It's sort of curious that this SEC action is to protect the venture capital investors like Sequoia who invested in FTX shares directly. If I were a retail investor who lost my savings in FTX, I might be feeling upset that the government is rushing to action in defense of billion-dollar funds whose own due diligence failed massively, while seemingly nothing is being done to help those who invested in crypto based on F…
SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
151–160 of 251 posts
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#152The most interest aspect in the FTX saga, for me, is that SBF was treated very gently by major news outlets (and maybe by government regulators too)... until regular individuals in social media started asking: Why is SBF being treated so kindly? Why would journalists (and regulators) assume that SBF meant well? A possible answer that no one ever mentions is that SBF possesses many qualities that are valued and admire…
Arthur Hayes has written extensively [0] on these points. [0]: https://blog.bitmex.com/white-boy/
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#153I'll just quote part of what I said a month ago :) > And given what's leaked from their balance sheet, I don't see how people avoid jail time. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33608691 I'll also add that SBF going on tour was the stupidest thing he could have done. Every time he spoke, he was giving the government more evidence. Hubris has often been the downfall of the rich and powerful throughout history. What'…
>like Musk and SBF I‘m sorry, but what ? Just to give some perspective that I don’t think HN really gets: most of my friends have increased their twitter usage. If you aren’t aware, whatever the team did there a few days ago really has appeared to cut bots down to almost 0. SBF is an [alleged] criminal who has [allegedly] defrauded people of billions of dollars, and will likely be spending a substantial amount of tim…
Meanwhile, all of my friends have erased their Twitter accounts (some migrating to Mastodon, others to other social media sites, others happily forgoing social media at all), all of the organizations I'm a part of have stopped using Twitter for official communication, the subreddits I follow have banned Twitter links, and my product has removed its Twitter integration. Large swathes of the internet are defederating from Twitter.
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe the federal criminal indictment is public now. [1] - First count: Conspiracy to commit wire fraud to defraud customers. - Second count: Wire fraud on customers. - Third count: Conspiracy to commit wire fraud on lenders. - Fourth count: Wire fraud on lenders. (again, specifically lenders to Alameda) - Fifth count: Conspiracy to commit commodities fraud. - Sixth count: Conspiracy to commit securities fraud. I…
Imagine reading a document like this with "United States of America v Your Name" at the top. It would be terrifying. These charges are serious and SBF is going to go down for a long time if convicted. There's also a forfeiture section in the federal indictment that demands forfeiture of all any and all property that is traceable to the commission of the offences.
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine reading a document like this with "United States of America v Your Name" at the top. It would be terrifying. These charges are serious and SBF is going to go down for a long time if convicted. There's also a forfeiture section in the federal indictment that demands forfeiture of all any and all property that is traceable to the commission of the offences.
Will his political donors have to give back the donations?
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#156The most interest aspect in the FTX saga, for me, is that SBF was treated very gently by major news outlets (and maybe by government regulators too)... until regular individuals in social media started asking: Why is SBF being treated so kindly? Why would journalists (and regulators) assume that SBF meant well? A possible answer that no one ever mentions is that SBF possesses many qualities that are valued and admire…
Consider the alternative where the media "slammed" SBF on the daily, it would further discredit crypto and lead to a faster decline in value, therefore it would be harder for financial institutions to efficiently devest from crypto without significant losses.
Sorry, typed this on my phone.
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
Frankly, it seems to me that VCs should be liable for money FTX owes its customers. These are professional investors who didn't insist on very basic things, such as proper financial sheets from a finance company. Frankly, that's gross negligence. Professional investors should have legal responsibility to do at least some due diligence. In addition, they're becoming owners of a company. As owners, why shouldn't they b…
I agree! For VCs, crypto has been a “Heads we win, tails you lose” proposition. Normally it takes 3-10 years for a VC investment to reach an exit. In crypto, they get tokens that they’ve been able to dump to retail almost immediately. A16Z has a particularly suspicious shitcoin pipeline via their Coinbase board seat. I hope SEC also ends up prosecuting investors who participated in these token offerings, and ideally…
Prosecuting those rubes for being among the victims? If there is evidence they pumped and dumped those tokens or didn't report their income correctly, then sure. But otherwise, why prosecute people for being stupid enough to accept payment crypto?
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#158It's sort of curious that this SEC action is to protect the venture capital investors like Sequoia who invested in FTX shares directly. If I were a retail investor who lost my savings in FTX, I might be feeling upset that the government is rushing to action in defense of billion-dollar funds whose own due diligence failed massively, while seemingly nothing is being done to help those who invested in crypto based on F…
> If I were a retail investor who lost my savings in FTX, I might be feeling upset that the government is rushing to action in defense The customers will be paid before investors with whatever money is there. This is well established by previous case precedents, including in places like unregulated poker betting sites. Anybody can have a claim, including the SEC, but the courts decide allocation order.
That really depends whether the investment is structured as a secured loan (senior debt) or not. Secured loans get paid out in full, before the unsecured creditors such as customers.
> but the courts decide allocation order
Mostly that is defined by the laws of the jurisdiction, not the individual court.
In the Bahamas, the ranking of creditors and shareholders are as follows[1]:
Creditors with a mortgage or fixed charge: assets secured in this way are outside the scope of the insolvency.
Costs of insolvency proceedings: all costs and expenses properly incurred in the company's winding-up (including liquidator's fees).
Employees' debts: sums due to employees under the terms of their employment contract.
Preferential payments, such as unpaid taxes, contributions to occupational pension schemes and liability for compensation for injury or occupational disease.
Creditors with a floating charge.
Unsecured creditors.
Shareholder loans.
Shareholders' equity.
In the US[2]: Under the Bankruptcy Code, the priority of allowed claims and interests is, in descending order:
Secured claims.
Administrative expenses and priority claims.
General unsecured claims.
Subordinated claims.
Equity interests.
Outside of bankruptcy, creditor ranking is determined by state law and in certain circumstances, the agreement of the parties, such as in an intercreditor agreement. In bankruptcy, the priority of creditors' claims and interests in a debtor's estate is set out in the Bankruptcy Code.
VC early investments may be a convertible note, often senior debt that can be converted to equity in the next investment round[3].The costs of insolvency proceedings, or administrative costs, may be determined by the liquidator. The liquidator will generally milk the system (within their legal limitations) as much as possible (extremely high charge-out costs per hour, etcetera), so customers will often get didly squat. A senior liquidator might be charged out at say USD800 per hour, down to the secretary who might be charged out at USD120 per hour. The liquidator’s goal is to charge as many hours as possible, without being so extreme that the court pulls them up on it, or to finish up quickly if there is no more money left to suck.
[1] https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/9-518-5211
[2] https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/7-501-6870
[3] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/senior-convertible-note...
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Will his political donors have to give back the donations?
He is the donor. And, no, recipients of legal donations don’t have to give them back because they came from a bad person. (The illegal donations he seems to have admitted to might have to be given up, but that’s a separate legal issue.)
https://www.google.com/search?q=sbf+political+donations+claw...
Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whoa, are you trying to tell me all the big fish hyping up the Regulators Are Evil Economy get near-total legal protection of a regulated market, but all the little people who got taken in by it are going to get screwed? An incredible and unforeseeable development! Surely there will be more charges over time but the end result isn’t going to change much. The wealthy people who’ve been boosting all of this will take t…
None of the big fish are getting money back. No one is going get money back. It's gone. At the same time, I have trouble finding sympathy for anyone involved. SBF is a sociopath, thief and liar. Those big-name investors should have known better and I'm sure in many cases they did. They probably should start lawyering up too, because they've got investors of their own who have been harmed either through malfeasance of…
8% APR from a crypto company was obviously a pyramid scheme. Anybody who put their money into FTX was either unbelievably stupid, or knew they were playing with fire and hoped they wouldn't be the ones to get burnt.
If somehow all the money has been utterly destroyed so nobody involved gets any of it, that would probably be the best outcome. If the cryptobro investors get their money back, they're just going to use it in other scams to hurt more people.