Thank you very kindly for taking the time to offer me such explanation @purpleprose. :c)

Yes, the China announcement was a shock - and leads me to believe that they (unlike JP Morgan who merely engaged in market manipulation via their statements) have reason to fear the power-un-consolidating effect of crypto-currencies.

Of course over-dependence upon Bitcoin as flagship sent many cryptocurrencies reeling.

I think that I better understand the notion of an emergency 'stability-based' crypto-currency - but there are two things that come to mind here.

First of all - confidence in a coin to have worth independent from Bitcoin, etc. seems like shaky territory if without true backing - a stable foundation upon which such a crypto's worth is inherently founded.

Secondly, in the event that people can just trade in their imminent loss-making cryptos in exchange for this stable medium, does this not mean that somebody chose, wittingly or not, to carry the explosive can which then detonates in their hands and leaves them with a net loss?

Yes, some could move fast enough to ensure that they aren't the ones left holding the can - but I feel that I may be missing an important piece of the puzzle here - as the 'overall' outcome doesn't seem all too attractive (somebody still loses just as much).

Out of curiosity - what did Litecoin initially aim at to do hat seemed to indicate it as a potential shelter coin?

Thank you again for your patience. :c)