KaiZXBT
--
Perhaps Tom Lee was right about the October 10th crash 🤔
The co-founder of Delphi believes Tom Lee is likely correct.
Assuming a market maker suffered a financial crash on October 10th and threatened to sue the exchange, the logical scenario would be that the exchange would have to sell off all its accumulated profits to cover the shortfall. This selling would be continuous, indiscriminate, simply selling anything with liquidity — a classic "dumping to cover losses" tactic.
Initially, he found this scenario unconvincing, because if market makers suffered losses, they would need to buy back the lost altcoins, and thus altcoins should have recovered. But in reality, altcoins didn't rise. So what was the reason?
A more plausible explanation is: market makers know that when exchanges sell BTC, altcoins usually fall more sharply, so they proactively wait. They don't buy back immediately, but wait for the price of altcoins to be pushed lower before buying in order to both regain their position and profit from the arbitrage difference.
Another important point: market makers know exactly when exchanges finish selling BTC, because they are the ones waiting to be paid. Therefore, they only start buying altcoins at the final stage, when the selling flow from exchanges has dried up.
Stories like "quantum" or "Japan" may spread easily, but he doesn't think they are the real cause of this decline.
His feeling is that the indiscriminate selling pressure has almost ended, and the market may soon have a rebound.
However, it should be emphasized that this is just personal speculation based on rumors, with no confirmation yet.
{future}(ETHUSDT)
The co-founder of Delphi believes Tom Lee is likely correct.
Assuming a market maker suffered a financial crash on October 10th and threatened to sue the exchange, the logical scenario would be that the exchange would have to sell off all its accumulated profits to cover the shortfall. This selling would be continuous, indiscriminate, simply selling anything with liquidity — a classic "dumping to cover losses" tactic.
Initially, he found this scenario unconvincing, because if market makers suffered losses, they would need to buy back the lost altcoins, and thus altcoins should have recovered. But in reality, altcoins didn't rise. So what was the reason?
A more plausible explanation is: market makers know that when exchanges sell BTC, altcoins usually fall more sharply, so they proactively wait. They don't buy back immediately, but wait for the price of altcoins to be pushed lower before buying in order to both regain their position and profit from the arbitrage difference.
Another important point: market makers know exactly when exchanges finish selling BTC, because they are the ones waiting to be paid. Therefore, they only start buying altcoins at the final stage, when the selling flow from exchanges has dried up.
Stories like "quantum" or "Japan" may spread easily, but he doesn't think they are the real cause of this decline.
His feeling is that the indiscriminate selling pressure has almost ended, and the market may soon have a rebound.
However, it should be emphasized that this is just personal speculation based on rumors, with no confirmation yet.
{future}(ETHUSDT)
ရှင်းလင်းချက်- ပြင်ပအဖွဲ့အစည်း၏ ထင်မြင်ယူဆချက်များ ပါဝင်သည်။ ဘဏ္ဍာရေးဆိုင်ရာ အကြံပေးခြင်း မဟုတ်ပါ။ စပွန်ဆာပေးထားသော အကြောင်းအရာများ ပါဝင်နိုင်ပါသည်။ See T&Cs.