On July 4, 2025, the cryptocurrency community was astounded by the simultaneous transfer of 80,000 Bitcoins, originally mined during Bitcoin’s early days, to SegWit wallet addresses. These transfers, worth approximately $8.6 billion, were recorded from eight inactive wallet addresses that had remained dormant since 2011. The identity of the owner and the intent behind these transactions have sparked widespread intrigue and speculation.
Details of the Massive Bitcoin Transfer from Eight Old Wallets
Blockchain data revealed that each of the eight old wallets from the Satoshi era, each containing 10,000 BTC, was converted to the bc1q format of SegWit addresses within the same minute. SegWit, or Segregated Witness, offers benefits such as lower transaction fees and enhanced security, indicating a significant technical upgrade within the Bitcoin 
$91,081 infrastructure.
According to Arkham, an analytics platform, these eight addresses likely belong to a single individual. As these funds have not been channeled to exchanges, they did not create any immediate selling pressure. Arkham noted that the transactions were for “wallet address upgrades,” dismissing widespread fears that a major Bitcoin holder, or “whale,” was intending to sell off their assets.
Experts suggest that these bulk transfers might be related to operational goals, such as simplifying key management for the addresses or renewing custody infrastructures. However, the specific identity of the wallet owner remains unknown, maintaining an air of mystery around the event.
Response from Coinbase on Allegations
A user on X shared a screenshot claiming that one of the 10,000 BTC-holding wallet addresses had conducted a transaction of 1.5 BTC in 2013, linking to a forum for proof. This claim swiftly circulated on the platform.
Conor Grogan, a manager at Coinbase, refuted the claim, labeling it as “fabricated.” He supported his counter-assertion by sharing a screenshot of the Blockchain record, which confirmed no transaction of 1.5 BTC had occurred at that specific address.
Grogan’s rebuttal highlighted Blockchain transparency’s role in thwarting misinformation. Analysts caution that unverified claims about early Bitcoin movements could incite unnecessary panic among crypto enthusiasts and stakeholders.
