/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>53680569
Link pumped, BTC dumped to suppress it. Tale as old as time.

>>53680586
Assuming this is true, who and why is suppressing link?

>>53680619
((They)) are

Just like every other LINK breakout attempt, it got shot down by BTC dumping the whole market.

>>53680621
>>53680635
But why?

>>53680652
to make newfriends sell and foster negativity towards the only real project in crypto

>>53680652
Checkout the smartcon talks with Sergey and associates of SWIFT, DTCC, BNY. They talked abut how stinky linky could potentially be used to settle and secure quadrillions of dollars. Are there any more questions?

>>53680682
>Are there any more questions?
I do actually, if the goal is to suppress link's price, why was it even allowed to pump to 50 dollars in the first place? Why was it even allowed to breach 1 dollar?

>>53680652
So far, we have proof that:
- Nexo and other big institutions are shorting LINK
- Binance, the largest holder of LINK after Chainlink, are literally copying the code base of the project and reusing it under the framework of BSC (they want a piece of the pie, just like what they've done with ETH)

>>53680701
I'm sorry, but you're asking way too many questions.

>>53680701
Why is the reply you're responding to deleted? What did it say?

>>53680569
RLC, API3, BAND all spiked in unison with LINK down to the minute, in fact RLC and API3 are holding off much better than LINK
these "oracle" shitcoins have the same arbitrage bots, it's shitty whale games meant to distract the bagholders

>>53680746
>Checkout the smartcon talks with Sergey and associates of SWIFT, DTCC, BNY. They talked abut how stinky linky could potentially be used to settle and secure quadrillions of dollars. Are there any more questions?
he then proceeded to delete it himself so you can bite, the oldest shilling trick in the book
/biz/ never fucking changes

>>53680748
Yeah but RLC/API3/BAND are bad projects (I don't own their tokens.)
LINK good project (I have many tokens.)
>>53680756
I figured it was a self delete, just wanted to know what was said. Thanks

>>53680820
your subjective, biased opinions have nothing to do with how this shitty market operates
my point is that LINK isn't doing anything special, it is moving in unison with the broader market and specifically is in lockstep with these aforementioned shitcoins

it's a fakeout. idk if it's algorithmic or just someone's edge, "they" know LINK has a zillion shorters and traders terrified that it will randomly pump out of nowhere, freak pumps like this against the market are intended to scare them into making a mistake

>>53680839
*You're

>>53680663
Retarded logic.
It’s better for them to price you out. Token isn’t needed, simple as.

>>53680839
Yeah I was just having a giggle is all m8. Thanks for your insight

Major gigawhale (or centralised group of whales) swing bot has clear pattern, It's not only LINK, There are other coins that act in predictable manner right before or right after major BTC action.

>>53680569
see pic

>>53680748
>RLC, API3, BAND all spiked in unison with LINK
lmao no they didn't.
Link was the only one to have an actual pump.

>>53680569
LINK is an optimal signal coin for whales. The market cap/volume is just optimal: it's not too high, so it's relatively cheap to manipulate the price (aka signalling), it's not too low so it's not possible to manipulate it below whale levels. And the price is relatively stable (compared to some other crypto chains) because nothing ever happens. Sergay and his roasties don't do anything and there're lot of brainwashed bagholders "who're never selling" and have no real money to buy, stabilizing the price.

There're some other coins which could fit the criteria, but I have a feeling at least some of the whales playing with the LINK price are from here and are purposefully shitting on the linkies.

>>53681513
RLC pumped almost 30% while LINK managed a 14% followed by a big retracement
if anything, RLC was the one to have an actual pump, not LINK
>>53681836
/thread

>>53681853
RLC was higher just the day before, stop posting nonsense.

>>53681879
you're right on this, but RLC did indeed pump simultaneously with LINK at the exact same time from $1.95 to $2.22 which is almost 14%
same applies to BAND with a 13% pump and actually API3 had the biggest pump of them all at 20% but it retraced even harder than LINK
bottom line is all of them are running on the same algorithm, proving that LINK does not have independent movements against the market
check the charts yourself

>>53681941
Chainlink was literally the only one out of all of these that had a significant (i.e. much higher than the days prior) pump right at that time.
And then a few hours later Bitcoin dumped.

>>53682004
>Chainlink was literally the only one out of all of these that had a significant (i.e. much higher than the days prior) pump right at that time.
LINK pumped 13.85%
BAND pumped 13.20%
RLC pumped 13.8%
API3 pumped 17.8%
all of them pumped at the exact same time (3AM UTC)
what are you even talking about?

>>53682065
Anon, Chainlink was the only one that pumped to a significantly higher level than the preceding period.

>>53682074
anon, I think you're genuinely retarded

>>53682081
Literally everything in the crypto market had some kind of upward thrust right at that time, that's what bots cause.
But Link was one of the very few that was climbing to higher levels than the period immediately prior.

In other words: Link was sticking its head out above the market trend.
And when you want to suppress the price of something, this is exactly what you want to push back down.

>>53680569
it was the maker integration news.

>>53682115
ok anon

>>53682170
Your pic shows exactly what I said.
Here's an even clearer depiction.

During that spike, APU3 is the only one outside of Chainlink that is somewhat higher than the preceding period, but only by like 5%.
That specific spike for Chainlink sticks out by around 15%.

>>53682218
>but only by like 5%.
And only for a split second.

Link pumped and the pump stuck for like 6 hours. And then they dumped BTC.

>>53682170
>random irrelevant shitcoins are allowed to trend upwards all they want
>the second Chainlink tries to move upwards from its flatline, Bitcoin dives off a cliff to stop it

Thanks for posting that chart, anon. Very enlightening.

It was me. I'm the singular root cause of the behavior "btc dumps whenever link pumps".
It's actually backwards, it's pretty easy to tell when btc is about to dump. I just push the price of link up before every btc dump. It's easy to do this because markets are so thin.
I don't make money doing this. I just thought it would be funny.

Does anyone actually short BTC whenever link pumps?

>>53680569
quantitative eating, kek

I heard Sergey has a huge funko pop collection

>>53680569
why do you think btc dumped? if you think it is because of literally anything else in the world besides chainlink you are a retard

The market makers know its not needed therefore they dump the price to get it closer to its true value of 0

>>53682170
This image completely destroys linktards severe case of confirmation bias lmao

>>53682218
>>53682252
This is convincing, response anon?
>>53682081
>>53682170

>>53681432
See photograph.

>>53683356
yes yes,, gaze upon it with your primitive mongolian eyeball

>>53682115
It is true that three sips of the Ganges is quite comparable to the "post nut clarity" experience but that's hardly something you can market on a bottle.

>>53680619
God.