Ok... So new question, why do some of the exchanges vary by a lot on the value of the coins? Like using bitfolio was seeing bitfinex stating BTC is 13k, while Coinbase stating 14.5k Never mind, it looks like it all works out to not making much moving between exchanges due to fees/time
So day over day change. Bought X amount of LTC at $254 wacocc Bought X amount of BTC at 12,600 wacocc Selling 60 % of both at $400 & $17,800 Selling 30% of both at $320 & $16,200 10% liquid for alt coin xfers. SIL
ETH I bought much less. 150 shares @ $642 WACOCC. 40 @ 775(near it rn) 50 @ 812 60 @ 900 If all actualizes, plus 30k not much. Eth we don't have the size. SIL
Anyone hear about this FUN coin? Probably super volitale but casino/gaming backing could be huge for long play (maybe). Anyway I know I need to join the discord and I will soon, unfortunately in the middle of a remodel and my home office setup is all taken apart... Lastly, thanks again to everyone, I finally made some trades wooooOoo!
Bought in after their token sale started, promising idea to me. Also got the previous CEO of William Hill (huge betting company) on board and should partner up with some casinos soon.
So glad you're in on this one makes me feel a bit better, I've been reading up on this quite a bit lately. I'll definitely join you guys soon on discord.
They supported the Segwit2x hard fork, planning to immediately offer the new coin and they would "let the market decide" which should have the BTC ticker, IIRC. Then the Bitcoin Cash fiasco. And I think I'm missing a few others events. I can see why people have that sentiment about them.
This was the case all over the Bitcoin universe at the time. Many people thought Segwit was going to be the new primary bitcoin and that the hard fork would be widely supported, similar to how Ethereum and other coins have forked and the original was mostly left behind. The link also mentions that Segwit2x wasn't going to help them anyway, so this one doesn't even fit the argument. What is the Bitcoin Cash fiasco? Everyone who had BTC on their servers wanted their BTC Cash the day the split was official. If anything, Coinbase has been the slowest of anyone to support BCH - every other exchange and many major wallets already support it. They announced back in August that they would support it around the beginning of the year and it's now a top-5 currency. It doesn't seem unreasonable for them to do it, especially since all their customers already were owed BCH anyway, so they'd have to enable a withdrawal system regardless. In terms of the crashes and potential manipulation, it's not like they can do much about that. When the biggest trading site in the world adds a currency, it's going to be disruptive. Their servers already have been struggling under the weight of December trading, so it's not unexpected that this would cause more chaos. Coinbase makes their money off transaction fees - they are likely going to be market agnostic overall. They just want there to be lots of trading. Beyond that, supporting these other currencies doesn't help Coinbase recover their millions in BTC.
I might be wrong, but I don't remember Bittrex or other exchanges threatening to re-name B2X as the new Bitcoin. It was pretty clear for over a month that the hardfork did not have consensus (#No2x?). That's a pretty hostile act toward Bitcoin any way you want to slice it. The link said *segwit* (not *segwit2x*) was not going to help them because they needed a bigger block size -- which is what 2X would have given them. I think it fits the argument just fine sir.
