/biz/ - Business & Finance

The worst part is to know that if SEC would come after LINK it would dump so hard that it would never recover

XRP might recover, with Link this is not the case

>>25283533
Uh no...

>>25283533
Damn, you cRipples really are off the hooks, now.

>>25283487
is it really this that is making us dump tho? I thought it was just a downtrend and a lack of interest after the $20 blow off top

>>25283533
cripple never had any marketshare retard
xrapid isn't used, it's vaporware garbage
8 years of your "on demand liquidity" turned off just so you retards would dream about the day it was turned on
meanwhile the VCs dumped on your head and filled you with their bags
you're retarded

>>25283799
dumb money is spooked very easily

>>25283487
Nothing makes me cringe harder than some fucking nobody on Twitter saying "my sources on the inside"

>>25283799

Nah it was cascade effect from XRP longs getting liquidated and algo bots dumping the whole market in tandem. People don't know what that means so they're assuming normies (who aren't even in this market) and institutions (who know better) are literally reading the news, then walking to their computer to sell massive amounts of all cryptos at low prices.

>>25283533
This is the dumbest post I've seen in ages. How could a network whose token price will be driven by usage, and is currently still in early speculation phase, possibly 'dump so hard that it would never recover'?
One can only infer from this assertion that you think the Link token's price is based on speculation alone, and will remain so.
I have 50k Link. If I thought for a second the network would not be used in the future, I'd wouldn't hold it.
Absolute retard territory, my friend.

>>25283799
It's pretty much that, after a blowoff top it takes a long time for things to get moving again. Best to hope for is for LINK to range for awhile, not to start trending hard up again.

That and I think the entire market is scared of BTC retracing heavy. A 30% retracement in BTC will scare most other coins. XRP would go to like, $.08

>>25283799
yep

>>25283533
Hello zeus capital.

>>25283487
Based Scott Melker. The only sane person on Twitter

>>25283487
its not a security jeez. it has utility in the network ... like eth

>>25283487
why are xrp holders so desperate to sink link with them? don't get it
do they hate themselves in secret?

>>25285222
I think its because link and xrp holders have always fought with each other on twitter

>>25283487
you just know hes holding heavy link bags

>>25284144
yeah especially some beanie baby pop musician

>>25283975
>>25284289
link has no use case. literally not one person can refute this

>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?

>>25285871
LINK currently secures hundreds of billions of dollars with their oracles, that's a use case.
also i love how you copy and paste this nonsense in every link thread for months, you're clearly paid.

>>25286247
no they dont theres literally zero proof of that except them saying "uhhh yeaahh we partnered up with some defi shitcoins" which is the exact same shit xrp claimed to have done until they got btfo by the sec

>>25286433
you're literally making shit up again

>>25286478
cope you couldnt refute either of my statements; xrp said the same shit as link does until the sec found out they were bullshitting their investors and their "partnerships" made up a miniscule amount of revenue

>>25286536
>XRP said the same shit as link does
no they didn't. Ripple was caught paying their "partners" money to use XRP. now show me proof Chainlink did this.

>>25283487
Yea, the asset that was included in the WEF's white paper and is being used as a cornerstone for the fourth industrial revolution is going to get hit by the SEC, sure.

>>25286433
You will never be a real pirate.

>>25283533
based
how will stinkies recover?

>>25286671

Average retard doesn’t know any of that, just use it as a sale if you want to buy more.

Ripple literally never did anything, like most of the scams in this space. LINK is a utility token and is being used as such by basically every major player in DeFI, besides its usage as in other data intrinsic areas - see T Systems, insurance, etc etc etc.

Comparing LINK to Ripple is like comparing a fax printer to a plastic apple.

>>25286433
>no they dont theres literally zero proof of that
listen kid you appear to be an XRP holder so clearly you're not aware of the concept of a block explorer or what a blockchain is
but when there is real work being done on blockchains it is transparent and you can go look at it yourself
you don't have to trust some greasy fat goblin jew like you did for years

>>25285871
>>25286433
>>25286536
Seriously what compels you to do this? If you're doing it for free you are mentally ill. Either you're a salty XRP bagholder or paid by Zeus Capital.

>>25286628
there is way too much shit for me to list but the 6 million dollar grant to some faggot who is shilling a link blog? what about that faggot fernando who shilled the oracle partnership for money and then ended up getting demoted? what about all the dead oracle startups that went nowhere? the list goes on and on

>>25286879
>>25286948
scroll up i bash xrp too its dogshit but that doesnt take away from the fact that link is massively overvalued rn and will continue to dump; im listing all facts that can be verified yet noone of you are disproving what im saying instead youre just calling me names lol

https://twitter.com/squatch_crypto/status/1343991648213209088

facts:
1. Link is used by maybe a dozen real projects, but with some real usage too.
2. There are many projects who don't use link, don't need to and don't intend to for oracles. It is not as standard as marines make it seem.
3. Out of those projects that do use link, Aave and SNX for example, it is fairly well known and understood that chainlink gave them a few million tokens.
4. Chainlink basically invented the fake partnership vibe. The scammy things that SEC goes after, like the 500k dumps, are all there.
5.these stats
>>25285871
6. Unironically not a good oracle solution nor good software quality.

from here on you have 2 paths
1. Chainlink had some minor traction, shouldve stayed low and grew much slower instead of paying companies to sign up with you only to not be used in the most massive bull run of crypto in history. It is over now and the government will pick the leftovers
2. Chainlink somehow settles all disputes (if any), unironically scales back and starts fixing fundamental issues like its own centralization in the protocol (sign up).

because you fucking idiots couldn't keep it to yourselves, LINK got taken over by le epic reddit and cringe twitter who pumped it and dumped it all over themselves like fucking children. now deal with it

>>25283487
>prove it
>no YOU prove it.

epic.

>>25285222
>why are xrp holders so desperate to sink link with them?
Checked and this.

Why are the cripples specifically targeting Link with their "you're next" fud?

>>25286536
>xrp said the same shit as link does
nope

>>25288167
>Chainlink basically invented the fake partnership vibe
Chainlink NEVER announced a "partnership" first.
It was ALWAYS the "partner" who announced first.

>>25288167
again you just make up lies with no proof or sources. it's obvious what you're doing.

>>25288288
>google
>>25288380
these are for the memes
i never expected it to take off lmao
also the stats are real, you can check the link yourself.

>>25283487
Linktards are coping super hard right now
You bought a security. I know multiple people are the sec and they look long and hard. My other friend works at coinbase and told me to sell because it is getting delisted

>>25288458
>google
Google announced first, pic related.

>>25288458
>>25285871
>the stats are real
No they're not.

>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.

Why are you retards having this discussion still. The SEC literally confirmed that Link is not a security. You look like idiots

>>25288551
Pajeets are coping super hard right now. You bought a Toilet Seat. I know multiple chaiwallahs are on the Toilet Witch payroll and they look long and hard. My other Ranjeet works at currybase and told me to shit because it is getting delisted

>>25283533

People might want to read read and read some more. Only way to get rich.

LINKmarines have been telling XRP for years that XRP is a security. They understand what is and what isn't a security because the Chainlink community are the most high IQ followers in crypto.

What is happening to XRP was Chainlink 101. We went through this already and know which coins ae gonna get cucked. The next one? XLM. thats alpha for today.

>>25283487
This is the tweet that saved Chainlink from the shitty SEC fud

Get fucked no-linkers and xrp fags

honestly the fud doesnt bother me.
what bothers me is normies lumping us together with xrpfags.

*shudder*

>>25284048

>>25288716
post evidence of this please

>>25283487
Anons, it's real fucking simple: the most squeaky clean exchange is Gemini, they comply with every little thing. They never touched XRP. They list Link. THE END .

>>25285871
>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?
Literally this. This is the reason the sec is going after ripple. The insider bullshit manipulation.
The parallels here are mind boggling, if you dont see it you are willfully doing so.
Hold link with deep concern.

>>25286247
>LINK currently secures hundreds of billions of dollars with their oracles, that's a use case.
Wut kind of schizo shill bullshit is this?? Yes, a handful of defi projects use link as there pricing oracle, is this what you are saying.

Coinbase is about to release a press statement about delisting link next week

>>25289614
>This is the reason the sec is going after ripple.
The SEC is going after Ripple primarily for leading buyers to expect future profits, you dumbass.

>>25285222
checked
i don't know but i remember back in 2018 i switched my xrp on link in 1:1 ratio, fucking lmao
now im holding 20k link instead of 20k xrp
best fucking decision of my life

>>25289614
>>25289686

Blablabla. Literally, no substance.

>>25283487
>https://www.newsbtc.com/analysis/xrp/analyst-who-called-coinbase-xrp-delisting-says-sec-is-investigating-other-altcoins/
its over

>>25289941
Yeah and link promised shared profit in staking.

GG link marines. Its over

>>25289700
Weak, zero effort, pulled out of your ass FUD.

Waste of digits. Kys

>>25288235
lest you forget

>>25290295

I just cant believe how FUDers are this retarded. Staking gains is different than a shared “asset” to be appreciated.

>>25290295
>Yeah and link promised shared profit in staking.
Staking is providing capital to collateralize some kind of deal, i.e. earning money through the fruits of your own labour, you brainlet. It would be a security if the token holders just earned dividends, but they do not.

>>25290295
>link promised shared profit in staking.
What?
They did no such thing you absolute moron.

Chainlink staking is simply the node putting up a guarantee sum.
If the node does a good job, the stake is returned in full.
No gains are made from the staking itself, all the gains are from providing oracle services.

>>25288716
that hasn't happened. xrp and link share a similar structure where a company holds a significant amount of the assets and the development of the asset is heavily influenced by a group of people. if the SEC succeeds with xrp, i see no reason why they wouldn't win against link or other similar projects.

>>25290483
except he wasn't talking about the price of token
he was talking about usage of the network

Everyone forgets that Link is based on the Cayman Islands. XRP was doing all their show on USA like nothing happened. Big difference.

>>25290687
that would not stop the SEC's ability to file a lawsuit.

>>25284235
can you explain some more or point me to somewhere I can learn about that? What is it about a margin long being liquidated that makes things crash further?

>>25290793

Imagine a series of stop losses being liquidated one by one each affecting the other in a domino effect.

>>25290676
yeah i know that i'm just trying to fuel the fire

>>25290637
>>25290739
The SEC is going after XRP for being a security.
What makes XRP a security is the fact that they kept promising token price gains, and openly working to achieve that.
Look up the Howey test.

Chainlink never did anything like that at all.
Chainlink will never be a security.

>>25288603
>Valuation isn't about the current state of things, it's about future potential.
LOL

Can we let the FUDers do their own thing?

I need to accumulate more Link at cheap prices.

>>25283487
I sold my Linkies because ETH is going to out perform and capital losses are good

>>25290943
That's literally why people invest you fucking brainlet. Are you new?

>>25283799
This. No-one cares about the xrp news, we've been on a bad downtrend for months.

>>25290943
I'm a private person, I can say whatever the fuck I want.
I can buy thumbtacks and pretend they'll go up in value.

What matters to the SEC is what the company says.

>>25290922

1. It is an investment of money
2. There is an expectation of profits from the investment
3. The investment of money is in a common enterprise
4. Any profit comes from the efforts of a promoter or third party
intent is not necessary.

>>25290975
imagine having capital losses from link

>>25291126
>There is an expectation of profits from the investment
Chainlink never said or even alluded to anything like this.

Ripple did so many times, which is why the SEC is going after them.

As an og marine, man i have to say that link fud is getting shittier and shittier as time goes. I remember when it was lol json and cup of coffe.
Weak faggots

Its all so tiresome

>>25291179
was there an investment of money? yes
is there an expectation of profit? yes
is the investment money in a common enterprise? yes, guess who holds a significant chunk of links and stand to gain from its valuation? both the holders and the development team. same with xrp and ripple labs
any profit comes from the efforts of a promoter or third party? certainly true, they have a development team funded through the assets they hold and sell.

they are on the same boat as ripple, perhaps not as well known or gregarious. but it's reasonable to believe that chainlink is structured similarly to xrp and ripple labs. it's for a jury to decide at this point but i see no reason why the SEC would not go after chainlink if they win against ripple labs.

>>25291179
that's bullish af actually
feeling comfy with diamond hands

>>25291241
json parser, pregnant muslim sergey, rory and sergey two russian scammers, sibos toilets, its happening tonight, nico bully, there were so many diff types of fuds. now all we have is this shitty fud about securities and that our link wont moon for a few years. the fud nowadays is really a fucking joke

>>25291008
Are you fucking retarded? Market value is current value plus some function of speculative value. It's what it's worth RIGHT NOW except some future value with speculative bubbles is priced in.

You're telling me chainlink being worth 10 right now is cause it's worth 10 in the future? Cause 10 is the VALUATION and it's some amount of real value plus a function of speculative future value. Aka how much it's "priced in", which is how sure people are of future value increases, which depends on the market and product development and real current value.

Aka ur a fagot

>>25291306
>was there an investment of money? yes
The same is true for currencies, which are the opposite of securities in the SEC's eyes.

>is there an expectation of profit? yes
The company has to LEAD people to expect profit.
At least read the fucking wiki about the Howey test.

Chainlink never even discussed the token price, let alone lead anyone to expect profit.
Ripple did, many times.

>>25288804
This.

Gemini is the most regulated exchange in the world and they NEVER listed XRP. and have LINK, ZEC, AAVE (post migration). They know what theyre doing and would not list a security.

>>25291402
you have to hit all the points anon, not just one to be considered a investment contract.

LINKIES check STX. SEC approved. Mooning while every crypto project is bleeding.

>>25290149
Who actually cares about SEC?
Like cryptocurrencies can't exist w/o USA, lol.

>>25291429
Ripple hits all the points.

Link does not hit the points about "leading people to expect profits through the efforts of the promoter/a third party".

>>25291402
also no anon, the company doesn't have to lead the people into the expectation of profits. the people simply have to have the expectation.

>>25291497
>the people simply have to have the expectation.
lmao
Again, at least open the fucking wiki about the Howey test, you absolute moron.

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

>>25291611
>>25291611
>or scheme whereby a person invests his money in a common enterprise and is led to expect profits solely from the efforts of the promoter or a third party
use the full quote anon, it's led to expect profits solely from the efforts. it's not 'led to expect profits'.

>>25291686
The "investor" has to be LED to expect profits.

That means the promoter/third party has to tell them "price will go up".

>>25283487
I'm not a fudder, I'm genuine holder, I've had 10k LINK for almost 2 years at this point and never doubted once until a few days ago. I have enough in crypto that making it is a real possibility in the coming year, but not if the SEC wreck my shit in the intervening time

>>25291727
anon, you're interpreting it differently. the sentence to me interprets; the efforts of a promoter or third party is what solely affects any expectation of profits. meaning that the promoter or third parties efforts are where the valuation comes from, not from the asset or item itself.

>>25291892
>you're interpreting it differently

Yeah, me and the SEC fucking lmao.

>>25291892
If that was true, every single asset that is being traded should be a security, including but not limited to : gold, silver, stocks, forex, Bitcoin and Ethereum (btw the SEC has stated that both are NOT securities)
tl;dr You are a faggot

>>25291892
>>25291966
you retards are stretching the definition of security to mean pretty much anything that isn't food, and even some food would fit your definition
fuck, by this logic every college should be considered a security and sued by the SEC as well
the truth is that the SEC sues everyone that brings disruptive technology to the table and they always bend the knee
it's a badge of honor really

>>25292174
>you retards are stretching the definition of security

Yeah, us, the SEC, and SCOTUS.

https://www.dfs.ny.gov/apps_and_licensing/virtual_currency_businesses/virtual_currencies
https://www.dfs.ny.gov/apps_and_licensing/virtual_currency_businesses/approved_entities_number
link is not a security, as gemini does not list securities.
link was cleared by the NYSDFS for both listing and custody, while xrpee was only approved for custody, not listing. jesus fucking christ people lets put this shit to rest already

>>25287800
This nigger is one of the worst twitterfags. Up there with ChainlinkGod.

>Saved chainlink
>Down 8% today

>>25291966
>https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2020/comp-pr2020.pdf
doesn't exist first off.
>>25292055
yes it could be, but gold and silver are not investment contracts, they are assets. if you bundle them like futures or etf's, they are.
>>25292174
the definition is mallable and not static as recognized.
>As the United States Supreme Courtnoted in SEC v. W.J. Howey Co.,Congressdefined “security” broadly to embody a “flexible rather than a static principle, one that is capable of adaptation to meet the countless and variable schemes devised by those who seek the use of the money of others on the promise of profits.”328 U.S. 293, 299 (1946)

>>25292199
>us groupthink
>plebbit spacing
>jewish technique of trying to get me to defend events that haven't even happened yet
what's wrong rabbi? too many goys not selling?
lmao shower day soon kike

>>25292306
sorry it does exist i found it, but it doesn't have the highlights you are implying.

>>25283487

LINK has a HUGE fucking target reticle over it because they use the same scam business model with premined centralized shitcoins that serve no purpose but to enrich the founders.

>>25292369
>it doesn't have the highlights you are implying.
lmao but of course it does.

>>25292318
>groupthink
This is a legal case, you dip.
SCOTUS set the precedent for what makes a security, and the SEC is bringing the case.

Imagine trying to spin this as "groupthing" fucking lol.

>>25292395
anon, lets stop beating around the bush. we all know that people who bought chainlink only did so because they thought sergey would deliver some revolutionary service or product that would make holding link worth a lot of money. no reasonable person would donate money to sergey, get links, and not expect to make any money at all.

>>25292445
But Sergey did not promise them future gains.

>>25292427
yeah you and that deformed hooked monstrosity you call a nose need to go back and stay there kike nigger
I hope you're not getting paid for this shilling because your handlers are going to be pissed at what a nigger tier job you're doing

>>25283487
I'M SO EXCITED FOR YOU GUYS!

>>25292445
thats you rationalizing it
however that is not how the law works. you need evidence of the team leading buyers to expect profits, which the team has very much not done. if you dont have evidence, then there is no case. you do realize the SEC has to argue a case in court right? you think they just go up on the stand and say
>hurr durr lets stop beating around the bush. we all know that people who bought chainlink only did so because they thought sergey would deliver some revolutionary service or product that would make holding link worth a lot of money. no reasonable person would donate money to sergey, get links, and not expect to make any money at all.

>>25292485
he offered an ICO. even if he didnt' flat out say it, let's not be retarded. he offered an ICO and people bought the ICO on that expectation to make profit. otherwise he should have asked for a donation. who would buy into an ICO if they didn't expect to make money?

>>25292524
even if they don't say it in words or advertise it, offering an ICO is pretty much implicit of saying they expect profits. why else ask for money and give them links? as a token of appreciation for their donation? heh.

>>25292445
None of this has anything to do with being a security.
Sergey has to lead people to expect profits, simply doing a good job has nothing to do with that.

>>25292550
>>25292578
ETH had an ICO and was cleared by the SEC from being a security.
Having an ICO has nothing to do with promising future gains.

>>25285222
Link does what XRP wishes it could.

>>25283487
that scott melker guy is a retard, best to keep your distance

>>25292578
you are initially offering a coin that can be used later. that is literally what they are selling. next you are going to tell me paying for a game a year in advance in a pre-order implies its a security too, since there was no working product at the time and they advertised a game with a future promise that can change dates.
the point is by offering an ICO you are not implicitly implying profits. ethereum held an ICO, are they considered a security? no, the SEC flat out said it isnt. an expectation of profit arises when investors are directly promised future value in return for what they are purchasing, to which, the chainlink team has done a phenomenal job of never doing, which isnt true for a lot of tokens in the space.

>>25290943
I bought LINK early because I knew I wanted to make a little business collateralizing and perhaps running nodes. I knew that if I waited to buy the token while the network grew & matured, it would get increasingly expensive to set up my business. So yes I bought on future potential, and no that doesn't make it a security. The motivation to buy link was to access & use the chainlink network because I thought I could create value myself through use of the network.

As an analogous example, I bought solar panels way back when renewable energy credits / allowances were being introduced. I bought in the panels in the winter when they go for a slight discount. In creating a community solar arrangement, I raised funds from willing neighbors to finance the acquisition & implementation of the panels. The key here was that it was made abundantly clear in marketing & contracts that the funders were buying a subscription to the farm's energy output (i.e. energy for their own personal consumption) and not a stake in the farm itself that they could profit from. Of course, they could consume the energy their subscription allowed in order to generate value, create cost savings, or otherwise indirectly profit.

But just like Chainlink, the thing was explicitly set up to sell the rights to consume a utility, not to invest in the utility itself.

>>25286628
no one uses chainlink

>>25292906
Chainlink is the backbone for a large number of Defi projects totalling many billions of USD.
And the Link token is used to pay for every single node input.
Cope.

>>25290922
>Howey test
to further on this salient point by this chad anon, i did some research and this made me feel much better, note the date

https://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-led-group-aims-to-help-crypto-firms-avoid-breaking-securities-rules

>>25293048
i couldn't find the link i saw yesterday with rankings but iirc chainlink has a 2 out of 5 where 5 is 'security' and 1 is 'currency'
obviously this isn't official, but seeing xrp at 4 and this current lawsuit made me feel better about link's role in all of this

>>25293118
ETH was already cleared by the SEC, so obviously the Ripple thing isn't a blanket crypto concern.
The Howey test is pretty clear, as long as the project in question keeps from telling people "we'll make sure the token price goes up", it's almost impossible to get slapped for being a security.
So it's pretty simple: don't be a greedy hypebeast shill.

>>25283487
>listening to the guy who FOMO'd into USO before the stock split it had during contango.
This guy is a fucking JOKE.

>>25293225
>ETH was already cleared by the SEC, so obviously the Ripple thing isn't a blanket crypto concern.
yeah to be clear I know the SEC has cleared BTC and ETH as currencies, my concern is more about Chainlink potentially being considered a security, sorry if unclear
sounds like we're in agreement though, link is likely not going to hit any issues from the SEC here (though the jews at the SEC could still do something if they wanted to)

>>25292268
With this and with the CRC rating link as a 2 and XRP as a 4 on the Howey test, it really is time to give it a rest

>>25292268
Thanks, anon.

>>25283533
Kek linkies seething

>>25292268
Your second link shows that 2 entities were approved to list XRP? This is the same situation as Chainlink with the exception being that XRP is greenlisted for custody, i.e. more inclusive.

The Gemini/CBC assurance is more reassuring.

>>25285222
low IQ people always try to bring down their betters. They're basically communists.

>>25283487
There was some larper a while ago who said you wouldn't be able to buy Chainlink next year anymore. Perhaps it's related to this shit.

xrp isn't supported by DEXes. Once the CEXes dropped xrp pairs, then there is literately no place to even dump this shit

>>25295458
what is a dex?