You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Are people fleeing BitConnect?
Also, I don't know if you've noticed this already, or if I'm missing something. I started comparing Coinmarketcap data (in $USD) to the block chain data on CryptoID (in BCC) by converting with an appropriate exchange rate. It looks like about 80% of daily volume is done off of any exchanges. Here is my preliminary analysis:
Also, I noted that the following days within the past year did not have enough block chain transaction volume for the minimum possible exchange transaction volume:
Google Sheet Link: http://bit.ly/2xSRblr
CMC data: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitconnect/historical-data/
CryptoID data: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bcc/#!overview
Am I missing something here?
I read somewhere on the internet that BitConnect "pressured" Coin Market cap into listing its own exchange. If you look at volume on Coin Market Cap by exchange.
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitconnect/#markets
you will see 94% of all the volume is on BCC. Lets talk about gorillas? Where does an 800 pound gorilla sit? Wherever he wants! Since, 94% of the volume is on the BCC exchange and Bitconnect directly and indirectly controls the BCC exchange it is not exactly a "free" market. BCC is that 800 pound gorilla. Since 94% of the volume is on that market, they can control the volume and prices. So that basically means they can send whatever data they want to coinmarketcap.
I would also share I got a love hate relationship with coin market cap. I love the data they have it is very useful and all put together, I think it is one of the best sources of data around right now. If you know of a better one please share. That said, their data is not exactly clean, honest or filtered. Basically, a lot of data is crap. I detailed that here... https://steemit.com/ico/@cryptick/how-to-fake-a-top-100-alt-coin-chart
and also here...
https://steemit.com/bitconnect/@cryptick/bitconnect-scam-inside-the-bitconnect-trading-bot-post-2
In defense of coin market cap, it is not just data at one or two of the markets, it is also a massive amount of data at any (many), most? of the exchanges. You really have to look into it closely t see what it really says. I think coin market cap is probably just doing the best they can with what they get. Garbage in is garbage out. It is just many of the pump and dump coins and cons fake the data. They have bots artifically create whatever number and type of transactions they need to manufacture the volume of transactions they think would "look" good.
I mean just imagine for a minute Bitconnect is legitimate. And it only "sold" BCC tokens twice. One when a customer joined and then once when they left.
How many tokens would need to trade everyday?
See lets go with the 8,000 number of customers and assume they are all on a 6 month (180 day) investment plan and evenly spread out. 8,000 customers/180 days is 44 customers a day. If all of the customers had $1,400 each invested $61,000 of BCC would need to transact daily. If new customers joined at 8 am and old customers left at 11 am we would need two transaction. (If new customers bought directly from old customers we would only need one transaction.) That Means there would he $122,000 of BCC traded each day. Instead volume yesterday there is 15.4 million! This is flunking the smell test! All that volume is nonsense. If I told you I put 500 people in my car, you wouldn't believe me because any normal person knows a car holds about 6 and a clown car at the circus might hold 20! but there is no way it could hold 500. Well that is the kind of crazy numbers we are dealing with at the BCC volume. People who bought in to BCC aren't so good at basic math, so this is not a problem.
This is pretty interesting. Using the experimental wallet feature at CryptoID it appears that there are over 184,835 addresses it believes are associated to this wallet. I think the deposit pattern is consistent with it being used as a sinking fund to receive exchange transactions and drive up price. The sudden withdrawals are likely to prevent any wallets from getting too big/visible.
I think we may have been observing something similar (albeit at a different wallet) when you noted the reduction in total wallets with balances. Also, the distinction between wallets with and without balances in the image seems to confirm your reasoning in your article above: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bcc/wallet.dws?28.htm
