The cryptocurrency industry comes with its own set of drawbacks and one of the major ones is Whale manipulation. Big entities moving assets in the industry has been a common affair over the past few years and the price has been repeatedly impacted due to large transaction orders.
A recent example was cited in intotheblock’s recent medium post. In May 2020, 50 Bitcoin dated back to 2009 facilitated movement in the ecosystem after a Twitter bot alleged that the transaction might have come from a wallet linked with Satoshi Nakamoto.
It triggered a series of gasps in the industry but the post suggested that major wallets making such moves do not necessarily mean manipulation.
Whale’s demographic position in the industry
According to the medium blog, most whales in the industry become large coin/token holders due to a few factors. Either these whales created an organization linked to the digital asset, or they were extremely early adopters who entered the crypto space, Hence, they usually have an added advantage over the average investor.
Whenever a large entity such a Grayscale makes a huge plunge into the industry (Grayscale acquired a total of 18,910 BTCs from May 11 to May 29), it most likely indicates that there is a sign of confidence as the investors keep increasing their original position in the ecosystem. The report added,
“Even though 18,910 BTC may seem like a big number, Bitcoin is still highly decentralized. When as asset is highly decentralized, it is less vulnerable to the action of whales.”
Even though every large transaction may not indicate manipulation, it usually leaves its mark in the industry. Previously it was reported that larger transfers are perceived with a sense of uncertainty, which may yield negative effects but is not always straightforward. The effect may also depend on the type of transfer such as cold wallet deposits, cold wallet withdrawals, hot wallet deposits, hot wallet withdrawals, or non-exchange transfers.
Although large transactions are largely seen from the lens of ‘manipulation’, it is not always the case and the overall transfer value creates an unintentional price divergence.
