Background of the Lawsuit
The ongoing class-action lawsuit against Bitfinex and its associated stablecoin Tether (USDT) revolves around serious accusations of manipulating Bitcoin prices. The plaintiffs have recently made it clear they won’t be amending their complaint, standing by their claims amidst complex financial narratives.
Key Findings from Griffin and Shams
According to a filing on December 2, a study by John Griffin and Amin Shams asserts that Tether was a key player in Bitcoin price manipulation. This research claims a link between USDT transactions and Bitcoin’s famed 2017 price surge, which peaked at nearly $20,000.
In their paper, Griffin and Shams stated,
“Less than 1% of hours with such heavy Tether transactions are associated with 50% of the meteoric rise in Bitcoin and 64% of other top cryptocurrencies.”
This statistic, if proven accurate, paints a concerning picture of cryptocurrency market dynamics.
Accusations Against Bitfinex Executives
The plaintiffs also allege that Bitfinex executives were either aware of the potential manipulation or actively participated in it. This accusation escalates the responsibility not only of the exchange but of key individuals behind it, adding a layer of intrigue to the case.
Bitfinex’s Response: A Counterattack
In a combative stance, Bitfinex responded to the claims crafted by Griffin and Shams. They dismissed these allegations, suggesting the researchers were motivated by something less than honorable. According to the exchange,
“To obtain publication, Griffin and Shams have released a weakened yet equally flawed version of their prior article.”
This paints a picture of a battle not just over legal claims but also over credibility in the academic and crypto communities.
The Longhash Perspective
Adding another layer to this narrative, the blockchain education platform Longhash released research that challenges the single-entity manipulation theory proposed by Griffin and Shams. Their study contends that if Tether was indeed manipulating the market, its effectiveness would be greatest during falling Bitcoin prices. As they pointed out,
“This contradicts the claim that Tether issuance drove the 2017 bull market.”
The implications of this finding could mean that the true nature of Bitcoin’s price surges is far more complex than merely attributing it to USDT activities.
Conclusion: Implications for Cryptocurrency Markets
The allegations of price manipulation through Tether are serious and could have far-reaching implications for the cryptocurrency landscape. As the courtroom drama unfolds, the market watches closely, keen to learn whether these legal battles will reshape perceptions and the operational landscape of major crypto exchanges.
+ There are no comments
Add yours