The great Bitcoin fork has just happened and things are going smoothly so far, there have been no blockchain reorganizations and no further sub forks. Currently Bitcoin Cash’s blockchain is 50 blocks behind the main chain, putting it roughly 8 hours behind. The reason for this lag is because it took miners quite a while to find the first block, some people panicked when a block couldn’t be found, but eventually one was found by ViaBTC.

Before the fork, only 3 exchanges traded BCH. Specifically, ViaBTC, HitBTC, and Kraken were the only platforms supporting the coin, with the asset trading at more than double the price on HitBTC providing an insane opportunity for arbitrage.

As the fork commenced, nearly half a dozen exchanges added Bitcoin Cash trading pairs. According to Coinmarketcap, Bittrex has taken the lead with 30% trading volume.

Source: Coinmarketcap

 

Bittrex is one of the largest crypto to crypto exchanges in the industry, and it is no surprise that most traders are flocking to that platform to take advantage of the incoming volatility.

What is interesting is how exchanges are at a disagreement when it comes to the naming convention of the token. It seems there is a 50:50 split between using BCC or BCH. While the exact name of the coin is up for debate, some argue that using the name BCC creates ambiguity. There is already a cryptocurrency called BitConnectCoin using the acronym BCC. Thus, exchanges supporting both cryptocurrencies would have to differentiate between the two if Bitcoin Cash is traded as BCC.

Furthermore, BitConnectCoin is not just another altcoin that can be buried in the ground. It boasts a market cap of over $300 million and trades at $54 per coin. Using BCC for both Bitcoin Cash and Bitconnect creates unnecessary compatibility issues if an exchange chooses to support both trading pairs.

Speaking of unnecessary issues, if Bitcoin Cash keeps trading at the current $200-300 range, Coinbase might find itself in quite a predicament. Their controversial decision to not support BCC tokens, and complications and delays with withdrawals might hold them liable for the losses each of their users incurred by not being able to either move their coins off of the exchange, or not being able to receive their share of BCC.

After all, it is the largest Bitcoin exchange with the most users, imagine owing $200 for every Bitcoin in the company’s possession, that would be a legal and a financial nightmare. Hindsight is 20/20, but Coinbase should have supported and issued BCC tokens. The bad PR, combined with disgruntled users was not worth the political statement.



Source link