Live data from Hacker News

Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

nytimes.com

251–260 of 338 posts

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#251
The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security".

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-...

Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#252

The thing that makes me very uneasy about this is... it's crypto. If you let people walk away with anything less than decades in prison you're setting a bad precedent. Why? Because the entire design of crypto is to allow you to squirrel money away, honestly what are the chances that these guys have some cold wallet lying around with a few million dollars in bitcoin? That's what I'd do if I was running this scam.

You're assuming that FTX is the extent of the DOJ and SEC investigations. SBF is going to be offered a deal - "Spend the rest of your life in prison or give us CZ/Binance and all the other big players and be out in 10". Remember, in addition to their chat group labeled "Wirefraud" they also had another one called "Exchange coordination" that the heads of other exchanges participated in. In addition to SBF, CZ (Binance), Powell (Kraken), Ardoino (Tether), and Sun (Tron) were participants.

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#253

The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security". https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-... Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.

This has been the SEC's stance since at least 2020 when they went after Ripple (XRP) for selling "unregistered securities" in their ICO.

It's the SEC's position that you can issue tokens, but they have to be "registered," specifically with them.

https://www.sec.gov/ICO

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#254

The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security". https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-... Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.

Wasn't this already the SEC's position?

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#255

The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security". https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-... Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.

That seems like the obvious interpretation though, rather than a surprise. What does a hypothetical exchange-issued token look like that could “fail” the Howey test?

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s hard to know for sure but I agree. SBF might catch a break for looking innocent and young, but this really is a textbook example of when bail should not be granted. Bail may happen if he ends up cooperating. I’m very interested to see if the parents are charged.

>looking innocent lol. lmao even

Sam Baby Face

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#257

The thing that makes me very uneasy about this is... it's crypto. If you let people walk away with anything less than decades in prison you're setting a bad precedent. Why? Because the entire design of crypto is to allow you to squirrel money away, honestly what are the chances that these guys have some cold wallet lying around with a few million dollars in bitcoin? That's what I'd do if I was running this scam.

You're assuming that FTX is the extent of the DOJ and SEC investigations. SBF is going to be offered a deal - "Spend the rest of your life in prison or give us CZ/Binance and all the other big players and be out in 10". Remember, in addition to their chat group labeled "Wirefraud" they also had another one called "Exchange coordination" that the heads of other exchanges participated in. In addition to SBF, CZ (Binanc…

Not saying that nefarious things weren't happening, but keeping lines of communication open between exchanges is reasonable and is not per se evidence of wrongdoing.

For example, if someone steals a bunch of coins from exchange A then you would want exchanges B and C to be able to made aware of that ASAP so that they can stop the movement of those coins.

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#258

The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security". https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-... Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.

They offered margin trading and all kinds of other things, the pitch being "like an exchange but with crypto". Why would anyone think it's not securities?

Re: Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang are cooperating in the criminal case against SBF

#259

Having scanned the documents, I can imagine a dynamic where Ellison was the CEO, but SBF was really pulling the strings. I bet many companies are like that, where investors or a chairman are the real decision maker and the CEO is managing downwards only. Especially when you have a complex corporate setup where you are told to request funds and resources from a parent org etc. If I am in a C-level position again I wou…

I get where you are coming from, but if she was CEO, she was responsible for her actions (and inactions) in that position. Letting some people off is not just and the various narratives these people are all spinning to avoid responsibility for their actions are ALL equally BS.

Of course. That’s the price you pay for getting a high salary and big benefits. And that’s why the effective beneficiary cares about who owns the things or who actually really control the thing. I have seen this dynamic way too many times (especially with spouses being “CEOs” or directors)
Post reply on HN