Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 500 posts

Re: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

#191

Post by Mizza »

shafyy wrote: post #175

It's so wrong that rich folks can just skip jail. I'm just reading Harari's Sapiens, and one of his points is that it's crazy that today it's accepted that poorer people are discriminated against. That many people think that being poor is a not something that happens by chance, but by people being lazy or dumb.

It's wrong that poor people who aren't a threat to society are imprisoned because they can't afford bail, not that rich people aren't. Don't think that the way to get rid of the disparity of privilege is to take it away - it is to grant it to more.

Re: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

#192

Post by ls15 »

satvikpendem wrote: post #77
dahfizz wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When does M mean thousand? I've never seen that. K means thousand.

M means milli in Latin, as in thousand (kilo comes from Greek). Millennium, millipede (thousand legs), and so on. Million just means a thousand thousands. That is why in most financial institutions, M means thousand, and MM means millions, literally thousand thousands.

Which is weird to me, because MM in latin numerals is 2,000

There is a way to express one million as M̅ (horizontal bar above M for M * 1,000), but I think this was a later addon that was not used by the Romans. They probably rarely had to deal with numbers in the millions and if they did, they could just express them as a product like M * M

Re: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

#193

Post by kickopotomus »

mokanfar wrote: post #150
kickopotomus wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite. You pay a bondsman 10%. The bondsman turns around and pays the full bail amount to the court. If you show up, the bondsman gets their money back from the court but keeps your 10% as a fee. If you don't show up to court, the bondsman does not get their money back and is left holding the bag for the other 90% of the bail amount.

What bondsman has $250 million in the bank to do this? Seems like such an obscure niche to be in.

I doubt they used a bondsman. $25 million is a pretty steep fee. They likely paid the entire bail amount and will get that money back once SBF shows up to court.

Re: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

#194

Post by bena »

berberous wrote: post #31
c22 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is, in fact, how bail works. But you can often get a bail bond (from a third party) for 10%-20% of the bail amount.

But that 10% is a non-recoverable fee, right? It seems insane they would have agreed to pay a third party $25M as a non-recoverable fee.

They will likely not being using a bondsman. They are probably paying the bond (ostensibly) themselves. They are taking a $250m loan using their house as collateral. If SBF does not make it to court on the agreed date, his parents will lose their house and be on the hook for the rest of the loan. If he does, his parents get the $250 million back and can pay off the loan. Until then, they are likely just making interest payments.

You can think of bondsmen as essentially very specialized financial institutions. They provide loans to people. If you have a $5000 bond, you can pay a bondsman $500 to front the other $4500 for you. If you make it to court, they get their $4500 back and it's all good. If you don't make it to court, they are incentivized to find you to make sure you make it to court. They are usually not pleased to do this.

You are not required to use a bail bondsman to post bail.

Re: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

#196

Post by __derek__ »

xdavidliu wrote: post #88
pessimizer wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's good that she did, because he played her for a sucker. He routed that entire massive fraud, which she may have barely understood (we'll see), through her as the CEO of a fake company whose only purpose was to embezzle deposits from FTX customers.

I thought Alameda came first, before FTX. Also, the fraud was on the FTX side, not Alameda, hence it doesn't make sense for him to blame her for it?

Isn't it a two-way fraud? Alameda defrauded FTX by knowingly providing worthless collateral for loans (FTT), which FTX fraudulently made using customer funds.

Re: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

#197

Post by [deleted] »

Frost1x wrote: post #173
WJW wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His parents' house is worth 250 million USD? (!?!)

I read the same two things in the article and scratched my head. I mean, I assume the entire $250 million mentioned didn't have to come from the home, the way its written it could be a modest home. None the less, it makes me very curious what the actual value of the home is estimated at and where he materialized that much in assets supposedly out of nowhere.

[deleted]

Re: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

#198

Post by bena »

jacquesm wrote: post #187
bena wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His parents now have a very good incentive to make sure he makes it to court. Once he makes it to court, that $250 million is paid back. The only thing the parents lose would be the interest payments on the loan from now until the court date.

I don't see them having that kind of money. They've been on the receiving end of the loot, it's essentially being allowed to leverage stolen money in order to finance the bail. Probably a judge doesn't care where it comes from and the bail bond people see the risk the way you do but it is a bit weird how a person suspected of crime at this level is allowed to await their day in court in freedom while others are immed…

While it is likely true that they are likely leveraging assets acquired through his fraud to post bail, legally, we have to give them the benefit of the doubt. The only way I can think of that they wouldn't be allowed is if the assets themselves were evidence in the crimes. And there's also the murky bit where the house itself wasn't fraudulently purchased, so if SBF is found guilty and he must pay back all the money, if they were able to come up with the money through other means, they could keep the house.

Next, they aren't using a bondsman. I doubt any bondsman has $250 million to dedicate to this for any length of time.

And they are allowed to wait "in freedom" because bail was posted on their behalf. Those are the rules of the system.

Re: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail

#200

Post by __derek__ »

eternalban wrote: post #93

Caroline Ellison appears to be flying under the radar here. Granted she kept her mouth shut but what's keeping others uninterested here? Also any informed opinion regarding her plea deal: Generous, not-generous, unusual, routine? ianal but 110 years to 0 years seems pretty sweet. Also didn't note any agreement to forever stay away from other people's money (since she agreed that she "is in fact guilty" [of conspiracy…

> 110 years to 0 years

Not so fast. The plea agreement does not include immunity:

> According to their plea agreements, Ms. Ellison and Mr. Wang are expected to truthfully disclose information to investigators, provide requested evidence and appear in front of a grand jury or court proceeding if asked. In exchange, the government will inform the judge of the defendants’ assistance and request lesser sentences.

[1]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-associates-of-ftx-founder-s...

Post reply on HN