The article should be taken with a BIG ASS grain of salt.   Perhaps, we could consider the article to be a historical rendition of bitcoin holdings rather than any kind of accurate snapshot of current bitcoin holdings.

Two obvious errors is that FBI auctioned off all (or nearly all of silk road related coins) and the article does not even know how to spell Gavin Andresen's name.., and even the article admits that Gavin proclaims that he had already sold a lot of his BTC holdings (whether true or not, who knows? and the article author does not seem inclined to delve too deeply for any kind of factual accuracy in regards to reasonable current direct evidence or reasonable inferences).


Don't let easily knowable facts get in the way of a good article.