Is REQ the most undervalued crypto out there right now?

I hold both

whats the other 4? OMG VEN LINK RLC?

Attached: 1516303891402.jpg (922x654, 35K)

Wait until $6k BTC at least my bro. Be patient. True capitulation has not set in yet.

Attached: pepeforest.jpg (736x815, 35K)

For me: XMR, BTC, ETH... basically that's it for me atm

Thanks, i appreciate it

It is completely ridiculous it is down in the 90s on CMC. It's fine it allows smart people to buy it cheaply and be literal millionaires when it inevitably takes off. Y Combinator involvement alone should make you buy. A few calls and suddenly pay by request is on all your favorite websites.

It's close. But 5,700 will be it.

nope. universa is

This is exactly my reasoning...partnering with Governments, Y Combinator, PwC the auditing and account I mean how in the name of fuck is this so low... The volume on Binance is non existant even in this hellish pit just cannot see why I'm the only one accumulating... feel like I must be missing something

>it doesn't do shit

It is pretty much a more advanced, more decentralized version of OmiseGO you spaz.

request is seasonal coin.
they are mostly being sold in winter when people buy them to heat their homes. now, not that much maybe for some bbq here and there. it might spike for 4th of july but that's it

ripple is the most undervalued crypto. req costs exactly wha it should

but none of those do anything...

Its a pajeet bro, no one wants pajeet shit

Attached: unnamed.jpg (900x900, 75K)

Ripple has a 20 billion dollar marketcap... It's still number 3 on CMC, I agree that it's probably undervalued but not as much as REQ

You're missing nothing. You're just early to the party.
You'll have to sir around awkwardly for a while with people you have no interest in and it'll be boring.
But once the party gets going, you'll be getting your dick sucked by a different 10/10 every half hour.

same

I dunno if I should wait some more to dump it more or just accumulate like a madman now

>coindesk.com/blockchain-token-velocity-problem/

no Request is an interesting project no doubt, but the REQ token is garbage and has no reason to exist. Article helps to explain

Look at it in the positive.

If you're so show this is something massive in a few years (I also believe) then you literally have so much time to pick up an insane amount of REQ and shitpost on Jow Forums in 4/5 years about how you quit your job and get to dump your bags on late comers during the next bubble

To take fees, for funding and governance? It does totally have reason to exist...

Damn dude hahahahahahaha

Next level

one of the dumbest and most unnecessary crypto projects out there, that only Jow Forums autist and redditors baghold

to take fees is not a reason to exist. they can take fees in ETH or even USD. Governance? lmao thats gold

>they can take fees in USD
then what happens if somebody makes a Dapp on the request platform that becomes the most used app, and they charge ETH fees instead of REQ. The foundation makes nothing
Use your brain retard

They do take fees in USD and ETH pajeet. DYOR ffs.

so wtf is the token for then lol?

The token is bought with the fees and burnt to drive the price up

that makes no sense. The foundation can take a cut of the fees regardless of what its denominated in. Fuckin retard

made up use case. thanks for proving my point. REQ was a fundraiser token nothing more. Does paypal have a token?

no wonder this thing hasn't mooned most people are too dumb to understand what it even is. research some more brainlet

no it hasnt mooned because non-retards realize that theres no reason for the token to exist. they needed fundraising to kickstart their project that needs no token whatsoever. why the fuck are tokens bought and then burned with fees? its just to keep u retarded bagholders happy

How is he wrong though? The only use case of the Req token is to be burnt as fee.
They could just take ETH as fee, but they need to reward their investors for now.

175K REQ - comfy as fuck.

>REQ
>undervalued
That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

Attached: efwj0Pn.jpg (1280x720, 47K)

holy shit thats nice.
thats my goal. 55k so far

'While it is built on the blockchain ledger of Ethereum, Request aims to be independent from other currencies,
monetary policies, or technological choices so that we build the most robust system possible.'

Hurr why is BNB bought and burned? Hurr what reason does BNB have to exist.
Oh wait I bet you don't have any BNB either. Stay poor nigger. The token is representation of network success, it price increases the more the network is used. Burning is built into the contract, it's not done by the developers. It automatically buys peoples bags itself and drives the price up with its profits. It's as if when you own REQ you metaphorically own the network, wide adoption leading to high priced REQ automatically. That's as far as I am going to spoonfeed you brainlets.

Request will have to remain flexible and scalable, this being one of the major challenges of
decentralized systems (as we can see with Bitcoin16 Segwit, or the Ethereum management of Ice age ...). We
wish to separate the governance of our community from the one of Ethereum and avoid a sub-governance
that would allow every Ethereum token holders to decide on the future of this community

Request is agnostic in terms of currency. We are creating a system that should not be dependent on the
monetary policy of another currency. Request should be as independent as possible from ETH inflation or
deflation

yes

wow so convincing

>metaphorically own the network

So what happens when people realize that they dont actually own any part of the network and that it's all metaphorical?

...

thats bullshit. theyll be taking a flat fee thats based on USD. Inflation of ETH wouldnt matter since they'd be paying the USD equivalent anyways

90 req have been burned sofar, much progress.....

My understanding of 'governance' is that if REQ wants to move/upgrade blockcahins it needs it's own tokens. REQ says it wants to be around for hundreds of years and this is only possible with it's own token. The token will rise in price because of token burn and because of expectation of token burn + confidence in the company. It combines speculation and working product hence why I see it as severely undervalued

We
wish to separate the governance of our community from the one of Ethereum and avoid a sub-governance
that would allow every Ethereum token holders to decide on the future of this community

In the process of scaling the Request network, there is a strong probability that we will use a solution such
as the Plasma Chains. In these solutions, a specific token help to incentivize the avoidance of Byzantine18
states and maximize security. The token is used as a POS (Proof of Stake) and stakers are disincentivized
against Byzantine behaviors or faults as that would cause a loss in value of the token.
Using a token is the most flexible and independent way to conceptualize a system that will need consensus
and security to evolve in the long term

do you really not question this at all? Theyre jumping through all kinds of hoops to try and convince you that theres a need for a token. How does the Request Network needs governing? Also need I remind you that governance aka voting rights is a feature of a security?

It's like BNB, you metaphorically own Binance, in the sense that Binance's success and profits are linked to BNB. If Binance stays alive and profiting then BNB keeps going up. If Binance exit scams you are left with bags. But overall it should go up due to mass burning as long as it stays alive. Both go up at a faster rate depending on usage. More usage = more fees used to purchase the token.

Unlike Binance the project isn't finished yet but will be totally revolutionary in the crypto space. It has the PwC partnership, the best partnership in crypto. People are just too fucking stupid to see what is in front of them. I've been around since 2014 and I've never been so bullish on a coin.

I bought on the way down at 65cents and at fucking 22 cents last week
My average overall entry is still at 12cents so the pain isnt too bad

Attached: newsa_1659.jpg (650x657, 83K)

You didn't hold any eth by any chance did you? I've been researching and reading about crypto since 2014 also but only invested in November of last year. My only worry is that NO alts will see any traction until they become uncoupled from BTC.

REQ fixes this problem. Although I suspect Binance might support fiat before REQ sees widespread adoption. REQ will definitely help though. Someone will set up a REQ buying network where you can just buy alts for fiat using Request Network. It's so easy even I could do it.

I know people have been saying that but i've not quite seen it although it does seem plausible. I'm also into GVT for that exact reason.

Ask yourself a question. What will REQ be worth in 5 years? $25 - $100 at least. 50K REQ will give you a return of 1.25 to 5 million. Thats the real moon shot - adoption! So invest $7,500 in your retirement and relax.

Attached: 0ad.png (600x682, 365K)

>retirement fund
>crypto
Pick one.
Then kys.

why is nobody seeing that?

look man I get that BNB has appreciated nicely, but it's flawed as well. I'm not interested in metaphorical ownership. Youre making a decent argument for REQ as a security, but they sure as hell didn't register with the SEC. REQ token doesn't have real utility. Only reason anyone would want to own any is for speculative purposes. If I need to use the network and theyre making me use REQ to do so, I'll just buy some on the spot and use it immediately

Because we're not all deluded like you.

genuinely I just want to make money if you can help me see my delusion I'd be very appreciative but as far as I can see this is a pretty solid investment

So what does it do then? And don't post the Pay With Request meme images, give me a real fucking use case that solves an actual problem that would be brought on by mass adoption. I'll save you time, because the answer is you can't. You missed the moon. nothin personnel kid.

Attached: IMG_0485.jpg (517x768, 342K)

Attached: picard-facepalm.jpg (895x503, 39K)

Also PWC is trying to push developpers and companies to use blockchain technologies. It's not
"okay, we are partners, let's see what we will do together"
translation : prize for creating a blockchain app to authentify meds against counterfeit.

Attached: Capture d’écran 2018-04-05 à 00.16.55.png (1168x1092, 1.25M)

That is a use case nigger.

-Cheaper than paypal
-Allows people to receive in fiat from a payment in crypto and vice versa
-Decentralized meme

Can you take your currency shitcoin and actually spend it? REQ will allow you to actually buy shit in ANY crypto, properly, not some purse.io proxy shit. There are also more projects besides the payment one.

>What is interledger protocol
Ripple labs already has this area covered.

ethereumworldnews.com/6-use-cases-request-network-req/ I think explains it better than I could

That's basically it for the token. The profit for the devs comes from speculation of the token. Because that's where the profit is, the network itself can have fees which are extraordinarily low compared to non block chain competitors, giving it a competitive edge.

yes like I said earlier, I like the project but not the token (especially as an American). There's a reason it hasnt been listed on any US exchanges yet even thought their mainnet is live. REQ would have a really hard time passing the Howey Test

The day Ripple labs takes over crypto payments, everyone has lost already.

Req hodler here. Not even mad lol.

I must have tried 3 times in this thread to tell you that success of the network = increased token price and you still don't get it.
>I like Binance and think it could go for years but I hate BNB! It's not needed for transaction fees so why buy it? It's just driven on speculation.
If you like the network accumulate the fucking token. Brainlets these days.

>If you like the network accumulate the fucking token
thats not good enough dude. It's not like I own stock in the company and am entitled to a kickback of profits. No real utility = fundraiser shitcoin. No thanks

literally stay poor then you fucking retard

The token powers the network assclown, if you like the network and think it will be used, buy the fucking token.

you dont get it man. they added an unnecessary layer to the network just as a means to raise funds. this is going to turn into a problem somehwere down the line. if the network couldn't exist without REQ, I'd fucking buy it...but thats not the case

If REQ didn't exist then the ETH token holders would be decide the future of the request platform. Request needs to be independent from any currency, blockchain or community if it wants to last.

Why would the devs just add an unnecessary layer that could potentially compromise the future of the network if they could just charge fees in ETH? They obviously believe it's necessary for the future of the platform.

>Thinks you need to own req to use the network.
You might be the dumbest person here, respectfully sir.

Attached: IMG_1411.png (669x514, 25K)

no they wouldnt, thats retarded. There is no future to decide for token holders. you have no stake in the project. If they want to make changes to the protocol theyll just do it. Theyre not gonna fucking consult you retards

>Why own eth? You don't actually get any dividends and it's not really needed, people can use traditional funding methods to raise money. It's not like dapps will be built atop req or anything or the pay by req button will fuel demand. Heh. Stay poor

Then answer this And how come you have managed to spot this fundamental flaw in the project, but Ycombinator have somehow missed it?

>being this dumb
they added the layer so they could raise 30m with an ICO

Wait so you mean to say it's the equivalent of a company going public?
'
Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at ft.com/tour.
ft.com/content/7bd1b20a-879b-11e5-90de-f44762bf9896

But shares give their holders no right of possession and no right of use. If shareholders go to the company premises, they will more likely than not be turned away.

They have no more right than other customers to the services of the business they “own”. The company’s actions are not their responsibility, and corporate assets cannot be used to satisfy their debts.

Shareholders do not have the right to manage the company in which they hold an interest, and even their right to appoint the people who do is largely theoretical. They are entitled only to such part of the income as the directors declare as dividends, and have no right to the proceeds of the sale of corporate assets — except in the event of the liquidation of the entire company, in which case they will get what is left; not much, as a rule.'

You think a button is a use case?

The biggest problem with REQ is that it's only useful if many of the cryptos that exist today will be around in the future and guess what, 99% of them are shitcoins and won't be around. What happens to REQ when there's only a handful of cryptos that are even being used in the future? Merchants will just decide they don't need the middleman and will accept these cryptos directly.

Yes, PwC partnered with request for the cryptocurrency payments use case. You are so smart. Do you know nothing about request?

>Wait so you mean to say it's the equivalent of a company going public?

ding ding. yea it is basically the equivalent....except for one problem, theyre not fucking registered with the SEC.

Binance coin exists to clean up dust. Very straightforward and useful.

The general consensus from regulators is to be very cautious (regulation wise) as to not stifle innovation of new technology. They don't care about legit projects with real partnerships and products, they care about scam ICOs. That is the green light for you my friend.

No they won't. It's way easier to implement Request than to try and set up a website to receive even 3 different currencies. Just imagine you had an online store yourself. Most websites today only accept Paypal or Credit Card. No website wants separate payment options for every crypto. They will just pick the all in one that takes less of a cut than Paypal.

I appreciate this reply and think youre mostly right, but here's my problem with that still: REQ basically was a scam ico. The network could fully exist on its own with no token (nobody has given me a compelling argument against this). The team could simply ask for fees in ETH and then cash the ETH out instead of using it to buy REQ to then burn. That layer was only put in place in order to justify a $30m token sale. The governance aspect is a joke (there's nothing to govern)