Is there going to be any reckoning for the VCs who poured money into this ridiculous business? I don’t see how you respect Sequoia’s judgement after this.
The Sequoia profile of SPF is quite the read: https://archive.ph/qFJJN
The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
481–490 of 748 posts
Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#482Can we discus recovery? The Madoff trustee was able to recover something like 90% of the Madoff Ponzi. Alameda and FTX's real estate purchases have value, as do their VC investments, purchases of bank stock, etc. In other words, it's not all gone. My understanding is that even some of the political contributions can be clawed back. FTX's purchases of IOU's (i.e., crypto) that declined in value are not likely to be re…
The problem is opportunity cost. People invested in Madoff to grow their money. So if I invest $100 in Madoff and ten years later they say “we recovered $90, congrats,” yeah that’s better than nothing. But if I had put that into a legitimate investment, maybe I’d have $180. Other folks got money out of Madoff during his scam years, and the trustee says “I’m taking that money back to pay back others.” So much of crypt…
> But if I had put that into a legitimate investment, maybe I’d have $180.
Or maybe zero. Investing is a casino unless you are very closely supervising your investments and have a thorough understanding of the underlying market dynamics. So better do your homework if you want to see some or all of your money back, preferably with a premium.
Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#483Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is opportunity cost. People invested in Madoff to grow their money. So if I invest $100 in Madoff and ten years later they say “we recovered $90, congrats,” yeah that’s better than nothing. But if I had put that into a legitimate investment, maybe I’d have $180. Other folks got money out of Madoff during his scam years, and the trustee says “I’m taking that money back to pay back others.” So much of crypt…
Naive question here: Wouldn’t you have to take into account due diligence when talking opportunity cost? As in, someone who did not do their due diligence and had a higher risk tolerance would be expected to have a lower opportunity cost. In simple words, likely to lose money on this deal but willing due to the high return chance.
Relative to the amounts of money lost here the DD costs would have been a pittance.
Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is opportunity cost. People invested in Madoff to grow their money. So if I invest $100 in Madoff and ten years later they say “we recovered $90, congrats,” yeah that’s better than nothing. But if I had put that into a legitimate investment, maybe I’d have $180. Other folks got money out of Madoff during his scam years, and the trustee says “I’m taking that money back to pay back others.” So much of crypt…
> Other folks got money out of Madoff during his scam years, and the trustee says “I’m taking that money back to pay back others.” What’s the limit on that? Dollars or time? I would be beyond furious if I was expected to help make someone else whole.
I don't think there's a limit when it's part of a criminal scheme.
Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#485From https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/13/sam-bankman-fried-denied-bai... : “Bankman-Fried's parents were animated during the proceeding, at times laughing or putting their fingers in their ears, according to Coindesk.” … what in the world.. I guess they really think they are going to somehow get him out of this.. how do they not understand that this type of behavior is not in any way helpful to him?
They watched their own flesh and blood son transition with breakneck speed from a high rolling billionaire who hobnobbed with society's elites to facing spending the best years of his life in prison, a disgrace to his family and their legacy. How do you think you'd cope with that psychological ordeal?
And quite probably are near the top of the clawback list if it turns out that any of the funds ended up with them. They have very good reasons to be distressed, their sons future behind bars is only one of the things they need to be worried about. Their whole world is crashing down around them, besides of course becoming persona non-grata to pretty much all of their friends and quite possibly family in case others got sucked in as well. I don't envy them.
Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#486Is there going to be any reckoning for the VCs who poured money into this ridiculous business? I don’t see how you respect Sequoia’s judgement after this.
[deleted]
Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#487Was listening to C-SPAN, they said his written statement for the record of the hearing was very offensive. "I would like to state, under oath," and then two words they wouldn't repeat. Doing a Google search of "SBF Fuck You" shows he's already told regulators and his lawyers to go F themselves, I'm guessing he said the same to the US Congress.
Forbes published it: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenehrlich/2022/12/13/exclus... He said "I fucked up" which would get C-SPAN in trouble with the FCC. It is a very defiant and entitled sounding statement though.
It's been a while since I've had a cable subscription but saying "fucked up" on cable was a common occurrence. CSPAN is a cable thing, not OTA.
Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#488Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very imaginative, but a little short on evidence.
You think there is no evidence that corruption exists? Or maybe you think it’s just “a few bad apples” problem?
I think you haven’t provided any evidence that politically connected people routinely avoid prosecution.
Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#489Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]
#490From https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/13/sam-bankman-fried-denied-bai... : “Bankman-Fried's parents were animated during the proceeding, at times laughing or putting their fingers in their ears, according to Coindesk.” … what in the world.. I guess they really think they are going to somehow get him out of this.. how do they not understand that this type of behavior is not in any way helpful to him?
They watched their own flesh and blood son transition with breakneck speed from a high rolling billionaire who hobnobbed with society's elites to facing spending the best years of his life in prison, a disgrace to his family and their legacy. How do you think you'd cope with that psychological ordeal?
> ... a disgrace to his family and their legacy
Count 8 of the indictment: "Conspiracy to defraud and violate the campaign finance law".
Who was running the fundraiser? SBF's mom.
Who was helping SBF trying to obtain regulatory capture of the crypto currency exchange market in DC? SBF's father.
I'm not sure SBF is the only one to bring disgrace to that name, that'll from now on always be associated with fraud indeed.