Dan Rusnac

@rusnac14

The “before and after” of Achain first fork (ABTC)

ABTC is a fork of Bitcoin and Achain mixed together and established by Mr. Aqua Zhao, Mr. Arthur Qiang and a group of technophiles. It combines the best of Bitcoin and Achain: light speed contract, cross chain communication, anti-quantum attack, low fees, and DPOS consensus mechanism. It’s one of the greatest technical innovations for Achain and above all, it’s the first test of Achain’s fork theory.

The block number 1498888 was the chosen one for the first epical Achain’s fork. The fork happened exactly on January 13, 2018, at 01:43:30 AM (GMT+8) and at the time of the snapshot BTC holders got ABTC according to 1:100, and ACT holders got ABTC by 1:1.

So let’s analyze what happened to ABTC and ACT before and after fork.

What happened to ACT?

8 hr candle of ACT/BTC on Kucoin exchange

What happened is that since it joined Kucoin exchange the market had a linear adoption of holders (1), then the price started to go the moon (2) at the beginning of January because more and more people started to find out about the imminent fork. The moment after the fork (3) the price immediately went -50% down because people who were there with the only purpose of the fork sold at the highest price possible, so the price starts falling to its initial value. A lot of people bought the dip (4) but those were the days where the entire coinmarketcap was completely red so it still continued to go down for a few days, after that the price started to stabilizing (5).

I am really curious to see if this fork pump and dump pattern will repeat itself in every Achain’s fork. Meanwhile, everyone is already thinking at the next fork: BitcoinOS (BOS), a new operating system that is integrated with the Bitcoin and blockchain technology. Until now there aren’t many info both on the new fork and on the BitcoinOS but for the project seems interesting, surely I will keep an eye on it.

What happened to ABTC?

Meantime while ACT was accumulating holders ABTC made it’s the first fork of Bitcoin and the coin was added to OurDax (a new exchange) and Kcash (a new multicurrency wallet), of course, it still wasn’t tradable. OurDax mathematically set a price of 150$ per ABTC, because it took into consideration the price of Bitcoin and the x10 of the circulating supply. Currently to the fork the price on OurDax went down to 30$, also, in this case, mathematically derived by the mix of the two forks joined together.

So at this point, three things happened:

  1. People start waiting to receive their ABTC: they have been delivered to Kcash and Achain official wallet users after a few days; then after a week, ABTC team delivered to KuCoin the coins reserved for people that had ACT on KuCoin at the time of the snapshot.
  2. The time to receive ABTC on KuCoin felt like infinity because meantime on OurDax people started trading features on ABTC’s initial price: it went all down from 30$ to 0,05$.
  3. But Kcash still showed the price of ABTC of 150$ so there was a lot of confusion: imagine to wake up, look at your wallet and read that you are a millionaire, would be shocked right?
Wallet of an Achainer posted on the telegram group

It’s unknown what will be the future of ABTC, it surely can compete with other Bitcoin copycats fork and it truly has a cool technology behind it, now it all depends on the team, marketing and exchanges (until now ABTC is tradable only on OurDax).

Was this fork a good thing for Achain?

First of all, every fork is good for Achain, consider it like a checkpoint: every fork that is made on Achain will always make the main chain more robust and secure because every fork makes a backup of the main chain.

I think that generally, this fork was a very good thing for Achain for at least a few reasons:
- It was the first practical application of the fork theory, so it’s not just theoretical anymore;
- Achain resisted the fork, it didn’t disappeared;
- They showed that the price between the newly forked coin and ACT doesn’t need to be related, they can follow their own path;
- They introduced and tested the first mechanism to give value to a newborn coin thanks to mathematical prediction and features.

Is it right to set the price based on features?

I think is a good way to set a price: you do the math and then the market decides by itself. It is also very healthy to set the price this way, take for example major forks of Bitcoin: after the fork almost all their price was >100$ and nobody knows why. At least now the initial price goes very low, almost nothing but not zero thanks its intrinsic value, and if one day it arrives to 100$ it means the coin really has a value and a use case.

Besides all it’s really hard nowadays to understand the value of something, especially of cryptocurrencies. What is the real value of Bitcoin? Ethereum? Achain? Abitcoin?

More by Dan Rusnac

Topics of interest

More Related Stories