Name one reason this coin isnt undervalued relative to ICO price.
Hint: you cant.
> b-b-but muh biweekly updates
blog.request.network
> b-b-but the team isnt growing
literally just added 3 devs and a new COO
blog.request.network
> b-b-but muh abandonware
requestpayments demo launched yesterday
github.com
accounts.request.network
> b-b-but muh coinmarketcap meme graph
pointing out that req lost a substantial amount of its value, vs fiat, is not an argument.
the fact that literal scam coins have lost more than req (a coin with an actual demonstrable use case and successful projects built on top of it, with YC backing, industry partnerships, even pipes to other meme services everyone here loves like chainlink) tells you all you need to know. its incredibly undervalued.
i see people on here defend iexec every other day on the basis of 'its undervalued, its under ico price!!!! cloud computing revolution!!!!!' like any serious developer or enterprise client would deploy their code over rlc instead of aws lambda. no matter how much you try to larp as a buterin acolyte the reality is cryptocurrencies have a single bulletproof usecase and thats not as stakeholding crypto assets, its as currencies.
we are in the pre-dotcom boom stage of crypto development and req has all the ingredients to become paypal 2.0.
yes its cheap right now. i know this is biz and we love to buy high sell low but if you want sustainable fucking gains look at whats right in front of you.
tl;dr: dont blame me next time you fall for some pajeet scam like chx or lto,with no use case, when the first consumer ready crypto payments solution had been shilled on here endlessly and you ignored it.
It's going to be delisted from Binance in April.
>he thinks binance delists based on volume
user i...
Why the token has value?
T. 10k holder
Req no longer needs a token since V2 is centralized
RLC is more undervalued than this token with little to no development
req is positioned to become the paypal of cryptocurrencies. instead of paypal fees req is burned with each transaction. hence req will rise in value over time, and in proportion to market adoption.
req is working with iexec, qsp and chainlink to create cross-blockchain integrations. it has strong institutional support and VC backing and a great team. oh and unlike link it actually has a working mainnet (kek)
better question is why is this coin so undervalued
How much usage does it have? Why will people use it in the future? How many people even use crypto as payment? Why do we need Request lmao. Is it some bookkeeping thing with 3 entry accounting, a fish supply chain tracker or what is it? It's a scam.
No. Unless it is his friend Justin, he delists on team transparency, usability and communication. REQ failed to deliver their roadmap, got rid of biweekly updates and are basically doing nothing after $30 million in funding.
You might be a butthurt bagholder, whatever, but rest assured he's aware of this, you know.
All buzzwords. "Great team", "VC backing", "institutional support", "the next PayPal". Just look at the chart. It's dead. No interest from insiders because they left. Literally last bagholders giving up and selling. Now look at LINKs chart. There's clearly still interest. Fundamentally it's sound, because smart contracts due save money. Crypto on the other hand creates more hassle and maybe saves you 1% while creating a lot more problems. Normies don't give a shit about buying with crypto if they get cashback. Decentralised stable coins will be used in the future I bet.
It's really baffling to me that people who have browsed Jow Forums for more than a week haven't yet done research on smartcontracts and Chainlink and haven't yet gone all in with their crypto portfolio. You are all wasting time with your shitcoins who hype on twitter.
the chainlink coin doesnt actually do anything. you dont need it for the chainlink technology (which btw is partnered with req as an oracle provider). req gets burned which each transaction and rises in value in proportion to market adoption.
yes market adoption is lagging, the market is down. pointing to obvious shill / whale manipulation-driven LINK pricing fluctuation does not dispute that.
XD
> How much usage does it have?
irrelevant but it has a very healthy and active dev community
> Why will people use it in the future? How many people even use crypto as payment?
argentinas currency devalues 50% year over year. if you were an argentinean, would you prefer to pay for your keurig pods over amazon with your rapidly depreciating argentinian pesos over paypal, or a relatively stable crypto with single-touch req payment and easy, square-like UI?
>has a very healthy and active dev community
You mean the reddit mod that created 75% of all REQ apps?
>subreddit community engagement is bad for development and market adoption
user...
Literally this. I bought a few K because I feel it’s undervalued and YC is very picky when it comes to projects.
As usual people will fomo when it’s past 0.30 cents.
People in countries with shitty currencies put their money in dollar or spend their money asap on stuff they need. Cryptos usage in those countries is bigger than others, but that doesn't justify the big market caps. Why would anyone need Request to pay with Bitcoin? And no nobody is going to accept some obscure shitcoins. It's gonna be either BTC, LTC, ETH or XRP. Most cases BTC and ETH. Getting Request set up on websites is gonna be near impossible because Amazon or any other big company doesn't want to get associated to a literal white collar scam(watch The China Hustle maybe you'll finally get redpilled).
>healthy and active dev community
wew
You sound like either a LINK marine doing his fud or an actual req bagholder which is really really sad desu. I'm guessing the latter.
Pajeet faggot shill. RLC is far superior in every aspect
> nearly impossible
> woocommerce addon already available
> literally copy paste a code from their website
Imagine being this retarded.
rlc is in a different market space and is a partner of req, literally the iexec logo is at the bottom of req's website. if you want to shill RLC fine, you should want REQ to succeed to. it's not a competition bag boy
what about the random coin burn ? :))
>Getting Request set up on websites is gonna be near impossible because Amazon or any other big company doesn't want to get associated to a literal white collar scam
what? req would just need to act as a service for square or something similar. why would REQ need to connect to amazon for it to succeed? amazon doesn't even support BTC right now
and why do i sound like a LINK marine? im not fudding any other coins or boosting LINK
You guys are hopeless. I'm gonna leave you be. Good luck with your adoption.
clearly you have not researched Chainlink thoroughly.
LINKs primary purpose is to transfer data. It is currently the only token designed to do such things. It is the only coin that can be used for that purpose in the Chainlink eco systems which means data transfer between smartcontracts and realworld data.
and the coin itself does ... ?
>Name one reason this coin isnt undervalued relative to ICO price.
Over a year later the coin does nothing they said it would do in the ICO whitepaper.
this is pajeet tier FUD. have you ever worked on a computationally complex project before? one necessitating fiduciary responsibility and financial security in an emerging market? overhauling the digial payments ecosystem is nothing to balk at. this is a long term hold.
if you believe in the underlying technology then the fact that the team is still keeping rapidly apace of its goals should be more important than releasing something shoddy just to say "we hit our >goals xD". that's not how quality software is developed.
YC isn't that picky if they let that shitty LEDU coin become a startup
Literally none of your points are common FUD.
The token economics of this project are absolutely horrible. Thanks to this project I legitimately stay away from every project that advertises token burn. It’s just a method to force deflation on their token that provides ZERO utility.
I still have a small stack that I’d rather see it worth $0 then sel at this point. I bought 1,000 I think for $200 and it is now worth $20. It’s on its last dying breath and something needs to change quickly for it to stay afloat.
There's no real reason to argue because you're obviously a paid shill but i'm going to anyway
>pajeet tier FUD
It's not pajeet tier FUD if the team couldn't fulfil any investor promises they set out to. If they were over-promising and they knew it it was very manipulative disingenuous. If they thought they would be able to do the things they set out in the time frames they laid out it shows just how immature and uninformed they really were.
>keeping rapidly apace of its goals
They are over 6 weeks late on even a rebrand which has nothing to do with technology blockchain technology. It's literally just a new logo and website. That should indicate something to you.
>bought 1,000 I think for $200 and it is now worth $20
Not doubling down and cost averaging by half for $20... nigga wtf is wrong with you, lmao
That guy explained it horribly. The token itself is just an erc20 token with erc677 functionality that allows token transfers to contain a data payload. The token itself has no special properties outside of that and it exsists to provide utility to the chainlink network.
The chainlink network itself is being created to facilitate nodes acting as oracles. Anyone providing a contract to the network needs to pay out their node operators using the link token but most importantly node operators need to stake the value of the contract to be held in escrow until the data can be reconciled. If there was no staking mechanism, a malicious node operator would have incentive to Sybil the network to game the outcome of a contract. If this malicious node wanted to game a contract but had his token staked in escrow, there would be no incentive to act this way as any finacial gain made through sybiling the network would simply be lost through the amount staked.
>if they were over-promising and they knew it it was very manipulative disingenuous
kek yeah, any startup that learns it's overpromising its deliverables in an untested is 'manipulative.' the takeaway here is they should perhaps hire a better agile coach, maybe their new COO will do so.
this is not a question of organizational maturity. most organizations arent fundamentally rethinking digital payments. schlep blindness is not a crime. neither is persistence.
> They are over 6 weeks late on even a rebrand which has nothing to do with technology blockchain technology. It's literally just a new logo and website. That should indicate something to you.
it indicates that they are taking the rebrand seriously. meanwhile chainlink has successfully switched logos to a hexagon and has no mainnet and a token that literally does nothing yet gets shilled by whales on here endlessly. breddy bullish value proposition.
Req token arent shares of the company. No dividends at all just specukation. At the moment request network can achieve his goal and req token to be worthless. The question is what makes REQ crucial in request network ambitions?
>the next paypal
You don't understand Req at all.
> At the moment request network can achieve his goal and req token to be worthless.
If it's going to be permissionless to use, an anti-spam mechanism is required. Req burn as fee is that anti-spam mechanism.
>he didn't read the whitepaper
Automated accounting, which extends to things like automated taxation and simplified auditing is a far more important aspect of Req than any simple payment system with autoconversion of currency. When banks have stablecoins on ethereum, any DEX running in a high TPS 2nd layer can be used as a backend to create a simple "paypal 2.0" with an autoconversion mechanism.