It is well known that Elon Musk is quite fond of attracting attention. From his hyperactivity posting tweets to actions that seem designed mainly to attract attention, he has already shown a thousand times, actively and passively, that he needs to know that he is in the spotlight and that, to do so, he is capable of do many things that, as a general rule, we would never imagine in a person with the level of responsibility that he holds.
But, of course, sometimes after those actions that, in theory, seem aimed at attracting attention, somewhat more wicked intentions can be hidden, and in this case it seems that we are in a perfect example of this. So it’s always good news to know that such intentions come to light and that, if appropriate, you may have to face the consequences of such acts. Well, today another story has begun to be written with that already well-known argument.
You will surely remember that, a few months ago, Elon Musk decided to cchange, in various places on the web, the Twitter logo for an image of Kabosuthe famous dog of the breed Shiba Inu which first became a very successful meme and which, later, became the image of Dogecoin, a cryptocurrency that achieved enormous popularity during 2021. And we must remember that this was only the last of a long relationship between Elon Musk and said digital asset.
Said relationship, and this is something we already talked about at the timehas had a clear influence on the price of said cryptocurrency, something that can be considered influencing the market, and which can be particularly questionable if you use such influence to maximize the return on your investments. Or at least that is what a group of investors who, according to the Reuters Agency, have sued Elon Musk for manipulating the price of Dogecoin think. In their lawsuit, they claim 258,000 million dollars, as they affirm that the billionaire sold around 124,000 million Dogecoin in April, precisely after changing the Twitter logo, which caused a 30% increase in the price of Dogecoin.
In the lawsuit, they define Elon Musk’s actions in relation to Dogecoin as a “deliberate course of carnival barking, market manipulation and insider trading«. And seen from outside yes that seems like a premeditated operation, since it was easily imaginable, in view of the precedents, that the market’s reaction would be the one that finally occurred. And if he had the intention of selling said assets… it’s hard not to suspect.