Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1115. (Read 3314330 times)

Is the darknet adaption increasing? I've read numbers of around 5% of the vendors accepting XMR on Alphabay.
 

smfuser,
Go easy on the question mark key 

Why did you initially believe the huge volume was "proof of artificial manipulation"? Did you think Poloniex was involved? Otherwise, could the cost of commissions be justified? What did you believe to be the goal? Why did you then decide "it's at least possible the volume is real growth" and what is your probability estimate? If it has been real, what would be your thoughts now about equilibrium value?

Yes, you've mentioned Kraken previously.

I find it difficult to believe there are not envious eyes watching the continued volume and not wanting to get themselves a slice. 

When you look at some of the rubbish listed on BTCe and the UI that has gone unimproved for 4 years, for example, it makes you realise that a lot of the older 'established' players across crypto may be getting too comfy.

Well we've been poking at the major exchanges for a year and more.  Kraken, for one, I know replied always that they were aware of it, but too busy to do anything ATM.  I bet the recent weeks' excitement has moved it toward the top of the stack.

XMR volume remains greater than the sum of all the other coins combined on Polo; I wonder how long it will be before another of the big exchanges announces it is opening a market.

I going to posit that will be the next major news.

He should. If he wants to appear legitimate and he wants his stake to be worth anything he should donate ATLEAST 1/3. Time will tell if he is smart enough.

That is open to argument because different people see it differently even in the ETC community. But that is not the real problem. The real problem is what does the attacker intend to do with all that ETC? Also can he sell them somewhere other than the exchanges where they will be surely frozen.

The attacker also donated 1000 ETC to the address of the ETC developers. Cheap he should donate a lot more.

Yeah, and that was the average over a longer uptrend, such as Jan-Mar 2013.

But in XMR it seems that there is huge volume during uptrend. So this ratio is more muted. More liquid. More good.

Others already pointed out the original assumption was mistaken. Moreover, you can't even "say that there is new money" with certainty, as the USD/BTC price can rise when existing Bitcoin holders trade the same or smaller amounts (denominated in USD) of BTC with one another at increasingly higher USD/BTC prices, with no addition of new money.

The hackers funds belong to him legitimately free and clear on the etc chain because of the professed principles of the etc devs and community (ones that the devs abandoned and subsequently forked the chain to make a new ethereum without inconvenient principles).

But either way I smell an etc buying opportunity if people react very poorly to this news.

Thanks, I already knew about his investment in the Zcash company, and I wondered whether his supposed claim (according to Bloomberg) that he invested more in Monero than any other altcoin also applied to that Zcash investment. If that was the potential conflict of interest tifozi meant, I still wonder what tifozi suspected could be Roger Ver's ulterior motive behind his apparent recent public support of Monero. Given that Monero will probably remain a better cryptocurrency to hold than Zcash for the foreseeable future, it wouldn't be surprising if Roger Ver belatedly realized that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/51bwgd/the_hacker_has_just_withdrawn_their_booty_from/

If I were 'the hacker' I would, for obvious reasons, be hungry for Monero. The only question is how you get a non-fungible crypto into a the fungible one.

Cool story but predicated on the understanding everyone else is fine playing out the game for her outcome.  As you say, her intentions will not be altruistic but if she* goes complete 'rape and pillage' the market will eventually thin out -- so she has to give new money an incentive to enter the game.  This clear and obvious wall strategy is going to become wearisome with the day traders especially.

I'm also wondering about your calculation that she totals 95% of the current market - surely the regulars here must alone total more than 5% of the order board (and significantly more in terms of total holdings).

*If the pronoun use here were accurate then perhaps this individual would be more altruistic

Yes.  If the shares last cleared at 100 and there is a 1mm float, and I buy one share for 101, the cap rises 1mm on my 101 moneyflow.  But then you sell the book down to 99, which requires 100 lots of 100, dropping the cap 2mm, while receiving ~1mm.  How much cap moves on flow is determined by the distribution of the book and how closely balanced the flows are.

Rational accumulators and distributors alike usually prefer to deal without impacting cap.  Anything else may be illegal manipulation, in u.s. equities.  Of course in crypto no one has ever been charged with a crime for price manipulation per se, AFAICT.

Evidently you haven't been reading the thread very carefully.

It's stock price times the number of shares, is it not?

yeh, that peak was nice XMR should be able to settle above LTC for a longer period - like forever.

I don't want to be the bad guy, but i think i have to say something, after it seems noone else is willing to tell it you ....

It's often a common misunderstanding from new bitcoin users, and i'm sure the old guys in here know it exactly, but noone is telling it, for some reason they are even telling you that you are right ...

An 600 million $ marketcap increase for sure does not mean that there were 600 $ dollar invested in bitcoin .... marketcap = total number of coins * current market price ... an increase in the marketcap is not an indicator of how much new money is invested. (You could say that there is new money, but for sure you could not tell that it is 600 millon $.)

Most in here know that, and you seem to be new in here (from your post count) ... i realy can't understand that noone is explaining that to you, instead they are cheering your numbers, what the hack is wrong with you guys? noone? realy?

He wants all the moneroj.  Cheap.  I am guessing he spikes it to 03, loans himself monero cheap, and shorts it down to 0188, holds it down a few hours so the ask fill in, then sweeps the book again.  Its what I would do if I had about 30mm to play with and didn't care who got hurt.  (But of course saying it in public reduces the likelihood quite substantially.)

Why?  I imagine: He anticipates $100 moneroj in 12 months.  But I think he's optimistic.  $25 average, maybe with a spike to $40-50.

If he has $120mm to play with, the game changes.  Then he plans to run the mcap up to 1bn, and start selling to HNW savers escaping DM tax/into policies.  Freeport customers, that sort.  That's a 5 year game that nets him about $1 bn and puts XMRBTC at parity 3-5 years ahead of the organic schedule, his final notional exit point.  No reason to add big (40-60% swing)  vol in that case, just ramp it until you run dry, short it 20-30% down, rinse, repeat.  My 12 month estimate would be $125, were that the case.  (Low probability due to capital outlay size.)

Anyhow, he's not doing it to make us wealthy, that's a certainty.  It's just a happy side-effect.  One way to help is to make market, but rather small and fast - with bots, really, using very little capital, except on wide spreads, biased upwards.  You might lose a wee on the inside every time he makes it rip or dip, but hopefully your deep-book orders more than make up for it during vol spikes - and the visible liquidity attracts both currency uses and reserve clients for the whale.

Cool story?

Anyhow it's getting close to the hour when he tends to get twitchy.