1. Home
  2. โฏ
  3. Companies
  4. โฏ
  5. Bitfinex
Bitfinex

Bitfinex status: access issues and outage reports

No problems detected

If you are having issues, please submit a report below.

Full Outage Map

Bitfinex is a crypto-currency exchange trading and currency-storage platform based out of Taiwan, owned and operated by iFinex Inc. Since 2014, it has been the largest Bitcoin exchange platform, with over 10% of the exchange's trading.

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Bitfinex reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

At the moment, we haven't detected any problems at Bitfinex. Are you experiencing issues or an outage? Leave a message in the comments section!

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Bitfinex Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

  • Difoxxn
    difoxxn (@Difoxxn) reported

    $๐—•๐—š๐—• ๐—ฏ๐˜‚๐—น๐—น๐˜€ ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐˜ ๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—น๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐˜†๐—ผ๐˜‚ ๐—ฎ "๐˜‚๐—ป๐—ถ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐˜€๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ฒ๐˜…๐—ฐ๐—ต๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ฒ" ๐—ณ๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ฟ๐˜† ๐˜๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐˜„๐—ต๐—ถ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ผ๐—ธ๐—ฒ๐—ป ๐—ถ๐˜๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—น๐—ณ ๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐—พ๐˜‚๐—ถ๐—ฒ๐˜๐—น๐˜† ๐—ด๐—ฒ๐˜๐˜๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ธ๐˜. ๐—Ÿ๐—ฒ๐˜'๐˜€ ๐—ฒ๐˜…๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐˜€๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ด๐—ฎ๐—ฝ ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐˜๐˜„๐—ฒ๐—ฒ๐—ป ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—บ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ธ๐—ฒ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐—ป-๐—ฐ๐—ต๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ป ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ถ๐˜๐˜† Bitfinex just yeeted $BGB off their platform (delisted July 3). And the "official reason"? A vague "listing qualifications review." Translation: read between the lines yourself. Meanwhile Bitget's out here launching Stocks 2.0 like it's the second coming of TradFi. Cool story. But nobody's talking about the fact that $BGB's 24h volume is a measly $10M on a $1.18B cap. That's a 0.85% vol/cap ratio. This thing trades like a ghost town, not a "top 3 exchange token." "Deflationary tokenomics" ๐Ÿคก let's fact check that real quick: Dec 2024 burn: 800M tokens. Massive, legit, impressive. Q2 2026 Morph burn: 3,010,400 tokens. That's not a burn, that's a rounding error. Someone's riding on 2024's hype with 2026's leftovers. And here's the part that should actually scare you โ€” there's NO public whale wallet breakdown for $BGB. None. Zero. Nada. An exchange that publishes monthly Proof of Reserves for 42 straight months... can't show you who's holding the bag on their own token? Make it make sense. That green candle everyone's screenshotting? Pure market beta. Zero BGB-specific catalyst behind it. You're not smart money for buying it โ€” you're just along for the market's ride. My honest take: this is a CEX with real revenue wrapped around a token with thin liquidity, a fresh tier-1 delisting, and zero whale transparency. That's not a "hold and pray" setup โ€” that's a "know your exit" setup. Growth headlines don't pay your bags. On-chain flow does. Stay sharp, don't get exit-liquidity'd. NFA, DYOR, act accordingly. #BGB #Bitget

  • TheBull1123
    The Bull Q๐Ÿ‚ (@TheBull1123) reported

    ๐ŸšจSOMEONE JUST OPENED A $16,000,000 $XRP LONG. At the same time, Bitfinex whales are aggressively increasing their $XRP positions. Wtf is going on???

  • Octop3s
    Octopus (@Octop3s) reported

    every BIT exchange is shutting down. never see a world where Bitfinex would ever shut down. thereโ€™s just too much money in the reserves.

  • Alehandro_PRO_
    AlehandroPRO CRYPTO (@Alehandro_PRO_) reported

    June 2026 Exchange Report ๐Ÿ“ŠSpot trading volume decreased by 5.1% compared to May. Derivatives trading volume increased by 4.2%. Website traffic decreased by 0.8%.Spot Trading: Bitfinex showed the biggest growth (+21.4%), while BitMart recorded the largest drop (-58.6%).Derivatives Trading: Deribit led with the highest growth (+26.6%), while HTX saw the biggest decline (-42.4%).Website Traffic: Deribit posted the strongest growth (+165.1%), while HTX experienced the largest drop (-50.8%).

  • WuBlockchain
    Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported

    July 2026 Exchange Spot Volume Report: total $429.0 billion, MoM decreased 21.7% Spot trading volume across 14 major exchanges totaled $429.0 billion in July 2026, down 21.7% from $547.9 billion in June, with all 14 exchanges recording month-over-month declines. Binance ranked first with $196.5 billion in volume, accounting for 45.8% of the total, followed by OKX with $41.6 billion and Bybit with $36.3 billion. The top three exchanges together accounted for 64.0% of total spot volume. Among the 14 exchanges, Uniswap recorded the smallest month-over-month decline at 9.8%, followed by Kraken at 13.4% and Gate at 15.9%. Bitfinex posted the steepest decline at 59.7%, followed by Coinbase at 26.4% and Bybit at 24.5%.

  • ImperiumPaper
    PaperImperium (@ImperiumPaper) reported

    Thoughts: First, congratulations to Tether! Second, note this is for Tether International, S.A. de C.V. and NOT for the parent Tether Holdings, S.A. de C.V. For USDT holders, this is mostly what matters, but does not close off hypothetical scenarios where the parent company is burning down while the issuer entity stays clean. In theory, thereโ€™s corporate separation (subject to El Salvadorโ€™s laws, which I do not know). In practice, even without shenanigans, a parent entity that Has A Bad Time could dividend out all the excess reserves at any time, reducing the equity to zero. This could be to meet a margin call, tax obligation, whatever the parent needs money for. A distressed parent can also encourage the issuer to hold assets from or extend loans to affiliates (of which there are many with all the investments Tether Holdings makes) or up to the parent. And in fact loans from Tether to Bitfinex to cover a shortfall were the heart of a conflict with the NY attorney general in 2019. So if youโ€™re the kind of counterparty that actually cares about an audit on Tether, you 1) want to see this audit, 2) want to look for related party transactions and loans, 3) look for any covenants or governance controls to keep the parentโ€™s problems from becoming the issuer entityโ€™s problems.

  • SupplyDemand29
    Muntari Abdulhamid (@SupplyDemand29) reported

    $BTC BITCOIN BOUNCES TO $64,812 AND ETHEREUM LEADS - BUT DON'T GET TRAPPED Today's market is doing the exact opposite of yesterday and most people will misread it. BTC is up to $64,812 from $64,246 open. Low was $63,267, high $65,176. We bounced $1,500 from yesterday's dump. ETH is at $1,922 up 1.12%, high $1,936 low $1,872. ETH/BTC at 0.0297 - ETH is beating BTC again. So what changed in 24 hours? Yesterday Korea's KOSPI crashed 10% and dragged us to $63K. Today Korea crashed again and Bitcoin went UP toward $64K. That's called decoupling. Bitfinex predicted this. When stress is rates-driven, BTC dumps with stocks. When stress is stock-specific like chipmakers Samsung and SK Hynix, BTC decouples and holds. That's exactly what happened today. Second, Fed relief. The panic before Fed is over. Market is positioned. Bitcoin held the $63K support and 50-day EMA at $65,089 area, printed its 4th weekly gain structure intact.

  • whits23
    whits (@whits23) reported

    @SaniExp have not heard from you lately. Bitfinex had 30000 bitcoin but just shut down with only 3600? Any explanation or truth? @w_s_bitcoin @Pledditor

  • FreeSpeechBTC21
    No Quarter Brandolini 110 IQ Small Blocker (@FreeSpeechBTC21) reported

    @BlueDavid BitMex went down.. is Bitfinex next?

  • TradingArgent0
    TradingArgento (@TradingArgent0) reported

    @bitfinex No, it will retrace to the key level of 72k, a support zone.

  • iamrahulinc
    Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported

    ๐Ÿšจ๐—”๐—ฅ๐—š๐—˜๐—ก๐—ง๐—œ๐—ก๐—˜ ๐—๐—จ๐——๐—š๐—˜ ๐—™๐—ฅ๐—˜๐—˜๐—ญ๐—˜๐—ฆ ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฑ ๐—Ÿ๐—œ๐—•๐—ฅ๐—”โ€‘๐—ฅ๐—˜๐—Ÿ๐—”๐—ง๐—˜๐—— ๐—”๐—–๐—–๐—ข๐—จ๐—ก๐—ง๐—ฆ! Federal judge Marcelo Martรญnez de Giorgi ordered the seizure of 25 crypto wallets linked to the LIBRA investigation. He instructed Binance, Bybit, OKX, CoinEx, FixedFloat and Bitfinex to provide user KYC, IP login data, associated bank accounts and complete transaction histories. Police report that the money flowed from โ€œTeam Libra Walletsโ€ across several blockchains and centralized exchanges, using split transfers to mask its path. $BTC

  • gvictor808
    Victor (@gvictor808) reported

    @ProofOfMoney Bitcoin custodian (and exchange) failures form a long-running pattern of hacks, key mismanagement, fraud, and insolvency that has repeatedly locked or destroyed customer funds. These are not isolated events. Centralized platforms holding private keys create single points of failureโ€”whether technical, operational, or human. Major Historical Failures Platform Year Estimated Loss Primary Cause Notes Mt. Gox 2014 ~850,000 BTC Prolonged security breach / poor controls Once handled >70% of global BTC volume. Bankruptcy; partial creditor repayments began years later and continued into 2025โ€“2026. Net unrecovered portion still very large. Bitfinex 2016 119,756 BTC Multi-signature wallet vulnerability Significant hot-wallet/security failure. QuadrigaCX 2019 ~76,000 BTC + other assets Founder death + sole key control / alleged fraud Canadian exchange; Gerald Cotten held sole access to cold wallets. Funds largely inaccessible. Celsius 2022 Several billion USD Insolvency / risky lending Withdrawal freeze then bankruptcy after market downturn. FTX 2022 ~$8 billion shortfall Fraud (customer funds diverted to Alameda) One of the largest exchange collapses. Bankruptcy proceedings later recovered substantial value; some creditor classes received >100% of petition-date claims due to market recovery and asset management. Other notable cases include Prime Trust (2023) and related entities such as Fortress Trust, which faced insolvency, lost access to wallets/keys, and allegedly used customer funds improperly to cover shortfalls. Broader Context and Patterns โ€ขHacks remain common (e.g., Bybitโ€™s large 2025 incident involving ~$1.4โ€“1.5 billion, primarily ETH, attributed to sophisticated attackers exploiting operational processes). โ€ขKey management failures (lost or inaccessible private keys) and commingling/misuse of customer assets appear repeatedly. โ€ขInsolvency cascades in 2022 (Celsius, Voyager, BlockFi, Genesis, FTX) showed how lending and leverage amplify risks when platforms treat customer deposits as their own capital. โ€ขRecovery is often slow and incomplete. Mt. Gox creditors waited a decade-plus; FTX moved faster with better asset recovery but still involved multi-year processes and frozen access during bankruptcy. Independent archives tracking custody access failures (including exchange lockouts, inheritance issues, and operational barriers) document hundreds of cases, with a high percentage of known outcomes ending in blocked or constrained access for legitimate owners or heirs. Key Lessons Custodial arrangements introduce counterparty risk: you rely on the platformโ€™s security, honesty, solvency, and operational competence. History shows these can fail catastrophically even at large, seemingly reputable firms. Self-custody eliminates that counterparty risk but shifts responsibility to the individual (seed phrase security, device integrity, inheritance planning, etc.). Hybrid approaches (e.g., multisig with careful key distribution) aim to balance the two. The repeated failures reinforce the core Bitcoin principle: not your keys, not your coins. Platforms can and do lose or lock customer Bitcoin through negligence, theft, or deliberate misuse.

  • CocaColaKid_OG
    Coca Cola Kid (@CocaColaKid_OG) reported

    Drag Bitfinex BTCUSD LONGS back down to 80K. They never sell at a loss.

  • rleder
    Rob Leder ๐ŸŸฅ (@rleder) reported

    @romanwagmi @notgrubles The first guy used a paid account with a public blockstream explorer. Iโ€™d bet they are circling in on him. The follow-ons need to be smart enough not to screw up going forward. The Bitfinex hackers were caught after 6 years. People get lazy and make mistakes, which you canโ€™t do when a 3-letter agency has a task force specifically dedicated to hunting you down.

  • llm_redteam
    Slade ๐Ÿ›ก๏ธ LLM Hacker (@llm_redteam) reported

    @btcliveco spot down, derivs up, traffic down. that's not a market getting bigger, it's the same crowd rolling the same money through more leverage. Bitfinex printing +21.4% spot while everyone else bleeds is the only real signal here.

  • Stashquants
    Stash Management (@Stashquants) reported

    @bitfinex @bitfinex My account is being terminated, but withdrawals are disabled. Your deadline is 15 Aug, 10:00 UTC. Iโ€™ve contacted support. Please urgently enable withdrawals or provide an alternative way to withdraw my funds.

  • bloom_pegnmk6
    Filzahanis (@bloom_pegnmk6) reported

    @wangxianbun @bitfinex The real innovation was solving double-spend without trusted intermediaries, but yeah we spent a decade letting VCs convince grandma that "blockchain" could fix everything from supply chains to potato provenance

  • CryptoJM95
    CryptoJGM (@CryptoJM95) reported

    ๐ŸšจSOMEONE JUST OPENED A $16,000,000 $XRP LONG. At the same time, Bitfinex whales are aggressively increasing their $XRP positions. Wtf is going on???

  • TheBlockCo
    The Block (@TheBlockCo) reported

    THE BLOCK: Bitcoin bitcoin:native sat near $64,000 despite $211.5 million in spot BTC ETF inflows Tuesday and a record S&P 500 close. Bitfinex, Glassnode, and Wintermute all read the same tape: bottom signals forming through boredom, not capitulation, with no demand engine behind them yet.

  • shanaka86
    Shanaka Anslem Perera โšก (@shanaka86) reported

    On 15th August 2010, a single Bitcoin transaction created 184,467,440,737 coins. That is 8,784 times the entire 21 million supply cap. Two addresses received 92 billion each. The fix took five hours, and it was written by hand. The supply limit everyone treats as a law of mathematics has already failed once and been restored by people. It happened again in 2018, when a second inflation path was found and patched before anyone used it. The cap survived because when it broke, humans coordinated inside an afternoon. Fungibility has no such defence. There is no consensus rule anywhere in Bitcoin saying one coin must be accepted like any other, so there is nothing to violate, nothing to patch, and no emergency to coordinate around. It has been eroding for a decade and no client has ever shipped a fix, because no rule was ever broken. The Bitcoin taken from Coldcard wallets are the current demonstration. More than 1,367 bitcoin:native and Galaxy Research says most of it has not moved. Every node on earth treats those outputs as perfectly spendable. Bitcoin has no stolen flag, no freeze, no administrator and no way to reverse a confirmed transaction. They are still close to "unusable" anywhere that checks identity. That decision is made outside the protocol entirely. Analytics firms score provenance, exchanges screen deposits, and custodians act on the result. There is no canonical formula for any of it. One provider models ownership clusters, another estimates proportional exposure, another counts hops. CoinJoin breaks assumptions several of those methods rely on. Two exchanges can examine the same output and reach opposite conclusions. So clean and ***** are not properties of a satoshi. They are privately manufactured 'credit ratings' attached to history. Which means the split forming is not two coins at two prices. It is a compliance spread. On-chain a bitcoin holds its full face value. At the regulated edge, what it is actually worth is that price multiplied by the odds an institution accepts where it has been. Bitfinex settles what that means in practice. Of 119,756 bitcoin stolen in 2016, roughly 25,000 moved through years of laundering. Over 94,000 were recovered, and not because any blacklist disabled them. Investigators obtained the private keys. Watching narrows the exits. Taking them back still requires control. Some read all of this as proof of the asset's strength, on the reasoning that only real value attracts theft and scrutiny at this scale. Criminals take enormous risks for cash, gold, art and data too! The harder observation is structural. Bitcoin fixed the scarcity problem that fiat has. It never solved the fungibility problem that cash solved by accident, because paper carries no history. Bitcoin carries all of it, forever, and the protocol has no opinion about what that history should cost you. One supply. One settlement ledger. And a growing number of private ledgers deciding whose spending gets accepted.

  • Excellion
    Samson Mow (@Excellion) reported

    Many things in this post are incorrect, and it matters that we correct them, because this version of the history is exactly what convinced people the last few months were a good idea. โ€œBIP-148 is celebrated as Bitcoin Independence Day, because it proved that ordinary users, running nodes in their homes, could force the most powerful mining cartels and corporations in the industry to back down. The users had no hashrate, no exchanges, no lobbyists. They had conviction and they had nodes, and that was enough.โ€ First, the framing. August 1st is what's celebrated as Bitcoin Independence Day (I coined and popularized that term). August 1st was the flag day, and it commemorates the outcome the UASF threat produced, not BIP-148 itself. Second, BIP-148 was not just "ordinary users" running nodes at home. It was a cross section of the entire Bitcoin network, something a lot of BIP-110 supporters seem to disregard: developers, exchanges, wallets, miners, and mega whales, alongside ordinary users. Most important to understand is that BIP-148 and the small block camp carried a massive amount of economic weight. Chain split markets ran on @bitfinex through 2017, and outside of those markets I know of many OTC deals struck privately in whale groups to trade one side of a split against the other. There was skin in the game on both sides of the war, and huge amounts of BTC put on the line to show real conviction. This was as much an economic war as an ideological one, and that point is rarely acknowledged. Even the companies backing BIP-148 were taking real risk. BIP-148 was never merged into Bitcoin Core. Running it meant deliberately installing different software and accepting that if the UASF chain lost, you could be reorganized off the chain entirely. Bitmain spelled that scenario out themselves, calling it a wipe out, in the same post where they laid out their hard fork contingency. Dozens of companies committed anyway (BIP-110 supporters would likely call them suitcoiners today). On the topic of hashrate, BIP-148 had no version bit of its own. It required bit 1, which was BIP-141. So the accurate way to state it is that BIP-148/BIP-141 had 30-45% of hashrate behind it for most of its deployment window. During that time I was COO of BTCC, overseeing a mining pool that was the biggest one signaling SegWit. So the UASF threat had three components that made it credible: economic weight, hashrate, and nodes. BIP-110 only had nodes. That is UASF cosplay, not a real UASF. Another point to cover: Mechanic was spreading misinformation in Spaces (and likely other places) that BIP-148, a UASF, activated SegWit. That is false. It was technically BIP-91 that brought miners in line with BIP-141. BIP-148 was effectively frontrun and never had to be tested. So Bitcoin Independence Day, while celebrating the flag day deadline, is as much a celebration of BIP-91 as it is of BIP-148. So no, it was not just nodes and conviction. Just think about things rationally for a minute. Why would buying a node-in-a-box give you the right to dictate what anyone else on the network does, regardless of whether it's a miner or another user? Does buying two nodes-in-a-box give you that power? Of course not. Btw the whole plug-and-play node culture came after the Blocksize War. In 2015-2017 you just downloaded the software and ran it on your computer. Stay humble and stack sats, but also stay humble when people who lived through the history try to explain it to you.

  • Moloch6666
    Moloch (@Moloch6666) reported

    @vincent_vancode It's manipulated on the way down and up It has been discovered in court how tether is manipulating the prices with bots in cooperation with the biggest exchanges(bitfinex case).

  • Hodl8333
    Calkob (@Hodl8333) reported

    @lukedewolf I think a market for Bip110 coin would have settled this even before the fork, similer to Bitfinex did around bcash split. I was there for UASF in 2017 and Bip110 had not even 10% of the support that that got. Back then everyone i know was willing to sell their bcash day one.

  • GainMaxxing
    Gain (@GainMaxxing) reported

    @bitfinex Bitcoin is broken money, fiat is fake money.

  • marsclavie
    clav (@marsclavie) reported

    the timeline is suddenly full of XPL bull posts a month before one of the biggest unlocks relative to float in crypto history. funny timing @plasma here's why it's one of the worst-structured tokens in crypto. with receipts. the setup was perfect. tether and bitfinex behind it. founders fund. $373m committed to a $50m public sale, 7x oversubscribed. $2b of stablecoins on chain on day one. ath $1.68. twelve months later: $0.087. ten straight red monthly candles. back to the launch-day open. โ€“94%. the chain: tvl from $5.7b in week one to $624m today. stablecoins on chain from 2b to 838m. fees: ~$830 a day. about $300k a year against an $870m fdv. that's not a bug. it's the design. zero-fee usdt means the core use case is structurally unmonetizable. every dollar of "adoption" produces nothing for the token. they built the one l1 that can't capture value from its own success. staking was promised for q1 2026. it's august 31. not live. no date. holders are just exit liq. meanwhile their own supply api shows 10.12b+ xpl, over 125m minted beyond genesis, while their docs say inflation "only activates when external validators and stake delegation go live." explain that one. tokenomics: 10b supply, 18% floated at launch. 25% team, 25% investors, one-year cliff. sept 25: 833m team + 833m investors + 89m ecosystem = 1.76b tokens in one day. 63% of the float. then 228m a month, 5% of float, until september 2028. the most circulated bull report, written by a disclosed plasma investor, models the cliff at "roughly 830 million tokens." official docs: 833m team and 833m investors. 1.67b. off by half, in a report about token demand. retweeted by the team. "look guys, this is why you buy xpl!" lmao. plasma one, "the world's first stablecoin-native neobank." their own data: 78,400 "cards." median balance under $1. one wallet holds 11% of all deposits. $17.9m total. 61 app store ratings. revolut has 75m customers and $6b in revenue. this is a dune dashboard with a visa logo. the card pays cashback in xpl. a token down 94%. every reward is a bag. platinum requires locking 100,000 xpl, about $8.5k, for a year. their own bull case admits the flywheel "partially throttles itself": token goes up, the lock costs more; token goes down, you're stuck in it. unit economics: 3โ€“4% cashback against 2โ€“3% interchange. their own investor report concedes they "may lose a little on each transaction." lock demand: ~33m xpl a month. vesting supply after sept 25: ~228m a month. seven to one. before the cliff. cmon bros. this playbook ran before. CRO: lock the token, get a metal card, 19x in 2021. rewards got cut, round-tripped 90%. plasma copied it, made the lock harder to enter, and launched it three months before the biggest unlock in the token's life. no CRO action, just dilution and holders crying. august had record binance spot volume, 12.75b xpl, 4.6x the float. looked like accumulation. it was a binance trading tournament. 4m xpl in vouchers. they paid for volume while the token sat at the bottom. october 2025, the founder: "no team members have sold any xpl." june 2026: wallets labeled plasma team moved 150m xpl to binance, flagged by onchain lens. august 2026: plasma-linked wallets depositing again, three weeks before 833m team tokens unlock. maybe it's market-making. they haven't said a word. same month: ethena bought out its selling investors and put a fee switch to a vote. +100%. monad offered to buy out early investors. pumpfun spent $350m on buybacks and ripped straight through its own cliff. plasma ran a trading competition. the stablecoin thesis is the best thesis in crypto. stablecoins settled $33t last year. the demand is real, in lagos and buenos aires and istanbul, and someone will build the rail. plasma had tether, thiel, and $373m of demand on day one. they built a token dispenser. im not buying the dip. i donโ€™t want it. not because the idea was wrong. because they made it about themselves and not the holders. zero

  • Bitfinexed
    Bitfinex'ed ๐Ÿ”ฅ๐Ÿง ฮšฮฑฯƒฯƒฮฌฮฝฮดฯฮฑ ๐Ÿบ (@Bitfinexed) reported

    Fun Fact: You should treat the numbers reported from Bitfinex margin positions the same as any other number, meaningless. Bitfinex could just report arbitrary meaningless information. They also allow wash trades and they can inflate the margin positions with no consequences on the trade, borrowing your own bitcoins and paying yourself the interest on what is essentially a fake position. Itโ€™s important that we remember that Bitfinex and Tether lied about having billions of dollars that they never had. Spewing out fake statistics is the least of their problems.

  • cryptonoobini
    Crypto Noob (@cryptonoobini) reported

    @bitfinex capital settling in utility says more than a meme spike slow money sticking around is the real tell

  • PikaDetects
    PIKACHU4SSR IS ๐Ÿ’žALIVE๐Ÿฆ‹๐Ÿ˜Ž (@PikaDetects) reported

    what is this about bitfinex ? Error loading address data. (400 OK: Invalid Bitcoin address) ?? #Bitcoin

  • K3m0s
    Kemo (@K3m0s) reported

    @tobitdogg @BitQua Not on Tradingview BTCUSD INDEX, CRYPTO, or Bitfinex charts. Their 2015 bear = 90 weeks & 2016-17 bull is 121. Bitfinex was the #1 exchange by volume outside China, whose exchanges were shut down and excluded from data. i.e. you have to ignore the #1 data source to get this

  • cryptowithKSA
    Bullish with CryptoKSA (@cryptowithKSA) reported

    ARGENTINA FREEZES 25 CRYPTO WALLETS IN $LIBRA PROBE ๐Ÿšจ An Argentine judge ordered the freezing of 25 wallets linked to the $LIBRA investigation. Binance, Bybit, OKX, CoinEx, FixedFloat, and Bitfinex have also been ordered to provide KYC data and transaction records to help identify wallet holders and trace funds.