Bitdao Community Asks Alameda Research to Respond to Token Dump Allegations – Featured Bitcoin News

Bitdao Community Asks Alameda Research to Respond to Token Dump Allegations – Featured Bitcoin News

Following the Bitdao token’s rapid fire jump on November 7th, members of the Bitdao community have asked Alameda Research to address rumors that the main trading platform has dumped Bitdao’s BIT tokens. The dump, if confirmed, would be a violation of an exchange agreement between the two entities that prohibits offloading each other’s tokens before November 2, 2024.

Alameda Research has 24 hours to process dumping claims

Following the BIT token’s sudden drop – from nearly $0.38 to $0.31 between 11:00 PM and 11:05 PM EST on November 7th – the Bitdao community has asked the Alameda Research team to respond to allegations of token dumping. In its BIP-4 update, the Bitdao community said that if the request “is not met and if sufficient alternative evidence or answers are not provided” within 24 hours, a vote to determine the fate of the FTT tokens held in the Bitdao treasury will . held.

FTX Binance Fallout: Bitdao Community Asks Alameda Research to Respond to Token Dump Allegations

According to the update, Bitdao’s October 30 exchange agreement with Alameda Research required the former to hold 3,362,315 FTT tokens in its treasury. Similarly, the agreement also forced Alameda Research to hold 100 million BIT tokens for a period of three years. Under the agreement, both parties had committed not to sell each other’s tokens until November 2, 2024.

Fallout over SBF’s alleged backstabbing by industry rivals worsens

In a response to Bybit founder Ben Zhou’s tweet, which echoed the Bitdao community’s concerns over Alameda Research’s alleged role in the BIT token’s plunge, the latter firm’s CEO Caroline Ellison insisted that the main trading firm was not behind the dump. Ellison explained:

Busy at the moment but it wasn’t us, will give you proof of funds when things calm down.

However, some Twitter users have rejected Ellison’s denial and have pointed to onchain data that appears to suggest that Alameda Research is breaking its agreement with Bitdao.

Reports of Alameda Research’s alleged dumping of BIT tokens came as the fallout between the main trading platform’s founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) and the Decentralized Finance Community (defi) Alameda’s regulation of Bitdao worsened.

See also  CNF Brief: 5 of the week's biggest stories

As reported by Bitcoin.com News, the rumors and allegations that SBF had been lobbying rivals had prompted Binance to offload nearly 23 million FTT tokens on November 5. Prior to Binance’s dumping of FTT tokens, reports of FTX’s insolvency had seen the token plunge from just over $25 on November 5th to just under $17 at the time of writing.

FTX Binance Fallout: Bitdao Community Asks Alameda Research to Respond to Token Dump Allegations

Commenting on FTT’s dive, Joe Consorti, a market analyst, claimed in a tweet that many traders are now shorting the token and this has led to the complete evaporation of $500 million in just two hours.

“Everyone and their mother short-circuits this thing. Every single circulating unit of FTT is probably being sold short right now. FTX needs to sell dollars to meet Binance’s and retail spot selling pressure, as well as the derivative losses. Congrats on this CZ Binance, seriously,” Consorti tweeted.

What are your thoughts on this story? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.

Terence Zimwara

Terence Zimwara is a Zimbabwean award-winning journalist, writer and author. He has written extensively about the economic problems in some African countries, as well as how digital currencies can provide Africans with an escape route.







Image credit: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or an endorsement or recommendation of products, services or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is directly or indirectly responsible for damages or losses caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *