/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>9624092
PRAISE HIM

report all larp threads

ban all larp posters

>>9624092
...what can only be done one way is specifically the output portion of the fiat integration side. even if an oracle solution is technically inferior, it will win if it has a monopoly on interaction with the established players who essentially have a cartel on these interactions.

smartcontracts need oracles to work. oracles are necessary but not sufficient. link has, from what i can tell, been built from the ground up to be the sole provider for end fiat integration using legacy systems. this means that smartcontracts need link to succeed. all other players in the space, even seeming competitiors, have a huge incentive to support link if they ever want to see widespread adoption (and get rich). that is a powerful motivator.

for bonus points: biz already knows what Sergey had to give swift to get this position, but I haven't seen it explicitly stated yet. any idea what it is?

if you're interested in talking more i'll be around for a while, if not, no big deal. good luck frens.

Soon

Someone be a bro and link previous thread

>>9624197
>>/biz/thread/S9339054

>>9624160
damn good interpretation. welcome fren, i remember you from the thread 2 weeks ago. you gave me some good advice regarding investment research and feel better about LINK more now than i ever have before.

>any idea what it is?
650m LINK?

>(to my knowledge) all other oracle providers are just starting to get this
So you're saying that the ability for company to use fiat for both the input and output of a ChainLINK smart contract is what gives it a massive advantage over other oracle providers, who have only just begun to explore how to offer the same end-to-end fiat service?

>>9624160
100 million Link and the development of bound rate systems

>>9624160
>the established players who essentially have a cartel on these interactions
Can you explain this some more? You mean that oracle providers will need to have relationships with banks or banking organizations like SWIFT to have them wire the money to the account specified in the smart contract

>>9624336
he may have, but ironically that part is less relevant
jesse lund talked about scenarios that were raised when stellar floated the idea of central bank backed digital currencies that caused major objections. the punchline was that if end customers could hold assets backed by a central bank there would be a run on commercial banks because they no longer really held a use case.
if link succeeds and the SWIFT APIs are built into the core functionality of smarcontract development platforms (eg zepplin_os) then swift partner banks are essentially immunized from being bypassed by using only CBDCs (which would be more economical).

take a guess what that's worth long term?

>>9624401
A big mac

>>9624336
I believe op told us in post a couple weeks ago that Swift was holding that huge stack of Link, which would not surprise me at all.

>>9624339
kind of
businesses, especially big established ones, often have processes in place that are not the most efficient or most economical because the use of other processes either would cost more than the cost savings to switch or would present a small, but nonzero, risk of catastrophic failure, which is unacceptable.
this is basically why using DLT native assets as a value transfer option in smartcontracts is generally not an option for most business, especially those that, ironically, have the most to gain from use of smartcontracts.
not sure if i explained that well, trying to think of a better way to put it but cant

>>9624423
If I were to add to that, would guess majority ownership of Link.

>>9624387
chainlink inputs and outputs can be used to do whatever people want them to.
swift probably won't allow other data providers nodes to trigger payments via fiat between member banks accounts
do you think that swift will allow their own nodes to do this? what does this do to the utility of data provided by banking members? what if you had a faster, cheaper, more reliable data feed but didn't have this functionality?

>>9624160
>biz already knows what Sergey had to give swift to get this position
Please don't tell me he gave them his special pancake recipe

>>9624160

>biz already knows what Sergey had to give swift to get this position.
Yeah it was confirmed earlier this week, really sad.

>>9624539
Kek

Sergey gave Swift a Smart Contract that ensures they will get to sacrifice his first born child.

>>9624484
You would buy the company, or at least a significant interest in it.

>>9624763
Still waiting on a reply. Link a subsidiary of Swift?

>>9624763
>>9625314
bump for answers. also i dont think biz knows what sergey gave swift..? is that some kind of high quality b8...

>>9625381
If Link is an actual subsidiary of Swift, it provides access to huge amounts of data that can be used to execute contracts. It would likely eliminate some of the concern around having access to confidential information, Banks are beyond anal about that and for good reason. Swift services Banks. Just a thought.

>>9625456
So Sergey would give them...what, a contractual obligation to not work with SWIFTs competitors?

There will be a mass suicide. It's either going to be linkies or no linkies, but a mass suicide is guaranteed.

>>9625508
Swift doesn't have competitors

>>9625593
right what you said makes sense, food for thought but what could sergey have given swift..sounds like OP is attempting to implicate sergey is bribing swift or am i interpreting it wrong?

>>9625641
Bribe is wrong, Sergey is a good boy.

>>9625593
Ripple, Are they not attempting to take away business from Swift?

>>9625576
I mean even if chainlink doesn't gain mass adoption the price will still rise substantially from here. They haven't even started marketing it yet. Worst case scenario for linkies is 2-3x from here instead of 1000x.

>>9625784
Bribe is a terrible word for this, more like Link becomes a formal part of Swift to gain access to financial data, and Swift benefits because they not only continue to provide services they have in the past (only more effectively) but also gets a portion of the Chainlink serving fees. Win-win.

>>9625878
I suggest calling it a "deal"

buy mobius please sirs is good coin than chainslink ceo far good and sergey

>>9625796
yes last time i checked ripple and swift are competitors...

https://financialtribune.com/articles/world-economy/83926/can-ripple-challenge-swift-gpi-s-monopoly

>>9624092
hey man
i remember last thread, but can you elevate a bit again on those price estimates

EOY2018 1.5 (0.5-8)
EOY2019 3.5 (1-45)
EOY2020 15 (5-700)
EOY2024 1500 (75-45000)

what are the numbres between brackets again? had something to do with average or what?

>>9625784
he dindu nuffin

>>9625994
50 cents - 8 dollars but EOY it will be $1.5

What's supposed to be new or interesting here? This is pretty boring stuff everyone knows and should be incredibly obvious to everyone with an IQ over 89.

>>9626177
nothing new just some people that hold link and bored probably.

>>9626158
why would it hit $8 and dip to $1.5..thats dumb

>>9626473
> why would it hit $1.40 in January and then drop to $0.26?

Thank you for these threads. They allow me to challenge my own investment. Big respect.

We are going to make it. I only have 120k at 21 but I have a suspicion everything will work out.

>>9626506
just cause something happened in the past doesnt mean it'll happen again.

>>9626473
if it hits 8 bucks most people will have a million dollars.

this is all just a nothing burger.