Thread 60852357

So, about these "quadrillions"....

if i was on the team i'd be pushing to go ahead and shutdown this tracker account like they did the last one

>FUTURE OF FINANCE!!!
HOW MANY HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS WERE WASTED ON THIS USELESS, JUNK PRODUCT?

>>60852357 (OP)
>Transactions: 780
Hahhahahhahahhahahahhahahahhahha

Sergey is a liar and a cheat. Every single word that comes out of his mouth is pure artifice

wtf no wonder the price is going nowhere

for those that need a refresher, here's the last post of the former ccip tracker account

weird how this new account claimed to be a different person despite very similar logo and format

i predict the new account goes the same way and is shut down to prevent criticism

upon further analysis, it appears their cut of fees is actually regressing

here's a post from april where 11m value is transferred and their fees are $1,236

compare to >>60852364 above and similar value is only netting $921

SHHHHHHH, IGNORE THE CCIP "REVENUE" AND FOCUS ON THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS IN OFFCHAIN REVENUE CL LABS CLAIMS THEY ARE BRINGING IN. BUT DONT ASK FOR THEM TO PROVIDE ANY PROOF OR SHOW THE RECEIPTS
>TRUTH>TRUST
FOR EVERYONE BUT CL LABS

i'll never forget that one time an anon beat you to the second post and everyone else got sloppy seconds. anyone got that screencap?

>>60852367
>capslock anon has switched bearish again
Bottom signal

>>60852465
GOOD TO SEE YOU TOO, BROTHER.

>>60852450
>FOCUS ON THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS IN OFFCHAIN REVENUE CL LABS CLAIMS THEY ARE BRINGING IN

did they ever actually say that? i've only seen random anons make that claim

if CLL said it, it would clearly be fraud. i think CLL is smarter than that to keep the scam going as long as possible

fuck all stinks
hate em all
think they're dumb and stupid and weird

>>60852450
>SHHHHHHH, IGNORE THE CCIP "REVENUE" AND FOCUS ON THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS IN OFFCHAIN REVENUE

lol it's hilarious seeing lower level cult boyscouts with like 500 link bragging about some offshore company they hold no equity in making money, allegedly

how does someone become so gullible

>>60852461
>i'll never forget that one time an anon beat you to the second post and everyone else got sloppy seconds. anyone got that screencap?

i remember that
got a good laugh
thats why they called him fast eddie

>>60852491
>did they ever actually say that? i've only seen random anons make that claim

yes the main channel has referenced the revenue here, as has the blog and middle managers catfish and clg

>>60852357 (OP)
If CCIP is so bad, how come SBI is adopting it for settlement?

>>60852580
>settlement
You mean RSS feed?

>>60852600
No I mean settlement.
For cross-border payments and foreign exchange.

>>60852568
ah i see, they're referencing total revenue lifetime. i think their lifetime revenue is around 200m, while they've dumped billions worth of the tokens.

clever marketing from them, people will assume they mean yearly like they're hyperliquid

>>60852357 (OP)
Yes, quadrillions, that's right.

>>60852357 (OP)
Quadrillions of HR roasties

fuck
all
stinks

>>60852357 (OP)
The quadrillions are there... you just have to IMAGINE them

>>60852383
SirGay

>>60852639
They use their data feeds to facilitate the structure of payments, they do not use it to settle.

>>60852450
Lame fud. They're buying $1m back every week with offchain revenue against the $60m they bring in monthly by selling link tokens.

>>60852357 (OP)
CCIP cannot make bridges obsolete because they are at a "good enough" state where the chance of an exploit has gotten too low (but it still exists) to make people go out of their comfort zone
btw the total current daily volume of bridge usage is around $1 bil according to defillama.com, meaning CCIP represents around 1% of the piechart which isn't horrible

of course the main use-case of CCIP was never envisioned to be providing bridge services or easy swaps to shitcoiners and casino degenerates; it is meant for institutional usage once the regulatory green light is given to firms and banks
finance titans would absolutely not tolerate any exposure to 3rd party risk while in cross-chain movements so CCIP was designed precisely with that in mind

>>60854335
>Yes, quadrillions, that's right.

that was two years ago
ccip daily revenue is around $900


>>60855649
do you hear yourself

in what world does a group of investors who have invested $6B into a company get euphoric about annual stock buyback of $52M

>>60856217
>it is meant for institutional usage once the regulatory green light is given to firms and banks

the cult will still be using this excuse in 2030, but at that point only the biggest saps will still buy it

tell me what specific regulations are preventing them from using it now
you have the us president launching memecoins and the cult has been telling us they were writing the laws themselves

>>60856443
$900 daily revenue more than: bitcoin, etherium, xrp, litecoin, shitcoins, fartcoins,

>>60852364
So calculating your picture ~$80 of fees per $1,000,000 of value transferred. So 1 quadrillion of value transferred would equate to 80 billion dollars of fees.

So this would make chainlink easily $1k per token if Sergey’s prediction of quadrillions comes true

>>60856460
>the president being a retard means banks will suddenly start being retards too
Lmao. I guess you didn't catch that 2 banks denied service to Mr. President over his antics. Banks are extremely conservative (no, not that way) and notoriously slow.