Conversation

Nov 28, 2021

Probably the most retarded thread ive read this decade. Silence is a perfectly acceptable option if stupid. Billionaires in my following, go ahead, see what happens

Quote Tweet

FreddieRaynolds

@FreddieRaynolds

· Nov 25, 2021

A few weeks ago I responded to @tbr90’s tweet with a brief outline of how a wealthy attacker could not only break @terra_money but profit heavily doing it with a Soros style Black Wednesday attack. Below I provide a detailed breadown...~$1B capital needed. twitter.com/tbr90/status/1

Show this thread

501

1,656

2,477

Space Tuna

@stabletuna

Nov 28, 2021

but ser would you please explain what exactly wrong with this scheme

Graye Williams

@GrayeWilliams

Nov 28, 2021

It makes irrational and incorrect suppositions while ignoring the actual systems in place that make what the OP proposed an impossibility. Not an improbability, an impossibility. From Archer: “What did you not comprehend about this?” “The basic premise, obviously .”

FreddieRaynolds

@FreddieRaynolds

Nov 28, 2021

Literally untrue. Obviously markets are more complicated then what I layed our but everything I wrote is possibility.

Do Kwon

@stablekwon

Nov 28, 2021

1/ Alright, I'll bite - $UST is just a derivative of $LUNA - building $UST inventory via $LUNA as the intermediary has strictly worse slippage costs. The example you posted is not only impossible (will explain shortly) but is fundamentally more expensive than just shorting

123

Do Kwon

@stablekwon

Nov 28, 2021

2/ Demonstrative example: Buying 100M worth of Luna (slippage cost) --> Selling 100M worth of Luna (slippage cost) Your PnL in steps 1,3 are disingenuous as price up as you buy 100M worth Expectation of 30% gain while *selling Luna* doesn't even make sense Bullish selling?

FreddieRaynolds

@FreddieRaynolds

Nov 28, 2021

I think you misunderstand my thread. You buy $100M in step 1 and sell that $100M in step 3. In step 2 you have manipulated LUNA price substantially upwards at minimal cost. Clearly there would be a gain.

Replying to

and

Yeah but why is your PnL 0 in step 1 (implying 0 slippage) and 30% in step 3? Also you contradict yourself in this thread that the market will become aware of the manipulation in step 2 and this will cancel out slippage cost (upwards price movement):

Quote Tweet

FreddieRaynolds

@FreddieRaynolds

· Nov 28, 2021

Replying to @stablekwon @GrayeWilliams and @stabletuna

Except you are shorting with the knowledge that $600M will soon be market dumped which is a pretty good predictor of price action. I agree nothing in markets is a certainty though.

1:29 PM · Nov 28, 2021Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

You are totally correct that slippage and tx fees are excluded and those would impact PnL in real life. However, even if you include slippage on the $100M trade that isn’t a contradiction of the fact that a $500M trade would move the market. And there would be profit.

FreddieRaynolds

@FreddieRaynolds

Nov 28, 2021

Without going into the weeds I think the easiest way to analyze this attack is just by looking at steps 1,2,3,6. You can exclude all the others and this attack still works.