has any user here ever done a study regarding the potential income of the LINK network once its up and running?
i never see discussed how much are companies paying for the data LINK will be able to provide. i also never see speculation regarding how will be the network used on year 01, year 02 etc...
any user that isnt a brainlet can comment on the topic here?
Other urls found in this thread:
etherscan.io
twitter.com
considering about 350,000,000 tokens being used in nodes on year 01 (i think this is reasonable), im having a hard time figuring out an estimative for node income.
i just cant find info regarding price of oracles service, and also cannot find info regarding actual volume / demand of this.
we really don't have any fucking clue. anyone who says otherwise is pulling numbers out of their ass.
bump, really interested in knowing more about this as well
0
You seriously didn't actually buy Link did you? Its a sick joke that biz likes to play on newfags. Ask yourself why no one talks about Link besides Veeky Forums? Reddit absolutely hates this project and there was a thread earlier where they rightfully were calling this shit a scam. I don't want to see you lose anymore money so sell and buy something useful like TRAC.
Return is based on demand for link service, not on link price. Therefore, estimate by approximating the yearly value of the network divided by cumulative node token supply
sure bud
well thats imo what makes LINK a super risky pick. really solid project, possibility of major partnerships, yeah, but no one knows the most important thing - how much income the network will be able to generate. we dont even have a vague figure
but to get some numbers we need to know A) how much companies pay for such services (which no one seems to know or care) and B) how much demand can we reasonably expect (ok, this one is harder to predict)
All I know is that there are entire floors of banks dedicated to contract arbitration and paper pushing. LINK will wipe them out.
If link processed $1T in smart contracts charged a 2% fee, brings in $20 B total.
Lets say 500 M in nodes, that brings us $40 each link per year. 8% yearly on $500 link, or 16% yearly on $250 link
a 2% fee is ridiculously high. it would be orders of magnitude under it
Alright, better hope for $10T in transactions then
fees wont be based on contract size. wil most likely be fixed based on service. so you shouldnt look at volume of smart contracts processed, but sheer number of smart contracts processed.
also, some smart contracts will pay to multiple nodes, some will just recquire one etc etc.
WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER
DO NOT UNDER ESTIMATE THE POWER OF POSITIVE THOUGHT! ESPECIALLY COLLECTIVE POSITIVE THOUGHT!!
THIS SHIRT IS GOING TO REACH $1,000 EASILY! HOLD THAT THOUGHT AND VISUALIZE IT IN YOUR MIND EVERYDAY AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE STARTING NOW AND IT WILL MANIFEST INTO REALITY. DO IT! I'M NOT JOKING!
VISUALIZE AS OFTEN AND AS DETAILED AS POSSIBLE!
any non-brainlet here? jesus american hours are the worst
Alright, lets work backwards then. If we want $40 per link per year, and we have 500 M in nodes, then we have to collect $20 B in fees. If link can only charge $1 per transaction, that would require 20 B transactions per year, 55 M transactions per day, spread across 10 K nodes with average 50 K link, that would bring it to 1100 transactions per node per day.
What is your hypothesis? Going to add any value to this thread OP?
There is something that not many people have noticed.
This is the oficial RequestNetwork wallet
>etherscan.io
Look at their Chainlink transactions. Specially the first one from 5 days ago.
>0.000000000000007315 Chainlink.
And now, look at this transaction from 3 days ago.
>7,315.910999999999992685 Chainlink
Do you notice something? 7315 seems to be the number in the first and second transactions but with different decimals. They are testing network functionality and interaction and THIS number could be the price per data request.
i think we can expect more like a few cents for request. has anyone looked into how much Oraclize charges? we can expect a bit higher than that.
definetly no, because A) prices will vary depending on requests and B) thats an absurd sum of money, even on today's price, for a data request
linkies so delusional they havent figured income possibilites yet lmao
yes they charge functionality
So .01 per data request. How many daily data requests will be transacted across all public and private blockchains in 2025? Hopefully at least a billion per year for chainlink's sake
thats why i said LINK will probably charge a bit more, because the service will be better (and more complex)
nice
google has 1.2 trillion searches per year. Chainlink needs 5 trillion queries @ .01 each to justify $ 1K link
>t. doesn't understand that the vast majority of linkies will be locked up in staking
current pricing reflects 2.5 billion queries per year @ .01 each 500 M locked in nodes.
actually the more link locked up, the lower the yearly ROI per link in the nodes
What would be a reasonable number of queries/hour? I imagine it would be drastically different depending on the contract, but wouldn't some require a high level of precision to, say, properly track current market rates?
I'm trying to find how often the average oraclize contract makes a query, any idea?
If we can expect high velocity query requests, there will be exponentially more than google searches
speculation would bring it up anyway
don’t underestimate the power of a global market
Because link is vapor ware. Biz tards hopes and dreams will be shattered.
that gift is gold
You are a MANIAC!
dude... SO ARE YOU
you are in every fucking thread saying the exact same shit
"the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"
>he thinks it's the same two people posting each time
That's cute.
Link is a shit coin that will never be worth anything tangible.
I will say this every time I see you pajeets shill
LINK 10000 US DOLLARS EOY
Link 11111 dollars eoy
>anything tangible
its already worth 50 cents you fucking absolute cock-face, fuck off faggot
>he thinks the "so are you" post isn't pasta.
you have to go back.