21–30 of 57 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s mostly because crypto is close to all time highs again.
This is due to non crypto holdings. They never recovered crypto from ftx
If at the end of the story, everybody affected is made whole, could it be argued that his sentence should be reduced?
* Some FTX investments, in particular Anthropic, have done very well over the past 2 years.
* Due to the mechanics of bankruptcy law, FTX's cryptocurrency liabilities were effectively converted to dollar liabilities when they filed, meaning that all crypto price increases since then are free money for the asset recovery. (You could reasonably frame this as bankruptcy victims not really being made whole, since their claims are substantially less than what FTX would owe them if it were still running, although there's good reasons it works this way.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If someone robs your house and steals your things, The police arrest the burglar and get your stuff back, does that mean the burglar should go free or get a reduced sentence? NO. THE ANSWER IS NO.
That's a different crime, so your reasoning does not apply. It my understanding (I could be wrong) that on financial crimes it does make a difference if you make the victims whole or not. No idea if it also applies somehow after the ruling, hence why I asked on this forum for intelligent discourse. Sorry if that bothers you, though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s mostly because crypto is close to all time highs again.
This is due to non crypto holdings. They never recovered crypto from ftx
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is due to non crypto holdings. They never recovered crypto from ftx
Yes, but if you had for example 1 ETH in FTX when it went down, you're not getting 1 ETH back now, you're only getting the dollar value of that ETH in November 22, which was much lower than current prices (> 50%).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a different crime, so your reasoning does not apply. It my understanding (I could be wrong) that on financial crimes it does make a difference if you make the victims whole or not. No idea if it also applies somehow after the ruling, hence why I asked on this forum for intelligent discourse. Sorry if that bothers you, though.
I think the original poster was aware that it’s a different crime and was attempting to simplify the concept so you were able to grasp it a little easier.
Breaking and entering is a crime on its own, while most financial crimes are non-violent by nature; a whole different set of rules apply.
Burglary is also different from fraud. Read about it, I can recommend a dictionary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a different crime, so your reasoning does not apply. It my understanding (I could be wrong) that on financial crimes it does make a difference if you make the victims whole or not. No idea if it also applies somehow after the ruling, hence why I asked on this forum for intelligent discourse. Sorry if that bothers you, though.
They're not really being made whole. > Depending on the type of claim they hold in the case, some creditors could recover as much as 142% of what they are owed. The vast majority of customers, however, will likely get 118% of what they had on the FTX platform the day the company entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy. If you had 2 bitcoins worth say 16k each in FTX; FTX is able to give you back 32k which is the value of your…
(Sentencing Judge Lewis) Kaplan also rejected Bankman-Fried’s claim that he deserves a lighter sentence because many of his victims may be made whole on their lost investments. "If a thief steals money, takes it to Las Vegas, and earns a handsome profit by gambling, he is still a thief, even if the funds are repaid." [1] [1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/ftx-crypto-fraudster-sam-bankm... SBF's crime wasn't losing mon…
Crypto could easily have crashed. And then...?
If at the end of the story, everybody affected is made whole, could it be argued that his sentence should be reduced?