Does Roger Ver control the Bitcoin price?

[piebeyb]

About 2 months ago Roger Ver spoke about the split of Bitcoin Cash and BSV.
Since then Bitcoin's price dropped from $6,500 to the $3,000 area.

Now he made a statement about supporting Bitcoin etc. etc. - and now we see the Bitcoin price is touching $3,600 hovering even towards $3,700.

So I would like to ask - does Roger Ver control the Bitcoin price?
If not - how come every time he says something extraordinary the Bitcoin price changes drastically?

Bitcoin is supposed to be free of any control but it seems like a few people have more control over it than others ... which is a huge drawback of Bitcoin in that case.

What do you guys think?

neither do I even believe the price of bitcoin is down not because of the split bitcoin cash, maybe it's just a coincidence to get a deeper fall in bitcoin prices but unfortunately stopped at $ 3500, many people predicted it was below $ 2000 including me, but we will see it again at the end of the year all prices will return to improve

[1714768081]

1714768081

[1714768081]

1714768081

[figmentofmyass]

About 2 months ago Roger Ver spoke about the split of Bitcoin Cash and BSV.
Since then Bitcoin's price dropped from $6,500 to the $3,000 area.

Now he made a statement about supporting Bitcoin etc. etc. - and now we see the Bitcoin price is touching $3,600 hovering even towards $3,700.

So I would like to ask - does Roger Ver control the Bitcoin price?
If not - how come every time he says something extraordinary the Bitcoin price changes drastically?

Bitcoin is supposed to be free of any control but it seems like a few people have more control over it than others ... which is a huge drawback of Bitcoin in that case.

What do you guys think?

these could easily be coincidences. roger might be an altcoin pump-and-dumper (bcash, dash, etc) but he doesn't control shit. he's not that rich, he doesn't control much hash rate, and people respect him less and less as time goes on. i really wouldn't worry about him.

[HeRetiK]

He can’t even control the price of his own shitcoin (BCH) which has a much lower marketcap so no, he definitely does not control the price of bitcoin.

That's a wrap, case closed.

Seriously though, Roger Ver strongly pushed BCH while trying to down talk BTC (even going as far as selling people BCH as Bitcoin), yet it amounted for very little. Seeing how little control he has over the Bitcoin Cash price his influence on the Bitcoin price is probably pretty much zero. So I believe that any correlation one may see between Roger Ver's comments and Bitcoin's price fluctuations is based on retroactive attribution, rather than causality.

[deisik]

You could throw away a few thousand coins at provoking a plunge but if the price goes down and stays down then that's looking like the 'true' price to me. No one can keep a price down for more than a few hours artificially

I basically agree with this part

Moreover, I've been telling folks here essentially the same thing about the hash war as it was likely only the trigger that started an avalanche of sell-offs which brought the prices to their current levels. However, we don't see a lot of action today as well as we didn't see a lot of action before the Bitcoin Cash split

This somehow makes you question the whole validity of your point. In other words, if someone sells a couple (thousand) bitcoins now and the price plummets below 3k, it will most likely remain there. Would it count as an organic drop? But if he didn't sell, the price would remain where it is now. Would that count as an artificial drop?

[Tstar]

Roger Ver definitely have some influence on the price like every powerful person in his area. It's like Jeff Bezos to comment some retailer without influence the retailer's stock price. But its exaggerated to talk about total price control over Bitcoin from one person.

[gentlemand]

This somehow makes you question the whole validity of your point. In other words, if someone sells a couple (thousand) bitcoins now and the price plummets below 3k, it will most likely remain there. Would it count as an organic drop? But if he didn't sell, the price would remain where it is now. Would that count as an artificial drop?

I would not call drops or rises organic. Both can be triggered by one entity. I would call their lingering result organic because it's where everyone else agrees the price should be.

Dumps that are rapidly bought up or rises that are rapidly dumped into until they're squashed signal that the majority doesn't agree with that attempt to change the price.

If the one particular person who initiates a dump to 3k doesn't do it, someone else would've been along at some point to fulfill that destiny.

[deisik]

If the one particular person who initiates a dump to 3k doesn't do it, someone else would've been along at some point to fulfill that destiny

I see what you mean

And this is where we disagree. In short, you assume that there is some form of price destiny (like where price "organically" belongs). I say that the whole thing is meaningless like when someone moves the price down and it stays there (with the rest completely inconsequential). Then someone else moves it up and it remains there all over again. In this way, the whole market may be indifferent as to where the price currently is or might be. So there is no "destiny" as it all comes down to someone moving the price hither and thither



To put it differently, the price can be both dead and alive, organic and arbitrary

[ryzaadit]

Roger can't control the market, The market reaction it's because of that news Hash War. This BCHSV & BCHABC makes the market down into the next support zone because he must cover the hash power fund. All trader just follow the trend market.

[arpon11]

About 2 months ago Roger Ver spoke about the split of Bitcoin Cash and BSV.
Since then Bitcoin's price dropped from $6,500 to the $3,000 area.

Now he made a statement about supporting Bitcoin etc. etc. - and now we see the Bitcoin price is touching $3,600 hovering even towards $3,700.

So I would like to ask - does Roger Ver control the Bitcoin price?
If not - how come every time he says something extraordinary the Bitcoin price changes drastically?

Bitcoin is supposed to be free of any control but it seems like a few people have more control over it than others ... which is a huge drawback of Bitcoin in that case.

What do you guys think?

Since bitcoin is decentralized I think he is not controlling bitcoin but people and investors are reacting to what he said through their investments channel.  In cryptocurrencies Roger ver has establish strong influence and those influence is what we are seeing in coins pricing.  I believe that in future we would began to understand all this and we should be able to invest along all this fundamentals statement.

[rdbase]

He can not do anything with bitcoins price. He tried and failed to control his own variant of bitcoin instead caused it to plummet in price.
There was a picture in wall observer which showed what he should look like now.
I will try and find it for you.

update found it!

From this post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg49704360#msg49704360

[figmentofmyass]

You could throw away a few thousand coins at provoking a plunge but if the price goes down and stays down then that's looking like the 'true' price to me. No one can keep a price down for more than a few hours artificially.

there was the bitstamp bearwhale back in 2014. i think that wall took a few days to break.

i agree though. i might give it a day or so to account for banking delays, but if real people are buying/selling a price level for any sustained period of time, that's the real price. that's why i don't buy the BS about willy bots and tether printing either. sure, maybe there were efforts made to pump the price. you think those alone could sustain bubbles (with full-fledged media coverage) for months and months? of course not. real money did that.

[mindrust]

True question should be that Can Roger Ver control the Bitcoin price.

And I don't think he can. He may affect it a little but can't control. It is not easy to control it somehow.

He does have (or used to have) big amounts of Bitcoin.
He has his tail into quite a big number of Bitcoin businesses (and their boards).

So he can affect it directly on the exchanges, but I think that he could get bankrupt if he goes on this path for long enough.
And he can affect it indirectly by affecting the decisions certain Bitcoin related companies take.

And he can (and does) damage Bitcoin with his "bcash is the real bitcoin" propaganda of bad taste and his imploding altcoins (forks).

There are even bigger whales than Ver but we don't hear about them every day. Roger is an attention whore. If you ignore him long enough he'll eventually get bored and leave the scene. Just like Craig Wright.

[deisik]

You could throw away a few thousand coins at provoking a plunge but if the price goes down and stays down then that's looking like the 'true' price to me. No one can keep a price down for more than a few hours artificially.

there was the bitstamp bearwhale back in 2014. i think that wall took a few days to break.

i agree though. i might give it a day or so to account for banking delays, but if real people are buying/selling a price level for any sustained period of time, that's the real price. that's why i don't buy the BS about willy bots and tether printing either. sure, maybe there were efforts made to pump the price. you think those alone could sustain bubbles (with full-fledged media coverage) for months and months? of course not. real money did that

There's more to it than you think

If it was real money that made the price rise from zero to hero and all the way up to almost 20k (within just one year), then where did that money go? As a conspiracy theory, let's recall that in August 2016 Bitfinex was hacked with over 120k bitcoins stolen. So how could they repay that debt? After they redeemed all BFX tokens in early 2017, they started to run "quantitative easings" with Tether, which allowed them to buy up real bitcoins with fake dollars and close the liquidity gap after the token redemption. That made Bitcoin go parabolic. Then they stopped printing tethers and the price expectedly crashed. It is basically the same thing as with Mt. Gox but done right this time

[shield132]

About 2 months ago Roger Ver spoke about the split of Bitcoin Cash and BSV.
Since then Bitcoin's price dropped from $6,500 to the $3,000 area.

Now he made a statement about supporting Bitcoin etc. etc. - and now we see the Bitcoin price is touching $3,600 hovering even towards $3,700.

So I would like to ask - does Roger Ver control the Bitcoin price?
If not - how come every time he says something extraordinary the Bitcoin price changes drastically?

Bitcoin is supposed to be free of any control but it seems like a few people have more control over it than others ... which is a huge drawback of Bitcoin in that case.

What do you guys think?

Man, seems you forget one thing, for roger ver, bitcoin is bitcoin cash, not actually bitcoin, at least he thinks so. So no, he doesn't have any control on Bitcoin's price, nor on BC. All he can and does also is hard try of making bitcoin cash more popular than bitcoin but according to coinmarketcap, his shit is on 6th place, people even prefer ripple over bitcoin cash, that answers every question.

[Shinpako09]

Roger Ver doesn't control the price. All he can do is influence the mind of those who have weak hands. Always remember no one knows what were going to happen exactly. All he say was just a speculation, to create an FUD. He is a supporter of BCH, so he will try to make that coin be on top.

[figmentofmyass]

there was the bitstamp bearwhale back in 2014. i think that wall took a few days to break.

i agree though. i might give it a day or so to account for banking delays, but if real people are buying/selling a price level for any sustained period of time, that's the real price. that's why i don't buy the BS about willy bots and tether printing either. sure, maybe there were efforts made to pump the price. you think those alone could sustain bubbles (with full-fledged media coverage) for months and months? of course not. real money did that

There's more to it than you think

If it was real money that made the price rise from zero to hero and all the way up to almost 20k (within just one year), then where did that money go? As a conspiracy theory, let's recall that in August 2016 Bitfinex was hacked with over 120k bitcoins stolen. So how could they repay that debt? After they redeemed all BFX tokens in early 2017, they started to run "quantitative easings" with Tether, which allowed them to buy up real bitcoins with fake dollars and close the liquidity gap after the token redemption. That made Bitcoin go parabolic. Then they stopped printing tethers and the price expectedly crashed. It is basically the same thing as with Mt. Gox but done right this time

that's a nice theory but the numbers don't seem to add up regarding the hack. bitfinex issued ~$70million worth of BFX tokens after the hack. from that, a significant amount was converted to equity in the parent company. by early october 2016 (long before the bubble began), there were only ~$48 million in BFX tokens remaining. all the while, they continued to do record-breaking volumes and became the world's biggest exchange. near the end of the year, they should have been making $100k+ a day in fees and it was constantly growing. if only half the outstanding october debt were converted to equity, the other half could easily have been repaid through operating profits.

bitfinex releasing $20-30 million into the market at once (redeeming BFX tokens for USD) obviously had an effect. naturally some of those people bought BTC with that money, especially because it was already in a strong uptrend. but that was literally only like ~20k bitcoins back then at those prices. there's no way that caused the market to then rise another $18k-19k over 8 months, lol.

so there's no reason to lump the bitfinex hack in there. if tether printing (as in, non-backed USD liabilities) really affected the market, it would have had to be several orders of magnitude bigger. of note: when the market topped in december 2017, the tether market cap was ~$1.1 billion. the tether market cap continued rising until october 2018 when it peaked around $2.8 billion. so the market crashed in spite of the continued tether printing.

people are always looking for explanations why the market does what it does. at the end of the day, bitcoin was pumping for the better part of a year, on massive volumes across the entire world. trying to blame that on tether is silly.

[cellard]

You are overrating the impact of Roger Ver's stack on the market. Yes, he has a big twitter megaphone, yes, he's a domain squatter using bitcoin dot com and bitcoin's twitter handle to push his agenda, and he has a decent amount of coins, but blaming the continuation of the bear market on him is delusional. He certainly helped with the whole fork clusterfuck but your thread title says "control specifically" and that's just not the case.

Also coin's wise, he's lost many on shitcoin investments, funding PR, mining forks and so on.

[el kaka22]

One person only can control the price only one way, buying or selling. If he doesn't buy or sell bitcoin than he can't decide on the price in other way. If he is not buying bitcoin to increase it or if he is not selling bitcoin to drop the price than all his talks are not really that important.

Bitcoin is not speculative in a way that just talking would affect bitcoin that much. Bitcoin cash war did affected the price but not because of the hard fork itself but because they needed to sell bitcoin to fuel their war and they needed to buy hash power and all that with it, the price drop was because of that. Also just because he supports bitcoin doesn't mean the price increased because of that, price was already dropping and needed to go back up for a correction.

[deisik]

so there's no reason to lump the bitfinex hack in there. if tether printing (as in, non-backed USD liabilities) really affected the market, it would have had to be several orders of magnitude bigger. of note: when the market topped in december 2017, the tether market cap was ~$1.1 billion. the tether market cap continued rising until october 2018 when it peaked around $2.8 billion. so the market crashed in spite of the continued tether printing

I don't think it should have been much bigger

After all, the market had already been rising, so they were not going against it (which would be downright stupid) but rather added a little more fuel to the furnace. How much a little more remains to be seen. In this way, there are two questions to be asked and answered. First, was Bitfinex printing non-backed tethers since if they did, that pretty much means the market growth was fake (at least, to a certain degree)? And, second, if they hadn't, where's the money then which fueled all this party?

[STT]

So I would like to ask - does Roger Ver control the Bitcoin price?
If not - how come every time he says something extraordinary the Bitcoin price changes drastically?

A good speculator makes the most of opportunity that presents itself.  I doubt he has any better control on BTC then many others but choosing when to try and tip the scales is possibly a smart action he is able to take.   'Control' is giving Ver far too much credit, jump behind an already observable trend would be not anything special and far more likely.   Its not one person that moves a price, if the exchanges were that thin it would not be useful as a market