Quote from: billyjoeallen on January 07, 2015, 06:08:01 AM

I don't have an account at Bitsamp so someone who knows more about it can correct me, but as I understand it, there isn't direct short-selling there. You have to borrow coins from other account holders and sell them, then presumably buy back on the exchange to cover your short.

If this is the case, then what if someone compromised Stamp a long time ago to not only sell non-existent coins but also to lend them out at interest? That could explain low swap costs (real coin lenders have to compete with fake coin lenders driving swap costs down). More importantly it could explain the prolonged bear market.

With naked short-selling, an unethical billionaire or group of rich people could drive the BTC price down for a prolonged period of time in order to acquire equity in the Bitcoin ecosytem at a steep discount. I'm pretty sure the FBI would consider this criminal behavior if it turns out they auctioned off their confiscated coins for a fraction of their true worth.

This is speculation, but it seems like an extremely convenient time for Stamp to get hacked just as they had an unusually large amount of coins in their hot wallet. That is further circumstantial evidence of a previously compromised security system.

Or it could be an inside job. I don't know the operators, but when I think of Slovenians, the term "rock-solid highly ethical financial management" does not come to mind.

what do you mean by "non-existent coins"?