I did a little research, because mostly this price surge is argumented with DNM's getting in the currency, which i still do not believe.
On Alphabay in median 1,9% 2737 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 136877.
On Oasis in median 6,9% 264 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 3813.
The last 0,018 hype on polo had over 100kBTC volume, with now residing somewhere at 0,014 with ~24kBTC volume.
So if 3001 vendors are responsible for over 100kBTC volume, every vendor in median had to have ~33BTC for playing wiht XMR, now somewhat around ~8BTC each if every vendor is actively trading --> possible but not likely.
Why, simply because these 100BTC to 800BTC buy walls would to have been built, in median, buy more than one vendor at the same time --> possible but not likely.
Even if, let's say 10% of the active vendors are actively trading with the new XMR (multiply the figures buy 10) which i still do not believe, this would be more unlikely to happen at the same time on the same place. The lending figures intensify my claim and theory of a single entity playing around and making the market to the contrary argument of "natural" growth
Think about it
On Alphabay in median 1,9% 2737 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 136877.
On Oasis in median 6,9% 264 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 3813.
The last 0,018 hype on polo had over 100kBTC volume, with now residing somewhere at 0,014 with ~24kBTC volume.
So if 3001 vendors are responsible for over 100kBTC volume, every vendor in median had to have ~33BTC for playing wiht XMR, now somewhat around ~8BTC each if every vendor is actively trading --> possible but not likely.
Why, simply because these 100BTC to 800BTC buy walls would to have been built, in median, buy more than one vendor at the same time --> possible but not likely.
Even if, let's say 10% of the active vendors are actively trading with the new XMR (multiply the figures buy 10) which i still do not believe, this would be more unlikely to happen at the same time on the same place. The lending figures intensify my claim and theory of a single entity playing around and making the market to the contrary argument of "natural" growth
Think about it
You are still not getting it (several others have replied as well): we most all agree this is speculation due to the DNM news. Obviously it has not (yet) seen any "real", "natural" use from that (or at least hadn't when the price started its crazy climb).
Now, considering that, this claim:
Quote
The lending figures intensify my claim and theory of a single entity playing around and making the market to the contrary argument of "natural" growth
is still absurd.