/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>18839873
>anything from the team?
Yes. Here's a message from 2017 where the team explain it.

>>18797828
The team told us what the team tokens were for before the ICO.

>>18357252
CMC bases its "circulating supply" on pic related.

>>18357262
You used the wrong ID trying to pretend to be the same person here: >>18356878 >>18357122

lmao

>>17292530
>tell us where that fuckin link went when it was thrown into binance half a year ago
You were told about that before the ICO.

Only 12 months until financial freedom, the countdown starts now

>>16368695
>>16368806
>>16369128
Then the "liquid supply" would be the full 1 billion, not 650 million.

Also, good job finding out what has been public knowledge since 2017 lmao.
You're a real smart cookie.
Please embarrass yourselves some more.

What was it like? What was biz like? Investing 33k in something before they even dropped the white paper is something I would have never done, how where you so sure of the success?

>>16135332
>>16135328
>imagine being this seething

They only own 30% (see pic), and KYC is literally optional.

>>15916410
The Chainlink team only ever had access to 30% for funding, see pic (which is from before the ICO).

For a comparison: before his divorce Bezos held 16% of Amazon FOR PURELY PERSONAL USE.

>>15865335
>He owns 65%.
35%

>>15722390
It's the other way around, see pic.
The 300 million tokens are for funding the project, and the 350 million tokens are for network users.
He has about 90% of the funding tokens left.

Considering that Chainlink is a decentralized network and therefore will not turn a profit for the devs BY DEFINITION, this is more than reasonable.

And keeping back 350 million tokens for future network users (in addition to the 350 million tokens sold to the public in 2017) makes absolute perfect sense because it keeps large buyers from controlling the network before it even launches.

>>15630013
>>15630058
Less than 1/3, see pic.

And if he had sold the majority of tokens to neet bagholders, you'd be fudding that.
Because you're retarded.

>>15599816
>Chainlink has no users!
https://docs.chain.link/docs/big-query-chainlink-testnet

>Chainlink isn't decentralized!
https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-live-ethereum-mainnet-connected-consensus/

>65% of the supply
30%, see pic

>KEKEKEKEKEKEKE
peak cringe

Zero effort fud.

>>15598377
>Well Sergey has over 70%
30%

>>15588534
You sure seem very upset about what I put my money and trust in.

The token distribution has been known since 2017, and Chainlink was never very outspoken about anything, including finances.
But they've been delivering in a big way, so they must be doing things right.

So i guess you are all aware of the FUD news about how link is being price manipulated. since theres so many links let me get to the source and link you the original writeup on this by anchain.ai themselves:
https://medium.com/@AnChain.AI/cryptocurrency-trading-investigation-market-manipulation-the-link-token-abcc3aa47567

now while reading through this something caught my eye.
>"By monitoring the initial addresses who received a large amount of tokens at the time of token creation, we found one address (0xdad2e11f) which sold 4.2M tokens between July 2–15, 2019. The user behind this address utilized multiple jump addresses and finally transferred the tokens to the Binance exchange (0x355cf0bE) for trading."
huh, that number is divisible by 700k, surely they are not reporting on:
https://etherscan.io/token/0x514910771af9ca656af840dff83e8264ecf986ca?a=0xdad22a85ef8310ef582b70e4051e543f3153e11f
why yes, yes they are. THES IDIOTS are reporting on the actual chainlink team selling tokens to raise funds for development and pretending that they are tracking down shadow traders.

WHAT FUCKING RETARDS

>>15575799
>muh 700k dumps
Pic related is from before the presale/ico.

>>15565042
Yeah, I heard about that back in 2017, before the presale/ICO even began.

>>15556538
See, this is what I mean.

People go out of their way to make threads about the 700k thing all the time, even though it's been known since before the ICO what the deal was, picrel.

>>15512267
Because pic related.
The 350 million wallet is for node operators.

>>15493981
>He still has 98% of his tokens left.
Sergey only holds 30% of Link for funding, not 65%.
See pic from BEFORE the ICO.

>hurrr dump means bad
Bezos holds 12% of Amazon stock, and he's dumping 1 billion USD worth every year to fund something unrelated to Amazon.
As a bonus, he dumped about 3 billion USD worth just a few weeks ago: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-bezos-stake/jeff-bezos-sells-amazon-stock-worth-28-billion-last-week-idUSKCN1UW07H

Imagine spending your every waking moment trying to paint asset selling for funding as a negative, even though it's what companies have been doing since the dawn of companies.
All in a desperate effort to convince people that you somehow know better than Google, Swift, Oracle, Gartner, Capgemini, etc.

Just imagine. Imagine being this absolutely pathetic.

>>15447360
>Nobody here ‘invests’ in printed dev controlled coins like a cuck.
Worked out pretty well for BTC, ETH, XRP, etc.

>65% dev controlled
30%, pic related newfren.

For reference: Bezos owns 12% of Amazon for purely personal use.

>>15436540