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

$1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

hindenburgresearch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 326 posts

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#261

Post by aeternum »

jfrunyon wrote: post #242
aeternum wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They claim to hold assets with values equivalent to 1 USD / Tether. Different than holding the USD directly. They provide a more detailed breakdown here: https://tether.to/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/tether_assuranc... About half in commercial paper and CODs. A quarter in t-bills. 2B in unspecified "digital tokens".

Yes, now that they've been caught claiming to hold 1 USD per Tether without doing so, they claim it's only stuff worth (in their estimation!) 1 USD per Tether. And still refuse to provide any evidence that they are doing so. Please stop defending them.

I generally agree, not sure why anyone would choose to use Tether when their are alternatives like USDC. However I still think it is important to properly represent Tether's current claims.

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#262

Post by perl4ever »

Dma54rhs wrote: post #93
perl4ever wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people say "hey, Tether is no worse than the existing financial system" I wonder if they don't understand the difference between holding a fraction of deposited money as reserves, and only having a fraction of deposited money as assets, period. As far as I know, when the latter happens in a real bank, they get shut down, shareholders lose their money, and only the FDIC saves the depositors. Just because that's t…

I've never held any coin but why can't it be true? The money is imaginary anyway and while you can talk about backing dollars with tanks and bomb at the end of the day is there are believers there is a market snd one market can outlive another. Saving depositors in regular banking is pure belief as well.

>Saving depositors in regular banking is pure belief as well.

What matters, I believe, is that they have the assets to back the liabilities. 100% plus a safety margin. As far as I know, a regular bank or credit union meets that criteria and Tether does not.

Haven't you ever watched "It's a Wonderful Life"? Where the guy in an effort to stop a bank run, explains that the deposits are tied up in the homes and businesses of the people of the community?

That stuff isn't imaginary, it's just that people are panicking and forgot that it's all connected.

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#263

Post by perl4ever »

jfrunyon wrote: post #226
sumedh wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a 5% drop in the price of Bitcoin would make Tether literally insolvent. Didnt BTC go down to 30K from 60K just recently?

Your point being? There are many, many ways for businesses to hide their insolvency, for years[1], or even decades[2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirecard#Scandal_and_insolvenc... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madoff_investment_scandal

Yes...but. People say this like it's a guarantee that insolvency won't catch up to them before the public panics, i.e. a bank run.

I don't believe that's correct. Insolvency seems strictly worse than being solvent.

As a depositor, if I don't see anyone else participating in a bank run, assuming the institution is solvent, then I have no reason to.

But if I know they are insolvent, even if nobody else in the world does yet, I have an incentive to immediately start a bank run, unless, say, there are bankruptcy proceedings right away that freeze everything.

It's the difference between musical chairs with one chair removed vs not.

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#264

Post by perl4ever »

jfrunyon wrote: post #246
sumedh wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read OP's point, he/she claimed that a 5% drop in the price of Bitcoin would make Tether literally insolvent, that did not happen when BTC went from 60K to 30K

Read MY point, please prove (or show any evidence) that it did not happen. You are claiming something that there is literally NO EVIDENCE of, while vast piles of available evidence points to the very opposite. Tether is, has been, and will continue to be insolvent. The only question is when people will notice.

I don't believe in Tether, but on the other hand, my logic that insolvency should lead to immediate destruction means...I should believe they are solvent.

I mean, that's basically it. Everything points to insolvency, but if it was, it would be history. Therefore, it must not be.

Anyone who "notices" should make it all fall apart instantly.

And loud mouth short sellers have certainly been wrong before.

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#266

Post by tenuousemphasis »

rvz wrote: post #208
garyclarke27 wrote: post #182

Tether is obviously not backed 1:1 by USD as previously claimed. Now the dodgy piechart informs us that it is backed mainly by corporate bonds and loans - if true I would guess mostly to related companies. A recent Bloomberg article says they have been lending Billions to Chinese property companies! Eventually enough of the gullible fools will realise that the Emperor has no clothes, then there will be a run on Tethe…

Correct. Tether is a giant scam as I and many others have said before: [0] Won't be surprised to see the scam finally unveiled and to cause a seismic crash in the crypto markets. I would start packing my crypto holdings out of the market real soon™... Things are getting quite, unstable and euphoric once again. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27960613

Why would a collapse of tether cause a crash in the crypto markets?

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#267

Post by LurkingPenguin »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #94
graeme wrote: post #2

This is very interesting. Hindenburg is the real deal. One challenge may be that, like the Mafia, Tether keeps its inner circle and employs family members. They have ~15 employees for a 70 billion dollar operation. The CTO’s wife is a manager, and the CEO’s daughter works for an unnamed crypto family office, which may be related. Their counterparties in Chinese commercial paper may not know they are counterparties du…

>Hindenburg is the real deal. Hindenburg is not the real deal. If you think Hindenburg is the real deal you should pay closer attention to their activities. They (he) are one of a number of noisy short sellers who try to drive stock prices with their tweets/reports. SEC should be doing things to these people. That said, he is probably right about Tether. Tether should make every crypto speculator or holder very nervo…

> They (he) are one of a number of noisy short sellers who try to drive stock prices with their tweets/reports.

Are sell-side "analysts" who cheerlead their long recommendations not doing the same?

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#268

Post by LurkingPenguin »

hackingforfun wrote: post #247
manquer wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each scam is draining some money from the market. All these scammers are siphoning of real money from the ecosystem each time. Fanatic and devoted fans there maybe, however they don't have limitless fiat money to play with. In the recent past, new found mainstream popularity has fueled inflows into all kinds of crypto products sustaining the strong bull runs despite significant and clear risks. This popularity has li…

How do you feel about stocks that have completely unrealistic P/E ratios? Is that not the same speculation that happens in crypto? And yes, I agree, prices don't go up unless people are putting more in, but I'm just saying that crypto is not unique here. Yes, traditional companies can liquidate their assets, but my point is, a lot of what's going on in stocks, at least ones greatly differing from traditional P/E rati…

A high P/E ratio simply means that investors are willing to pay more for each dollar of earnings. But there are actual earnings. There are no earnings backing crypto.

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#269

Post by stevespang »

mrDmrTmrJ wrote: post #213
sumedh wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, $1m feels very small for someone who could get more profit if they keep their mouth shut.

Short selling profit depends on timing - i.e. the drop happening before the fees for shorting kill you. So I do have this information, and want to make $$$$$$$ it's actually in my interest to also collect $1M from Hindenburg, to make this information plabic, *after I've established my positions

You can bet Hindenburg already has massive short positions somehow on all of this . . .

Re: $1M bounty for details on Tether’s backing

#270

Post by kingofpandora »

OJFord wrote: post #174
Taikonerd wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just realized that the Bloomberg reporter who wrote the recent story is named "Zeke Faux." ( Faux meaning "fake" in French, in a story about fraud.) Is his name a pseudonym? If not, it's another surreal point in a surreal story.

If you're unacquainted, look up (other?) examples of 'nominal determinism' - you're in for a treat!

*nominative determinism
Post reply on HN