Live data from Hacker News

FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

wsj.com

231–240 of 746 posts

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#231

From the article: "FTX Chief Executive Sam Bankman-Fried said in investor meetings this week that Alameda owes FTX about $10 billion, people familiar with the matter said. FTX extended loans to Alameda using money that customers had deposited on the exchange for trading purposes, a decision that Mr. Bankman-Fried described as a poor judgment call, one of the people said." In the FTX International terms of service ( h…

I’m pretty ignorant when it comes to this space. Do they not have any kind of compliance structure? In hindsight it seems pretty obvious that this sort of thing would happen without it.

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#232
post #67

All: please don't fulminate*. Perhaps you don't owe embattled billionaires better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. HN is a site for curious conversation, so please wait to feel some curiosity before you comment. * https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I think this merits your tradition of moderating less if YC's interests are implicated.

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would’ve been correct two years ago. We’re doing zero fractional reserve banking now. Hearing this should convince people that they should get their money out now, but nobody seems to care.

I don’t know about others, but I suspect that if the FDIC ran out of money, congress would figure out a way to fund it even if it meant printing money. I am okay with this.

But liquidity is the issue here. In the event that this happens, how long would it be before you could have access to your funds?

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would’ve been correct two years ago. We’re doing zero fractional reserve banking now. Hearing this should convince people that they should get their money out now, but nobody seems to care.

While you're correct[0], still the FDIC is guaranteeing it up to $250k. [0]: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm

Right, but the FDIC explicitly says large amounts may take longer in the status quo. The only reason to have money in the bank is for a reasonably safe, liquid form of money.

If they aren’t providing safety or liquidity, why should you use them?

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#235

From the article: "FTX Chief Executive Sam Bankman-Fried said in investor meetings this week that Alameda owes FTX about $10 billion, people familiar with the matter said. FTX extended loans to Alameda using money that customers had deposited on the exchange for trading purposes, a decision that Mr. Bankman-Fried described as a poor judgment call, one of the people said." In the FTX International terms of service ( h…

So if the chain is supposed to enable "trustless" finance, what enabled Alameda to take anything? Seems Alameda and its clients should be screwed, but FTX's holders should be relatively easy to identify and restore.

But everyone seems to say that's not the case. So what broke down here? Why isn't the ledger ledgering?

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#236
> FTX Chief Executive Sam Bankman-Fried told an investor this week that Alameda owes FTX about $10 billion, the person said. FTX extended loans to Alameda using money that customers had deposited on the exchange for trading purposes, a decision that Mr. Bankman-Fried described as a poor judgment call, according to the person.

This raises the question of who else Alameda owes. It's a sign of the times that $10 billion doesn't seem like a lot today, but it's way more than the Long Term Capital Management debacle:

> LTCM was initially successful, with annualized returns (after fees) of around 21% in its first year, 43% in its second year and 41% in its third year. However, in 1998 it lost $4.6 billion in less than four months due to a combination of high leverage and exposure to the 1997 Asian financial crisis and 1998 Russian financial crisis.[4] The master hedge fund, Long-Term Capital Portfolio L.P., collapsed soon thereafter, leading to an agreement on September 23, 1998, among 14 financial institutions for a $3.65 billion recapitalization under the supervision of the Federal Reserve.[1] The fund was liquidated and dissolved in early 2000.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management

When it comes to things like this, the connectivity of the money seems at least as important as the quantity.

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#237
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly, because banks tell you that they will loan out your money and you might not get it back, that's why you get interest on the account. They can't go horse betting, but they can loan it out. You don't have "title" over the USD in the bank reserves. This is like if you put $100 in Chase's security deposit box , and they opened it up, took the cash, and lent it out, and then when you come to get it, they say,…

Only tangentially related, but don't put cash in safety deposit boxes. Police can take them under civil forfeiture laws: https://nypost.com/2021/06/12/fbi-aims-to-keep-valuables-86m... https://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-raid-1400-boxes-us-priva...

Police can take anything anywhere under civil forfeiture; it's truly insane.

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like a very Adam Neumann move.

Sequoia did a nauseating, hilarious puff piece on him a couple months ago and this guy sounds like Adam Neumann’s second coming. https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/sam-bankman-fried-spotlig...

When I was first read it I thought it was a parody, Silicon Valley style.

But Sequoia this prestigious VC has been shown to be childish, incompetent, reckless and completely unprofessional.

It will be forever be a stain on them.

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#239

From the article: "FTX Chief Executive Sam Bankman-Fried said in investor meetings this week that Alameda owes FTX about $10 billion, people familiar with the matter said. FTX extended loans to Alameda using money that customers had deposited on the exchange for trading purposes, a decision that Mr. Bankman-Fried described as a poor judgment call, one of the people said." In the FTX International terms of service ( h…

I’m pretty ignorant when it comes to this space. Do they not have any kind of compliance structure? In hindsight it seems pretty obvious that this sort of thing would happen without it.

No post body was provided.

Re: FTX tapped into customer accounts to fund risky bets, setting up its downfall

#240
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are known expired strategies that generated large profits for long periods of time. In some cases the people involved in developing the strategies have directly published things explaining what they did.

Do you have any examples? Would be interested to read sone

Article mentions one (bitcoin arbitrage)
Post reply on HN