Connect with us

Cryptocurrency

This unknown cryptocurrency soared by 164,842% in hours, only to crash 99%

Published

on

About $ 7.65 billion entered the cryptocurrency market in just three hours on Monday via a largely unknown altcoin.

The token price known as WebDollar (WEBD) rose from $ 0.0003711 to $ 0.6121 between 9:00 GMT and 12:00 GMT. That meant just over 164.842% profit on the market valuation. Nevertheless, the price increase was accompanied by a decrease in volume; they fell from around $ 345,000 to $ 318,940 during the rally.

The breakdown of those three hours of wild price movement illustrated a sequence of incredible pumps and dumps.

According to data from CoinMarketCap, the first WEBD jump increased its market cap from $ 1.84 million at 9:54 GMT to $ 1.5 billion at 9:59 GMT – that’s just three minutes.

Later, at 10:39 GMT, market cap dropped to $ 5.12 million, followed by a further increase to $ 9.5 billion at 11:29 GMT.

At one point, WebDollar was the 18th largest cryptocurrency project by market capitalization, beating more established blockchain protocols like Stellar, VeChain, and Tron.

WebDollar’s market cap explodes by more than $ 7.65 billion in a matter of hours, only to plummet 99% later. Source: CoinMarketCap

But then the volatile madness ended when the token’s market valuation plummeted more than 99% less than two hours after peaking at $ 9.5 billion. As of 7:00 a.m. GMT Tuesday, it was $ 10.38 million. Meanwhile, WebDollar’s crypto ranking dropped from 18th to 873rd place.

The IndoEx factor

WebDollar’s pricing action on Monday showed features of a pump-and-dump token. Worryingly, the project’s market cap sped up and down billions of dollars, despite trading volume remaining in the $ 400,000 range. And looking closely, 99.23% of its trading activity came from a single exchange called IndoEx.

Most of the WEBD volumes during the pump-and-dump of the token were recorded on the IndoEx cryptocurrency exchange. Source: CoinMarketCap

IndoEx LTD is registered in the United Kingdom under company number 12029621. The exchange is said to be headed by a person named Spencer Collins who serves as its CEO and Chief Financial Officer. Another company called Grace North is currently serving as IndoEx’s chief technology officer.

Cointelegraph’s attempt to track down the two executives on LinkedIn and Twitter yielded no results. Meanwhile, a run of IndoEx reviews by its previous customers revealed that they accused both Spencer and North of wearing fake identities.

“Spencer Collins (CEO / CFO), Grace North (CTO) is a wrong person, works as a support in telegram chat,” wrote Leo99 in his complaint in the Bitcoin forum BitcoinTalk.org. “Push the solution of all problems continuously into the future or ignore the news.”

A closer look at IndoEx LTD’s official filings with the UK Registrar Office revealed that it received a First Gazette Notice in November 2020 for failing to provide details on its shareholders. The company responded to the agency with just one name, Collins Spencer, who holds 1,200 shares, suggesting that IndoEx is a sole proprietorship.

The British registrar later overturned the notice against IndoEx LTD. Nonetheless, the exchange continues to operate without approval from the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

FCA Directory did not return results that match IndoEx LTD

The research led to three important findings:

  • The WEBD price pump and dump comes from an exchange called IndoEx which operates under a UK registered entity called IndoEx LTD.
  • Collins Spencer, the company’s sole stakeholder, doesn’t exist anywhere on social media.
  • IndoEx’s LinkedIn profile boasts of 10 to 50 employees, but only three of them use the business-centric social media service. All of them have hidden LinkedIn profiles and are from Indonesia, not the UK.

Evidence so far suggests that IndoEx helped single-handedly pump and deflate the WEBD token on Monday. The token traded flat on Tuesday.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Cryptocurrency

Ethereum Might Dethrone Bitcoin as Best Crypto Store of Value, Study Argues – Bitcoin News

Published

on

A recent paper authored by members of several universities including Sydney and Macquarie argues that recent changes in Ethereum’s monetary policy make it a better store of value than Bitcoin. The deflationary effect that the EIP 1559 proposal caused on the issuance of the currency is believed to be the main cause.

Ethereum in the spotlight

A new paper released last month by members of Australian universities puts the spotlight on Ethereum and its possible future as a store of value. The paper entitled “Better than Bitcoin? Can cryptocurrencies defeat inflation? ”Is written by Ester Félez-Viñas from the University of Technology in Sydney and other scientists and compares the issue of Bitcoin with the new issue model of Ethereum, which makes the currency deflationary.

The paper says:

We show that after the recent change in its transaction protocol, the digital currency Ethereum has a significantly lower net emission rate of tokens than Bitcoin, which is achieved through the annihilation of the fees
associated with every transaction.

This has to do with the activation of EIP-1559, a proposal that burns Ethereum in proportion to the use of the network. While this proposal encountered resistance when it was presented – mainly from miners and mining pools – it is now contributing to this new appreciation of Ethereum as a potentially deflationary currency in the future.

Burning fees

The implementation of EIP-1559 resulted in the network burning a significant amount of Ethereum in fees. This change has resulted in more than a million ETH being withdrawn from circulation after just three months of its implementation on the mainnet. The study notes:

In many cases, the amount of Ethereum burned exceeds the creation of new tokens by the network, resulting in Ethereum potentially becoming the world’s first deflationary currency. We argue that this offers better inflationary hedging properties than Bitcoin, and therefore Ether may offer better long-term storage of value than Bitcoin.

Other cryptocurrency projects use similar burning schemes in hopes of recreating the same effect. Binance Coin recently activated an update for its network that also implemented fee burning. However, Binance Coin and Ethereum differ fundamentally: the latter has no upper limit for the issue, while Binance Coin has a hard upper limit for spending.

What do you think of “Better than Bitcoin? Can Cryptocurrencies Beat Inflation? ”Paper And Its Conclusions? Let us know in the comments section below.

Photo credit: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

Disclaimer of liability: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement for any product, service, or company. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author are directly or indirectly responsible for any damage or loss caused or allegedly caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

More popular news

In case you missed it

Continue Reading

Cryptocurrency

mark mobius: Don’t consider cryptocurrency an investment: Mark Mobius

Published

on

I don’t think cryptocurrencies fall into the viable investment category. It’s speculation that you could play with it, have fun with it, but not consider it an investment, says Mark Mobius, founder of Mobius Capital Partners.

Are the markets secretly praising tapering when it starts?

Tapering was in the foreground just a few weeks ago and is now taking a back seat because we are becoming aware that the Fed may be aware of this new Covid variant and may not tighten the screws as tightly as we expect.

If the Covid variant spreads, what happens then? How do you think the markets would adapt?

When this Covid situation struck last year, there was panic. The market collapsed dramatically but recovered very quickly. People have heard of Covid, big disaster, big problems and now they are starting to say that last time it wasn’t that bad, the market did well. So why should I panic at this situation?

Yes, the new variant is highly contagious, but not necessarily fatal. In other words, the deaths so far are minimal. So there may be times when people find that this new variant is not that serious, but people tend not to react as strongly as they did when they first panicked.

Her exposure to India was limited to three stocks. Did you do it four or five?

No, we are sticking to these stocks and are very happy with them. We’re still reviewing options, but we’re not making any changes so far.

Is there a reason you chose a persistent rather than a frontline name like TCS or Infosys?

Yes, the whole idea of ​​the fund was to differentiate itself from the indices. The ETFs are instruments that many investors use as they are based on indices. So if we offer something different from what people have now, that means doing something that the index is not involved in. It is important to us not to invest in companies in the index.

In our portfolio of three stocks, there may be two in an index rather than the main index. So that’s one of the top principles we have in our portfolio. The second thing is that we want to target midsize and small businesses that people haven’t noticed.

People don’t imagine these companies will grow. You will, of course, gradually see the value of the companies, then prices will rise.

PolyCab and Apollo, two stocks you own, are in some ways commodity consumers. At a time when we are experiencing a re-evaluation of the raw material complex and companies are struggling to maintain costs, does it make sense to rely on raw materials, consumers and not producers?

Not necessarily. If you look at the two manufacturers, yes they use steel and steel prices have gone up, but that’s only part of their total cost.

The other part is the work and other aspects of manufacturing. So the pricing implications are not that big.

Also, the good news is that the power of quality allows you to get a premium price point. You can raise prices without influencing demand too much. It depends on the individual company.

You will find that many commodity consumers continue to do well simply because the demand for their products is so great and their quality is good that they can hold the market while increasing prices.

Is there any reason for you to be concerned about your engagement in India?

We only care about one thing – the companies in which we invest. How is the situation in the company? How does the macro environment affect you? We don’t focus on the index or what ICICI or Reliance are doing. We focus on companies we invest in and find that price behavior differs from these and other companies.

Are you surprised by the kind of IPO euphoria we’ve seen with some of the emerging tech companies? Have you looked at names like Zomato or Paytm or skipped them completely?

We’re going to skip for two reasons. We don’t get into IPOs too often as they are perfectly priced. Their prices are not necessarily a bargain. Second, many of these IPOs, especially in the tech space, are based on hope and low money while companies are still losing money. We have a policy not to invest in companies that are losing money. Well, prices might not go through the roof if people are excited about technological innovations or get excited about the company and their hopes and fears, but at the end of the day we find that it’s better to stick with companies, which has a solid foundation, low debt and good income.

Many global investors investing in India are buying into private banks or buying into financial stocks. Why did you skip this?

Financial stocks are often included in the index, so we avoid them. It is often difficult to find out what is happening to the banks. So if you go to a bank to interview management and ask about the number of bad loans, they won’t tell you what happens. You don’t want to look bad.

Let’s say bad loans are 2% or 3%, but the reality is it’s probably closer to 20%, so that kind of opacity makes it very difficult to invest in banks. You have to be extremely careful. Those are the two reasons why we cannot favor banks. That doesn’t mean we’ll never go to a bank, maybe a small bank that is growing fast and solid for one reason or another, and where we can get the information we want, but otherwise one has to be very careful.

Would You Buy Bitcoin? So if you had to buy, sell and hold different asset classes, how would you classify them?

People should have some gold, maybe 10% of the emergency fortune. Gold, a currency in human history, is something you can have. Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies belong to the class of religions, it is a belief that if other people believe as you do, it will rise, but otherwise it is not an investment. It is not something that makes money, pays dividends, produces something. It is not just a currency but can be used for industrial purposes.

I spoke to a semiconductor manufacturer and said, have you ever used gold? He said yes we love gold to connect semiconductors, but the problem is its price. It’s a little too high. If it goes down we will switch from copper to gold because gold is far superior to copper. So I don’t think cryptocurrencies fall into the viable investment category. It is speculation that you could play with it, have fun with it, but not consider it an investment.

Do you think a bubble is emerging across the EV space?

In some cases there is a bubble. Every buyer rushes into this room. New electric car companies are listed or formulated.

It’s like the California gold rush. Many, many years ago, the people who made the money were the people who sold shovels and tools for the miners, and those are probably two of the people in the EV who make components for batteries or certain gear shafts that are likely to make money will. but a lot of auto companies won’t do very well.

What data point would you monitor that will convince you that it is time to sell or exit your India portfolio?

The most important thing would of course be state regulations. For example, says the Indian government, we will now impose a heavy tax on foreign investors or restrict the ability of foreign investors to limit their income. Things like that would panic and worry us very much.

That would be the number one problem. Others like the issues with income, company characteristics. We can deal with that so far. We can partner with the companies or sell, depending on what we think they will do. In general, we tend not to turn our portfolio very much. We have very, very little turnover because we have companies that we believe in and that we know will do well over the long term.

Continue Reading

Cryptocurrency

The U.S. seized a record $1 billion of bitcoin a year ago. Its value has tripled.

Published

on

The largest ever seizure of cryptocurrency by the U.S. government has proven to be a godsend for taxpayers.

It’s about thousands of bitcoins seized in November 2020 in connection with the illegal Silk Road Marketplace, a dark web forum where drugs and other illegal products were bought and sold using the digital currency.

The bitcoins are still owned by the government for bureaucratic reasons. And the year after that, the price of Bitcoin tripled.

So what was once worth $ 1 billion is worth around $ 3 billion today.

That’s a little less than when Bitcoin hit its all-time high of $ 67,000 last month. But with Bitcoin hovering at around $ 55,000 – up from around $ 18,000 in November 2020 – Uncle Sam has still done pretty well.

The government will auction the bitcoins, an Internal Revenue Service spokesman told NBC News. The proceeds from such auctions are typically paid into the Department of Justice’s Treasury Forfeiture Fund or Assets Forfeiture Fund and used to aid future investigations.

Most of the government’s handling of cryptocurrency has been far less profitable. In fact, it is mostly a story of missed opportunities.

The US Marshals Service says it has sold 187,381 bitcoins in nine auctions since 2014. A spokesman declined to provide the appropriate sums of money, but based on the price of Bitcoin on the day of each sale, NBC News estimated total revenue would have been around $ 179 million.

At today’s price, these coins would fetch more than $ 10 billion – nearly 56 times as much.

When it was first seized related to the Silk Road in 2014, the government seized 29,657 bitcoins and sold them for around $ 18 million. Today it would be worth more than $ 1.6 billion.

Back then, it wasn’t easy to sell Bitcoin, a digital currency created using blockchain technology and stored in what are known as digital wallets. The government is concerned that there will be no buyers, said Sharon Cohen Levin, who headed the money laundering and asset deterioration division of the US Attorney’s Office for the southern borough of New York for two decades.

“It was insanely difficult figuring out how to do it,” she said.

In hindsight, simply storing the bitcoin would have made a fortune, but for better or for worse, the government is unable to hold cryptocurrencies for investment purposes.

Silk Road was an anonymous marketplace for criminal activity. Its founder, Ross Ulbricht, was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2015 after being convicted of money laundering and drug trafficking.

The $ 1 billion seizure last year came after the IRS used software company Chainalysis to identify 54 previously undiscovered Bitcoin transactions carried out by Silk Road, the IRS said.

Those funds were traced back to a Bitcoin address belonging to an unidentified person who hacked into Silk Road and stole the money, according to court records.

“Following this investigation into the hack, law enforcement officials confiscated several thousand bitcoins on November 3, 2020. On November 4, 2020, the confiscated Bitcoin was valued at over $ 1 billion, ”the complaint said.

And now it’s worth a lot more.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending