Is anyone else starting to become a bit worried? mod note in first post

Rob2D

Uh oh. F2Pool dumping more. We could be seeing red all over again.

el diablo

DyldeBrill wrote: »

Does anyone know the best platform to buy Rubic (RBC)?

Looking at a few but will take any suggestions.

How is everyone's crypto going at the moment. I sold all of my BC, ETH (way too early but a profit nonetheless).

I have very little in crypto now currently. Have bought 2 Litecoin for the long term and spread the rest over XLM & GRT. I'm not looking for a quick profit earner - more a slow burner that will pay off :-)

Use CoinGecko for information on exchanges.

https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/rubic#markets

Why did you sell all your BTC and Ether if you're not looking for a quick profit earner?

bosco12345

Rob2D wrote: »

Uh oh. F2Pool dumping more. We could be seeing red all over again.

Looks like you were right. Red everywhere late last night and this morning. Another sale on

antgal23

If 40 K BTC isn't a support level for continuation of up trend next level I see is the 30 K

seannash

antgal23 wrote: »

If 40 K BTC isn't a support level for continuation of up trend next level I see is the 30 K

It may creep all the way down to that level alright similar to 2018. People are looking at the stimulus package in the US as a mechanism to reverse this downward trend but the appetite for crypto may be dropping off for the regular Investor

bosco12345

Looks like $43k was the floor this time round. Has risen to $45k the last hour now

Pintman Paddy Losty

The tether scam is starting to unfold badly. The whole thing is going to collapse very soon. If I had crypto I'd be selling it fairly sharpish.

Bob24

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The tether scam is starting to unfold badly. The whole thing is going to collapse very soon. If I had crypto I'd be selling it fairly sharpish.

Bitfinex just settled with the NY attorney general this week, meaning the Tether case is now closed ... not exactly what I’d call “unfold badly”.


The agreement specifies that at times Tether wasn’t properly backed, but also effectively accepts that it is now backed - as it allows them to keep operating and requires them to keep publishing the same backing documents which they provided as part of the investigation:

“Publication of Tether’s Reserves: On at least a quarterly basis for a period of two (2) years following the effective date of this Settlement Agreement, Tether will publish the categories of assets backing tether (e.g., cash, loans, securities, etc.), specifying the percentages of each such category, and specifying whether any such category constituting a loan or receivable or similar is to an affiliated entity, in a form substantially similar to that previously presented to the OAG.”

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/2021.02.17_-_settlement_agreement_-_execution_version.b-t_signed-c2_oag_signed.pdf

Dohnjoe

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The tether scam is starting to unfold badly. The whole thing is going to collapse very soon. If I had crypto I'd be selling it fairly sharpish.

You were telling people BTC was going to zero also, when it was 3k EUR.

The bear fundamentalists and bull fundamentalists are almost as bad as each other..

makeorbrake

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The tether scam is starting to unfold badly. The whole thing is going to collapse very soon. If I had crypto I'd be selling it fairly sharpish.

Jaysus Paddy you're losing your touch. I think the loss of Johnnyflash has hit you hard. As the fellas above have stated, the Tether FUD has been dealt with.

el diablo

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The tether scam is starting to unfold badly. The whole thing is going to collapse very soon. If I had crypto I'd be selling it fairly sharpish.

Welcome back Paddy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkcXjholnGk

donnaille

Bob24 wrote: »

Bitfinex just settled with the NY attorney general this week, meaning the Tether case is now closed ... not exactly what I’d call “unfold badly”.


The agreement specifies that at times Tether wasn’t properly backed, but also effectively accepts that it is now backed - as it allows them to keep operating and requires them to keep publishing the same backing documents which they provided as part of the investigation:

“Publication of Tether’s Reserves: On at least a quarterly basis for a period of two (2) years following the effective date of this Settlement Agreement, Tether will publish the categories of assets backing tether (e.g., cash, loans, securities, etc.), specifying the percentages of each such category, and specifying whether any such category constituting a loan or receivable or similar is to an affiliated entity, in a form substantially similar to that previously presented to the OAG.”

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/2021.02.17_-_settlement_agreement_-_execution_version.b-t_signed-c2_oag_signed.pdf

Very strange read of this? Tether has been banned from doing business in New York and has agreed to an impossible level of transparency. Nowhere does it effectively accept that it is now backed.

Tether printing also appears to be paused since the settlement....there's quite a bit more to run on Tether I feel.

As to the effect it will continue to have on the crypto ecosystem - TBC.

Bob24

donnaille wrote: »

Very strange read of this? Tether has been banned from doing business in New York and has agreed to an impossible level of transparency. Nowhere does it effectively accept that it is now backed.

I think the document is written in a way whereby the rhetorics allow the NYAG to claim victory while leaving Tether off the hook (so that everyone can happily move on).

As far as I understand they were already effectively not directly dealing with NY residents/institutions (bit-licence and all, reason why many crypto businesses don't have dealings there), so this ban from NY doesn't change anything from the status-quo.

And by saying that regularly publishing the the same kind of documentation which was provided as part of the inquiry is a sufficient condition for them to keep operating, the NYAG is implicitly accepting that as of today and based on what was provided, they don’t have an issue with Tether's financial position (if they weren't satisfied with that documentation, why on earth would they agree to settle and close the case?). The document refers to previous periods whereby the backing was a bit dodgy, but doesn’t mention any issue as of 2021.

So I'd see the main impacts on Tether are the cash payment (not very large in the grand scheme of things) and the fact that they will need to maintain the same level of transparency they have shown as part of the inquiry (might be somewhat bothersome for them, but I'd see it as positive for the industry as a whole).

CoinTelegraph's take seems to be similar to mine: https://cointelegraph.com/news/tether-to-report-reserves-and-pay-18-5m-fine-after-settlement-with-nyag

donnaille

Bob24 wrote: »

I think the document is written in a way whereby the rhetorics allow the NYAG to claim victory while leaving Tether off the hook (so that everyone can happily move on).

As far as I understand they were already effectively not directly dealing with NY residents/institutions (bit-licence and all, reason why many crypto businesses don't have dealings there), so this ban from NY doesn't change anything from the status-quo.

And by saying that regularly publishing the the same kind of documentation which was provided as part of the inquiry is a sufficient condition for them to keep operating, the NYAG is implicitly accepting that as of today and based on what was provided, they don’t have an issue with Tether's financial position (if they weren't satisfied with that documentation, why on earth would they agree to settle and close the case?). The document refers to previous periods whereby the backing was a bit dodgy, but doesn’t mention any issue as of 2021.

So I'd see the main impacts on Tether are the cash payment (not very large in the grand scheme of things) and the fact that they will need to maintain the same level of transparency they have shown as part of the inquiry (might be somewhat bothersome for them, but I'd see it as positive for the industry as a whole).

CoinTelegraph's take seems to be similar to mine: https://cointelegraph.com/news/tether-to-report-reserves-and-pay-18-5m-fine-after-settlement-with-nyag

The document doesn't refer to any issue as of 2021, as that isn't the period that was under the NYAG investigation. The documentation that Tether had provided was sufficient in proving that Tether did mislead the public around the cash reserves held.

My only axe to grind in all of this is against voices in the Bitcoin community who are trying to paint this as a win for Tether/Bitfinex/Bitcoin. An $18.5mn fine is not insignificant for a firm that has never been able to show reserves above ~$61mn - we don't know how much cash they actually have on hand.

Perhaps this will all prove to be FUD when the first transparency report is published in 3 months time.

I'm ignoring the Deltec leak rumours in all of this as I haven't really been following that story develop around the real/forged documents.

Nothing against CoinTelegraph, but it's far from a neutral source.

Bob24

As I said, it would be a very strange behaviour on the part of the NYAG to close the case and litigate if they hadn’t been shown documentation to satisfy them that things are now in order. If they thought there was an ongoing issue, their duty would have been to kept going.

donnaille

Bob24 wrote: »

As I said, it would be a very strange behaviour on the part of the NYAG to close the case and litigate if they hadn’t been shown documentation to satisfy them that things are now in order. If they thought there was an ongoing issue, their duty would have been to kept going.

I don't disagree, but I also don't believe the now being in order was part of this investigation.

I don't remember whose take it was but it was along the lines of the settlement being a win for both sides. It's another way for Tether to buy time, while the NYAG has set its trap.

This is why I believe nothing is resolved until the first transparency report rolls out in 3 months time

makeorbrake

donnaille wrote: »

The document doesn't refer to any issue as of 2021, as that isn't the period that was under the NYAG investigation. The documentation that Tether had provided was sufficient in proving that Tether did mislead the public around the cash reserves held.

I don't like defending a centralised entity because centralised entities are exactly why btc came into play. That said...
Remember that the banking set tried to lock crypto companies out of banking services for years. I'm sure there are no angels at Tether/Bitfinex but they were walking a tightrope over an extended period due to those challenges.
They had legitimate funds on account with a panamanian based shadow bank- and those funds were seized by the US/Poland/Portugal. That triggered the loan from tether to bitfinex.
It's not smart to trust any such entity but ironically, they haven't done so much wrong (although that can never be a guide for the future as such).

donnaille wrote: »

My only axe to grind in all of this is against voices in the Bitcoin community who are trying to paint this as a win for Tether/Bitfinex/Bitcoin. An $18.5mn fine is not insignificant for a firm that has never been able to show reserves above ~$61mn - we don't know how much cash they actually have on hand.

Isn't the market cap of tether 106 billion today? In that context, is that fine a big deal?

donnaille wrote: »

Perhaps this will all prove to be FUD when the first transparency report is published in 3 months time.

The transparency reports they volunteered to provide - they weren't ordered to provide. I don't give a fiddlers for tether/bitfinex. Any centralised entity will act in its interest and not for the greater good sooner or later.

Having said that, there is also no doubt in my mind that some have been using this saga to tar and feather bitcoin/crypto - without any proper knowledge of whether there is an issue. Nouriel being a prime example.

cnocbui

donnaille wrote: »

The document doesn't refer to any issue as of 2021, as that isn't the period that was under the NYAG investigation. The documentation that Tether had provided was sufficient in proving that Tether did mislead the public around the cash reserves held.

My only axe to grind in all of this is against voices in the Bitcoin community who are trying to paint this as a win for Tether/Bitfinex/Bitcoin. An $18.5mn fine is not insignificant for a firm that has never been able to show reserves above ~$61mn - we don't know how much cash they actually have on hand.

Perhaps this will all prove to be FUD when the first transparency report is published in 3 months time.

I'm ignoring the Deltec leak rumours in all of this as I haven't really been following that story develop around the real/forged documents.

Nothing against CoinTelegraph, but it's far from a neutral source.

It's pure win compared to the atlernative that was on the table. This here's your call mate, Lamar.

CorkRed93

makeorbrake wrote: »

I don't like defending a centralised entity because centralised entities are exactly why btc came into play. That said...
Remember that the banking set tried to lock crypto companies out of banking services for years. I'm sure there are no angels at Tether/Bitfinex but they were walking a tightrope over an extended period due to those challenges.
They had legitimate funds on account with a panamanian based shadow bank- and those funds were seized by the US/Poland/Portugal. That triggered the loan from tether to bitfinex.
It's not smart to trust any such entity but ironically, they haven't done so much wrong (although that can never be a guide for the future as such).


Isn't the market cap of tether 106 billion today? In that context, is that fine a big deal?



The transparency reports they volunteered to provide - they weren't ordered to provide. I don't give a fiddlers for tether/bitfinex. Any centralised entity will act in its interest and not for the greater good sooner or later.

Having said that, there is also no doubt in my mind that some have been using this saga to tar and feather bitcoin/crypto - without any proper knowledge of whether there is an issue. Nouriel being a prime example.

The fine is a slap on the wrist but the findings of the investigation are surely the bigger story? if in 2017 only 18% of tether issued($442mil) was backed how much of it was backed in 2020 when it printed billions per week?

cnocbui

CorkRed93 wrote: »

The fine is a slap on the wrist but the findings of the investigation are surely the bigger story? if in 2017 only 18% of tether issued($442mil) was backed how much of it was backed in 2020 when it printed billions per week?

Enough to satisfy the authorities doing the investigation?

donnaille

makeorbrake wrote: »

I don't like defending a centralised entity because centralised entities are exactly why btc came into play. That said...
Remember that the banking set tried to lock crypto companies out of banking services for years. I'm sure there are no angels at Tether/Bitfinex but they were walking a tightrope over an extended period due to those challenges.
They had legitimate funds on account with a panamanian based shadow bank- and those funds were seized by the US/Poland/Portugal. That triggered the loan from tether to bitfinex.
It's not smart to trust any such entity but ironically, they haven't done so much wrong (although that can never be a guide for the future as such).

The banking set are regulated - so I see this from both sides. It's not as simple a case as many try to make it out.

makeorbrake wrote: »

Isn't the market cap of tether 106 billion today? In that context, is that fine a big deal?

I haven't seen that number before? I struggle with the terminology market cap in relation to crypto and even more so in relation to a stablecoin. Last I saw it was somewhere in the region of $35bn USDT in circulation - but these aren't company assets. I think it's difficult to say how big a deal the fine is as Tether's business model is not transparent.

makeorbrake wrote: »

The transparency reports they volunteered to provide - they weren't ordered to provide. I don't give a fiddlers for tether/bitfinex. Any centralised entity will act in its interest and not for the greater good sooner or later.

Having said that, there is also no doubt in my mind that some have been using this saga to tar and feather bitcoin/crypto - without any proper knowledge of whether there is an issue. Nouriel being a prime example.

I don't believe they volunteered to provide anything, it's a requirement of the ruling - unless I'm misunderstanding this point?

Agree on your last point - I mentioned the voices in the Bitcoin community earlier who are passing this off as a win, there's the other side too (Nouriel & crew) using it as the beginning of the demise of crypto. Both as bad as each other, and damaging to credibility of the space.

donnaille

cnocbui wrote: »

It's pure win compared to the atlernative that was on the table. This here's your call mate, Lamar.

What was the alternative and to what extent are we sure it's been avoided yet?

ILikeBananas

Anyone else see the recent splurge on NFTs as a red flag? $69m for a digital piece of art last week; $85 for someone's fart noises.

They kind of seem like the things that people will look back on after a crash and say "That was probably the time to get out".

cnocbui

donnaille wrote: »

What was the alternative and to what extent are we sure it's been avoided yet?

Any time an individual or entity knowingly provides false information regarding any type of security, there is a risk that the individual or entity will face a securities fraud investigation. At the federal level, securities law violations are punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a $5 million fine.

That was the alternative, hence getting to know your cell mate, Lamar.

We are sure it's been avoided because the case has been settled, which means money changed hands and there is no longer a case being pursued.

KilOit

Market is ridiculous at the moment imo, dead projects are coming back to life and I feel a real frenzy in the air.
money pumped into BTC few months ago then flowed into ETH then came good alts with real use cases then came the stupidity with NFT and meme coins.
I'm half tempted to move a large portion to USDC for next few weeks

Timmaay

About 15% of my crypto portfolio gone to usdt now (staked in crypto.com for between 6 and 10% so it's still going up), the aim is to push that up to 30% next few weeks, and let it sit until there is some serious pullback.

donnaille

cnocbui wrote: »

That was the alternative, hence getting to know your cell mate, Lamar.

We are sure it's been avoided because the case has been settled, which means money changed hands and there is no longer a case being pursued.

I don’t even know if you’re on the same subject as my posts. There’s little point discussing if you haven’t read the settlement document.

joeyboy11

I’ve been hearing that bitcoin is due a big correction late April. Possibly something drastic like a 50% drop from a 70k USD high.
Any opinions/insights on this? I have half a btc and would love to short it and try reach a full btc!

Bob24

joeyboy11 wrote: »

I’ve been hearing that bitcoin is due a big correction late April. Possibly something drastic like a 50% drop from a 70k USD high.
Any opinions/insights on this? I have half a btc and would love to short it and try reach a full btc!

Yes, 1rst of April is the exact date I am told ;-)

More seriously ... every BTC bull cycle has seen multiple corrections. They are more typically in the 20-30% range and 50% would really be a massive one (not impossible, but not my base case).

We have already seen a few corrections in this cycle and are likely to see a couple more later in the year, but I wouldn’t pay too much attention to people trying to predict their timing. Talk is cheap and it is easy for them to make many predictions until one of then eventually comes true.

cnocbui

joeyboy11 wrote: »

I’ve been hearing that bitcoin is due a big correction late April. Possibly something drastic like a 50% drop from a 70k USD high.
Any opinions/insights on this? I have half a btc and would love to short it and try reach a full btc!

Hang on a minute, I'll just brew a some tea so I can look at the leaves then tell you the date and time of your death.