Again, the lending wasn't a Ponzi
It was a ponzi. They advertised unrealistic return rates and last bagholders didn't get their money back. Your mental gymnastics can't change that fact.
Again another nutty one. So if you're holding bitcoin and all the whales dump it doesn't it make it the same thing? There is nothing that's going to keep the price of bitcoin up if everyone sells it at the same time.
Bitconnect didn't dump any coins! I showed that on the coinmarketcap graph. Very small volumes on the exchanges around the time of the dump. They probably did the opposite and bought it back cheap. How could they have been dumping a coin that has 100% yearly inflation and rises from 16 cents (I think the lowest) to close to $500 in a year and is freely traded on lots of exchanges??
You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.
Im quotting this for references, bookmarked this and archived it as well. It will be nice to show this back to you once the whole empire ended and check what your reaction will be
You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.
If Unrealistic return rates isnt considered as ponzi to you then what would it be? a gift?
You are probably still young but I can ensure you that suchmoon and I has been here quite some time and has seen alot of these kinds of things dissapearing