Ric⬡

We can now correlate all this institutional adoption of Chainlink directly to $LINK token usage: From the public GitHub PRs (first two screenshots attached): 🔹 "cre:workflow:compute (ms)": compute is its own billable resource. 🔹 "emitted for successful and failed executions": every run is billed. 🔹 "bills them from the enclave's own measurement": confidential workflows are billed too, by time inside the enclave (trusted execution environment for private/confidential computations). From the DTCC Demo we can see that those CRE Orchestration fees are paid in LINK (screenshots 3 and 4 attached as examples). So: - Institutions adopt Chainlink through CRE. - Each workflow, as seen in the DTCC AppChain demo, consists of multiple orchestration fees (+ CCIP fees), each paid in LINK. - In the DTCC demo, there were 4 separate orchestration fees and 1 CCIP fee - that's 5 separate LINK fees in total. - If there were any margin calls or collateral swaps, more thorough compliance checks, or any Confidential Compute required in that demo, that would likely require further Orchestration/CCIP fees. - The Chainlink Github shows that CRE billing for each execution is proportional to the compute time in milliseconds required. Therefore: - The more separate workflow steps where the user signs, the more orchestration fees incurred. - The more computations in a workflow, the more orchestration fees incurred. - The more complex those computations, the more orchestration incurred. - Data Feeds/Streams also required in DTCC Demo for continuous collateral pricing, which is another Chainlink service used (usually subscription-based, per-use based if AI Agents using CRE. In summary: Institutional adoption up > LINK fees up $LINK token absolutely needed