Chainlink valuation

[Anonymous No.56288568]

Top 20 by coinmarketcap, excluded stablecoins.

What is the story that Chainlink is valued at such a ridiculously low valuation?
Lets see:
1. Bitcoin: Crypto Pioneer, first money, mythical founder, closest to decentralized store of value there ever will be
2. Ethereum: First Smartcontract platform, most advanced, best ecosystem.
> Valuation 37% of Bitcoin
4. BNB: Token of largest exchange, fee-incentive when holding BNB (used to atleast)
> Valuation: 6% of Bitcoin
5. XRP: ???
> Valuation: 5% of Bitcoin
7. Solana: ???
> Valuation: 1.6% of Bitcoin
8. Cardano: ???
> Valuation: 1.6% of Bitcoin
9. Dogecoin: Meme-coin of Elon musk
> Valuation: 1.6% of Bitcoin
10. TRON: ???
> Valuation: 1.6% of Bitcoin
...
18. Chainlink: First oracle platform, most advanced oracle provider, most advanced bridging solution, best smartcontract enhancer
> Valuation: 0.7% of Bitcoin

Like what the hell? Something like 10-20% of Bitcoin mkcap would be fair simply based on *current* value add in this ecosystem. This is not even taking into possible *future* value add, which however issomething like the valuation of Cardano or Ripple are entirely based on, which at the same time are at a *multiple* valuation than Chainlink.

I just can't wrap my head around this insane distortion and gaps between these projects based on either current value add OR future value add. It just doesn't make ANY sense.

[Anonymous No.56288592]

>>56288568
It's the same as females.
Tokens 1-17: Needed.
Tokens 18+: Not needed.
Simple as.

[Anonymous No.56288621]

>>56288568
I wouldn't be any happier if link was hovering at $20 instead as you suggest, but at least I'd be 3x richer.

[Anonymous No.56288641]

There is no retail demand for Chainlink. What is LINK used for? To pay for data from oracles. Retail users doesn't to need to use data from oracles.

Why do people buy ETH and BNB? To pay for gas fees/trading fees.

Why do people buy Bitfcoin, XRP, Cardano and Dogecoin? Because every midwit heard about them and they are buying it because their friends and "influencers" are buying them.

Solana and Tron are pumped by scammers (FTX and Justin Sun)

The only way LINK will pump is when people are buying it for staking or when all those supposed banks and mega corporations start using it.

[Anonymous No.56288642]

>>56288621
$20? Even at a pathetic $20 it would be less than half of what Ripple is worth. Compare the value add of Chainlink to crypto vs Ripple and it is insulting even if it was $50 and had the same market cap as Ripple.

I suggested a fair value *at minimum* 10% of Bitcoin mkcap, which is 14x higher than currently.

[Anonymous No.56288665]

>>56288568
This is great. Lots of room to move.

[Anonymous No.56288669]

>>56288641
This. Or if you can start using CCIP from a centralized front-end and pay in LINK.

[Anonymous No.56288704]

I agree OP
We’re due for a major repricing at some point, it’s a screaming buy
Made me think of this tweet I saw recently

[Anonymous No.56288721]

>>56288641
No one buys eth to pay for gas lol, they buy it because they hope it will go up in value. Chainlinks dismal price performance is kind of self-fulfilling. No one cares about fundamentals, everyone knows like as that coin that randomly pumped against the market before the last bullrun and then crashed hard while everything else mooned. That was absolutely toxic for its speculative value. Eventually the combination of SWIFT and CCIP will cause it to pump hard against the market again, but who knows when that will be? Endless delays by the team have crushed sentiment and there is nothing to rescue it

[Anonymous No.56288728]

>>56288721
Sentiment will come back as soon as the price goes up. That's how it works. Sentiment follows price, not the other way around.

[Anonymous No.56288797]

>>56288728
No, that isn't how it works. In a purely speculative asset price literally is sentiment. At equilibrium the price goes neither up nor down, someone must decide to buy first before price can increase. That decision is sentiment and price action is its consequence. Chainlink's hope is that the decision to buy will be triggered by immediate need rather future anticipated demand due to CCIP and the asset will transition from speculative to fundamental

[Anonymous No.56288809]

>about the price of a cup of coffee

[Anonymous No.56288822]

>>56288641
>There is no retail demand for Chainlink. What is LINK used for?
Holy shit now ask these same questions for ADA, XRP, Tron, ...

>Why do people buy ETH and BNB? To pay for gas fees/trading fees.
The actual raw demand generated by this is hilariously low.
Plus it's a zero-sum game considering miners are constantly selling their rewards.

>>56288797
>price literally is sentiment
That and suppression.

[Anonymous No.56288993]

>>56288822
Overall a good post and you point out what i mean.

There are some that are useful, and they all have high valuations (BTC, ETH, BNB). The big exception is Chainlink, which has low valuation and high value-add in the crypto space.
Then there are some that are pure hype, but without any concrete concept that even that would justify their valuation (XRP, ADA, SOL). All valued higher than Chainlink. Marketing, youtube influencer, founder hyping them - maybe.

>That and suppression.
How do you explain that. You can only sell once. Every short you open, you need to close at some point. Price suppression by any entity doesn't make sense. Also Sergey dumping the tokens doesnt make sense. At most he can dump another 100% of market supply. Fine, lets say the market prices this in, I give a haircut of 50% valuation. Then I half my minimum fair valuation of 10% to 5% of bitcoin market cap. Still 7x higher than here ($50).

[Anonymous No.56289191]

don't forget chainlink already topped at #5 on cmc
but the real reason why it's never seeing those highs is the same reason why xrp isn't ever getting back to #2 on cmc:
trying to market yourself as a bank/institution infrastructure provider is not attractive to retail buyers once the pump and dump (xrp: 2017, link: 2020) has been completed.

[Anonymous No.56289250]

>>56288993
bitcoin, ethereum, binance, solana, cardano, dogecoin, tron all have one major thing in common: their target users are individuals, whether as a money, a platform, a utility on top of the baseline level of speculation all these things get.

xrp and chainlink on the other hand have zero value to retail and no reason for retail to ever use them outside of the baseline level of speculation. once that retail hype cycle has concluded you're left with no buyers because there's precisely nothing retail can do with xrp or link or any b2b/infra crypto asset. they're at best speculative investments, at worse an excuse to dump forever on retail to fund a failing company.

institutions cause less buying power than retail, and less price bumps than retail for everything that isn't being scooped up as a store of value. the misconception that a very small number of entities using an asset in its intended form, to pay for fees, is somehow going to cause more price bumps than retail throwing massive quantities of money at something as a pure play investment is laughable.

[Anonymous No.56289290]

>>56289250
>xrp has zero value to retail
>once that retail hype cycle has concluded you're left with no buyers
Ripple peaked before ETH, but even at the very height of ETH's price action (2017-2018) Ripple was neck-and neck with it.
Also, Ripple is still rank 5 after three years of net negative news.

None of it makes any sense when you compare with Chainlink.

[Anonymous No.56289344]

>>56289290
don't forget to use the btc chart if you want to find out where the top is. ethereum peaked mid 2017, driven mostly by the ico mania demand for eth (near pure retail demand) and the drama around bcash creating nervousness around bitcoin.

the real reason xrp peaked then and not in 2013 was simple: in 2013 everyone knew xrp was a joke. by the time the first mainstream bull market rolled around in 2017 the majority had no idea about xrp's past failures, they saw a high marketcap but low unit price alt and went crazy with it. the problem is the cycle chainlink experienced is the equivalent to xrp's 2017 cycle not its 2013 cycle, so the chance for any new highs, especially in real terms is very unlikely.

[Anonymous No.56289384]

>>56289344
The point is you say XRP is in the same boat as Chainlink when it comes to retail "having to use them", but in fact the difference in price action and relative valuation between XRP and Link could not be more pronounced.

Between late 2020 and now, all Ripple has done is get sued by the SEC.
During that same timeframe, Chainlink adoption and institutional interest absolutely exploded.
But in that timeframe, Ripple did a 2x, while Chainlink did a -50%.

[Anonymous No.56289404]

>>56289384
go look at xrp/btc and see what it did this cycle, 2019/2020-2023. claiming it's performed well isn't accurate, it simply had a narrative win against the sec which barely broke the 1y btc high and then retraced right back down again.

and critically even if we assume institutions are interested in link the token, which i am highly skeptical of, see >>56289250:
>institutions cause less buying power than retail, and less price bumps than retail for everything that isn't being scooped up as a store of value. the misconception that a very small number of entities using an asset in its intended form, to pay for fees, is somehow going to cause more price bumps than retail throwing massive quantities of money at something as a pure play investment is laughable.

the only way link goes up because of institutional adoption is if retail see this, thinks it's going to make the price of link go up, and buys it (which is the only reason the price goes up.)

[Anonymous No.56289418]

>>56289404
>claiming it's performed well isn't accurate
I didn't just say it "performed well", I said it did a x2 while Link did a /2. Which is objectively what they did.
And when comparing two assets vs BTC and fiat at fixed points in time, the proportionate difference in performance is exactly the same.

>the only way link goes up because of institutional adoption is if retail see this
Then explain how Ripple went up.

[Anonymous No.56289577]

>>56289418
mid cycle performance is pointless to look at. link peaked in 2020 before bitcoin even got moving all because of defi summer and a host of other defi tokens that have since performed much like link.

i don't know why this is confusing you. ripple is such an old and established alt that retail is going to care more about it than it ever will about link, a coin that appeared among thousands during 2017.

ripple simply got dragged up by bitcoin but failed to appreciate against it this cycle. link topped this cycle against bitcoin and has spent the rest of the time retracing those gains, just like ripple did in 2018-2019.

[Anonymous No.56289588]

>>56289577
You said XRP and Link are in the same boat when it comes to retail needfulness.
But apparently retail needfulness has nothing to do with price and/or relative ranking, as evidenced by Ripple.

[Anonymous No.56289613]

the reason the price doesn't go up is simple: there are a ton of people that are happy to sell at a low price

[Anonymous No.56289623]

>>56289588
they're in the same boat but that doesn't make them equally attractive, it just means they're both vying for a market and utility that isn't relevant to retail. you're asking why retail likes xrp more than link and its simply because xrp was first.

[Anonymous No.56289642]

>>56289623
>you're asking why retail likes xrp more than link and its simply because xrp was first
Quant came after Chainlink and has zero retail needfulness, and both were around 20 cents in 2018, but Quant is now $80 and Link isn't even a 10th of that.

[Anonymous No.56289644]

>>56289250
>bitcoin, ethereum, binance, solana, cardano, dogecoin, tron all have one major thing in common: their target users are individuals,
Bitcoin, dogecoin, maybe.

Everything else tries to be in for businesses/institutions in some way. The big, big spike that catapulted ETH from a relatively stable $10 to $1800 (x180) in 2017 was literally the announcement of the "Enterprise Ethereum Alliance". Note that this was a x180 *after* it had already gone x30 from its ICO price ($0.30 to $10).

[Anonymous No.56289673]

>>56289642
do you know what the notional value of all dumped quant by the team is and how that compares to link?

>>56289644
they try to as a partial narrative, and i'm pretty sure ethereum wasn't 1800 in 2017 but it's been a while.
trying to compare link to eth is a fools errand though. ethereum basically created the entire market segment that allows link to thrive in the first place, and is grandfathered in as "the" smart contract chain in a similar but lesser way bitcoin is grandfathered in as "the" blockchain.

[Anonymous No.56289680]

>>56289673
>do you know what the notional value of all dumped quant by the team is and how that compares to link?
Do tell.

[Anonymous No.56289682]

>>56288728
lmao no

[Anonymous No.56289691]

>>56288728
>That's how it works. Sentiment follows price, not the other way around.
This.
The vast majority of money follows hype i.e. news, and if the price isn't moving then "the news must not be that big".

[Anonymous No.56289723]

>>56289680
that wasn't a rhetorical question. you have to consider sell pressure given how illiquid most of these alts are.

>>56289691
the kicker is alts only get one hype cycle where they go on a mega run, after that it's lower highs for life unless you get elon to shill you to 100 million followers.

[Anonymous No.56289734]

>>56289723
>that wasn't a rhetorical question
So tell me what notional value was dumped by Quant.

>>56289723
>alts only get one hype cycle
That's the most retarded thing I'll read all day.

[Anonymous No.56289740]

>>56289723
You are a retard and need to stop posting

[Anonymous No.56289742]

>>56289673
>and i'm pretty sure ethereum wasn't 1800 in 2017 but it's been a while.
Right, just checked - it peaked at $1372 in January 2018. Still, a x140 in less than a year after EEA announcement.
>they try to as a partial narrative
No it was *THE* reason for ETH to rise in 2017. smartcontracts existed already in 2016 where ethereum hoovered around $10. It was the (anticipated) business adoption through its enterprise alliance that gave ethereum (and crypto in general) its huge boost.
>ethereum basically created the entire market segment that allows link to thrive in the first place
Exactly! And credit where credit is due. ETH is valued at 37% of BTC MC.
Now: Which solution created the entire defi market that allowed polygon, uniswap, Avalanche, Fantom etc. to thrive in the first place?

And then, why is one valued at 37% of BTC MC and the other at a pathetic 0.7%? It just doesn't make any sense.

[Anonymous No.56289745]

>>56288822
>Holy shit now ask these same questions for ADA, XRP, Tron, ...
The returns to successfully killing ETH are so high that ADA or Tron are worth more just due to upside risk. Oracles aren't worth tens of billions.

[Anonymous No.56289764]

>>56289745
>killing ETH
Why kill ETH when L1s can obviously exist beside one another?

>Oracles aren't worth tens of billions.
lol oracles are needed to make L1s usable for trillions of $ worth of transactions per day.
Without oracles, blockchains are isolated not just from external data (i.e. where all the actual value is), but even from other blockchains.

Pic extremely related.

[Anonymous No.56289782]

>>56289673
>ethereum basically created the entire market segment that allows link to thrive in the first place
lol without Chainlink defi would’ve never taken off.
Most of defi relies on oracles, and every single one that wasn’t Chainlink failed spectacularly.

[Anonymous No.56289836]

>>56289764
The only use of crypto is gambling, none of the banking use cases will ever materialize. Oracles are not needed because the tech is not needed. The goal is to be the biggest decentralized gambling & speculation platform. ETH fills that role for now, but there's huge upside for Tron or ADA if they can usurp ETH in that role. Chainlink can't become a decentralized gambling and speculation platform so its valuation is lower.

[Anonymous No.56289846]

>>56289836
>the goal of crypto is speculation
>but quintillions worth of massive institutional adoption will never happen

You are one dumb motherfucker lol

[Anonymous No.56289866]

>>56289846
Most speculators still don't understand that institutional adoption will never happen, which is why it's possible to make money holding crypto. There's always a dumber trader than you who believes that this market cycle will finally be different.

[Anonymous No.56289883]

>>56289866
>Most speculators still don't understand that institutional adoption will never happen
Looking at Link's price, it's the exact opposite.
You're proving to be dumber by the minute.

[Anonymous No.56289905]

>>56289734
i don't know, i never owned any of these alts.
feel free to find out how many alts have made successive btc highs >4 years apart. alts are a revolving door, you get in, and never stay more than 3 and a bit years.

>>56289742
if eea caused the june 2017 btc permatop of 0.15 then sure, but if the timing doesn't align then most of those gains were from the ico mania and bitcoin turmoil. the fiat gains were just a result of bitcoin going from <1k to 20k.

>Now: Which solution created the entire defi market that allowed polygon, uniswap, Avalanche, Fantom etc. to thrive in the first place?
the answer is retail doesn't care because they bought (and hopefully sold) matic, avax, uni, or ftm instead of the infrastructure underneath which will never capture more value than the app layer.

if you don't get it now set a reminder to check link/btc in 2027 and you'll see what i was trying to tell you.

>>56289764
the problem is oracles become less necessary as defi "eats the world", so if you're bullish defi you'll necessarily be bearish oracles as prices become less reliant on exterior markets.

>>56289782
that's great but it's like saying without internet providers aws would have never taken off, yet aws steals most of the value because oracles are a commodity.

[Anonymous No.56289964]

>>56289905
>i don't know
Then why did you ask me?

>oracles become less necessary as defi "eats the world"
Defi eating the world means the world puts its data on-chain, which requires oracles.

[Anonymous No.56289969]

A chainlink team memeber is drunk posting in the official tg right now

[Anonymous No.56290006]

>>56289905
>that's great but it's like saying without internet providers aws would have never taken off, yet aws steals most of the value because oracles are a commodity.
The whole point of any smartcontracts valuation (in particular Ethereum's) is that whatever goes through it, the smartcontract takes a small economic slice off. That has been the entire argument for a high valuation of smartcontracts since their inception, something which internet providers don't do. The question only remains how much economic value will go through and eventually how much the cut will be.
That holds true for Ethereum as smartcontract and Chainlink as oracle/compution platform. So its precisely NOT a commodity like internet, but more like AWS charging for every single data running through.

[Anonymous No.56290022]

>>56289964
because it's clear chainlink's continual liquidation of "uncirculating" link is one of the reasons why it's underperformed.

oracles are necessary when the source of truth is off-chain. if it ever becomes popular enough to where price discovery of assets is on-chain first then oracles have much less importance in the ecosystem. they're more of a stop-gap solution, something defi needs to grow out of over time if it's going to be treated as a serious market.

[Anonymous No.56290028]

>>56290022
>t's clear chainlink's continual liquidation of "uncirculating" link is one of the reasons why it's underperformed
Absolutely not.

[Anonymous No.56290061]

>>56290028
maybe go back and read the part where i explain why end user products like the three you listed will always perform better than obscure infrastructure alts retail can't use.

[Anonymous No.56290070]

>>56290061
>inflation is the reason Link underperformed
>but not the reason anything else underperforms

There's that double standard we all know and love.

[Anonymous No.56290078]

>>56290070
smaller buying pressure means a smaller increase in circulating supply has a much bigger effect. this is quite literally markets 101.
do you guys even participate in this market or did you just sit the last cycle out and hold link all the way down again? it's like you want to just keep throwing money at guys like me.

[Anonymous No.56290090]

>>56290022
You are such a retard it is fucking painful

[Anonymous No.56290096]

>>56290078
>smaller buying pressure means a smaller increase in circulating supply has a much bigger effect
Chainlink historically has had massive buying pressure lol

[Anonymous No.56290118]

>>56290090
did you own link in summer 2020? are you still holding it now? did you sell any of it?
i think we both know who the retard is here.

>>56290096
>>56290090

[Anonymous No.56290178]

>>56290118
>alts only get one cycle
>Sergey dumps too much
>why didn't you sell

All the stalest fud imaginable coming from one convenient source.

[Anonymous No.56290220]

>>56288568
Another demoralizing metric to look at is current volume. Chainlink’s volume is on par with most of those and still multiple factors bellow them in price. I don’t know what’s going on I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. Can some autist anon do research to see who/what is suppressing the price

[Anonymous No.56290233]

>>56290220
like i said, there are a lot of people that are willing to sell for a low price, that's why the price isn't going up. it's not rocket science

[Anonymous No.56290283]

>>56290220
>Can some autist anon do research to see who/what is suppressing the price

It's extremely obvious.

[Anonymous No.56290315]

>>56290283
Bitcoin’s not selling its self. Someone is dumping it. If autists on here can find Shia Lebouf’s flag only by airplane routes and position of the sun and stars I’m sure that would be easy

[Anonymous No.56290349]

>>56290315
we all know a big dumper, he does it regularly

[Anonymous No.56290355]

>>56290315
That would be pretty insane.

[Anonymous No.56290420]

>>56290349
>it’s Sergey who keeps dumping Bitcoin!
I will never get over the absolute retardation of fuddies.

[Anonymous No.56290464]

>>56290420
How about Ari? You think the former chief scientist from rsa labs, the individual for formalized proof of work doesn’t have a metric fuckton of bitcoin? He seems to genuinely enjoy teaching, but he definitely doesn’t have to.

[Anonymous No.56290480]

Can anons just put in some big orders? We're so close to the upper channel and i think if we just break $8.50 it will effect a lot of trading bots to buy link.

[Anonymous No.56290583]

>>56290420
he's just selling link for btc, then selling the btc for dollars. it's the perfect crime, retail doesn't understand who is doing it

[Anonymous No.56290679]

>>56290583
>he's just selling link for btc, then selling the btc
Link would crater to 0 before a single BTC was sold. Don’t be retarded.

[Anonymous No.56290729]

>>56288568
Every coin mentioned in your post is severely overvalued. None of them have the economics to justify even 1/100th of their price.

[Anonymous No.56290733]

>>56288721
>No one buys eth to pay for gas lol

Dumbest thing I've read all year.

[Anonymous No.56290938]

>>56289905
>the problem is oracles become less necessary as defi "eats the world"

Why do you think so? The real world is always going to be outside the crypto walled garden. e.g. weather, goods movement, people, etc. There's always going to be a need to put the irl data on chain.

defi isn't going to eat tradfi either. That's what Sergey has been talking during Smartcon and on the Bankless podcast. Banks never really migrate to a new technology. Instead, they wrap the old technology into a layer that enables the interaction with the new technology. SWIFT is a wrap around some fax protocol that banks used 50 years ago or somesuch. CCIP with its oracles is a new iteration of this.
So the oracles aren't going anywhere.

[Anonymous No.56291661]

>>56289883
>Looking at Link's price, it's the exact opposite.
It's closing in on ICO prices vs. ETH and is down almost 90% from ATH. I think my thesis is looking good.

[Anonymous No.56292000]

>>56290733
he's not wrong, crypto is a dead ponzi, gas is used to trade shitcoins... that people will believe will go up in value. which they then move around to other shitcoins they believe will go up in value, including eth itself and bitcoin. and when the casino dies and nobody's playing, the price goes down, like now. that's not saying you can't make money off a ponzi, but be honest with yourself, there's nothing eth actually does in the real world yet, nobody uses it for anything but shitcoin gambling.

[Anonymous No.56292066]

Sergey has always said the price should be around the price for a cup of coffee. It’s not a coincidence that the price has hovered around this range for years. And he will keep dumping to keep it at this price.

[Anonymous No.56292220]

Token not needed

[Anonymous No.56292857]

>>56288641
/thread
also the edgelords here went out of their way to piss off a bunch of retail, further ensuring less demand

>>56288721
>delays
you still don't get it... the delays are part of their main product (selling worthless tokens to people desperate to get rich)

>>56288728
disagree...typically alts get their one cycle and then die. Maybe you get a 5x if overrall markets go parabolic, but very unlikely


>>56289418
your casual crypto investor is familiar with XRP but not Link. Ironically they also think XRP is "cheaper" because they don't understand market cap. Maybe if Link could do a crypto version of a forward split it would lure in more buyers

>>56289723
>the kicker is alts only get one hype cycle where they go on a mega run, after that it's lower highs for life unless you get elon to shill you to 100 million followers.

correct...I've seen lots of cope this past year saying how this trend will be broken in the upcoming cycle. It reminded me of all the people parroting Ben Cowen's "lengthening cycle" theory this past cycle. Remember, the more things change, the more they stay the same

>>56289740
don't marry your investment...always loses money

>>56289969
lol can you post screenshot? I got banned, like so many others before me. Remember folks, "trust over trust"...UNLESS it involves criticizing the grift

>>56290178
>FUD
you mean reality?

[Anonymous No.56292945]

>>56288568
>these valuations don't make any sense!
>therefore chainlinks valuation is low!
wrong it's overvalued as well

[Anonymous No.56293004]

>>56292000
Checked and so much this. The entire ecosystem of crypto today is just a casino. ETH is just gambling chips.

LINK is a bet on real adoption. Maybe we're retarded for betting on that, but I can't stand idiots who are like "MUH ETH TOKEN NEEDED". ETH is a useless piece of shit, if this is all blockchain ever amounts to every single ETH use case gets regulated into dust in time.

[Anonymous No.56293129]

>>56289723
> the kicker is alts only get one hype cycle where they go on a mega run, after that it's lower highs for life unless you get elon to shill you to 100 million followers.
That’s way too early to conclude. That is like drawing big conclusions in 2005 right after the dotcom boom.

[Anonymous No.56293201]

>retail doesn't care
>retail isn't buying
>it isn't pumping because of retail
For God's sake, nobody gives a fuck about retail and their $1b of (probably credit) investment capability. The question is when are the quadrillions gonna move link. That's it. When will institutional capital flow into link?

[Anonymous No.56293701]

>>56288642
I've used Ripple plenty of times. Don't hold it, but used it lots. Never used or held Link once.

[Anonymous No.56294429]

>>56291661
So the fact that Link's price is so awful means that speculators DON'T understand that institutional adoption will never happen?
Give it a minute.

[Anonymous No.56294472]

>>56293129
i know right
these fags have seen (at best) 2 cycles, and now they think they can predict the future forever

[Anonymous No.56294504]

>>56289250
>there's precisely nothing retail can do with xrp or link or any b2b/infra crypto asset.
wtf can they do with btc/eth/solana/doge? nothing

[Anonymous No.56294615]

>>56289836
>none of the banking use cases will ever materialize
they have literally already began to materialize

[Anonymous No.56294620]

>>56289905
defi eating the world has no bearing on blockchains knowing what the fuck is happening in the real world

[Anonyous No.56296825]

>>56290315
You're suggesting Shia Lebouf is behind all this?

[Anonymous No.56297060]

>>56290733
He’s right you retard. Eth coin is actually not needed. What the fuck am I suppose to do with it other than flipping useless shitcoins? What value does that even bring?

[Anonymous No.56297080]

>>56293701
Do people just get on biz threads and lie? Who would do that??

[Anonymous No.56298132]

>>56288641
Well said, and this is why I think projects need to work on simplicity like Allianceblock whose compliant solutions will be needed by DeFi projects, instead of complicating things

[Anonymous No.56298230]

tick tick linkies

[Anonymous No.56298305]

>>56298132
MEXC and BrillionFi adopted one of its products already, I think when it sees mass adoption it will be one of the biggest mover

[Anonymous No.56299306]

>>56297080
Linkies lie a lot just to get newfags on their endless ponzi. I'd rather increase my chances of winning a Funtoken jackpot than sink it in Sergey's dead pile of crap

[Anonymous No.56299529]

>>56297080
XRP was used a lot to do transfers between CEX in 2018 because it was much cheaper than BTC or even ETH fees.

[Anonymous No.56299558]

>>56293004
>ETH is a useless piece of shit
Holding LINK with retards like you is the biggest FUD there is. It would be so much for everyone if you just never posted again and just lurked.