>>60796166
>>60796192
>Remember CELO? There was a governance proposal to bring Chainlink onto the Celo Network for a whopping 5,980,314 CELO over 3 years (that’s ~2M CELO / year or $850k / year at current prices).
>This gives us roughly an estimated 360,000 transactions per year for seven price feeds. So far, the Celo Network averages around 20 gwei for 2023. A Chainlink price feed update currently costs roughly 135,000 gas. At current gas levels a single Chainlink update transaction will cost roughly 0.0027 CELO or roughly $0.0012 (sometimes even less). With our estimated 360,000 yearly transactions we’re looking at gas costs of 972 CELO or roughly $408.24. If we assume the network activity increases tenfold we’re at 9720 CELO or $4082.4.
>I could 10x these numbers again to 97200 CELO and it doesn’t even come remotely close to the 2 Million CELO ask of Chainlink. I could attribute 100k for personnel and infra costs and that still doesn’t justify asking for over roughly $850k a year. Networks like CELO are getting milked. There is no easy way to put this, but since Chainlink Labs wants to stop dumping their own token to subsidise price feeds, pay node operators and their salaries, they’re now looking elsewhere for that money and putting a heafty profit margin on top.
>I’d love to say that Celo is a single case, but it is even one of the lowest numbers that are circulating. There are networks out there being asked for 8 figure sums per year to get Chainlink to deploy there. So if you’re out there wondering why Chainlink services aren’t available on a particular chain yet it is most likely because that network refuses to get scammed.
Not sure if this is trustworthy, as it's written by a competitor, but can a smart Anon calculate roughly what Chainlink is making from all its users?
Source:
https://medium.com/@ugurmersin/chainlink-price-feeds-vs-api3-managed-dapis-and-the-state-of-defi-227ac1f56a18
