Chainlink Maxi Shares Why LINK Is A Better Institutional Bet Than XRP

bitcoinistОпубликовано 2026-03-21Обновлено 2026-03-21

Введение

In a controversial post, Chainlink ambassador Zach Rynes sparked debate by arguing that LINK is a superior institutional investment compared to XRP. He criticized Ripple for prioritizing equity shareholders over XRP token holders, claiming the company uses XRP sale proceeds to fund corporate acquisitions and stock buybacks that don’t benefit token investors. Rynes dismissed the XRP Ledger as an "obsolete ghost chain" with minimal market share in real-world assets and stablecoins, while highlighting Chainlink’s dominance in DeFi, institutional partnerships, and structurally aligned incentives—noting that even Chainlink employees are rewarded in LINK, not equity. Ripple’s former CTO, David Schwartz, countered that Ripple’s consistent XRP sales created lower entry prices for buyers, a claim Rynes rejected as "elite-tier gaslighting."

Chainlink Maxi Zach Rynes has ignited fierce debate across the crypto community after sharing a pointed critique of XRP and Ripple, drawing significant backlash from supporters and former executives. The ambassador has framed Chainlink’s native token LINK as the superior institutional play, labeling XRP a ghost chain. He also criticizes Ripple’s recent share buybacks, suggesting that the company prioritizes shareholders over XRP investors.

Chainlink Maxi Takes Aim At XRP And Ripple

In a recent post on X, Rynes argued that XRP holders are effectively funding a company that has openly stated it will prioritize equity shareholders over token investors. He explained that when a company sells both tokens and equity to investors, it creates two competing stakeholder groups whose economic interests diverge. As a result, when excess revenue is present, equity investors hold superior, legally enforceable rights, leaving XRP holders at a disadvantage.

Rynes argued that Ripple sells XRP and uses proceeds to acquire companies and fund stock buybacks that benefit only shareholders. He also noted that, even under oath in court filings, the crypto company admitted that XRP’s bridge currency use case is demand-neutral and does not affect price.

Furthermore, he dismissed the XRP Ledger (XRPL) as an “obsolete ghost chain” sitting outside the top 40 chains by usage, holding less than 1% market share in real-world assets and less than 0.01% in stablecoins. The Chainlink maxi further noted that Ripple itself issued 90% of the RLUSD stablecoin on Ethereum and has since expanded to additional chains outside the XRP Ledger, including BNY Mellon’s private EVM chain.

Supporting Chainlink, Rynes stated that LINK presented a structurally cleaner investment case compared to XRP because it has no equity investors competing for value. He explained that every layer of network growth focuses primarily on the native token and that even Chainlink Lab employees receive long-term incentive rewards in LINK rather than equity.

He pointed to Chainlink’s more than 70% market share in DeFi with $60 billion in secured TVL, alongside institutional partnerships with SWIFT, the DTCC, Euroclear, JPMorgan, and others as proof of tangible adoption. The Chainlink maxi finally concluded that the LINK token represents the best index bet on institutional blockchain adoption. At the same time, XRP functions as a “bank-themed meme coin” that Ripple sells to retail to fund corporate acquisitions.

Ripple’s Former CTO Fires Back

The debate escalated when Ripple’s former Chief Technology Officer (CTO), David Schwartz, entered the conversation. Schwartz argued that Ripple’s consistent and predictable XRP selling over five years created sustained downward price pressure, which he claimed actually benefited buyers who accumulated tokens at lower prices than they would have otherwise paid.

Rynes sharply rejected the rebuttal, calling it “elite-tier gaslighting,” and questioning whether Schwartz argued that suppressing XRP’s price through Ripple’s own selling activity was a benefit to holders. Schwartz doubled down, criticizing the comment and insisting that a constant factor already priced into the market affects buyers and sellers equally. He said that anyone who purchased XRP benefited from low entry prices just as much as they might be affected on the way out.

LINK trading at $9 on the 1D chart | Source: LINKUSDT on Tradingview.com

Связанные с этим вопросы

QAccording to Zach Rynes, why is LINK a better institutional investment than XRP?

AZach Rynes argues that LINK is a structurally cleaner investment because it has no equity investors competing for value, all network growth focuses on the native token, and it has dominant market share in DeFi with major institutional partnerships, unlike XRP which he claims is a 'ghost chain' and a 'bank-themed meme coin' sold to fund corporate acquisitions.

QWhat specific criticism did Rynes level against Ripple's financial practices?

ARynes criticized Ripple for selling XRP and using the proceeds to acquire companies and fund stock buybacks that only benefit equity shareholders, while openly prioritizing them over XRP token investors.

QHow did Ripple's former CTO, David Schwartz, respond to the claims about Ripple's XRP sales?

ADavid Schwartz argued that Ripple's consistent and predictable XRP selling over five years created sustained downward price pressure, which he claimed actually benefited buyers by allowing them to accumulate tokens at lower prices than they would have otherwise paid.

QWhat did Rynes cite as evidence of Chainlink's tangible adoption and institutional use?

ARynes cited Chainlink's more than 70% market share in DeFi with $60 billion in secured TVL, alongside institutional partnerships with major entities like SWIFT, the DTCC, Euroclear, and JPMorgan.

QWhat did Rynes claim about the XRP Ledger's (XRPL) usage and market position?

ARynes dismissed the XRP Ledger as an 'obsolete ghost chain' sitting outside the top 40 chains by usage, holding less than 1% market share in real-world assets and less than 0.01% in stablecoins.

Похожее

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Summary: This article explores the perceived "death spiral" risk between MicroStrategy (MSTR), its Bitcoin holdings, and its perpetual preferred stock (STRC), drawing comparisons to the LUNA-UST collapse. While both systems feature price anchors, high yields for holders, and potential feedback loops, their core mechanisms differ fundamentally. The MSTR-STRC structure relies on continuous financing to sustain its high dividend payouts, primarily through stock ATM offerings. A negative feedback cycle could occur: falling MSTR stock price makes raising equity capital harder, increasing pressure to sell Bitcoin, which undermines STRC confidence and further depresses MSTR. However, unlike LUNA-UST's automated, direct linkage, the MSTR-STRC loop is weaker and has brakes: STRC dividends can be deferred or rates lowered, and STRC holders have a $100/share liquidation preference in bankruptcy, providing a price floor. The company's sustainability hinges on its ability to continue financing. Its current ~$900 million USD reserves cover only about 6.3 months of its ~$1.71 billion annual interest/dividend burden. The next six months are critical, aligning with both the potential bottom in Bitcoin's four-year cycle and the depletion timeline of its reserves. While a LUNA-style catastrophic collapse is deemed highly unlikely due to structural differences, the key question is whether MicroStrategy can navigate this period through healthy deleveraging to restart its capital engine.

Foresight News15 мин. назад

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Foresight News15 мин. назад

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

MicroStrategy's Debt Risk: A Turning Point in the "Never Sell" Strategy As of June 3, 2026, MicroStrategy holds 843,706 bitcoins (valued at ~$53.1B) but faces significant financial obligations. Its capital structure includes $6.75B in convertible notes and $15.48B in perpetual preferred stock (led by the $8.5B STRC series), creating an annual payout burden of ~$1.71B. With software revenue at only ~$500M, interest and dividend obligations far exceed operating income. A critical shift occurred in late May 2026 when the company sold 32 bitcoins for ~$2.5M to cover dividends, breaking CEO Michael Saylor's long-standing "never sell" pledge. This symbolic move triggered a sharp decline in both Bitcoin's price and MSTR stock, reflecting market fears about cash flow sustainability. The core of the strain is the STRC perpetual preferred stock, designed as a "permanent loan" with no maturity date but requiring high monthly dividends (currently 11.5%). Its business model relies on a three-part cycle: issuing new STRC shares, using proceeds to buy more Bitcoin and fund a USD reserve, and using that reserve to pay dividends. This cycle depends on continuous investor demand for STRC and Bitcoin's price appreciation. Analysis shows Bitcoin needs to appreciate at least 2.3% annually to cover the $1.71B in yearly obligations at current holdings. With Bitcoin price down ~22% from March 2026 highs, this pressure has intensified. The company's $900M USD reserve can only cover about 7 months of payments if STRC issuance stalls. Key risks are not immediate bankruptcy or forced Bitcoin liquidation (as BTC is not collateral), but rather: 1) The erosion of MSTR's premium to its Bitcoin holdings (mNAV), which would cripple its ability to raise cheap capital; 2) A vicious cycle where stagnant Bitcoin prices reduce STRC demand, draining the USD reserve and forcing BTC sales, further depressing prices. The period from February 2027 to September 2028 is a crucial test, with over $5.9B in convertible notes facing put options or maturity. In essence, MicroStrategy has evolved from a simple Bitcoin holder into a complex financial entity acting like a "private Bitcoin bank," leveraging its BTC holdings to create layered financial products. Its survival depends on maintaining Bitcoin's price trend, its stock premium, and market appetite for its preferred shares. The recent token sale marks not a betrayal of its Bitcoin thesis, but an admission that the leveraged strategy must eventually be paid for.

marsbit25 мин. назад

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

marsbit25 мин. назад

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

Anthropic has published an article titled "When AI builds itself," discussing the emerging concept of "recursive self-improvement," where AI begins to actively participate in designing, training, testing, and optimizing its own subsequent versions. The company presents internal data showing that by May 2026, over 80% of code merged into its codebase was written by Claude, its AI model. Claude's capabilities have expanded to handling complex, open-ended engineering tasks, achieving a 76% success rate in such areas, and even contributing to research processes, such as optimizing code performance and conducting AI safety experiments. Anthropic outlines an evolution from human-driven development to AI-assisted workflows, culminating in the current stage where AI agents can autonomously write, run, and delegate code. The company cautions that the path toward a "closed loop," where AI continuously improves itself, is becoming visible. It calls for coordinated global mechanisms to potentially slow or pause frontier AI development to allow safety research and societal structures to catch up. However, the timing of this warning coincides with Anthropic's preparations for an IPO, framing the narrative not just as a safety concern but also as a demonstration of Claude's advanced capabilities and its integral role in accelerating Anthropic's own R&D—creating a potential "flywheel" effect for competitive advantage. This contrasts with OpenAI's recent, more policy-oriented discussion of the same risks, highlighting the competitive dynamics in the AI industry as companies position themselves in both the technological and regulatory landscape.

marsbit1 ч. назад

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

marsbit1 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы

Популярные статьи

Как купить LINK

Добро пожаловать на HTX.com! Мы сделали приобретение ChainLink (LINK) простым и удобным. Следуйте нашему пошаговому руководству и отправляйтесь в свое крипто-путешествие.Шаг 1: Создайте аккаунт на HTXИспользуйте свой адрес электронной почты или номер телефона, чтобы зарегистрироваться и бесплатно создать аккаунт на HTX. Пройдите удобную регистрацию и откройте для себя весь функционал.Создать аккаунтШаг 2: Перейдите в Купить криптовалюту и выберите свой способ оплатыКредитная/Дебетовая Карта: Используйте свою карту Visa или Mastercard для мгновенной покупки ChainLink (LINK).Баланс: Используйте средства с баланса вашего аккаунта HTX для простой торговли.Третьи Лица: Мы добавили популярные способы оплаты, такие как Google Pay и Apple Pay, для повышения удобства.P2P: Торгуйте напрямую с другими пользователями на HTX.Внебиржевая Торговля (OTC): Мы предлагаем индивидуальные услуги и конкурентоспособные обменные курсы для трейдеров.Шаг 3: Хранение ChainLink (LINK)После приобретения вами ChainLink (LINK) храните их в своем аккаунте на HTX. В качестве альтернативы вы можете отправить их куда-либо с помощью перевода в блокчейне или использовать для торговли с другими криптовалютами.Шаг 4: Торговля ChainLink (LINK)С легкостью торгуйте ChainLink (LINK) на спотовом рынке HTX. Просто зайдите в свой аккаунт, выберите торговую пару, совершайте сделки и следите за ними в режиме реального времени. Мы предлагаем удобный интерфейс как для начинающих, так и для опытных трейдеров.

1.6k просмотров всегоОпубликовано 2024.03.29Обновлено 2026.06.02

Как купить LINK

Обсуждения

Добро пожаловать в Сообщество HTX. Здесь вы сможете быть в курсе последних новостей о развитии платформы и получить доступ к профессиональной аналитической информации о рынке. Мнения пользователей о цене на LINK (LINK) представлены ниже.

活动图片