Bitcoin Forum

It's blatantly obvious Eth is and has been wash traded by a single entity on Poloniex for literally months now.

Why is Poloniex doing backroom deals with market manipulators to artificially pump coins to defraud investors?

Huh?  Proof?

You seriously believe Eth isn't wash traded?

There probably is wash trading in many of these coins, but I'd say it isn't clear they don't just pay the 0.05% fee. That seems an acceptable cost of doing business to the extent it draws in millions of dollars of new money to the ecosystem.

Maybe Poloniex is involved (of which I have no evidence either), or maybe they just worked hard to avoid screwing up while others dropped around them until they ended up being the biggest crypto exchange that is able to benefit from the trading windfall, wash trading or otherwise.

Also, they just added 2 coins in 2 days.
Decred & Voxels.

Both of them pumped up.
What do you think about this?  ::)

Voxels isn't even a coin, just counterparty or omni token spam. I don't remember which.

Decred is a pretty decent project, in the sense that a lot of work went into it, and it is trying to do interesting things with refined PoS+PoW hybrid, voting, etc. I don't see any reason that shouldn't be listed.

For a while Poloniex seemed to lay off listing every piece of shit, but they seem back on that game. Maybe it has something to do with the topic of this thread; they fear the end of the ETH windfall and need to get back to their core business of listing garbage.

This is quite normal. A lot of people are expecting a rise in price when a coin is listed on Poloniex.

Yes I understand. But do you think that Polo uses this to their advantage?
Do you think they fill their bags with that coin before listing it?

can you guys help me understand what wash trade means and how they benefit from it?

Of course they can do that, because they will surely make some profit on it, but I don't believe that they are doing it.


You can call it "fake" trading (i.e. buying and selling something, pay just the fee for the trade and create artificial volume).

Or in the case of zero fee exchanges (not Poloniex according to their posted fee rates, but who knows what private discounts/rebates may exist), you don't even have to pay the fee to do it.

I'm not sure about that. A lot of people are following Ethereum, and I believe that the volume is genuine. If I was part of the Poloniex exchange, I would not risk my reputation like that. They have become a leading (not only altcoin) exchange in the world and they are making a lot of money anyways. :)

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. There are certainly other exchanges in the crypto space that charge zero fees, meaning if wash trading does occur (LOL if anyone doubts it), the people doing it don't even need to pay the fees in order to create fake volume.

In terms of Polo, I don't know if they offer any discounts or rebates privately beyond what they give everyone, but it is not unusual, or even improper, to give incentive discounts or rebates to high volume market makers. I've been offered this in the past by other crypto exchanges (not Polo).

I agree with you that the original premise of Polo being in on the wash trading is unlikely, but I wasn't suggesting that at all.

My thoughts exactly.  If one thinks that they shouldn't become one of the larger exchanges, then blame Cryptsy and BTER.  Their customers went to Poloniex.

I am not using Polo lately since I have stopped trading for a while, but I do believe that they are offering some discounts to like you called them "high volume market makers". Of course that this is not something, which we can call improper... its just doing good business. :)

You actually believe the Eth wash trader is paying 100-200 BTC per day (sometimes probably even more than that) just to wash trade?  It's obvious Poloniex has made a backroom deal with them because they'd be better off just buying the actual coin to manipulate the market rather than wash trading if they were paying that much.

As for ETH daily trading volume, it's trading in the millions in 3 different exchanges + in hundreds of thousands vs fiat.

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ethereum/#markets

So I don't think Polo is doing some shit deliberately.

Like I said, large traders might get more discounts than the public fee schedule. That doesn't mean Polo itself is wash trading, plus as tokeweed pointed out, other exchanges trade a lot of Eth too. Unless they are all conspiring, they're not in on it. More likely if it is going on, the people involved are independent of the exchanges.

There is no *might* about it.  Like I said, it's not possible they're paying the public fees because they'd be better off spending that money to just constantly buy coins to manipulate the market upwards instead.  You can draw no conclusion besides the fact that Poloniex is in bed with the likely single entity manipulator.

This is a big deal.  We already know the Chinese exchanges do things like this, but it's due to publicly having 0 fees open to all users.  This makes it so all markets are represented equally, just blocking out visibility of real volume stats.  Poloniex, on the other hand, has about a million different coins listed with only one single market being represented this way.  This gives the illusion to the untrained, outside observer that only one altcoin has any interest or activity and all the others are meaningless, when it's really a manufactured illusion to defraud investors.

And you know that isn't also happening? Maybe their belief is that showing price increases and spectacular volume is the way to sell ETH to the market, and selling a billion dollar cap coin as legitimate to market is well worth some fees.


It would be a big deal if you actually had evidence.

"r0ach said so" does not make it a big deal.

Yeah... too much conspiracy. :D

More like simple math.

Why is everyone so jelly of Polo and Ethereum all of a sudden?

Then don't use them when doing trades.

If he earns more then that, i dont see reason why not.


I don't understand why you did not stated this month ago when was obvious? I mention several times in Monero speculation thread that sudden high volume on Poloniex is suspicious, but did not recall anyone would agree with me.  It was seen since all coins got increased volume at same time. and that happened many times. So it was one or a group of traders, working together.


But what you are saying now is something else. And i am not sure how you can prove that. Would they do that and risk their reputation when they were moving to top exchanges, even without this?

My main problem with it is they're supposed to be an altcoin exchange, but now they're framing one coin as superior to all others due to a backroom deal they made with someone to allow permanent wash trading of one single asset.  When you give someone non-public rates on trades that results in one coin being wash traded to 50-100x higher volume than every other coin, it makes Poloniex themselves in on the pump/manipulation.

The last thing on earth you want is to be trading assets where the exchange owner is in on the manipulation themselves.  Anyone remember when Vertcoin hit something like $10?  I talked to Big Vern and told him to add it to Craptsy.  What did Big Vern do?  He added the coin and then immediately disabled wallets so nobody could deposit shortly after, dumped at market peak, then re-enabled wallets again several hours later.  He probably just dumped coins that customers themselves deposited (shorting), then buys back after the market crashes.  If the exchange owner is in on any type of manipulation, traders are screwed and there is no reason to go anywhere near the coin.

I totally agree.  You need to treat all costumers equally.  All need to have same fee.  But how we can be sure, this is true?  As i stated before, they risk to much.
If your complain is that ETH fees are lower then for other coins i don see that as something bad. If they offer this to all traders.

They can also make no fee trades if they want. As long as they are for all traders and everyone know that and assume that part of volume can be fake.

Why do you assume that there is one person doing all the trades on Ether? More likely there are lots of smaller traders, who are trading on margin, which is why you see such a huge volume. Ether's volume on Kraken and other places is pretty big too.

When that Mike Hearn thing happened, lots of bitcoin traders switched to Ether - ETH got lucky in that their coin was being promoted at the same time. If the Hearn thing had happened two years earlier, the rush of money fleeing bitcoin would have gone into Doge.

If you look at the btc/usd charts and the ETH/USD charts, they are negatively correlated. This is being caused by bitcoin traders finding something new and more profitable to trade.

@alyssa85

because trades started at same hour, on at least 5-10 moments. for like 5-10 coins. It was one guy or a group of guys work close together, to manipulate market. Yes, they used all tools possible so knew when they must do something for best result.

Please show your proof.  These are serious allegations.

Its going to be alright folks, the kind of wash trading - OKCoin is soon adding ETH pairs so there is no way Polo will be able to compete in the wash trading game.

Roach, is this you? 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4jg1br/psa_poloniex_is_close_to_insolvency/

Haha.

These are some serious accusations...

no

Roach has had a bug up his ass ever since he invested in BTS and the trolls on Polo dumped on him. He whined and complained that these markets don't have enough liquidity to support margin trading. He's right, but so is the fanatic standing on the corner yelling the Apocalypse is coming. I have lines plotted from 6 months ago on Bitstamp, and its a joke how obvious BTC trades. These markets trade like the guy who plays ABC poker. Yes Roach, Polo is a turd festival, but so is everything else in this rigged world. To me, you are nothing but another mushroom farmer.

No Eth shills please.

Yes, I am a shill! And you are a guy who trashes anything but his own interests. I know I am a joke, but you have no idea the joke is on you.  ;)

Yeah. It is interesting. Poloniex was hacked back in 2014 and lost 12% of it's coins. See

http://www.coindesk.com/poloniex-loses-12-3-bitcoins-latest-bitcoin-exchange-hack/

But I haven't heard of any hacking since. After the original hack they raised their fees to make back the money. Fees have since gone down and they don't charge high exit fees either (which is a sign of trouble).

I can't find any information about whether they have raised any start-up capital (the reason exchanges like Coinbase and Kraken are safe is because they have a large amount of venture capital as a cushion, letting them ride out problems).

r0ach,

bl234st is right for one thing. Judging by your threads and posts, you are looking like a very negative person. I'm not blaming you, I'm just pointing to the facts...


I know about that one. This subject could be very controversial, because if some exchange make an announcement about a hack, it may scare a lot of people thus leading to its failure. I can say (in some way) that I see nothing wrong If they are indeed hacked and then quietly solved the problem, without going public. 

Do they have any venture capital backing them? If they do, they are safe, because that money acts like a cushion if they are hacked. I googled but I couldn't find anything.

There are several ways to manage the risk of hacking if you are an exchange. Get insurance (lots of traditional banks get bespoke insurance against hacking from the Lloyds insurance market in the City of London - I'm surprised bitcoin exchanges haven't approached the underwriters there - they do all sorts of unusual insurance and would probably take on the risk for a fee). The second way is to raise a lot of venture capital, and use that money to compensate customers and keep trading in the event of a hack. The third is to set aside reserves - but I couldn't find out anything about Poloniex doing that either.

By contrast both Coinbase and Kraken have raised a lot of venture capital. According to the following article:

http://altcointrading.weebly.com/blog/signing-up-to-a-bitcoinaltcoin-exchange-read-this-first

Coinbase raised $106 million and Kraken $5 million.

There are no rules about wash trades with cryptocurrency, right?  I know in the U.S. you can't do wash trades with stocks (last I remember anyway). 

It's crazy how very much we're still in the wild west,  in the frontier land with redskins shooting arrows at us and killing our horses.  Proud to be part of the virtuous side of it, not the devious side.

uuups, if this is true und polo is going down then... mhh i don't know what to say.

i hope this is not true.

I think they don't...

I'm not an expert in trading.
is wash trading illegal on its own or is it illegal only when is used to evade taxes?

Yes, if involving securities (legally these are securities), any attempt to defraud shareholders of value is illegal (this would be considered price manipulation). There is no doubt in my mind the volume is artificial, people in this space forget a single person in the real world with money could damn near buy up an orderbook . These markets don't have very large caps compared with regulated markets that state actors participate in.

Look at the doge chart on polo. Looks like a goddamned ekg.

Yup.

Everytime this guy posts we need this:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/cc/60/a2/cc60a2a0a6cfe61600a3a5eddc219ccc.jpg

Sorry to be rude, but maybe your brain power is just slightly lacking since you don't realize there are 5 billion alts and 99.9% of them are scams.  While you're performing fellatio on the scammers, most people know that none of these things have improved on BTC at all besides zk-snarks and ring signatures for anonymity (Zcash and Monero).  People like Belcher have already worked on p2p coinjoin for Bitcoin, so there's probably no reason for DASH to exist.  When I say "improved", it's not really clear on-chain anonymity will even be useful when you have to scale off-chain or via transaction bundling (2nd tier LN type solutions).

As for $martcontract$, Ethereum was just a joke from the start.  Releasing an IPO cash grab for a coin they didn't know how to make work, and we're now seeing likely not possible to work beyond a proof of concept level.  So yes, when speaking about altcoins, there's not a whole lot to be positive about.  You likely have a few video cards laying around you mine scamcoins with and instantly dump them, so your attitude towards them is positive as a money source.  If you look at them from the perspective of investing actual money, then logging on an altcoin exchange is like a Bernie Madoff theme park.

Lol ok.

And I like the new fee structure.  It encourages people to make more limit orders making the market more liquid.

There may be not 5, but 50 billion coins, from which 99.99% are scams, but you just proved that you'd prefer to just trolling, instead at least try to make some researches. One of the proofs is that you are talking to me in this way. Frankly speaking, if you do that in real life, and in front of me, you'll be in deep trouble.

You may think that I am "performing fellatio on the scammers", but where is your proof for that? If you look more carefully you'll realize that I am everything, but a scammer (or their supporter). And at least I am trying to do something positive!

20,000*0,05%=10?

So much sour grapes

Exactly.  He was an avid follower of the Larimers once.  He defended them even when the Larimers were sucking the Bitshares community dry.  Now he sold all his BTS and is making whining these boards his hobby.

Wrong.  I talked to Larimer stating why their system wasn't anti-fragile enough and needed to be changed, but nobody else seemed to think so.  The bitshares forum is a giant echo chamber.

Well yea, all PoS systems are useless.  Just like unprofitable PoW is also useless (the come from beyond and anonymint idea).  Nobody has improved on Bitcoin at all yet.

Hahahaha.  Nice.  Keep 'em coming for Roach's sake.

yeah that was a red flag for me just like with craptsy
plus another red flag which is daily withdrawal "limits" for crypto
(aka "to stop bankrun on wallets because we run on fractional reserve")

better safe than sorry

dont trust "exchanges" that run without multisig wallets
crypto exchanges should be trustless just like bitcoin, fully transparent, public transactions with all trades verifiable against multisig addresses

I hadn't paid attention to their wallets.  They don't use any type of multisig or anything?

i dont think there's exchange with that support, most are on gox level of security

bitsquare uses 23multisig, but they are in beta

me too, this is what i always think and believed poloniex is doing. it is illegal in every ways. i hope SEC look into this now rather then later.

simple math ??? :o

Honestly, any exchange that allows participants to place orders in "not good" faith is in violation. All orders must be placed with the intention for fulfillment, but I regularly see massive walls placed simply to scare other traders into dumping/pumping. That vanish once someone starts to buy/sell into them.

Just try to see Polo order book, and found something weird (for me).

http://s33.postimg.org/d8n8bigwv/Screenshot_9.jpg

Belive me or not, those BIG Volume always moving.
The first time i found it at 0.025, then when price down, it moves to 0.024, then moves again to 0.032

http://s33.postimg.org/gx618dov3/Screenshot_2.jpg

For me, that looks fishy.  ;D