Former Coinbase PM charged in cryptocurrency insider trading tipping scheme

Post by Spooky23 » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 5:34 PM UTC

vishnugupta wrote: post #56

It talks volumes about the internal controls at CB that it took a tweet to expose this. Given the speed with which they grew last two years I expect their financial and security processes to be next to nothing. This is just tip of an iceberg. Insiders would have made tens of millions over last two years of bull run, if not more. This dude just got greedy and unlucky to get caught just as the crypto bubble began burst…

Post by hef19898 » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 5:35 PM UTC

prepend wrote: post #33

hef19898 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your knowledge is privileged an non public, and might reasonably impact share prices either way, yes it is illegal. Not a lawyer, but your Buffet example above would be something I'd either run through compliance before traiding or I just wouldn't trade at all before said whatever he planned to say. Source: Countless of SOX-mandatory insider trading trainings and falling under rules covering restricted traiding wi…

> If your knowledge is privileged an non public, and might reasonably impact share prices either way, yes it is illegal. Unless you’re in the US Congress as there is an exception for their legislative insider info.

Post by Forgeties79 » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 5:39 PM UTC

olalonde wrote: post #146

ChainOfFools wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crypto people love to talk about incentives when referring to things like crypto adoption by the market, or corrupt actions on the part of incumbent powers like bankers or politicians. They are much less enthusiastic about discussing incentives when it comes to things like exchange operatiors front running their clients, centralizing forces in crypto generally, etc.

What makes you say that? In my experience, centralized exchanges are perceived as public enemy #1 by a lot of crypto people. They are seen as a necessary (but temporary) evil to bridge the "legacy" fiat world.

Post by zamalek » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 5:40 PM UTC

MR4D wrote: post #144

H8crilA wrote: post #133

Why are they being prosecuted? Those are not securities, or are they? "Wire fraud" implies that they defrauded someone by lying to their own advantage over a digital channel. Insider trading is generally legal for non-securities. EDIT: I am not implying that they shouldn't, on a moral level. They should! I am asking about legal technicalities, and about the state of law around those issues.

I have this same question. Crypto has not been defined as an asset category yet (and the SEC has not declared it to be a “security” so far). FTA - “. . . wire fraud conspiracy and wire fraud in connection with a scheme to commit insider trading in cryptocurrency assets. . .” I’m presuming that it’s the fraud they are going after, and the “insider trading” aspect is verbal sugar. I can’t imagine that insider trading w…

Post by ffggvv » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 5:42 PM UTC