Quote from: psy on July 01, 2012, 06:10:11 PM

Quote from: nedbert9 on July 01, 2012, 05:43:06 PM

Quote from: psy on July 01, 2012, 05:01:50 PM

Quote from: bitfury on July 01, 2012, 03:41:30 PM

Well. wrong point. To clarify it further - look @ transactions of BFL:

http://blockchain.info/address/1JuZT3sBomuzcFjQvVTLdXM97U6wCvazJR

Today there's 7'500 BTC is left (of total 112k BTC turnover).

That address belongs to bit-pay, not to BFL, so, you can't say for sure if that payment was for them or not.
Also, the only transaction to that adress today was of 3.500 BTC, not 7.500 like you say.
Look at the first transaction that ever went to it, 1 year ago http://blockchain.info/tx-index/1018671/3f53678ae6f8d51f004705aae9dff75c62e924fe34fb26c04c869f861fade274

You don't seem as smart as you say you are, dude. Roll Eyes

I think the point was the huge spike in tx activity on 6/23 forward. Plausible.

What's plausible is that it's a Bit-pay consolidation adress. Just look at the exact sums that get sent to the address.
Bit-pay converts the USD price to BTC each time a payment is made, so those exact amounts are impossible. Also, they use a different address for each transaction.
What you're seeing there is one of bit-pay's cold storage addresses. Ofcourse some of those coins are from BFL sales, but that's not a BFL address.

Agreed. I don't know what bit-pay's volume is, but I can't imagine that the volume from 6/23 forward is coincidental.