3 ms·
This is so wild. Assuming it was financially motivated, wouldn't the involved party stand to benefit more by shorting and posting that the ETF was denied?
by traeregan 3y ago
This is so wild. Assuming it was financially motivated, wouldn't the involved party stand to benefit more by shorting and posting that the ETF was denied?
- paulpauper 3y agono, because they make money on both ways: on the pump and then shorting. The account being hacked lowers odds of approval.
- paulgb 3y agoYou could still make money on the way down and then the way back up. And you’d probably move the market more than the ~3% that it was moved because the market consensus already gives a high probability to an approval this month. I get your point that it may not rebound quite as much because the hack itself lowers the odds of approval, but imagine the optics of Gary Gensler saying “it's not true that we denied the ETFs” -- bitcoin boosters would read that as a signal that it will be approved.
- fulladder 3y agoIt could be a trader who was already long and looking to exit the position. Figured this was a good way to goose returns. Who knows?
- rhyperior 3y agoAnd that's why the most likely answer is that the message was queued to go out and sent prematurely.
- traeregan 3y agoPerhaps. There were an odd couple of "likes" made by the SEC X account during the same time period though (they've since been "unliked"), and Chair Genlser + a follow up post by @SECGov both specifically say that the account was compromised.
- qingcharles 3y agoThe message was really official looking too, which is how they fooled me.