Chainlink - More revenue then every other protocol but one???

[Anonymous No.49420302]

Guys, I'm scared. What do these numbers mean? I must be wrong right?

https://market.link/overview Shows LINK revenue earned by the nodes/data providers. This is earnt by protocols that use LINK paying for data with the LINK token across all chains.

Currently shows over a 7 day period 227k LINK has been earnt in total.

Which works out to about 12million LINK tokens annually.

Chainlink is currently worth around $7.70 each...12million x $7.70 = $92million gross per year.

We of course have to consider gas costs. Market.link shows us that the chainlink network spent $800k on gas in the last 7 days. So about $41million spent across an entire year.

$92 million - $41million = $51million earnt in revenue a year.

$51million in revenue puts chainlink at very near the top of the pile in most successful protocols if we use this data; https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/metrics/protocol_revenue

This can not be right can it? Are those numbers right?

I do not believe chainlink offers any 'token incentive/miner reward/network bootstrapping'. This is all from actually users. No ponzi token inflation.

I think this is a big deal. But no one else seems to have noticed. Have I finally lost my mind?

[Anonymous No.49420320]

Tokenomics get switched on in 2022 - did you know nodes will also have to compete for jobs by staking more LINK in order to access the higher value revenue streams? CCIP will also be released this year unleashing high value usecases that will demand more LINK staked.

https://blog.chain.link/understanding-the-security-impact-curve-and-future-fee-opportunity/

https://chain.link/cross-chain#cross-chain-interoperability-protocol

The market hasn't worked out where the long term value capture is. The oracle problem is worth more than all of crypto combined.

Blockchain = Computer

Blockchain + Oracles = Computer + Internet

Blockchain + Oracles + DECO (CL component) = Computer + Internet + TLS/SSL

Chainlink is Layer 0 (see CCIP link above), the blockchain of blockchains without a blockchain or the TCP/IP of blockchain. Abstraction layer that will be used by everyone, in the end crypto = the "Chainlink Cloud" and everything else will be plug-in's and adapters to said cloud.

One day the market will be forced to come to terms with the reality that chain value capture is bound to blocks / throughput while the data layer (decentralized generalized oracle protocol with no cross-dependencies) has exposure to actual contract value and has no limitations short of global economic productivity. Chains have no direct value capture from a contract worth 1$ or 1 trillion - Chainlink does/will.

They are building the worlds first trust network which is an extension layer to the entire Internet. It is also a winner takes all layer - attempting to replace / compete with Chainlink will be the equivalent of trying to spin up a second competing set of Internet protocols.

Gartner knows where this space is going;
https://mobile.twitter.com/Gartner_inc/status/1533885772734119944

Who is Eric Schmidt?
https://mobile.twitter.com/DrakeLinked/status/1532166792965042176

Most will write this off as XRP-tier schizo, but ignoring this post will haunt them. Few.

[Anonymous No.49420344]

>>49420302
Didn't read; never selling.

[Sage No.49420554]

meds

[Anonymous No.49420566]

>One day the market will be forced to come to terms with the reality
Let me stop you there anon.
There is a lot of money to be made in denying this reality for as long as possible

[Anonymous No.49420922]

>>49420302
Please delete this thread. This is my last warning. I would hate to report you and your account get a strike. Delete now your math is wrong and its dangerous to give out financial advice.

You've been warned

[Anonymous No.49421024]

>>49420302

[Anonymous No.49421142]

>>49420302
>>49420320
Not all of the Chainlink supply is currently being traded. You are buying a tone that is inflated and not needed

[Anonymous No.49421197]

>>49421142
Plus the CEO is kind of a bad guy.

[Anonymous No.49421340]

>>49420302
If you're just looking for revenue (like token terminal) then you'd use the $90 mil figure, $50 mil would be profit.

Looks and Dydx generated a lot more revenue but their market caps are way smaller. I'm not familiar with their tokenomics but I though Looks returned some revenue to token holders? revenue and marketcap seem to be pretty disconnected.

[Anonymous No.49422300]

>>49420320
based

[Anonymous No.49423034]

>>49421340

The link rewards in the past month are 1.8m link no ?

That’s $166m revenue a year at current price of link, minus $96m in gas a year at current, that’s 70m in profit.

[Anonymous No.49423036]

>>49420302
>>49420320
You haven't lost your mind. Every once in awhile, it's nice to type out a reminder of why LINK is king; focus keeps drifting elsewhere.
I look forward to seeing peer-to-peer commerce, as an industry, booming. End-to-end guarantees of product production to its on-chain specifications, material composition and purity, and delivery. Options for lesser materials in the ordering process, options for total customization.
Nearly every industry will be turned on its head. Technology will eventually advance at an absurdly rapid pace on scales that are far too impossibly tiny and invisible for financial constraints to have any real effect.
Even if the machines we do this with are hardly capable in their initial iterations, what matters is that they all follow a standard; the language between machines is the same. Improvement in execution will come naturally.
Seeing this play out—projects and teams using Chainlink that don't know anything about its origins, and just opt to use it for the realizable value it brings—will be fascinating.

Trust-minimized uptime guarantees will eventually appear, I'm sure—embedded devices that connect to one-another remotely, to ensure that data from trustless hardware to its networks (read: Chainlink) can always flow. We will probably be the ones to incentivize it, because higher uptime of Chainlink's sensors is strictly in our interests, the interests of our clients, and the interests of the financial system at large—which we will control, because our nodes are the closest thing there is to something that "calls the shots" when it comes to the cost of the trust connections that contracts need in order to execute, and our nodes know every cost-saving route to undercut competition. That's how good this works.

The effects of real-world-interfacing trustless hardware are going to take a few years to happen, definitely—but I can't think of better outcomes for society, practically speaking. Marketplaces for everything, always.

[Anonymous No.49423444]

>>49420302
>ID: Shil

[Anonymous No.49423811]

>>49420302
>ID: shill
Checked ID

I hold 150k LPL. I am a brainlet. I don't even understand any of these mean.

[Anonymous No.49423942]

>>49420302
Go back you filthy fat onions boy

[Anonymous No.49424117]

This nigger copied this from a plebbit thread in crypto. Feel free to spam that thread with Jason Parser shit

[Anonymous No.49424209]

>>49420302
So 51$ million... The value of all circulating LINK is is 3.5 billion dollars. If we assume all of this is staked somewhat geometrically across the network that would produce a 1.5% APY at this time

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.49424317]

>>49424209
>he doesn't know

[Anonymous No.49424373]

>>49421197
is this real???

[Anonymous No.49424410]

>>49421340
All these shitcoins inflate their token and link doesnt. Link is the only token that does not inflate and actually earns something for their holders.

[Anonymous No.49424493]

>>49420302
Absolutely bump. Thanks OP we need more like this. Soon, boys.

[Anonymous No.49424652]

>>49424410
Have you earned any link as a bagholder? Or have you just absorbed a 120 million LINK dump on open market orchestrated by Sergey? It's the same type of shit just with premine instead of continuous mint.

[Anonymous No.49425053]

>>49420302
>https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/metrics/protocol_revenue
>Top dapps and blockchains based on cumulative protocol revenue in the past 30 days
>in the past 30 days
Retard
Opensea makes 370 million yearly revenue. Looksrare (literally who?) 150 million. Chainlink token economics are fucked.

[Anonymous No.49425173]

>>49420320
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Blockchains, is in fact, Chainlink/Ethereum, or as I've recently taken to calling it, Chainlink plus Ethereum. Ethereum & other L1s are not operating blockchains unto themselves, but rather components of a fully functioning Chainlink system made useful by Chainlink Core Adapters, CCIP and vital system components such as VRFs comprising a full Blockchain as defined by the WEF.

Many dApp users use specific Chainlink DON systems every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of Chainlink which is widely used today is often called "Ethereum", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the Chainlink system, developed by Chainlink Labs.

There really is an Ethereum, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Ethereum is the settlement layer: the blockchain onto which the settlement for your dApps happens. The base layer is an essential part of an operating blockchain, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete Hybrid Smart Contract System. Ethereum is normally used in combination with Chainlink DONs: the whole system is basically Chainlink with Ethereum added, or Chainlink/Ethereum. All the so-called "Ethereum" flavors are really flavors of Chainlink/Ethereum.

[Anonymous No.49425184]

>>49423036
Really interesting post anon cheers

[Anonymous No.49425259]

just slurped another 80 cubes

[Anonymous No.49425388]

>>49425173
You're right anon but this is too much for the normies to absorb right now

[Anonymous No.49425389]

>>49420302
Apart form your reddit spacing..
> Chainlink is currently worth around $7.70 each...12million x $7.70 = $92million gross per year.
The revenue was generated past year, with an average price of $LINK of around $23, so a more accurate calculation would be:
>12million x $23 = $276 mn
Now the gas fee was $41 mn, but this will get reduced with Arbitrum and other fee-reduced L2's. So profit will be close to $276mn (assuming no further growth in usage/adoption).
Now add to that that certain service layers will require the nodes to have a deposit in case of faulty data, i.e. require nodes to have LINK staked, which will further reduce supply and the scarcity increases the value of the token itself only about 4 times .. then we're easily at $1bn in revenue (which roughly translates into profit as well with the new L2 fee-structure).

$1bn annual profit, annualized 50% growth rate over the next 15 years, market cap is $3.5 bn - do you see what's wrong?

[Anonymous No.49425523]

>>49425389
>https://market.link/overview
>LINK Rewards
>32.42K LINK
Hs calculations are right you dumb trannie
>Now the gas fee was $41 mn, but this will get reduced with Arbitrum and other fee-reduced L2's.
Arbitrum has been on mainnet since last year

[Anonymous No.49425645]

>>49425173
Holy shit, I've been on this board full time since 2017 and have never read this adaption of the Richard Stallman pasta. Absolutely and unequivocally based, it perfectly captures the essence of the original quote and the fat protocol thesis. Fucking saved and hats off to whoever made this pasta.

[Anonymous No.49425802]

>>49423036
I hadn't thought this far ahead.
>material purity
Fascinating idea but 10 years away I'd say.

[Anonymous No.49425826]

>>49425389
His calculations were right faggot.
You also have take into account that if chainlink was higher priced then this means nodes would just earn less link. Mostly everything on their end is denominated in fiat.
If you want some food for thought here, we can look at pic related and notice which dates were the most active for link and we notice the 11th/12th which coincide with the luna fiasco.

[Anonymous No.49426138]

Didn‘t read; not buying

[Anonymous No.49426146]

>>49424652
Those tokens ‘dumped’ on the market are used to keep everything running smoothly when the markets are down. Many Defi projects are firing staff right now because they have no money. They will likely go bust. Those token sales for bootstrapping were timed perfect and also help decentralise the protocol without the tokens going to VC’s.

[Anonymous No.49426228]

>>49425826
If you then head over to bitinfocharts you can notice that there is a spike on that specific day for eth transactions. An easy assumption to make from there is if we extrapolate that to past periods which had the same transaction volume, due to Chainlinks monopoly on the market it likely benefited node operators for around 10% of the year. Keep in mind that is a conservative estimate as you can clearly see the spike goes way above the levels seen during the luna crash but we'll keep it as is for simplicity's sake. Fuck it hold up.

[Anonymous No.49426233]

>>49426228
The network likely made upwards of $122mil in 2021.

[Anonymous No.49426246]

>>49426233
Color coded for all you retards

[Anonymous No.49426517]

>>49426233
is that before or after gas costs

[Anonymous No.49426859]

>>49420302
Here OP, I visualized it.

This is pretty insane considering how Chainlink mainnet is currently so limited while ETH is pretty much running as hard as it absolutely can.

[Anonymous No.49427028]

>>49426859
>in the past 30 days
>putting chainlink yearly revenue

[Anonymous No.49427085]

>>49425645
I shot my shot at chainlinking that particular pasta once and I see many of the connections I used but I have no idea if anon posted my version or someone else's. Perhaps someone took my rough draft and improved upon it.
I need to drink less.

[Anonymous No.49427453]

>>49425173
bravo

[Anonymous No.49427539]

>>49425173
Based!

[Anonymous No.49428210]

>>49420320
my main question for you is do you think the XRP schitzos can be right along with LINK
i have a fair amount of resolve that LINK has a huge future. but what i have seen on XRP is fairly promising too. however im more concerned with that becuase i think an XRP shadow fork is more likely to be used for bank clearing compared to a different chainlink.
The main fud with LINK (to me) is that you could use a different token for collateral however staking alleviates these concerns

[Anonymous No.49430470]

>>49425053
>comparing NFT "revenue", or even Ethereum "revenue" to Chainlink revenue
ETH cycles hands in NFTs a lot, and I guarantee you that there's the involvement of parties that don't exchange liquid value for ETH before spending it on transaction placement; that's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does inflate ETH's "revenue" figures, which everyone seems to think are very strong
I personally think that ETH is in a very scary situation; it has a valuation so high that it would take decades for its current revenue to remit any one holder on the value of their ETH, and as it gets more valuable, costs go up. $100 transaction fees are neither inviting to value builders, or speculators.

Current whales are apathetic towards scaling solutions; this doesn't look good. Makes it look like money doesn't care about its product. They probably think that L1 being the "only option" is better for their "revenue" figure; this could blow up in their faces very badly.

[Anonymous No.49430509]

>>49425053
>comparing NFT "revenue", or even Ethereum "revenue" to Chainlink revenue
ETH cycles hands in NFTs a lot, and I guarantee you that there's the involvement of parties that don't exchange liquid value for ETH before spending it on transaction placement; that's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does inflate ETH's "revenue" figures, which everyone seems to think are very strong
I personally think that ETH is in a very scary situation; it has a valuation so high that it would take decades for its current revenue to remit any one holder on the value of their ETH, and as it gets more valuable, costs go up. $100 transaction fees are neither inviting to value builders, or speculators.

Current whales are apathetic towards scaling solutions; this doesn't look good. Makes it look like money doesn't care about its product. They probably think that L1 being the "only option" is better for their "revenue" figure; this could blow up against their interests very badly.

[Anonymous No.49430635]

>>49420302
$51 million in annual revenue? FUCKING LMAO, it's nothing. NOTHING. Random grocery store gets higher revenue. You make big deal out of it and it's the exact opposite - proof that LINK is worthless and token is not needed. 3% is probably not a joke.

[Anonymous No.49431786]

>>49420302
fuck you
document.querySelectorAll('.postMessage').forEach(function(item) {
item.innerHTML=item.innerHTML.replace(/<br><br>/g, '<br>');
});

[Anonymous No.49431852]

>>49431786
broken bot?

[Anonymous No.49431942]

>>49431852
>fuck you
>document.querySelectorAll('.postMessage').forEach(function(item) { item.innerHTML=item.innerHTML.replace(/<br><br>/g, '<br>'); });
what did the bot mean by this?

[Anonymous No.49431969]

>>49431942
it means fuck you

[Anonymous No.49432039]

>>49431969
cool but what about the other part and why did you delete it?

[Anonymous No.49432396]

>>49425173
OH NO NO NO NO NO ETHEREUM BROS WE GOT TOO COCKY

[Anonymous No.49433319]

>>49425645
How can you have been here for 5 years and still not realize that no one gives a shit how long you've been here or what you think about this pasta or that meme.
Being here that long isn't something to brag about.
It's something you should be deeply embarrassed of.

[Anonymous No.49433419]

>>49431969
He means that OP is using reddit spacing.
Which is only fair since OP did indeed copy paste here his own reddit thread.

[Anonymous No.49433452]

>>49433419
was for
>>49432039

[Anonymous No.49434102]

>>49423034
past month includes that UST/LUNA implosion, which is too far of an outlier to average that happening 12 time a year

[Anonymous No.49434313]

>>49425389
>but this will get reduced with Arbitrum and other fee-reduced L2's
I saw so much shit for the longest time about arbitrum reducing LINK costs but i've not seen it a whole lot in action yet
arbitrum has been out for, shit, 8 or 9 months now? i'd imagine by that point the costs savings would have already happened already

[Anonymous No.49434317]

>>49425645
>>49427085
I winged it because I had to move and couldn't search for pasta.
Some parts are not completely right.

[Anonymous No.49434898]

>>49425053
Not sustainable and in opensea's case they were literally front running an ripping people off. KYS nigger

[Anonymous No.49435004]

Time to sell the news. Since were pumping and all...

[Anonymous No.49438279]

>>49434102
True but this is before CCIP, FSS, DECO, STAYKING, SWIFT, GOOGLE, PEEPEEPOOPOO

[Anonymous No.49438366]

>>49420302
>https://market.link/overview
Go to https://market.link/direct-request

>99.3% Polygon
What ... what did they mean by this GNSbro's?

[Anonymous No.49438528]

>>49438279
not to mention a bear market