COINMARKETCAP.COM IS FLAWED, and shouldn't be used as solid investment advice.

[toldy]

I saw this thread on peercointalk.org and I'm wondering if it is true:

www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2432.0

coinmarketcap.com is flawed, and shouldn't be used as solid investment advice.


For instance, Auroracoin having 50% pre-mined sitting in wallets contributing to the overall coinmarketcap score is extremely misleading and gets people to throw mining hashrate and money at it by the overvalued numbers reported.

mhps made this analogy which could hold true:

I could make a coin, premine 1 trillion, and leave some coins to be mined. I will mine 1 coin and trade it on an exchange I setup, where I will sell the coin for $1. If no one buys it, I buy the coin myself. Then I will claim that the coin has a marketcap of $1tr.

It would work too, with one exception.  Coinmarketcap.com might decide to not carry that particular coin once it was discovered that its purpose was to falsely outprice Bitcoin and show the flaws in the coinmarketcap.com formula.

coinmarketcap.com's business model is to attract eyeballs to its site so they click on the Google Ads at the top/bottom of the screen.  So far it is meeting their demands, because every where you go, every one quotes them as an authoritative source for information.

They state right in their announce posting that it is calculated as simply as this:

Code:

Marketcap = Price x Total Supply

As per Wikipedia Market capitalization (or market cap) is the total value of the issued shares of a publicly traded company; it is equal to the share price times the number of shares outstanding.

The key here is "shares outstanding, which is defined as all the shares of a corporation or financial asset that have been authorized, issued and purchased by investors and are held by them.

When it comes to AURORACOIN, 50% of the total coins pre-mined  prior to March 25, 2014 have not been issued, nor purchased by investors.  So the market cap that Coinmarketcap.com claims as being valid for Auroracoin is wrong.

I suggest that coinmarketcap modify it's algorithm instead to be:

Code:

Marketcap = Price x Total Publicly Distributed Number of Coins obtained by:
                    a) non pre-mined
                    b) not hoarded by founders who were ready with miners on standby for the announce post
                    c) actually purchased by real investors.

Now all of a sudden, guess what happens?

AURORACOIN falls down the list
RIPPLE falls down the list

You could keep going, even the great DOGEcoin would fall down the list, if you consider how much of those coins fell into the lap of the first developers and those knowledgeable about the coin before it was released.

Now consider Peercoin's release:

That's 9 days of notice to the public before release, with precise release schedule, and announced right here on the most populated cryptocurrency forum, rather than some obscure place. Check out all the other altcoins, I bet you would find that we had one of the most fair launch of all altcoins, if not the most fair launch. PPCoin has 0 premine (even genesis block has 0 mint), 0 taxation. Difficulty started at 256, unlike many other altcoins which were started with very low difficulty. Difficulty adjustment is continuous, which means there were a lot less number of low difficulty blocks.

This is hugely important.  Peercoin should be miles ahead of these other coins if reported fairly.  This is why coinmarketcap.com is only doing an injustice to the cryptocurrency community by reporting half-true numbers.

Now I don't think they do it in vain.  They report the easiest numbers to report. Investigating each individual coin to determine the real number of shares [coins] outstanding that were properly distributed and/or purchased, takes a lot of work.

So any media or true investor looking at the real market cap needs to find this information elsewhere.

www.realcoinmarketcap.com seems like an available domain. Any one up for the challenge?

From what I have read it would still seem that having a realistic average would be harder to come by - as of yet.

We're still in the pre-historic stone ages before the wheel was invented as far as deciding the true value of a cryptocoin.

What ever pretty chart and numbers coinmarketcap.com shows seems to be the winner of the day for trading volume on an exchange.

YES, coinmarketcap has _that_much_ influence on daily trading unfortunately.

If I was evil, AND I owned coinmarketcap.com, I'd buy a coin, show a great increase on my pretty charts, wait until the market followed me, and then I'd dump it.

Disclaimer: (I'm not evil, and I don't own coinmarketcap.com, and I have no proof they are doing that yet either.)

People talk about a 51% attack on coins. What about coinmarketcap.com having a 95% marketshare of the "coin valuation / statistic reporting" market?

Hello? McFly?  (back to the future movie reference)

While every one is running around creating exchanges, and new coins, we need some competition for coinmarketcap too!

Peercoin's price is what it is, quite simply, because of coinmarketcap.com, I fully believe it.  Coinmarketcap doesn't take into account how rare a coin is..... It is strictly eyeballing how many coins have been created and the last trading price of a coin.

This is going to change, probably this year sometime. When it does, expect Peercoin to jump huge points in the market, once the coinmarketcap gig is up.

The proper thing to do here is to really see how the altcoin market has developed, who deserves to be on top, and for what reason.  They really need to re-consider their top position of reporting statistics and make the necessary corrections before some one else does it for them.

........so frustrating.......

I do believe they started out on the right foot, for the right reasons. But after Auroracoin and Ripple surging so high, with pre-mines. Some thing is obviously wrong.

Please re-post and share, pleeeease...