>over 30% of Defi is secured under chainlink
>>60267734token not needed though
30% of nothing is still nothing.
>>60267768It directly correlates with the price of a LINK token. If the total value of defi locked is at 500 billion and LINK maintains a 30% secured value share, the effective price would be 85 dollars
>>60267852cry more linkchud
>>60267914No this is a warning. If defi grows and LINK maintains its 30% total value secured share. The price doesnt go down unless defi as a whole does.You wont see bottoms like this in an established system
WOWOWOWOWOWOW LOOK AT THAT!!!>30%!!!GOOGLE HAS A 90% SHARE IN THE GLOBAL SEARCH ENGINE MARKETI FINALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE HIDING STRATEGY IS...ITS CHAINLINK HIDING HOW LITTLE ADOPTION THEY HAVEITS CHAINLINK HIDING FROM THEIR COMMUNITY THE TRUTH ABOUT HOW WIDELY-USED THEIR PRODUCTS AREITS CHAINLINK HIDING THEIR TRUE MARKET SHARE WITH MISLEADING CUMULATIVE INFOGRAPHICS
>>60268122>LINK securing 4x more in USD than pythYou know what happens to the price of the token regardless of what percent is holds? If the whole defi market hits 500 billion in total value locked, and LINK secures 30% at most. Each LINK token would be worth atleast 85 bucks.
PRICE PREDICTIONSWith chainlinks historical influence being at 60-70% TVS for DEFI the TVL for that would need to be>At $200 billion Defi TVL, LINK could reach $42.01>At $300 billion Defi TVL, LINK could reach $63.00>At $476 billion Defi TVL, LINK could reach $100Market cap = TVS ÷ 4.35(Historical ratio) = 120B ÷ 4.35 = 27.59 billionPrice = 27.59B ÷ circulating supply = current price
>>60268200>If
>>60268410Zion market research forecasts Defi to grow to 232 billion by 2030 a CAGR of 42.6%Fortune business insights pegs it at 337 billion from 59.6, a CAGR of 28.2%
>>60268200>>60268392Delusional. I hold link but all these price estimates are silly. The relationship obviously won't be linear, and even then it's a bad way to predict the token price in such a clown market that exists almost entirely on speculation.
>>60268484Its not linear but the lower the historical ratio goes it implies greater adoption regardless of market cap.Its liklier for a price hike at a ratio of 2 than its historical ATH of 4. Currently sitting at 3. The more TVS secured, depending on the services used means more tokens are being used.Its like an amazon subscription, the first 30 days you can try out prime and cancel without paying. For basic data and price feeds doesnt require purchasing a token, but many other features routinely do.>data feedsNo>VRFYes>automationYes>functionsYes>oracle callsNoThe reason with all of these adoptions happening and NOT driving up the price is because only their basic solutions are being used as of this moment
>>60268735These things make zero revenue compared to the token dumps Sergey does. That's why it doesn't go up.
>>60268943Basic price fees dont require buying the token, but if you do you get a 10% discount.They have their foot in the door but somehow have to convince these partnerships that VRF and automation are critical tools to have. Those features require token purchasing
>>60267734the price will skyrocket with the DTCC bringing capital onchain, Chainlink will secure 100 PERCENT of tradfi in defi, causing insane appreciation in price of the ticker: LINK tokenwgmi 10 more days
>>60268978I looked it up and most likely the DTCC great collateral expirement wont demonstrate CCIP or LINK directlyTheyre focusing on their in house tools like hyperledger, but its chain agnostic and perfectly allows for CCIP integrationSo not likely
>>60267742Meanwhile XRP (worth x15 times as LINK)
>>60267734cool but price? oh and chart? :}
>>60269047Heres your chart chang
>>60269051Now do defillama bridge volume :^)
>>60269051Also hilarious how redstone and pyth are gaining fast on CL. Before long they will have surpassed it and you losers would be in disbelief, will be one of the most hilarious moments this board has to offer. Another thing is the TVS is vacuous, completely meaningless. It wouldn't be that high without the subsidies, so you can also say the higher the TVS the lower the LINK price because the subsidies get dumped on the market.
>>60268200>If the whole defi market hits 500 billionImagine believing that a market composed 100% of dog, cat, shit and fart tokens can reach 500 billions.
>>60267734it could secure just as much with $link at 10 cents
>>60267768>>60267819>>60267914>>60268122>>60268410>>60269047>>60270136>>60270215>>60270218why do you hate us so much for so long
>>60270259because link is a memecoin with an 8 fig marketing budget so they can dump on retards(which is their actual business)if the market was rational is would stay under $1 until they a) generate significate yearly revenue b) holders have exposure to that revenue
>>60270288why is the same rigour only applied to LINK? Bitcoin hardly makes any revenue, not to speak of doge, xrp, cardano etc. Everything but LINK is allowed to pump purely on speculation?
>>60270378every coin has a different value thesis. btc doesnt need to produce revenue, its the most fairly distributed coin secured with the most hashratexrp is of course the biggest scam in crypto, with probably mid 8 to 9 figure marketing budget with infinite paid shills on tiktok/youtube/twitter/4chan. they put a masterclass on how to run a scami honestly dont mind people holding link if they understand its strictly a branding play(similar to $uni). with the goal being to sell at peak euphoria and then buy the inevitable -90% dipbut their psyop nonsense is super annoying and dishonest
