>>60517787
>but the node operators are paid in LINK

yeah and then they turn around and sell link
USD->LINK->NODE->USD
Takes about 10 seconds

every buy of LINK will be paired with an equal sell

no friction = no increase in link/usd = no reason to hold

>>60522572 (OP)
>what is staking

>>60522580
a toy given to fanyboys to keep them from a tantrum

do you really think the fantasy of cryptoeconomic guarantees will ever come to pass? do you know how chaotic it would be to try to assign value to information and figuring out the difference between "good" and "bad" behavior?

staking sounds neat when you first think about it but when you dive in, it doesn't work if your goal is to "deliver truth"

(also I didn't mean to link to another thread in the OP)

>>60522572 (OP)
What if they didn't sell it for some reason?

>>60522602
you cannot solo a node
you need to organize, you need people
people like to know they are taken care of when joining a group.

why would keep your companies money in the form of a low friction utility coin? there will always be enough coins in circulation for a company to insta buy. You may think "that's convoluted, there must be a reason for the token"

yeah, there is: To sell to greedy midwits.

>>60522580
What a funny low IQ logic.
From where comes the staking interest? Thin air? Like fiat?

>>60522580
considering they could not make real staking happen for 8 years and admitted defeat by doing shitcoin staking instead, it's safe to assume that it's not going to happen

>>60522580
4,5% of total supply is staked
8% of total supply is injected in the market per year for the next 5 years.

Turboretard

notice how all the usual shills don't even dare to touch this thread lmao

>>60523206
it's because i'm a real person and not a paid fud

its not like the shills have any incentive to add it to their discord coordination list and the bosses never actually come here

>>60522572 (OP)
this is true for now

if mainstream adoption ever happens number go up

>>60522798
there is no demand for it... .yet....

lets be real, chainlink is one of the only projects that keeps progressing itself year after year.

>>60523326
Sergey hasn't killed anyone... yet.

>>60523315
nope
ok lets say the value is $10
companies are buying, nodes are selling
price stays at $10, right? No friction, no price change

same holds for $0.0001 or $100 or $100,000. All that changes is the amount of link bought and sold.

But think of the people holding 99.99% of the LINK that isn't being used at that particular moment. Why wouldn't I sell to gain some BTC or $ or whatever money you want? Why wouldn't everyone else?

If your usecase only involves a fraction of your token being used, and the services are only nominally priced in your token but everyone uses USD for their accounting your token will not be worth anything

Staking is the only feature that could bring value to LINK.

LINK=$13 is the market's way of saying "we really doubt that staking is possible in the oracle space but there is a wild shot it could work"
$13 is a lottery ticket - 0.001% chance it goes to $1000 and every other scenario is ZERO

>>60522572 (OP)
what is this schizo thing I'm looking at goyim ?

>>60523351
by this logic BTC would never go up in value cuz miners are constantly selling
in other words, you're dumb

uhh but I'm never selling ever?? lOLLL

>>60523432
that's why you're poor

>>60523422
>duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude my special altcoin should be treated like bitcoin


grim

so does anyone have any ideas on why chainlink dipped to $12.65 exactly on CMC?

any theories on the signal?
I think it means not much is gonna be happening for a bit

>>60522572 (OP)
friction is just a bit of the equation
its also precieved value (BTC vs Monero)
its supply demand (of hoarding)
its revenue / income (from staking)
> if LINK pays 10% on staking the price will likely 3-5x to bring that down to 2-3%

>>60523351
I think you struck some good points but I do not fully agree.

“99.99% of LINK is unused, so why not sell it?”

This is a classical opportunity cost argument. If LINK is not mandatory to use within its ecosystem, or if the incentive to hold it is low, there will logically be selling pressure. But not all tokens need to be “used” continuously to be valuable. Think of stocks: you don’t actively use them, but you hold them because of (expected) dividends or price appreciation. For LINK, staking plays a central role in this as a capital lock-in mechanism, if the demand of oracles increase which is what we bet on, then more LINK will be transfered and there will be more staking.

Staking is more than just a reward. It acts as a collateral and reputation mechanisms for node operators. Chainlink’s new staking v0.2 program also introduced modular slashing, which increases the skin in the game effect. This makes LINK fundamentally more valuable than a purely speculative token.

So your argument ignores that USDT doesn’t necessarily undermine the value of LINK. What matters is that there is structural demand for LINK, as a fuel, collateral, or governance/voting instrument. Ethereum also uses USD pegged pricing, hell, a lot of smart conctract probably will directly peg to USD but that doesn’t make ETH worthless — as long as people need ETH for gas fees and network interactions.


quick example: https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/91507/pegging-a-contracts-price-to-usd

>>60525937


December 16, 2024: $30

June 18, 2025: $12

>>60527145
low iq take

high iq thread bump

>>60525937
>ETH

fair enough
good point, even

>>60522572 (OP)
You really thought you'd cooked with this fud, huh?

According to your logic nothing would have any value because it can simply be sold.

Holy fucking retarded, Batman.