[no linkies allowed]
I read that it has just $145.173.496 mcap
This shit has a big potential, definitely DeFi related, even if it gets in top 30 it will do a 5-6x or maybe more.
It does what chainlink does and there's no Sergey Nazarov.
Am i missing something? Please tell me
>It does what chainlink does and there's no Sergey Nazarov.
There is chef nomi a known scammer
its like chainlink except it doesn't have a working product, secures $0 of value and runs on its own blockchain for no reason
and the devs have been caught plagiarizing form the chainlink codebase
>and runs on its own blockchain for no reason
Ethereum is dogshit, that’s a valid enough reason for me.
That said, I still think Link is better. But fuck Vitalik.
chef nomi is from sushi, not band
Actually being an erc-20 token is a chainlink flaw
Plagiarizing code is not a crime, if you change and improve it.
Bands purpose is to see which crypto is partnering with them so you can stay away from those scams, unironically useful af.
solid project that got the backing of a strong network of stakeholders. As for the price, it has a huge upside potential (~20M circulating supple, 100M total) sitting at $7 currently. Linkies hate to admit it, but band will pump with link 100%.
are you somehow salty, are you in a team? Is your soccer club winning?
I don't give a literal fuck about teams and marines.
Is Band a legit project? Then it has a big potential.
Is it a scam? Care to explain why?
Yes, if you look at many lame old shitcoins doing nothing, they have like 7 times the m.cap of this.
If there's no shady people behind this, healthy comminity and legit project, well, it seems that we'll see another big pump very soon.
From a marketing point of view, eth killer #9001 of oracles. I wouldn't know how to shill it to anybody without mentioning LINK and lying about potential market penetration. Will pump and dump with the market. Do to mc and supply, could see a nice unsustainable pump.
No one is going to actually use this shit, but i agree it could pump since it's following link. It'll always be 2nd place to link.
I literally don't care about anything except making $, does BAND have any organic pumps left in it?
[no linkies allowed]
Look, seriously, i like Link, but it reached its peak at this stage.
I know that you guys believe that it's like the god of crypto and have homosexual feelings for its Ceo, but its an erc-20 token, its actual success is related to what Vitalik shitcoin will achieve in the future.
Nice thing about the shitcoins market is that you can fuck with many women, you don't have to marry your investment.
I keep some linkies but i want to put my money in other projects too, expecially if they have room for more gains.
>organic pump
>crypto
this isn't anything that will ever be used on a big enough scale, so no.
Forget it. You react like the eth killers react to eth. Always assuming somebody is an eth shill. I made good moey with BAND when the oracle media hype started. Would I buy back, no
$145.173.496 m.cap
Link actual m.cap is 26 times band m.cap
If it does what it does and there are no shady things behind band, hell YES if it will have more organic pumps.
I don't like eth very much and i think that being an erc-20 token is a chainlink flaw.
Scalability? Let's not mention the gas fees then.
The point is not if there will be an eth killer, the point is that there will be several eth-like protocols, and they will probably work at the same time, i don't believe in a "winner takes it all" scenario.
I hate to talk about LINK again because it will trigger you, but LINK is not limited to eth. BAND on the other hand sits on its own chain and this makes it less flexible, marketing wise. While you can shill one as being "operated" on multiple chains, BAND will always be BAND.
>I don't believe in the winner takes it all
Sorry, hyper capitalistic environments like crypto tend to go monopolistic, it is close to a zero sum game and not some democratic hippy trippy land like the idealists think. If btc and its copies with extras, eth and its killers with extras didn't taught you that, get into an other space. ETH is objectively dirt, but it will always be THE SC platform. BTC is objectively dirt shit, but it will laways be THE CC. That said, if BAND should manage to network better and get more partners that can of course be used to market it. If nothing drastically changes BAND will always be number 2, which is not bad if all you want is to shill it and pump and dump it, and make money.
I mean TRX will never be much, and Justin still made it
I told i own some link, not a link hater, but if you just focus on link you will lose the possible gains here.
Link went in top10, what do you expect, that it flips eth? Ok it can do more but band has more room for growth in my opinion.
There are lots of useless projects in the top30.
The question is: is there room for band in the top30? If the answer is yes, then we have to expect another 5x sooner or later.
Even if it's number 2, well, the potential growth is bigger.
>Sorry, hyper capitalistic environments like crypto tend to go monopolistic
I doubt, if you think about that: the scalability issue can be solved by using tons of blockchains, not an hyper-capable one.
And, why one should pay extreme fees on a saturated blockchain when he can change in another shitcoin, move the money with lower fees, then change again?
the only reason band gained traction is because cz endorsed it. band was just another oracle competitor to link like tellor, witnet, oracalize and many others.
Authority figures in crypto are a huge problem because they undermine fundamentals and corrupt honest marketing especially in terms of a China hustle
Certainly it has more potential growth and I agree that do to market cap and supply it should see a nice pump, probably into the 30s, if there should be another oracle hyping, but it will not stay there? In my opinion no, and I'm personally not looking for unsustainable pump and dumps, and my 5x and more, I will get somewhere else with a higher probability.
>the scalability issue can be solved by using tons of blockchains
Could be, but it isn't the case. eths retarded fees didn't kept any food token hunters from paying them, nobody of the platform and sc providers even got close to the idea to use any other sc platform. That is the nature of capitalism, the strongest, in that case best marketed chain wins, there is no shred of communitarianism left in crypto, 2012 is long gone. The idealists lost, the capitalists won.
>What is a Chicom scam.
You definitely did more research than me, if the fundamentals are good and there are no problems, it will definitely reach the top30.
Then it will maybe be good to switch to another project, i'm not marrying my investments.
>That is the nature of capitalism, the strongest, in that case best marketed chain wins
I don't know, it's not a matter of industrial standards, it's a digital world, so there's the possibility to integrate all the blockchains and make them communicate, it could be a welcomed idea if the single actors realize that single scalability is not that easy to achieve, and it's better if many similar blockchains exist and work together.
Is it a commie thing? Doubt, if it's just a good solution.
When and if the market will move trillions of dollars, people will actually use those shit-chains and expect that they work properly.
Chef nomi steals uniswap code and Sorawit steals Chainlink code. Also its been proven that Sorawit is Chef Nomi
"how many coincidences do we need before its mathmatically impossible?" -Q
>its been proven that Sorawit is Chef Nomi
where
Look through the Top 30, and in that regard the 40s 50s and 60s, there are a bunch of projects that have more backers, bigger and more active fan boys and better sales pitches. It wont be an easy ride for Band, but if there is going to be an other "The Oracle Problem solves so many fundamental problems" run, it will do it. More conservatively, if I would still hold Band bags I would aim for mid 40s.
>a digital world, so there's the possibility to integrate all the blockchains and make them communicate
you don't hold any quant by chance? The idea is already there and if it can be solved in a user and dev friendly way, I see nothing stopping it, but for the time being, it is different chains with specific purposes competing for marketshare. It isn't even so much the chains, it is the users that will flock to what is used by everybody else and the backers of a certain chain looking to make it the industry standard as you say to grab as much market share as possible
>Commie thing
The commie thing is thinking that because there are so many why not use them all and have a happy little family and share market share equally. That will simply not happen in a free market where people are free to compete, and the theory and reality has shown, free markets have a tendency to become monopolies because bigger fish eat the smaller to sustain their growth and get rid of potential competition endangering their survival.
Like amazon or google could share the market with all the smaller, but they wont do and have no incentive to do it.
>The commie thing is thinking that because there are so many why not use them all
You don't get my point, the point is that no one is and maybe can never be capable of running a real world scenario in which tons of people move money and expect to not pay 20% in fees or wait forever or a transaction.
Look at the state of the blockchains now, a bunch of good ideas, ok, but no one is really using them, and some little peak in usage makes them explode.
So, if scalability is a myth / can't be achieved / is too expensive / takes too much time, the best case scenario can be to use tons of decent blockchains at the same time to run the world smoothly.
>you don't hold any quant by chance?
No, i've seen it shilled on here too much so i thinked it was a scam
scalability isn't a myth, it can just not be done on a layer 1, except if vitalik proves everybody wrong with eth 2.0. For now Layer 2 or off-chain would make eth for example scalable, but neither miners nor hodlers have an interest doing it.
>Nobody is using them
There you are wrong, just because you don't see what happens in the back-end doesn't mean it doesn't happen, IBMs Hyperledger is already actively used by companies around the world
>Quant a scam
Everything is a scam to get you to spend your hard earned cash on. But if quant succeeds in its interoperability quest and keeps getting backed by actual banks, and not fucked over by them, it might go to the moon, especially looking how dlt is adopted by banks to comply to new regulator requirements and trying to gain back lost trust, and if one expects every bank consortium using their own private dlt. It is a high risk gamble
>IBMs Hyperledger is already actively used by companies around the world
LOL
>There you are wrong, just because you don't see what happens in the back-end doesn't mean it doesn't happen
You realize how much blockchain is used now and how much will be required, expecially if different services will be integrated?
I would say that now it's used maybe at 1%, but i could be wrong, it could be 0,1% too.
Vitalik is actually full of shit, everyone is, and market knows that these are the early stages, the crypto world is not ready for a fully operational transition into a working thing, it will require years, and maybe the solution i've suggested will be easier to achieve.
Saddest thing about link success will be seeing those chinks succeed by being a scammy chink copy. I would have rooted for witnet or even tellor as the pointless number 2 but band is really garbage.
>seething and business don't go together
remember