/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>13290217
>there is only one Anon you can trust to bring you real news.

>>13290217
>1.5% in fees when transacting 100k us$. Let's say it's a fixed 150 dollars
You're off by an order of magnitude

enjoy a brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrap calcanon

>>13290270
Damn it, yes. A typo. I meant 0.15%

The rest still stands because I used the us$150 figure, not the 0.15% or 1.5%.

>>13290217
Link is shit

>>13290307
No worries

>>13290217
Holy fuck cringelord.

First of all, why would all the transactions made by swift needs a decentralized oracle answer.

Second look at Ethereum how many transaction per second it can process. Hurrdurr muh blockchain independent. Well have you already tought about if the nodes are blockchain independent ? How you get paid if you run on Hyperledger?

Third banks could simply copy Chainlink. And run nodes with already known and trusted dataproviders. You know providers you could keep liable in case of wrong data.

For fuck sake do you really think that some sweaty nerds will get rich by simply buying access to an already known datasource and running an node. You will bring anything new to table?

The

D E L U D E D
E
L
U
D
E
D

>>13290317
Link is lit

>imagine if we just get 1% of 1% of the total transactions! We’ll be billionaires!

Doing shit like this is a clear indicator you’re a college kid who has never run a business or accomplished anything in terms of financial success.

>>13290367
Fren, you are the cringy one here

>>13290367
>Holy fuck cringelord.

I actually kek'd.

>>13290217
is this how you cope?

>>13290251
whats that creature on the chair

>>13290401
In part, yes.

>>13290367
This. Why would Swift run all of their transactions through a smart contract and then pay for a decentralized oracle?? Why the fuck wouldn’t they just create their own ERC shitcoin?

Biz has gotten so pathetic. Do any of you faggots even know what ChainLink is? It isn’t for payments or bank transfers. It’s for fucking data.

>>13290413
a opossum you retard

>>13290217
When moon?

>>13290439
ive never seen one before it's cute

>>13290378
I kinda agree with your point. The "top down" approach is terrible when trying to estimate the potential success of a project, particularly when it has nothing going for it, and when you're trying to execute it.

But if you're analyzing a price target for an investment, it's good to know what needs to happen for that target to be hit. If you're invested in XYZ stock, it's nice to know what yearly revenue figures need to be met in order for your investment to grow x%.

>April 2019

How many more years for this to be reality?

>>13290217
LINK will be used in 0 transactions, so its value will be $0. Have you not realized that nothing will come of this token yet?

>>13290217
this is from swift alone. Let alone...all the others. So what needs to happen to hit $90,000?

>>13290450
yea they make great pets but you have to keep them in groups of 4 or 5, else they get lonely

>>13290470
Nope, still clinging on to hopium and using advanced coping strategies such as posting these calculations on an anonymous basket weaving video forum.

>>13290462
No, it’s literally not. Stop trying to pretend you know shit about VC or finances in general. Everyone knows how to take a fraction of a big number. That’s not how business works. It’s especially not how a new tech that literally has zero current use cases works.

>>13290515
This. 0% of 0 transactions OP. You got memed on. It's not even a new tech because that would imply that it does something.

>>13290515

If swift payments were worth 10bn a year, it would imply the whole market is worth about 20bn, and therefore chainlink's chances getting revenues of 70bn would depend on other market spaces...

I honestly don't think it's "literally not" useful/interesting (otherwise I wouldn't have posted it), but whatevs.

>>13290564
>You got memed on.

I often think about that. It's a risk I'm willing to take.

>>13290515
you can pretend to be a subhuman nigger with 85 IQ somewhere else lmao

>>13290586
Day one current use case it has. Mainnet isn’t out yet. Stop “implying” numbers or even pretending you know what SWIFT is. It isn’t Western Union you brainlet.

It’s so funny to me that brainless here think an entity like Swift sits around and goes “hey! Why don’t we run every single one of our processes through this ChainLink thing? What could go wrong?” or that there would be a predictable and proportionate amount given to faggots for buying a shitcoin.

It’s like you people think SWIFT did and ICO and you bought into SWIFTCOIN and they’re just gonna Pump your bags. Do you know how anything works besides shitcoin pump and dumps??

>>13290639
Point out something even remotely wrong with anything I’ve said.

>>13290616
Why do you reply earnestly to discord niggers and people pretending to be retarded? It's objective fact if you're not invested in chainlink you have room temp IQ and will continue to be a failure the rest of your life. Don't talk to these people like they're humans because they're just monkeys larping as sentient beings.

>>13290669
>It’s especially not how a new tech that literally has zero current use cases works.
honk honk you subhuman faggot

>>13290684
How can you even think of yourself as remotely smart if you think anything OP has said itt makes any sense?

>>13290251
Cute cat!

>>13290217
A cup of coffee would need to be $1000 for this to happen

>>13290698
I’m waiting for you to point out one thing wrong. Maybe you’re in the same unfortunate league as OP. In which case neither of you even understand ChainLink which is pretty hilarious.

>>13290727
>chainlinks price is only affected by it's market cap
that's you, you subhuman nigger

>>13290217
>the value of the token will depend on the dividends it pays
>lets assume all 1bn token are staked on nodes

LINK is unlike any existing income asset, as there will be true, actual utility to the token -- it will give access to the network required to participate in the upcoming smart contract economy.

That alone will drive demand, which will rocket the price upwards once adoption gets high enough and the majority of the tokens are indeed staked.

For the sake of a napkin calc, though, i like it

>>13290746
are you not pretending? lmao

>>13290764
There will be no upcoming global smart contract economy. The global economy will collapse before that can happen.

>>13290655
You sure can strawman the shit out of an issue. We're all impressed

>>13290755
Where did I imply this?

>>13290792
>said all the people history has forgotten since the dawn of civilization.

Seriously, shorting society is almost always a bad idea.

But maybe it's different this time

>>13290833
hey, subhuman nigger, is this really all you got? Lmao jesus christ dude you're such a pathetic faggot, just stay in discord holy shit you idiots cant live without circle jerking yourselves off.

now go crawl in an oven you insufferable cunt

>>13290684
KEK. Yeah it would be easier to just not reply, but I can't help myself.

Replying to people who agree with what I wrote or find it interesting is usually...not very engaging. On the other hand, what seem like just hateful comments and/or FUD on the surface **could be** genuinely rooted concerns if you dig deeper. Replying = digging deeper. I guess I'm trying to expose myself to the FUD, understand it, and hoping to find some reasonable counterpoints to my own.

You all genuinely are clueless as to what smart contracts are and what they will be used for. You should stop pretending you have a clue because it is clear you don’t. You sound like a bunch of retards that think ChainLink is XRP. You parrot shit about token valuation and can’t give even the slightest real use cases for ChainLink. It’s sad because you’re clearly a bunch of kids hoping this is going to make you rich overnight.

>>13290860
You actually have the right perspective because it is apparent you have a lot to learn about ChainLink. You’re probably inquisitive enough to learn too. The other brainlet ITT is beyond hope.

ChainLink isn’t for Swift bank to bank transactions. SWIFT’s POC was about payouts in financial instruments. These are like financial contracts that are state-dependent: If X when Y, then do Z. Normally getting all of that worked out involves time and people.

>>13290859
Why are you so strongly in defense of something you don’t understand.

Give me one specific usecase for ChainLink. And I don’t mean a general answer like “derivatives” or “insurance”

Give me an example of a derivative or insurance contract where you’d use ChainLink.

>>13290860
There is no FUD against chainlink.
>muh digital currencies
All coins are garbage compared to chainlink, there's a few here and there that are good and actually serve a purpose for our future but chainlink is the only coin I am aware of that actually has the potential to revolutionize our world. There really isn't anything going on in the crypto space that matters outside of Smart Contracts.

>>13290925
stay in discord and talk to yourself there, subhuman nigger

>>13290867
Right so this is the core of why none of OP’s calculations make sense. He’s tallying the value of SWIFT transactions, which is too surface level. We need to target the specific types of transactions that require external data to trigger a transaction. Like a variable rate bond payment that requires current interest rates. Or engaging in a credit default swap that requires credit ratings to determine payment amount. A transactional message is not in and of itself requiring chainlink to function

>>13290764
Also, one of the advantages to decentralization is that it should make transactions significantly cheaper. For that reason i think your $150 average cost is probably higher than it will end up, maybe by a factor of 2. Which means your final 12.5% of the Swift market would go up to 25%. But that's pretty nitpicky for a napkin calc

>>13290948
Right

>>13290944
Just stop

>>13290808
but hes not wrong. the only reason swift and chainlink can be said in the same sentence is because they won a contenst.

>>13290421
>Why would Swift run all of their transactions through a smart contract and then pay for a decentralized oracle?
Because the costs are similar to using a centralized oracle and its more secure
>Why the fuck wouldn’t they just create their own ERC shitcoin
They did it's called LINK

>>13291041
uh let me guess you just read assblaster posts?
everything you know about link you got from retards thinking they found there golden ticket

>>13291041
Why the fuck do they need an oracle to do a transaction? What are you even talking about?

>delusion

how long before linkies claim these are breadcrumbs proving Taylor SWIFT is using link

Just go up please :(

>>13291041
You need an oracle when the corcumstances executing the agreement are outside of either party’s control. INITIATING A TRANSACTION IS WITHIN THE CONTROL OF THE PERSON WITH THE MONEY

>>13291081
Smart contracts require 3rd party data to execute. An Oracle provides the data.

But link just did a poc bond coupon for swift they're not "working" with swift and no matter how many apple eating pasta stories I read it doesn't change this simple fact

Ok so what happens when everything is all and well...what happens when they run out of tokens to reward the staking if everyone staked all at once how long would it take for it to run outta tokens

I don't think many of you realize the mere fact we debate LINK so much is a testament to it's quality as an idea.

1000 EOY.

>>13291714
Why would they use a smart contract to do a simple monetary transfer ?

>>13291934
No, a lot of it is because it is extremely hyped by people who hardly understand anything about it and there is a lot of misinformation spread

>>13291081
SWIFT GPI uses oracles.

>>13290948
>>13290981

*that's* why you think the calculations don't make sense? Because I'm considering the values of swift "payments" rather than swift "securities" consolidation?

First of all I considered only "payments", and left out "securities" as a category when counting swift messages. If you think (maybe rightly so) that securities related swift messages usually are associated with external data, you might want to repeat the calculation with those numbers, and the result will be pretty much the same, because the number of daily "payment" related messages and "securities" related messages are pretty much the same.

>https://www.swift.com/about-us/swift-fin-traffic-figures/monthly-figures?

What may vary greatly in that case is the average cost per transaction, to calculate the market size, which is one of the reasons I didn't choose it. Usually costs related to foreign transfers is much more standard (there isn't much variability or complexity, whereas in securities there's a lot of different contracts to be settled, with varying costs)

Also, the "payments" segment, while not immediately apparent, is actually related to a large amount of transactions where there is a need to verify certain external data, especially when related to foreign trade.

>>13291913
...then who was smart contract?

>15 posts by this ID

>>13292012
This is correct.

This is not even factoring in the derivatives market.

>>13290378
Disagree, market sizing is an important part of running a business or building a product. Understanding the portion of a market you need to capture to reach a valuation is a valid method to understand potential value/price. I think it’s you who has no business experience, or at best you run a small business like some backwoods jabroni would.

>>13290367
I can't tell if this is funny FUD, or if you're fucking retarded.

Gartner estimates that by 2022, ratified unbundled (that is, defined impact) smart contracts will be in use by more than 25% of global organizations. Unbundled means closely defined and with narrow impact, rather than complex nested contracts where the outcome permutations become nearly impossible to test. Nevertheless, smart contracts will increase in popularity over time, and will begin to impact global commerce.
This is why we are going to 1k and we can do it without SWIFT

>>13294404
ledete

>>13294404
Swift have banned Sergey from bringing coffee into meetings because it sets him off and all he does is shill coffee standard by repeating it over and over again.

>>13294170
>backwoods jabroni
he sure knows his role now