balouthebear

List of threads that might be of interest to you. Crypto valuations - Spoiler: They are basically all the same and none is special. $BTC is NO exception here: teapaw.org/cryptopia13/status/195…

Economists barely agree on anything. If they do - like here - one should typically really pay attention. If my claims are so easy to disprove - why don’t you give it a try?

All of that speculation - we simply cannot know at this point. Would not expect $Link holders to get stocks though if they really IPO. It‘s probably too complicated cause tokens and stocks are completely different regimes and there would be many jurisdictions involved

The token has absolutely 0 to do with what Chainlink Labs does or what services Chainlink offers. So a reaction would make no sense whatsoever. We just got the 987th time proof of how detached the token is from their offerings.

It‘s called Commitment and Consistency popularized by Dr. Robert Cialdini. These people are boxed in by their prior public statements. It’s the same thing as with $BTC or $XRP people. Both coins as non-sensical as $Link but people have built their reputation based on them.

Using AI as a non-native speaker should not be an issue. And the arguments there have NOT been refuted. Basically any serious economist says $BTC goes to zero. Ever considered why? All of them idiots?

We don’t know that for sure yet. There are still regulatory issues to be fair. We will know when Chainlink labs announces their IPO. Basically all the value accrues to them and it would make a lot of sense for them to do that.

That is one of the two most important questions there are in this regard. The other and even more important one is: Will economics 2.0 or sth similar that gives $Link a purpose ever happen?

Similar ideas - a little bit more nuance 👇

That’s not entirely true. Economics 2.0 had a very different role for $Link in mind. The main question is if we will get there. The longer it takes the less likely that is. The reserve is just total nonsense and a red herring. It makes 0 sense whatsoever.

$BTC cannot fulfil what you want it to do or to be. It produces the wrong incentives which work exactly opposite to all existing store of values so far. So it‘s a terrible bearer asset. The thread here lays this out 👇

out and see what happens. The system works as fine or even better than today. $Link would have made sense if you really needed it to secure the value in the network. But the last years have shown that it works perfectly fine without it. Chainlink labs found a different way.

The organizations don‘t need $Link to work and appreciate in price. In fact for most of the participants in the CL ecosystem it is an impediment and they‘d be much better off with stables instead of $Link. The ecosystem works perfectly fine without $Link. You can simply take it…

If you have a different opinion I‘d like to hear it. Meaning a step by step explanation how & why the token captures value as it is & not just claiming things like most of the marines do. As things stand, I‘ll end up at an increase in the velocity of token circulation at best.

There is no way to invest in it. The token makes no sense and is completely detached from what Chainlink labs does. So you‘d bet on MAJOR token improvements which you might or might not get. Without it, the token will underperform as it has done for many years now.

It would be much better for the token if they go back to the original idea and make it in integral part of their services (meaning NOs having to put up $Link and competing against each other etc). Staking or nonsense like a reserve are just artificial mechanics.

I wish more $Link supporters would come to this conclusion - it‘s the only one one can arrive at this point. The baseless and endless shilling of $Link by the remaining marines is just annoying and misleading at this stage. Probably causing more harm than doing good 🤷‍♂️

The issue and the risk is that they will not need to sell $Link anymore then. Their business is probably already profitable and currently basically all the value that is created within the CL ecosystem accrues to CL labs. That‘s why they can even start nonsense like the reserve

So your base-case is a) the token stays as it is and will not get proper tokenomics b) more adoption will not simply lead to an increase in the velocity of token circulation but an increase in the value of $Link? Do I get this right? And if so - how do you arrive at b)

within the CL ecosystem much easier. So what I do is an assessment of what happens based on the underlying incentives: a) Do they switch and favour equity over the token? Or b) do they make the token useful? Both is possible. I am not so convinced than you that it will be b)

they could not really do that so far because of legislation. But the world is not stopping in the meantime. Their services work without the token having a meaningful role. You could probably replace $Link by a stable-coin tomorrow and it would make the life of many actors..