Topic: Charlie Lee Sold his Litecoin for "Conflicts of Interest" (Read 298 times)
Profit on investing in promising startups. ConnectOur website
Yesterday, Charlie Lee sold his Litetcoin. He said he was doing it because of the "conflict of interest" that arose as a result of talking about Litecoin. What are your opinions of it?
I think that he has a point. Although he may have no monetary incentive for Litecoin to rally, he has every other incentive to see it succeed. It was his creation and he has his name to it. By not holding the coins, he can easily sing its praises without having to worry about accusations of "market manipulation".
That is much less that can be said about other coins in the cryptocurrency ecosystems.
https://www.coinbureau.com/analysis/litecoin-founder-sells-ltc-avoid-conflict-interest/
I think that he has a point. Although he may have no monetary incentive for Litecoin to rally, he has every other incentive to see it succeed. It was his creation and he has his name to it. By not holding the coins, he can easily sing its praises without having to worry about accusations of "market manipulation".
That is much less that can be said about other coins in the cryptocurrency ecosystems.
https://www.coinbureau.com/analysis/litecoin-founder-sells-ltc-avoid-conflict-interest/
That's an intriguing perspective you put up. I think I have to agree with you on that, but I just don't know how the community will react to it moving forward. It's possible that they'll see Charlie Lee as a coward of sorts to pull out when there's a promising build up. There will always be people who fail to see that it's potentially beneficial for the whole of the coin, and these people might weigh down the price by removing their support of litecoin as well. We'll see what happens within the next week.
There is really no conflict of interest here to me, it is your project and if it dies you should be ready to die with it, but it seems strange that he feels people may think he is going to be manipulating his own coin by holding a huge chunk of it? Let's see how this goes.
He wants to prove that his not associated with what's happening to his coin.
But who knows if he is really saying the real thing that he sold most of his litecoins, he can just bluff or it's for real since he's totally a rich lad.
I'm thinking that he's using the word "charity/donation" to avoid something.
But who knows if he is really saying the real thing that he sold most of his litecoins, he can just bluff or it's for real since he's totally a rich lad.
I'm thinking that he's using the word "charity/donation" to avoid something.
He probably 'believes' that is why he is doing this...on the other hand...he 'sold' at the high prices....so delusion in this case can work both ways
he has his cake and eats it too...( I'm selling because of conflict of interest (reality: tummy hurts from possible bubble), sold at the height, (tummy
no longer hurts from the possible bubble, but a soothing effect of selling at the price high...helps him sleep at nite
not sure if sold if the prices were reversed, he'd feel all that chipper
was a win/win choice in 20/20 hindsight
Really,, I’m surprised he does that for that reason and most developers really does hold they’re own coin as a sign of confidence that trust litecoin.. But doing this for an issue that is totally can be ignored and not a big issues to be seriously sold all for a certain “conflict of interest”.. Nah I think that is not a good decision..
As a NEWBIE, how would you explain bitcoin as against other offline currencies? 
Yesterday, Charlie Lee sold his Litetcoin. He said he was doing it because of the "conflict of interest" that arose as a result of talking about Litecoin. What are your opinions of it?
I think that he has a point. Although he may have no monetary incentive for Litecoin to rally, he has every other incentive to see it succeed. It was his creation and he has his name to it. By not holding the coins, he can easily sing its praises without having to worry about accusations of "market manipulation".
That is much less that can be said about other coins in the cryptocurrency ecosystems.
https://www.coinbureau.com/analysis/litecoin-founder-sells-ltc-avoid-conflict-interest/
I think that he has a point. Although he may have no monetary incentive for Litecoin to rally, he has every other incentive to see it succeed. It was his creation and he has his name to it. By not holding the coins, he can easily sing its praises without having to worry about accusations of "market manipulation".
That is much less that can be said about other coins in the cryptocurrency ecosystems.
https://www.coinbureau.com/analysis/litecoin-founder-sells-ltc-avoid-conflict-interest/
Everyone of us ,have a different opinion and speculation about the cryptocurrency coin,maybe charlie lee have his own thought about his litecoin,maybe we cannot read his wisdom about of conflict of interest of litecoin,but we respect his opinion.but being rude to judge instantly about litecoin is so unrightious and judgemental,but for us there is no a conflict of interes and all about in crypptocurrency world is equal and fair.
I don't know if there is really a conflict of interest. Look on what happened when he did announced that he sold most of his Litecoins, the whole crypto market goes into a crazy correction and I don't know if that's intentional or that just happened and it's a coincidence.
I’m on litecoin for months now and learning that the founder does this is not a good sign. It isn’t a conflict of interest when you holding something you made, for the purpose to show that you believe on it. But this action makes me question if he does it for supporting a new altcoin then there is something happening behind it and that is a bad move.
He just want to prove that his not manipulating his own coin.I get that but honestly by the timing and the reason is so shallow, nevertheless he can even do it without using his real wallet and identity on holding or manipulating? Right. There is some sort of much more deeper reason for it but to accuse a big person like him without proof is useless. I just keep myself open for possibilities that might affect after his actions.
litecoin is best altcoin for bitcoin "you can find some online site accept it".
15 min conforming make litecoin best place when bitcoin fee bumping "will happen’s many in future"
15 min conforming make litecoin best place when bitcoin fee bumping "will happen’s many in future"
I don't know if there is really a conflict of interest. Look on what happened when he did announced that he sold most of his Litecoins, the whole crypto market goes into a crazy correction and I don't know if that's intentional or that just happened and it's a coincidence.
I’m on litecoin for months now and learning that the founder does this is not a good sign. It isn’t a conflict of interest when you holding something you made, for the purpose to show that you believe on it. But this action makes me question if he does it for supporting a new altcoin then there is something happening behind it and that is a bad move.
He just want to prove that his not manipulating his own coin. 
His act crashed Litecoin for $ 130 because many others began to sell. I hope this will not cause Domino effect.
Not true. The price didn't crashed after he posted on reddit 3 days ago. On that day it only dipped(from 0.019 btc per coin to 0.018) then suddenly went back up. The only reason why litecoin's price went down it's because of bitcoin and every other crypto was also affected by that crash.The price of litecoin is still the same after what happened and he said that he sold all of his ltc except for his collectible ones so overall he still has some ltc left.
I’m on litecoin for months now and learning that the founder does this is not a good sign. It isn’t a conflict of interest when you holding something you made, for the purpose to show that you believe on it. But this action makes me question if he does it for supporting a new altcoin then there is something happening behind it and that is a bad move.
What I don't understand is how gullible people can be. They take 2 inputs of information:
— one of which is a glaring red flag (he divested his fortune into 100% non-litecoin assets)
— he gives a stated reason which is plausible and thoroughly a PR move to say the least!
He probably had a mental pricepoint where he told himself that "if litecoin ever surpasses X dollars, I'd have enough financial freedom to do this checklist of things and still be rich afterwards."
Also he avoids the fate of SO MANY the dotcom millionaires who had significant wealth in a single asset class, which may have later been worth nothing. The guy is smart. He is an engineer who was HIRED BY GOOGLE and I can tell you that engineers are methodical/calculating in their thinking.
His rosy language is the giveaway that he's not being honest in his actual reason for selling.
I’m on litecoin for months now and learning that the founder does this is not a good sign. It isn’t a conflict of interest when you holding something you made, for the purpose to show that you believe on it. But this action makes me question if he does it for supporting a new altcoin then there is something happening behind it and that is a bad move.
I think that as the founder of Litecoin, Charlie Lee has been earning a lot of litecoins over the way, he was one of the first people to start mining litecoins, and he did it with a very low difficulty, he had a huge amount of money in litecoin, and he wanted to make the exit.
The large increase in price of the bitcoin, made a lot of people that was supporting bitcoin all way long, to start selling the bitcoins they have been holding for years, just because they had a profit that they couldn't afford to lose.
Money changes people, someone who made 100000$ from 10000$ investment, may sell it even if he believes that bitcoin is going to be mainstream and is going to be the future currency.
The large increase in price of the bitcoin, made a lot of people that was supporting bitcoin all way long, to start selling the bitcoins they have been holding for years, just because they had a profit that they couldn't afford to lose.
Money changes people, someone who made 100000$ from 10000$ investment, may sell it even if he believes that bitcoin is going to be mainstream and is going to be the future currency.
In as much as I feel it is his decision and he has some point, but still, he should have kept going a bit, rather than going totally all out. What is the essence of the decentralization we are fighting for when Charlie Lee himself feels holding cash as against his own coin that he has put out there is better for him, if he indeed exchanged it all into fiat. It is more like a Captain abandoning his own ship for another one but at the same time, his intentions may be a good one but that depends on how the community perceives it.
Really some point there bro! He should have at least considered some options and how the community would really react to the whole thing before doing that.I am not sure what he exchanged his LTC with, but if it is the centralized system, then that totally sucks, but let me just assume for now that he placed it maybe in bitcoin or another currency not owned by him. The move is questionable and it is sure going to keep generating a lot of conflict itself.
It is entirely irrelevant whether Charlie Lee wanted to show that he was more concerned with Litecoin's development than personal gain. His act crashed Litecoin for $ 130 because many others began to sell. I hope this will not cause Domino effect.
Even I wish that it does not crash the LTC completely and its value reaches in a single digit. Though it would not happen but selling off his entire stake means something might be in a state of trouble for LTC. How much truth about his statement is a matter of question as people might interpret in different ways now.
It is entirely irrelevant whether Charlie Lee wanted to show that he was more concerned with Litecoin's development than personal gain. His act crashed Litecoin for $ 130 because many others began to sell. I hope this will not cause Domino effect.
Didn't see that news coming, truly unexpected! However, he is not abandoning the ship as you mention. I can understand his reasons and personally I think he has done in the best interest of the litecoin community. He will stay on board and continue to develop litecoin.
I really hope he does and I truly hope he is able to convince a lot of people with his intentions, but all the same, it is a good project, it is receiving some attention and I am sure there may be some pretty good prospect for it in the long run. However, I still so much believe this is how a larger chunk of the community is going to see this anyway until maybe they see some other moves maybe.
That is really some huge conflict of interest and as much as that calls for questioning, it is his life and he can decide to do whatever he likes, but I would be concerned holding LTC though because if the owner decides that he is cool with the profit and decides to cash out, does that mean something ? Probably I am just trying to overthink things anyway, but that sounds more like abandoning your own project to me.
Yesterday, Charlie Lee sold his Litetcoin. He said he was doing it because of the "conflict of interest" that arose as a result of talking about Litecoin. What are your opinions of it?
I think that he has a point. Although he may have no monetary incentive for Litecoin to rally, he has every other incentive to see it succeed. It was his creation and he has his name to it. By not holding the coins, he can easily sing its praises without having to worry about accusations of "market manipulation".
That is much less that can be said about other coins in the cryptocurrency ecosystems.
https://www.coinbureau.com/analysis/litecoin-founder-sells-ltc-avoid-conflict-interest/
I think that he has a point. Although he may have no monetary incentive for Litecoin to rally, he has every other incentive to see it succeed. It was his creation and he has his name to it. By not holding the coins, he can easily sing its praises without having to worry about accusations of "market manipulation".
That is much less that can be said about other coins in the cryptocurrency ecosystems.
https://www.coinbureau.com/analysis/litecoin-founder-sells-ltc-avoid-conflict-interest/
I see the point of this discussion, since that means that he does have the freedom to get involved and not be called out for influencing the market. Unlike what the Ethereum foundation has been continually doing. They have been pushing for its price to go up since they hold a huge chunk of the whole ETH supply. But well this is like being a founder owner of a big business. You want it to succeed because it is your work.
He wants to prove that his not associated with what's happening to his coin.
But who knows if he is really saying the real thing that he sold most of his litecoins, he can just bluff or it's for real since he's totally a rich lad.
I'm thinking that he's using the word "charity / donation" to avoid something.
But who knows if he is really saying the real thing that he sold most of his litecoins, he can just bluff or it's for real since he's totally a rich lad.
I'm thinking that he's using the word "charity / donation" to avoid something.
First of all, I'm not sure that he really sold his Litecoins. He said it on Twitter, but how we can know that is true? There is no proof of it, we don't even know, how much LTC he had.
But in this case, I don't see any conflict of interest. What's wrong that creator of Litecoin had was holding more or less coins? I think it's normal thing that he want that his project would suceed. I'm sure that devs of mostly coins have more or less their coins and nobody sees market manipulation or conflict of interests in that.
But in this case, I don't see any conflict of interest. What's wrong that creator of Litecoin had was holding more or less coins? I think it's normal thing that he want that his project would suceed. I'm sure that devs of mostly coins have more or less their coins and nobody sees market manipulation or conflict of interests in that.
Jump to: