Bitrazzi
Bitcoin, Cryptocurrency And Blockchain News

Mt. Gox Trustee Wants People to Stop Relating his Activities to Market Prices

0

A debate has taken over the entire crypto community – is Nobuaki Kobayashi, bankruptcy trustee of Mt. Gox, responsible for the decline in the cryptocurrency market?

Kobayashi has an answer to this question: No, he isn’t.

It all started when Mt. Gox lost over 850,000 Bitcoins in a hacker attack, as well as $27.4 million from the company bank account in 2014. The company filed for bankruptcy and hired Kobayashi as a lawyer in April 2014. A report published on March 7th 2018 explained that he had sold 35,841 BTC and 34,008 BCH “with the permission of the court”. Crypto users noted that the sales were made in seven separate transactions from December 18th 2017 to February 5th 2018. Considering the trustee came under the category of a ‘whale’, someone who holds a large amount of cryptocurrency and could in turn easily manipulate the market, he has been receiving a lot of criticism ever since.

A report released on March 17th gives an insight to Kobayashi’s point of view. He explains that he “sold BTC and BCC [BCH], not by an ordinary sale through the BTC/BCC [BCH] exchange, but in a manner that would avoid affecting the market price, while ensuring the security of the transaction to the extent possible.”

Many people believe that the Mt. Gox sale didn’t affect cryptocurrency market prices. Some say that since transactions were completed over an extended period of time, the decline in BTC price can’t be related to the sell-off. Cointelegraph published an analysis which explained that except for one sale, Bitcoin increased in price when they occurred. The website also found a negative correlation coefficient between the market and Kobayashi’s sale.

Kobayashi has also asked people to stop mixing BTC and BCH transfers for transactions, “Please refrain from analyzing the correlation between the sale of BTC and BCC [BCH] by us and the market prices of BTC and BCC [BCH] based on the assumption that the sale was made at the time the BTC and BCC [BCH] were transferred from BTC/BCC [BCH] addresses that I manage, as such assumption is incorrect.”

However, many users don’t believe the statements mentioned above. Trustnodes.com wrote that public addresses were being observed for any activity. Blockchain data also showed that both events were largely connected to each other. The same sentiments were repeated by a Redditor who said that the correlation existed between “drop and timing”. People who had been watching these addresses ever since the hack, or those with insider information, or whales and hodlers, reacted to these sales, in turn causing the drop in Bitcoin’s price.

Image Credit: Deposit Photos

Comments