/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>53778507
Etherscan provides a tool to look at the top 500 token holders. Almost all of them were created in blocks on the same day, within the same hour. Try to find a single account in the top 150 that wasn’t funded by the origin account. Furthermore, there is a whole block of accounts that all have the same exact amount in them.

All funded by the origin account.

I couldn’t find a single Ether account in the list of 500, from randomly clicking, that had any activity beyond just funding Hex.

Then check out this Ethereum address, with funds originating from a money laundering mixer all paying the gas fee on 200 accounts each worth 350-400 million dollars in Hex tokens. See for yourself and do the math.

These simple observations show that Richard controls the majority of the entire supply of Hex. His laziness to use a single account to fund the gas fees on 200 other massive accounts is much appreciated because it made the analysis much easier to collate.

So how much Hex does he control in total? I originally speculated from the above points that an automated account analysis program would show his ownership of up to 80%. Well as it would turn out, someone has actually managed to collate the addresses funded from the origin address and Richard’s token database shows he controls 88% of all Hex! 88%, just wow!

If Richard himself didn’t want to pay a 20% founder’s tax on a coin, why does he deem it acceptable for you to pay an 88% founder’s tax? He didn’t even attempt to make the product remotely fair and he’s playing anyone who buys into it for fools.

I’ll note that he can’t get that value out of the system unless lots of future suckers buy in to prop up the price while he is unloading, which is why the marketing efforts are more broad than you typically see for cryptocurrency.

But why obfuscate his holdings? Would there be fewer Hex token buyers if everyone knew he controlled so much and the main point of the token was to enrich himself?