The reasons behind the transactions remain unknown, and it still remains to be seen whether or not it will affect EOS’ price in any significant way.
According to the new data, there has been a lot of activity within the EOS market recently, with crypto whales moving around 22,999,990 EOS coins (approximately $85,108,534) in the last several hours.
The amount moved was split into two large transactions. First transaction carried 19,999,990 EOS ($74,028,996) from crypto exchange Huobi to an unknown wallet. Only minutes later, a second transaction took place, sending 3,000,000 EOS ($11,079,538) from this unknown crypto wallet to another one.
The reasons behind the transactions remain unknown, and it remains to be seen whether or not it will affect EOS’ price in any significant way. In the last seven days, the EOS price has been on a slow but relatively steady rise, after managing to break a healthy resistance level at $3.40. Notably, the resistance was broken by a sharp growth last Saturday, September 7th.
The growth led EOS’ price to $3,60, which was also broken only hours later as EOS reached the height of $3.90 yesterday, on Tuesday, September 10th, which is when its price started to drop. The drop has continued in the last 24 hours as well, although, in the previous hour or so, EOS price saw small growth, which took it from $3.70 to $3.75.
Is this another attempt at market manipulation?
Crypto whales are known for making such sudden moves that result in moving vast amounts of coins, and whenever they make one such move — they significantly impact the market behavior. This is why many believe that they are doing it on purpose, in an attempt to manipulate the market. If true, EOS might see significant price growth in hours to come, as many are likely to start buying the coin, since the whale responsible obviously isn’t looking to sell them.
On the other hand, the whale has broken down the amount and sent a decent-sized portion of 3 million EOS coins to a separate wallet, which might indicate future plans to start selling smaller amounts of EOS instead of shifting the market once more.
The whales’ behavior is often a mystery, and many will, undoubtedly, keep an eye on these particular wallets in days to come, trying to deduce what is it that the whale might be planning.
As for EOS itself, the coin’s performance in 2019 has been quite positive until early June.
The coin managed to go from $2.45 at the beginning of the year to $8.20 on June 1st. This was its peak in 2019, and after that, its performance was marked by a series of drops which have led it back down.
While the cryptocurrency still sits well above $3, it might only be a matter of time before the price returns to its January value. Perhaps the whale reacted to prevent that. Of course, it is equally as possible that their action had nothing to do with an attempt to manipulate EOS’ price, although many will probably doubt that.
Millions worth of USDT and EOS transferred across wallets and exchanges as communities rally
Today, almost 20 million USDT and EOS worth of more than $3 million was transferred across unknown wallets and popular exchanges.
Significant cryptocurrency transfers have always made news as the movement of a substantial amount of capital has resulted in various shifts in market dynamics. A recent transfer reported by Whale Alert, a cryptocurrency data aggregator, showed that almost 20 million USDT was transferred from an unknown wallet and the Binance exchange.
Since it was a Tether movement, several members of the industry claimed that it was just a pump and dump scheme and that it didn’t’ amount to anything significant. At the same time, the $19.95 million transfer was not taken lightly by other members of the community as the market was moved sideways for some time now. The hash for the transaction was b2db77002bea5f0d66e5411a348e7d8ca1d73e65f8ff230ca0015459ade99a18 with the transfer occurring at block 14487982. The time of transfer was 11:38:39 on the 14th of November.
The unknown wallet held an address of TMbCKxATSzuZLioEyHCNSct2YeSfvnyE1Q with a balance of a negligible amount of TRX, BTT, USDT, and WINK. The 19.9 million USDT transfer occurred in one fell swoop and not in multiple transfers.
The receiving wallet address was TAUN6FwrnwwmaEqYcckffC7wYmbaS6cBiX, with the number of transactions clocking in at 1454123. Post the transfer; the wallet had 195.655 million TRX tokens and another 518,816 TRX tokens that settled after BTT transactions. The total balance of the wallet after all the transactions was 22.133 billion TRX.
Tether was not the only cryptocurrency that was transferred between wallets as reports also showed that a million EOS tokens were also sent from one unknown wallet to another. The transfer amounted to $3.409 million and had a timestamp of 5:19 on 14 November. The number one EOS pool was ‘eoshuobipool,’ with the pool being set up in China.
That particular pool had 2.944 percent of all the votes, which was approximately 331.11 million in number. The receiver wallet had an address of ‘vqsaeptppqwh’ at 39 percent RAM usage. The total wallet balance after the transfer was $3.410 million, with multiple transactions occurring at the same time.
EOS had taken a hit recently when Weiss Crypto Ratings stated that Cardano was clearly superior to the eighth most significant cryptocurrency. In June of this year, Weiss Ratings had downgraded the score of EOS because of issues related to centralization.
Weiss Crypto Ratings says ‘Cardano is clearly superior to EOS’
Weiss Crypto Ratings, a crypto and financial ratings company, managed to divide the crypto community on Twitter yet again by saying that Cardano is “clearly” superior to EOS. While many were arguing over the merits of each project, most agreed that the company has lost all of its credibility.
Crypto rating company stirs the pot with yet another bold claim
After the ICO boom of 2017 died out, the crypto space seemed ready to adopt more serious, research-driven projects. Companies working on ambitious projects such as Cardano, EOS, and TRON began gaining a lot of traction, each one gaining an incredibly dedicated following.
With that, the competition between similar projects, or projects looking to solve similar problems, began to rise. A deep schism was created in the crypto community, every group more determined than the other to fight for the success of the project it supports.
In such a climate, any statements directly comparing two projects are almost always going to wreak havoc within the crypto community, which is why most steer clear of any controversial statements. Weiss Crypto Ratings, on the other hand, doesn’t.
The rating company gas garnered quite a reputation for its inflammatory comments online. Just last week, the company went ahead with a very bold proposition, suggesting the XRP community should transfer to XLM, as Stellar had more of a “technological advantage” over Ripple’s platform.
Continuing to stir the pot, Weiss then tweeted another unsubstantiated claim, saying that Cardano was “vastly superior” to EOS.
Weiss followed up its assertion in a series of tweets starting with its observation that EOS has centralization problems.
Crypto community united over disdain towards Weiss
In a follow-up tweet, the company shared more details backing up its claim. Namely, Weiss Crypto said that the reason Cardano was superior to EOS was that it had just completed the first snapshot and balance check of the network for the Shelley incentivized testnet.
The explanation, as many users pointed out, sounded more like an advertisement for Cardano than a well-thought-out argument.
As expected, the statement caused quite a reaction on Twitter. Hundreds of users responded to the tweet and the reactions were mixed, to say the least. While some contested the assertion of Cardano’s superiority, saying EOS had a far bigger user base and potential, others were adamant in their defense of the yet-to-be-functional Cardano.
However, despite the vast differences in opinion, almost everyone seemed to agree on one thing—Weiss Ratings has lost the little credibility it had.
Leaving EOS and Cardano aside, there is an argument to be made here that a company that provides “unbiased” ratings of stocks, ETFs, financial institutions, and cryptocurrencies should restrain itself from making statements like these.
EOS.IO Creator Block.one Breaks Silence After Network Collapse
After the recent EOS-based airdrop of a shady token, the issue of a network governance became really contentious. Today, Block.one made their voice heard.
Block.one, the fintech team behind the EOS.IO blockchain, has issued their first public statement since the recent collapse of the EOS network. From the statement, few could have expected this kind of reaction.
Block.one: It’s Time to Step In
With Block.one holding of 9.5% of the total EOS tokens in circulation, many individuals began to publicly participate in discussing ideas and proposals about upgrading the network. More importantly is the fact that Block.one will begin participating in block producer voting:
We now feel ready to begin playing our proportional role, with the focus of continuing to support healthy upgrades of the EOS network, the official statement says.
It’s ironic and obvious that this forced decision by Block.one is characterized as an exciting milestone “marked by joining the EOS community in more actively furthering the iterative advancement of public blockchain development”. Apart from the BP-voting participation, the only action that is clearly disclosed is the launch of the #EOSGOV hashtag on social media, allowing the public to share their suggestions on how to improve the EOS blockchain.
EOS (De)Centralization: New Page in History
We can say with certainty that the decision made by the EOS.IO leaders will be widely criticized as one more step to EOS network centralization. This story started a year ago when severe whale-dominated nature of EOS.IO blockchain was disclosed. 69 % of native tokens were controlled by 100 accounts in November, 2018.
According to the Whiteblock Report, EOS acts not as blockchain, but as a cloud database, in which transactions may not be verified by cryptographical means. EOSians then reported the transactions, which were reversed by arbitrators.
The decision of Block.one to intervene in the block producer voting process is because of the EOS network cohesion, when the CPU capacity of users were overloaded by an airdrop.