2017 his intentions. what they got ripple for was practically nothing. it was always seen as an investment. the fact is chainlink ico'ed. and had us clients. and dumped secretly.

he's going to jail

and link is going to zero

and that's the truth

[Anonymous No.25122133]

>>25122043

Chainlink tokens have no other use than fucking speculation. You cannot do anything with a Chainlink token. It will be EASILY argued in court that anybody buying a chainlink token had an expectation of profit because THERE IS NO OTHER USE FOR THEM.

Chainlink IS a security if XRP is one. It is not even debatable.

[Anonymous No.25122157]

>>25122097
Fucking lol

Ripple:
>the CEO himself and the official website constantly shill the future token price.

Chainlink:
>anonymous 4chan posters shill the price

You:
>that's the same thing to the SEC

Are you huffing paint right now?

[Anonymous No.25122182]

>>25122133
>Chainlink tokens have no other use than fucking speculation.
Chainlink tokens have been used as currency ever since the first day of mainnet.

Here's T-Systems (Deutsche Telekom, T-Mobile) receiving Link tokens for their node contributions.

[Anonymous No.25122199]

>>25122157
Your argument is destroyed
>>25122133

Chainlink is a security if XRP is one and there is absolutely no countering this fact.

[Anonymous No.25122222]

>>25122199
Ripple:
>constantly referring to future price increases (ceo, website, ...°

Chainlink:
>never discuss the price, let alone future price increases

you:
>it's the same

[Anonymous No.25122230]

>>25122182
That is Sergey subsidizing the network by paying partners. Even more damning evidence of being a security. It is obviously not a fucking currency. The average purchaser of a chainlink token has absolutely zero use for them other than speculation.

[Anonymous No.25122241]

>>25122222
Holy checked and based.

[Anonymous No.25122253]

>>25122230
>has absolutely zero
besides making you seethe like a tard.

[Anonymous No.25122254]

>>25122199
I havent made up my mind yet and am reading the debates, but you're being a fucking retard

[Anonymous No.25122255]

>>25122222

It is over for chainlink. Damage control all you can. I don’t give a shit if you lose all your money. Chainlink is a security and it is clear as day.

[Anonymous No.25122265]

>>25122222
Quints of truth. Kek approves. Chainlink is blessed with memetic strenght.

[Anonymous No.25122288]

>>25122230
>That is Sergey subsidizing the network by paying partners.
That is the contract operator paying the nodes.

And the contract operator is paid by the clients, see pic.

[Anonymous No.25122287]

>>25122253
>>25122254

>A board of emotional Chainlink bagholders seethes when I point out the reality of the situation

I am shocked

[Anonymous No.25122294]

Imagine being a brainlet like OP.

LOL.

They WILL get sued. It's only a question "WHEN".

Chainlink got a shitload of attention and you can bet your ass the SEC is screening every little thing.

Sergey will get nuked, if only for his grande selling of Chainlink for his personal benefit.

[Anonymous No.25122315]

>>25122287
What the fuck are you talking about, I said I follow the debate because I'm even considering selling, but you're not answering his points, filthy nigger iq.

[Anonymous No.25122328]

>>25122287
>emotional
You are not very self-aware.

[Anonymous No.25122332]

>>25122255
Show me a single instance of Chainlink (or any official Chainlink channel) alluding to future price increases.

You will find zero, meaning Chainlink will never be a security.
Unlike Ripple which has many such instances.

[Anonymous No.25122354]

>>25122288
Big check again.

Truly blessed be Kek art thou.

[Anonymous No.25122361]

>>25122294
Sergey never alluded to future price increases;
- therefore he never led anyone to expect profits from simply holding Chainlink;
- therefore he passes the Howey test;
- therefore Link will NEVER be a security.

[Anonymous No.25122363]

>>25122332
>alluding to future price increases.

Do you think this was the main reason Ripple got sued? If true, then Chainlink *should* be safe, but I am not one to trust legal courts.

[Anonymous No.25122373]

>claims to have utility but sold without discrimination to investors who could not reasonably be expected to have an use for it
>central entity is expected to make the asset useful. investors don't reasonably have the capacity to make the asset useful independently of that central entity
>nondisclosure of dumps by the ceo
>subsidizing partners to make up for lack of organic market demand
this applies to xrp and chainlink equally
but sure, cling to the one thing that's slightly different. because the expressed intent of the ceo nudge nudge wink wink is so much more important than hundreds of millions of dollars of retail money siphoned into the pockets of a scammer

[Anonymous No.25122381]

>>25122363
>Do you think this was the main reason Ripple got sued?
One of them, yes.
It's one of the key requirements for being deemed a security.

If you fail that requirement (like Link does), you cannot be deemed a security.

[Anonymous No.25122390]

>>25122381
What are the other requirements though? How does chainlink fare against them?

[Anonymous No.25122402]

>>25122373
>who could not reasonably be expected to have an use for it
What the fuck are you talking about?

Start a Defi company or a node and partner with Chainlink, and you will have an immediate use for Link tokens.
It's a very simple process.
And the process will be even further simplified once mainnet is fully opened.

[Anonymous No.25122441]

>>25122390
See OP pic.
For crypto, the "expectation of profit" is the only gatekeeper when it comes to being a security.
ETH was already cleared by the SEC because it does not meet that requirement, but does meet all the others.

[Anonymous No.25122463]

>>25122441
Thanks for the info. When will it all be decided? is there a date or something when the SEC gives a decision?

[Anonymous No.25122482]

>>25122373
>this applies to xrp and chainlink equally
>but sure, cling to the one thing that's slightly different

That "one thing" is a key requirement to being deemed a security lmao.
It's not me clinging to it, it's SCOTUS and the SEC since 1946.

[Anonymous No.25122485]

The absolute cope of these posts.

Ask yourself “why did I buy Chainlink tokens” and you’ll realize why the expectation of profit is easily marked.

I give absolutely zero fucks if you idiots want to lose all your money.

[Anonymous No.25122494]

>>25122485
>Ask yourself “why did I buy Chainlink tokens” and you’ll realize why the expectation of profit is easily marked.

This goes for ETH too, no? How come they were cleared?

[Anonymous No.25122506]

>>25122485
It's not about my reason for buying, it's about me being led by Sergey to expect profit just from holding.

Which is why ETH was cleared by the SEC.

[Anonymous No.25122531]

>>25122463
>When will it all be decided?
The Ripple thing?
No idea.
Best case is Ripple settles out of court, with a fine and some ancillary measures (delisting from US exchanges, etc.)

Garlinghouse really fucked up saying "price will go up" so much, they'll probably want to set an example.

[Anonymous No.25122532]

>>25122485
>Ask yourself “why did I buy x tokens”
Wait a minute, you're telling me every coin I've ever bought into is gonna get fucked by the SEC? Including bitcorn?

[Anonymous No.25122543]

>>25121909
It already is if XRP gets classified as one. Any premined coin would technically be.

[Anonymous No.25122551]

>>25122532
ETH was already cleared by the SEC.

You have to be actively telling people the price of your token will go up in the future to get rammed by the SEC for being a security.
Which Ripple did.

[Anonymous No.25122569]

>>25122043
>>25122157
>>25122182
>>25122222
>>25122241
>>25122253
>>25122265
>>25122288
>>25122332
>>25122361
>>25122381
>>25122402

>only 106 nodes in a private KYC network
>out of those, 83 have ran 0 jobs (!)
>only 22% of the network is used
https://market.link/search/nodes

>only 255 data feed available after years of development
>99% are all price feeds
>out of those, only 10% have been used in the last hour, 90% of which were just a bulk update across
https://market.link/search/feed

Do you think a coin with these metrics after 2 years on mainnet should be in top 10 with a 13 billion dollar valuation with a founding team that still holds 60%+ and does dumps on a weekly basis?

[Anonymous No.25122571]

>>25121935
Link is a utility token
/thread

[Anonymous No.25122577]

>>25122373
>>subsidizing partners to make up for lack of organic market demand
I see this point from many low iq posts, but no one has been able to prove it's true. In fact, there are tweets from chainlink users who say they are paying for the service. Why do you "people" lie so much? Pls provide sources that back up your claim
>b-b-but his dumps!
He might be selling otc to clients via binance, not unheard of. There is nothing in reality proving serg is subsidizing anyone

[Anonymous No.25122581]

>>25122531
>The Ripple thing?
Meant Chainlink, my bad. Does Chainlink even have an ongoing investigation right now or is link just being picked on randomly here on biz?

Ripple is probably totally fucked. What bothers me right now, price wise, is that LINK seems to be extremely coupled with XRP which is not something I think I'd say in my entire life. So fucking awful. XRP is going to tank harder from now and it would just mean LINK will follow down. However if SEC clears LINK, people would fomo back into it like its nobodys business.

[Anonymous No.25122585]

>>25122543
Are you legitimately retarded?
Serious question, help me understand why you don't seem to grasp the pic in OP.

Did the project tell people "price will go up"?
>Ripple: yes, many times
>Chainlink: no, never

If yes: security
If no: not a security

[Anonymous No.25122586]

>>25122441
This is false, it has to do with the sale of tokens to raise funds. Everything else is icing on the cake.

[Anonymous No.25122597]

>>25122577
>Why do you "people" lie so much
Why did Sergey lie about Swift and Google? Is he a criminal?

[Anonymous No.25122608]

>>25122581
No, Chainlink has no investigation against it.

>>25122586
>it has to do with the sale of tokens to raise funds
1) then explain why ETH was cleared by the SEC
2) source?

Whether you're a security or not is decided with the Howey test.
You have to fit ALL of the requirements, or you're not a security.

[Anonymous No.25122620]

>>25122569
>only 106 nodes in a private KYC network
It's not a "private network", they're private contracts.
Contracts will always be private, they are whatever the client/contract operator want them to be.

>out of those, 83 have ran 0 jobs (!)
You have no idea what "jobs" means.
The nodes are ALL providing oracle inputs at every single interval (barring some catastrophic temporary event).
Which is their only task.

>only 255 data feed available after years of development
>99% are all price feeds
And they provide the back-end for many billions of USD in Defi.

>out of those, only 10% have been used in the last hour, 90% of which were just a bulk update across
You have no idea how many times users (Aave, Synthetix, ...) are using the feeds lmao. Only they can know.

>Do you think a coin with these metrics after 2 years on mainnet should be in top 10 with a 13 billion dollar valuation
Valuation isn't about the current state of things, it's about future potential.
Pic very related.

[Anonymous No.25122656]

>>25122620
>Valuation isn't about the current state of things, it's about future potential.
linker confirms LINK token is a security

[Anonymous No.25122663]

>>25122597
>Why did Sergey lie about Swift and Google?
He didn't.
Both Swift and Google announced their connection to Chainlink first.

>>25122581
>What bothers me right now, price wise, is that LINK seems to be extremely coupled with XRP
It's a kneejerk market reaction.
Link blew up recently, so it tends to be a lightning rod for bad news for now.

[Anonymous No.25122701]

>>25122656
I can "believe" all I want when it comes to speculation.
What matters is what the issuer/creator/promoter of the item in question leads people to believe.

Children's toys often go up in value as collectibles, but the toy company can't ever say anything like that.

[Anonymous No.25122710]

>>25122663
Swift hasn't mentioned Chainlink in 3 years. Sergey lied on the website claiming it's a partnership.

Several Google employees have confirmed there is no partnership, Sergey lied on the website claiming it's a partnership.

It's a proven fact at this point that Sergey lied about Swift and Google. You're lying by trying to deny a proven fact.

[Anonymous No.25122712]

>>25122373
I bought LINK because I hope to one day stake it in a node that provides verifiably random data to the blockchain, which I consider the ultimate business model and the future of mankind. So there.

[Anonymous No.25122773]

>>25122506
This. It’s not about retard retail. If it was retard retail, cabbage patch dolls, coins, cards, and alcohol would all be securities. It’s about the company leading users to expect profit which chainlink does not. Chainlink will eventually be a pass to use the chainlink system whether it goes up or down. Gd, liberals and zoomers are dumb af.

[Anonymous No.25122820]

>>25122773
And the worst part about retard liberals is their low iq crab mentality. “If I’m going down, I gotta drag someone else down” bullshit. Guess link got the lucky straw.

[Anonymous No.25122909]

They had said link would eventually cost at price of one cup of coffee -> you could buy starbucks with one link -> therefore link is a security.

[Anonymous No.25122940]

>>25122909
>They had said link would eventually cost at price of one cup of coffee

source?

[Anonymous No.25122950]

>>25122940
There’s no source for bullshit

[Anonymous No.25123010]

>>25122663
what about presentation slides? Even Paypal, visa etc etc logos were plasterred all over it.. so did SWIFT.

I hold link and I don't fucking believe in any of these big things anymore. It's all this DEFI bullshit partnerships. This coin is just another crypto market crap. Sergey is billionaire from it though.

[Anonymous No.25123069]

>>25121935
how is one million $1000 EOY posts a 'reasonable' expectation of profits?

[Anonymous No.25123116]

>>25123069
Ignore him, he is a seething cRipple who has lost all reason.

[Anonymous No.25123138]

>>25123010
>what about presentation slides? Even Paypal, visa etc etc logos were plasterred all over it.. so did SWIFT.
What does any of this have to do with the security situation?

[Anonymous No.25123149]

>>25121976
cability

[Anonymous No.25123166]

>>25122940
You seem like a good anon. You are way way too gullible. There are some smart anons replying in this thread, and a ton of retards. For crypto success you either need to be the smart anons or recognize them easily.

[Anonymous No.25123171]

>>25122710
>Swift hasn't mentioned Chainlink in 3 years.
And?

>Sergey lied on the website claiming it's a partnership.
No he didn't.
Swift paid Sergey to complete a PoC for them and present it at Sibos.

>Several Google employees have confirmed there is no partnership
Google announced first, pic related.

[Anonymous No.25123175]

>>25122710
the problem with fudders like you is youre small minded snivelling unambitious worms and thus assume everyone else else is like you and has no aspiration beyond making a quick buck. big brained visionaries often arrive where they are because they strive for something greater than themselves and you unironically can't wrap your vile little mind around that fact. meanwhile you have to tripfag on an anynomous message board to achieve the most pathetic and empty sense of relevance. even then you can only garner attention with negativity and spite because you have nothing of value to contribute. enjoy your (you), I know its what you live for you fucking insect.

[Anonymous No.25123211]

>>25123166
Thanks. I asked for source even though I knew he had none. I havent followed the fundamentals of link too closely, but everytime I listen to Sergey or check Chainlink's official posts they're almost eerily quite about Link's price.

The only thing where I think the SEC might get Link at is in regards of the ICO. I've seen some US people say they participated in it.

[Anonymous No.25123249]

>>25123211
>The only thing where I think the SEC might get Link at is in regards of the ICO
ETH had an ICO and was cleared by the SEC.

>I've seen some US people say they participated in it.
Not Chainlink's fault if they broke the rules.
They made it very clear that US citizens were banned from the ICO.

[Anonymous No.25123296]

>never discussed price
>about a cup of coffee

[Anonymous No.25123322]

>>25123249
I really appreciate your input in this thread. The last fud I'm getting is in regards about LINK being "66% centralized" and "500k weekly dumps", any thoughts on that?

[Anonymous No.25123356]

>>25122940
It's in the whitepaper, retard. lurk more

[Anonymous No.25123395]

>>25123356
i sold ripple at 0.51c are you enjoying my bags

[Anonymous No.25123410]

>>25122585
COPE more! Read the fucking lawsuit, LINK Is next and so is any other premine. Has literally nothing to do with your cope pic. KYS

[Anonymous No.25123429]

>>25123410
I'm not joking I was 75% certain on selling my bags but after seeing how you faggots reply to his posts I think I will hold my link bags for a bit longer

[Anonymous No.25123432]

>>25122608
ETH isn't cleared you fucking moron. Read the new guidelines. Literally every single fucking premined coin is now in the cross hairs of the SEC. Keep coping you pathetic fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.25123449]

>>25123432
Right, and they went for your stupid shitcoin instead of ETH first because?

[Anonymous No.25123468]

>>25123449
Because ETH isn't still dumping coins on the market to fund it. Most likely why Vitalik dumped his bags way back when.

[Anonymous No.25123477]

>>25122222
schizos goooooo
link shizos are different from xrp schizos

[Anonymous No.25123491]

>>25123322
First, I check.

None of that is relevant to the security question.
And a ton of the tokens Sergey "dumps" are going to things like contracts (thus nodes).

>>25123410
>COPE more! Read the fucking lawsuit
Read the Howey test.
If Ripple hadn't been telling people "lol XRP price go up" all the time, the SEC would have no case.

>so is any other premine
lel, the SEC already cleared ETH you derp.

[Anonymous No.25123519]

>>25123432
>ETH isn't cleared you fucking moron.

OOPSIE POOPSIE

>>25123468
>ETH isn't still dumping coins on the market to fund it
Oh yes they are.

[Anonymous No.25123521]

>>25123491
LINK devs literally doing 100% exact same as XRP by dumping coins to fund the project. LINK is fucked and you know it! Keep on coping!

[Anonymous No.25123539]

>>25123519
>Posts irrelevant article from 3 years ago before the SEC introduced crypto guidance
Literally KYS

[Anonymous No.25123566]

>>25123521
>dumping coins to fund the project.
This has nothing to do with being a security or not.
ETH was also premined and also dumped tokens to fund the project, and it was cleared by the SEC.

Cope and seethe in the corner.

>>25123539
> irrelevant article from 3 years ago
lmao, cope.

>the SEC introduced crypto guidance
lel, do source me, tiger.

[Anonymous No.25123569]

>>25122569
>10 rupees have been deposited to your PayPal

[Anonymous No.25123570]

>>25123468
Thank you for proving you are a ripple tard. As I suspected, you niggers are just mad lmao. Have fun bagholding while my LINKies pump as soon as this pathetic FUD dries up.

[Anonymous No.25123588]

notice how fudders are targeting link specifically with this SEC shit. if link is considered to be a security, then so are 99% of altcoins.
it's almost as if they only want you to sell your linkies and not any other shitcoins. wonder why that is

[Anonymous No.25123601]

>>25123566
based and checked
link is no more of a security than eth

[Anonymous No.25123624]

>>25123588
Literally any coin that continues to sell on the market to fund it's project will be caught up in a similar lawsuit. Cope all you want.

[Anonymous No.25123710]

>>25123624
>imagine monitoring a thread for an hour and replying 8 times because you care so much about the finances of link holders
thanks for your concern, but i'm good. you had 3 years, btw

[Anonymous No.25123713]

>>25123624
Selling for funding has nothing to do with being a security.

Start coping any time you want.

[Anonymous No.25123721]

>>25123710
this

[Anonymous No.25123740]

>>25123624
And you still owe me source on that "guidance" thing.

[Anonymous No.25123767]

>Nobody:
>Absolutely nobody:
>Ripple: value go up, maybe
>Link: get me a burger

Retweet for free ripple fidget spinner

[Anonymous No.25123776]

Wow XRPcucks so mad. Not sure if its mostly just people trying to get low buy orders or just XRP retards.

As said before keep in mind Link dumping tokens does make it more decentralized and is different than XRP doing it because new Link tokens can't be minted unlike XRP. Especially when there is a whole section of the whitepaper that explains they will be doing this and for what purpose.

[Anonymous No.25123866]

>>25122569
kek
Stinkers absolutely obliterated.
Actually not just CL, it's the whole shitcoin sphere who's like this, a gigantic ponzi farm running only on greed and hopium but never delivering anything.
The whole crypto bubble implosion will remain in history books for the millenias to come as how gullible and retarded humans can be when promises of future gains are the bait. The Great Shitmania of 2010-2020.

[Anonymous No.25123886]

>>25123866
>>25122620

[Anonymous No.25123907]

You got to feel bad for Ripple. They didn't do anything different to any other ico but they were earlier before every ico realized they needed to put in small print that the token was a utility and was not an investment.

[Anonymous No.25123930]

>>25123907
>before every ico realized they needed to put in small print that the token was a utility and was not an investment
Some of the promises of price increases were just from last year.
Garlinghouse is just a colossal retard.

[Anonymous No.25123946]

>>25123886
Do these very meager results justify 700K tokens being dumped on a weekly to (((finance))) the team?
We all got slowly exit scammed, the sooner we admit it, the less painful it will be.

[Anonymous No.25123990]

>>25123946
Isn’t funny how the “token dump” number moves around in the fud attempts? One it’s 500k, another it’s 700k. But the best part is their fud is proof of the network actually being live. Since it’s going to pay node operators atm kek

[Anonymous No.25123994]

>>25123946
>We
Kek, sure noLinker

[Anonymous No.25124020]

>>25123990
>One it’s 500k, another it’s 700k
Either it be 500k + 200k or 700k, it's literally the same thing lol.

[Anonymous No.25124022]

>>25123946
This has nothing to do with being a security or not.
And those tokens aren't just getting "dumped".

[Anonymous No.25124193]

if the price of a cup of coffee increases, then the SEC is going make sure LINK gets BTFO and Sergey will never again get a Big Mac

SELL SELL SELL

[Anonymous No.25124248]

>>25124022
More COPE
You are a pro at mental gymnastics

[Anonymous No.25124313]

>>25124248
Please tell me how "selling to fund" is relevant to being a security.

[Anonymous No.25124447]

>>25121958
zero

[Anonymous No.25124534]

>>25124248
And you STILL owe me source on that "guidance" thing.

[Anonymous No.25124643]

>>25122222

[Anonymous No.25125122]

>>25122551
>You have to be actively telling people the price of your token will go up in the future to get rammed by the SEC for being a security.
>Which Ripple did.
Why did the SEC let cRipple continue their scam for so many years?

[Anonymous No.25125145]

>>25125122
>thinks the government is fast

Oh, ccp zoomer.....

[Anonymous No.25125170]

I need to buy the dip and binance won't let me deposit fuck this

[Anonymous No.25125248]

>>25125122
Building their case.
A ton of evidence is from 2020, see pic.

[Anonymous No.25125619]

>>25121935
>>25122004
>>25122133
>>25122199
>>25122230
>>25122255
>>25122287
>>25122485
LMAO LOOK AT THIS FUCKING DUDE

[Anonymous No.25126029]

Right now is undoubtedly the best buying opportunity for Link. The XRP fud has driven everything down and once the market wakes up to Zeus BS and SEC blessing, Link will race up, IMO. Pure speculation and obvs there are loads of other factors, but defo XRP is giving this buying chance.

[Anonymous No.25126088]

>>25125619
he literally types like a pajeet too

[Anonymous No.25126130]

>>25121935
Oh Anon I.... do you really think the SEC will cite what weirdos like us are discussing on an anonymous bulletin board in their assessment of whether or not Link is classed as a security?
You really shouldn't make such a fool of yourself

[Anonymous No.25126577]

>>25126029
There was zero reason for CL to dip like that, but markets gonna market.