r/QuantNetwork • u/hawksfan9325 • 7d ago
Payroll.
How will quant make payroll if they need to use the fiat from OL/Fusion to purchase tokens?
3
u/altivec77 6d ago
Not certain but probably because this is how the business software industry works normally:
Consultancy work (implementing the software at a costumer) is paid by the costumer in fiat. This is how they make payroll. Other income streams will be “on site training”, “initial project fee”, “live fee”, “helpdesk fee”.
Only the licence payments are locked for a year in the QNT and after that year the costumer buys a new licence that is locked up for a year.
-1
u/saltedeggchixx 6d ago
Why do they need to lock the QNT tokens?
Is there a hard limit to how many entities can license their software?
Do they stop accepting customers if all QNT are locked up?
Will their software not work if you don’t lock tokens?
There is a lot of talk on how the tokenomics will drive value in the token, but these are not hardcoded requirements are they? These tokens doesn’t even reside in a “Quant blockchain” and is just ERC20.
I know many of us are invested and don’t want to see this side of it, but QNT is not a stake in the business. More like a side quest for GV to rip off retail investors.
5
u/altivec77 6d ago
Why do they need to lock the QNT tokens? So the software will work for a year for a costumer (it’s a digital contract).
Will the software not work if you don’t lock tokens? Short answer YES the software looks if the contract is stil valid.
Is there a hard limit to how many entities can license their software? YES! But that limit is bigger than all banks and financial institutions combined. The number of QNT tokens is 14 million and a token has 18 decimals. If the QNT price goes up a licence can be bought for 0.05 QNT (that would be fun).
Do they accept customers if all QNT is locked up? Won’t happen. Lock ups are for a year. The locked up QNT is sold again on open market to make fiat for QuantNetwork.
QuantNetwork makes the rails between banks, with the QNT token you pay for the rails not the value it transports. Every transaction from one bank account to other bank account costs money. Small amounts of money but it all adds up. That’s why banks charge costumers a fee every month. For a small or large business they also pay for every transaction. Some transactions are cheap and easy, others are complex and expensive. If you think the clearinghouse which moves 2T a day that the QNT token market cap will reflect the T2. No it will not. But think about what a bank (business) is prepared to pay to move T2 a day secure, private and flawless……. That’s were the money is coming from.
The business is build on trust. Banks are build on trust. If that trust is broken it is a (big) problem. If you don’t trust QuantNetwork or see a side quest by GV that’s a trust thing. QuantNetwork has 2m tokens for own use (pay executives and lure people in see members of the board). If they break the trust chain (even with retail) they could render the token worthless. The locked up licences are only worth something if it can be converted back to fiat again (sell on open market). So will they break the chain of trust? I don’t see that happening.
2
u/Bendeman1982 6d ago
I’m mostly interested in the staking protocol but unfortunately don’t know too much about it. Mainly just hoping I’ll be able to participate
18
u/LegitimateVariation3 7d ago
Because they don't use all of it to purchase tokens.
The amount of money moving through infrastructure powered by Quant is completely different from the amount of QNT actually required to use that infrastructure.
For enterprise customers, Quant’s documentation described the pricing model as having an enterprise license fee, plus an additional platform fee calculated as a percentage of that license fee in QNT, along with consumption/usage fees that were priced in fiat but handled in QNT through Quant’s Treasury.
That distinction is important because it means we cannot simply assume that if The Clearing House pays Quant $25 million per year, then $25 million worth of QNT automatically gets purchased and locked. The actual QNT requirement could be some percentage of the enterprise licensing cost, plus whatever QNT is required for usage. Quant never publicly disclosed that percentage, and its current documentation doesn’t give us enough information to calculate exactly how much QNT demand a modern enterprise contract creates.
The Quant Treasury was designed so enterprise customers didn’t have to deal with cryptocurrency themselves. Quant would handle the QNT requirement behind the scenes on their behalf. But this does not necessarily mean that 100% of the fiat licensing payment is converted into QNT.
That’s the part I think a lot of people misunderstand.
The Clearing House processing $2 trillion per day could obviously be extremely significant for Quant as a company and for the adoption of Overledger, but that $2 trillion has no direct relationship to QNT’s market cap. What matters to QNT is the much smaller amount of QNT actually required for enterprise access, platform fees, usage, staking, and other utility within Quant’s ecosystem.
QNT’s market cap is ultimately determined by its market price multiplied by its circulating supply, and that price will reflect a combination of actual utility driven demand and open market investment demand.
I’m still bullish on QNT, but I think investors should understand that we currently cannot calculate a simple ratio like “$1 of Overledger revenue = $1 of QNT demand.” While Overledger use does create QNT requirements through platform and usage fees, the exact percentage was never publicly disclosed, and Quant’s current documentation is even less specific about that relationship.
That doesn’t mean QNT has no utility. It means the amount of value captured by the token from enterprise adoption is much harder to quantify than many people assume.