Bitcoin Forum

Polo is to face class action suit for insider trading before announcement of delisting 17 altcoins,evidence being gathered now according to a coin developer.

This sounds like an "Alternative" Truth.  :D

There is only one truth when it comes to Polo.

"Maybe" this news about the lawsuit is organized by those delisted coins owner and devs. Polo is one of the big exchanges and to be listed in Polo is like a prestige or something like having a "wow" factor. Not all coins was listed there and to be delisted is something like a setback. Anyway, those delisted coins can be listed in other exchanges too, hope that if they perform well they can comeback.

Please check the price graphs of all coins delisted, on April 17.They are all similar,somebody traded/sold all the coins in large amounts before the announcement of delisting.

What is your source? Which coin developer is filing the suit?

My source is VOX it's a class action suit

as far as i can tell they're answerable to no one. their terms and conditions will probably allow them to come around and murder your pets with no comeback.

Polo made some people so rich that can now afford lawyers to sue Poloniex.

i remembered back in the old day polo is just a shit exchange, they would lists anything. what the world of crypto have change and evolving so fast.

Well we will let a judge decide whether insider trading in crypto is allowed by an exchange

craptsy then bitREKTx and then some shit from montana, yeah I can recall too.

HOW DID IT BECOME THE BIGGEST?
AHHh yeah ... shit coins ... a shit coin exchange!!
Is #1 in volume, fucjk
you Gemni stamp gate bases and KYC crack N squidheads

Why not role out a side Exchange?

If you are rolling in money.  Then just build a page 2.

It's nowhere near the biggest it's a minor exchange compared to bitfinex and others.Bitfinex daily turnover will exceed its weekly.

uh, have you lost the ability to count somewhere along the way?

let alone figure out that bitfinex doesn't work any more.

Please post the names of all 17 altcoins and I am very sure there will be no such lawsuit. They are scam cryptocoins that were used for pump and dumps. Poloniex had the reserved right to delist them. If there were people involved in insider trading it was the coin developers themselves.

And how did all 17  know before the Polo announcement.Please post constructive comments

If Poloniex kills Sparky I will murder every last one of those bastards.

Unity (Supernet), one of the best projects going on in Crypto, but it´s just about volume, Polo is an exchange, after all.

Bitfinex is trading fine and turned over 44 million dollars yesterday,it cannot take deposits or withdrawals by bank wire from some countries/banks

There's no law that they have to add coins and keep them forever on their exchange. What's your news source?

Just google "Unity", "Supernet", and i guaranty, your brain will stick to the window  :)
It will be a mess, for sure . . .

I don't think insider trading regulations apply to cryptocurrencies, only stock or other SEC regulated securities. At least... not yet.

Any insider trading regulations that pertained to cryptocurrencies would be hard to enforce and prove too.

Maybe not insider trading but fraud is conceivable. That covers a lot more bases.

No fraud in "Unity" "Supernet" going on. See for yourself. Then come back, and clobb me to death.

and: insider trading ? Of course it happens, all the time !

Please, this is cherry picked data. There were LOTS of coins pumping the week Polo announced the delist. Examples: APM, DGB, EMC2, FTC, GAME, PINK, POT, XEM... Look at the charts, they all pumped during the same period. One has nothing to do with the other.

Polo traded 62,000BTC in 24 hours. With just Ripple.

This will be fun to watch. Doesn't matter if there was any or not or even if Polo "wins". If it ever gets to discovery all hell will break loose. I would think Polo would settle out of court before it ever reached that and probably use everyone's BTC to do it lol.. Oh yes, this will be fun.

How much of that volume is real :)

I don't think anyone has moral right to sue them for insider trading. If they did it, they just acted accordingly to their power, using markets. No one was forced to sell or buy there. Insider trading is one shit of a concept if you ask me.

It would not make any sense to insider trade those coins because you can't short them anyways.

Plus look at the volume today 142953 BTC, with 0.2% trade fees both ways thats like $750,000 of daily commisions alone. Not including the other 3 currenies.

It makes no sense what so ever for them to commit insider trading.

Insider trading is never allowed.. Doesn't matter if it is only stock or regulated securities.

That it is difficult or impossible to enforce in crypto is another thing ofcourse.

I am glad Poloniex is delisting the crab. I am not sure if I am the only one but I have problems with Poloniex user interface - it is sometimes pretty slow and clumsy - probably one reason is that there is so much crab listed so better to get rid off them and focus on a few quality coins and offer them high liquidity and margin trading opportunity.

For people here who do not know what insider trading is, its nothing to do with shorting coins or any other idea you seem to have its operating on knowledge, not in the public domain.What Polo did or someone with their knowledge was sold all 17 wallets before announcing they're delisted .Now as they were sold for BTC a judge has to decide again if insider rules apply to bitcoin and if they defrauded their clients in any way.

A cryptocurrency trading expert, who wishes to stay anonymous, spoke about the situation at Poloniex:

“There are people already organizing to present a class action lawsuit for insider trading. I don’t know if that’s going to go anywhere. That’s a ‘bad’ storm for any exchange, having your emails turned over and investigated inside out, a lot of explaining to do.”

Tristan D’Agosta, the founder of Poloniex, is apparently a music graduate, with no listed experience in coding until he created Poloniex. Instead, his work background appears to be fully in “sheet music” and “freelance fiction.” Maybe that's why their security is that bad

I'm surprised all the other exchanges like ccex are delisting inactive coins but they are not being sued so how come only Poloniex being sued for de listing,exchanges has valid reason to delist because their database cannot keep up

Its like taking kids by the hand here,it's nothing to do with delisting coins, that's their prerogative but selling the wallets of the coins they held before making the announcement can imply insider trading or fraud

since polo have a lots of traders and more and more people around him are losing money because of those supported project, better to wait for more news update regarding to this concerned as what you've mention also cryptopia delist some coins and no one react about it.

If someone says it's about delisting coins once again I will put my hand through the screen and punch him.

VOX is almost at the same level now as it was prior to the announcement... I do not see any valid reason for whining. It is obvious that Poloniex will get rid off their Voxels they have collected as fees before they will delist it.

My advice is that if you think the price is down, then buy and do not whine. If it is expensive, then sell.

It is good that Polo will focus on quality and leave the shitcoins to other exchanges.

Personally I am happy for removal of shitcoins - it makes Poloniex userface more userfriendly as there is less traffic. Actually if I am not mistaken, I have sent them a suggestion to start removing all the shitcoins from the exchange.

Well if your ok with that type of behavior I am glad you don't run a company as you would be in the jail

you probably hold the crap bag, after almost 4 years this unity (supernet) still offer nothing it have promised and volume have usually less than 1btc. this scammer jj777 already went to created another scam kid project komoto. the logo is created by some 8 year old girl for $10,0000.

polo delisting coins which sit for years which offer and develop nothing on their original promised/roadmap. again, years and years, nothing like they list today and removing next month.

Yes, your probably right half were virtually dead but there were a few good possibilities.The problem arises where Polo used their knowledge to sell their wallets or someone did with the knowledge they were being delisted.That can be construed as insider trading or fraud

The fact that there are sells before delisting may not be a proof it is Poloniex that sold. It might as well be some large trader exiting their position. You need more solid proof that it is Poloniex that sold before announcing delisting. And, if a project/coin is decent the announcement of delisting it from Poloniex should not affect on the price. Delisting from one of the exchanges is not that big deal in my opinion.... By the way, how do you know it is not Poloniex that caused the dump? A lot of selling was taking place upon the announcement.

All 17 altcoins had massive dump before the announcement just check the graphs. I was never a believer in coincidences.I hold no altcoins apart from mining fees from our pool and I just bought some EXCL as I want to try a master node,so have no skin in the game just reporting the facts  

No, that is not neccessarily how being found guilty of insider trading works.

If insider trading regulations applied to crypto, which I don't think they do since they are not regulated by the SEC...

Sure, if you have enough evidence that they acted on insider information by selling the cryptos themselves before the delisting would probably equate to a settlement in the class action.

But, it does not have to be Polo that actually did the selling of the cryptos. Disseminating the insider information to a third party, and the third party acting on the information is also illegal. Especially when the tipper receives some sort of economic benefit for tipping off the third party.

So, even if you didn't have proof that Polo acted on the information, you could probably reach a settlement in the suit if you had reasonable evidence that they tipped off a third party about the delisting in advance of it, and then that third party acted upon that information.

If that were the case, then both the insiders (tipper) and the third party(s) (tipees) would be guilty of insider trading.

Martin Repetto, CEO of Voxelus and Voxels coins (VOX) suspects insider trading around Poloniex.

“Honestly they sent no warning whatsoever, there is no problem with The voxel nor Voxelus, in fact, we are better than ever. I don’t know why they choose to delist us, they haven’t contacted us previously, but if you care to investigate, take a look at the graphics of ALL the coins announced to be delisted, they all follow a trend like if “someone” knew they were going to get delisted, hence price dropping like crazy. They all look alike.”
“We don’t have proof but everyone is saying thru the grapevine that there was inside knowledge. This can turn into a shit storm, we want to know why we got delisted, and address any issues to be listed again, also we want to know about the pattern all these coins followed EXACTLY 1 day before the announcement.”

I think that the lesson to be learned, here, is do not hold, in meaningful quantities, crypto that is listed on only one exchange (No matter how big and what volume) - unless that crypto is, itself, capable of exchange on the blockchain - e.g. Waves, NXT etc.

You have a point,people trust poloniex compare to other exchange and coins that are on their database are top coins in the market,polo is known as the best destination for the best coins in the market,they should explain this to all their traders and members.

Isn't half the point of having a crypto exchange so you can insider trade on it? I'd be shocked if this isn't going on with every unregulated exchange.  IIRC various exchange owners have even admitted to trading on their own exchange before realizing it might not be something they should be talking about openly.  Of course if they do that why wouldn't they use insider info. Hell, that's probably how they pay the Polo mods  ;D

We are a US-based cryptocurrency exchange offering maximum security and advanced trading features.So if there US-based they must comply with  FinCen’s requirements so they have to record all transactions that take place on the exchange.If a class action starts FINCEN will become involved

Maybe the developers of the future delisted cryptocoins are informed a few days before they are announced to be delisted. It would be unfair not to. But of course most of those developers are really scammers. Sometimes you question why they were listed if they had no future.

Does nobody read before they answer and I have quotes from other DEVs who say the same that they were not informed beforehand, again that would be insider trading if they had

Again. you're cherry picking data. There is no correlation between the pumps and delist unless you conveniently ignore: APM, DGB, EMC2, FTC, GAME, PINK, POT, XEM... and others. Look at the charts. There is no correlation between the pump and the delist when you factor in ALL markets.

The OP and supporters of this thread do appear to be correct.

no one is talking about pumps were talking about massive sell-offs before the announcement on all 17 coins but yes there were suspicious pumps

But as I said the exchange has to follow FinCEN rules so all transactions are recorded 

Yes, well, if you had insider information, you would have to be very naive "not" to try to hide the illegitimate pumping and dumping with apparently legitimate pump.

Pump literally costs next to nothing, especially if you actually accomplish your goal.

The shit will hit the fan shortly and it will really hit it hard

Having "insider information" does not mean that there is no ambiguity to the information. People privy to the information could have been informed of "The List" of possible delist coins, but when the "tish" hit the fan, only 17 of them ended up being delisted. This seems to explain the frantic activity with some of the other coins. In other words, to me, it does not look well for Poloniex.

I'm not taking a position on this either way, I have lots of money on polo and I suspect them of shenanigans from time to time.  I don't know whether or not you follow politics but I'm pretty certain that regulators in general, and financial regulators in particular are going to be taking the next four years off.

I know fincen and the boogieman of "terrorist" will still be an issue, but nobody is accusing polo of helping terrorists launder money, so I just don't see any serious pressure on them to follow any legal requirements these days.

I looked at the charts of these coins and compared them to the charts of other noname alt coins not being delisted and I don't see any huge differences aside from the plunge which came after the announcement, not before.  A lot of altcoins had volume spikes and raises in price on April 16th, including coins not listed on Poloniex and coins that are on Poloniex but not being delisted. The announcement came at 708PM April 18th.

I'm not convinced they could make that much money trading a bunch of illiquid, low volume, low market cap altcoins compared to what they make in exchange fees from doing legit business. I can see how someone might think they did something funny unless they dig deeper.  In any case, someone had to be a willing buyer. Maybe they have bots that manipulate the price? If they do, I suggest they STOP now and play it clean for the good of the technology and cryptos in general. Raise fees if you have too.... if they raised transfer fees to and from a bank account to .5% or charged a monthly fee of 10 bucks per user or something of that sort they'd make a KILLING compared to trading these 17 almost worthless, low liquidity altcoins.

If I were them I'd have customer service/HR reps posting on this forum at all times to answer questions like this or at least cover their butts.

That is hard to believe. After all the scams and the scandals in the cryptospace, do you still believe the developers word that they have not heard anything before their projects were delisted? I do not believe it. Information always gets leaked.

to be honest when all Devs that answered said no warning and in the past I know for certain no warning was given, unlike you I would take the word of the Devs before Polo

Giving developers warning before they delisted would not be a good idea legally.. when you make announcements like this, you're not supposed to leak it to anyone before hand to cover your butt... though if they told the developer and the developer leaked the information they would be the one liable.. it would be like leaking earnings reports ahead of time and letting people insider trade before they come out.. which I'm guessing does happen and people don't get caught all the time... human beings are corrupt and will take advantage when they can.

Who is filing the lawsuit? Some of those cryptcoins have anonymous developers like Supernet and what they are doing is not really legal. The developers cannot do anything because Poloniex could get someone to file a counter lawsuit versus the developers for making and maintaining a ponzi.

To answer a few questions here, It's unclear who is filing but lawyers have been instructed to look into the possibility of suing.Supernet should not have been listed as Bittrex would not list due to the fact it's becoming more a share than a coin.
Polo counter suing as they are a ponzi, unlikely as they would become implicit in listing a Ponzi.As I said before even lawyers looking into the possibility would draw attention from FinCEN and a lawsuit might not be even needed for Polo to get into deep shit

Got a link? Seems like there's always these class action lawsuits that get announced but no news.

How's this for strange.

I somehow have an open margin long position in XRP @ .00021461? The price never came near that, nor spiked to that price point, yet here I am with this open position I did not order, that is obviously at a huge loss because the price only ever made it around .00014.

So tell me: How exactly would an open position fulfill at a price that never even spiked to that price point? I'm sitting looking at a loss and lending fees that just keep adding up for an order I didn't make, and obviously would never make, why the hell would I buy something that's 1.5x the recent ATH? I wouldn't, but yet here I am slowly losing money over it, if I close it out Ill lose hundreds of dollars. I contacted support, but wont cross my fingers that they respond.

Polo is turning into Cryptsy.

Patterson Law Firm in FL has been put on retainer and are investigating claims against Poloniex for fraud. You can contact Alexander Passo @ apasso@pattersonlawfirm.com if you've been dealing with any issues. Poloniex's terms of service are not enforceable in court, regardless of how much they want you to think they are.

I narrowly missed getting scalped but I'm still pissed about it.  My coins are off that site.  They're throwing the same red flags as Gox and Crypsy.  And I cut my teeth on Crypsy.  Broke my heart.