|
quote:Vlad Matveev has learned the hard way how volatile cryptocurrency hedge funds can be. my sides
|
#
¿
May 21, 2020 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 06:02 |
|
|
rjmccall posted:i bet you can buy a cruise ship for real cheap in the same way that you can buy a castle, i.e. it's an unending money sucking pit that takes a staff of dozens just to hold off the constant deterioration there was a story in gizmodo or something about how cruise lines are selling the ships for about $4m for scrap
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
The_Franz posted:lol coinbase oh lord i didn't even think about this they're not broker-dealers so SIPA doesn't apply. they're not futures commission merchants, so commodity regulations don't apply. they're not a bank. those are the only bankruptcy regimes that give priority to "customer" claims. god i hope they go bust that case would be loving hilarious
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2022 01:22
|
|
|
he got paid more than he earned 
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2022 15:41
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:ransomware dried up since russia locked itself away from the world's internet and as a result crypto volume cratered and a few cashouts plus people running arbitrage attacks against dumb contracts have caused prices to plummet and a lot of idiots to have massive losses. eh i think this is probably wrong crypto has become insanely correlated with the nasdaq because it's the same speculative bubble. interest rates were zero, people were looking for returns, they piled into dumber and dumber poo poo. now that interest rates are rising and those bubbles are popping, crypto is as well.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:FB mainstream software toucher pay literally is $350k-$400k also, employees have costs above their pay (benefits, taxes, office space and overhead, etc)
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2022 18:30
|
|
|
look i don't need to win the billion dollar jackpot on the lottery tickets i bought, i will settle for the five million dollar prize
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2022 18:53
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:lol, "tether is the most important crypto" by what measure exactly? it's capable of suddenly and sharply going to zero and blowing up the entire crypto ecosystem because it is propped up on a lie about reality that can be abruptly falsified bitcoin is just a mass delusion so it can't as effectively suddenly collapse
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2022 22:08
|
|
|
also 30% apr is insanely high for a ponzi scheme they must be loving desperate monday should be good
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2022 22:13
|
|
|
DrankSinatra posted:I get paying depositors 30% APR for liquidity in USD, but what value does paying interest on Tether give them? If people are cashing out, who’d be happy with tether? If you pay 30% for real money and not for tether everyone will exchange their tether for real money defeating the point
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2022 23:29
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:https://twitter.com/coffeebreak_YT/status/1525478171575033856?s=20&t=H28cq9rmYF3C_2C7VEkllQ that’s a lot more clever than I thought they were
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2022 03:31
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:lately i'm into an obscure thing called "computer comedy", you probably haven't heard of it given your posting neither have you
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2022 05:52
|
|
|
sorry your posting is quite fine but you can’t set yourself up like that
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2022 05:53
|
|
|
i feel like i missed the ape slurp juice business and that i would very much like to read it is there a good summary somewhere
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2022 21:41
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:in forex trading it has been empirically shown that an automated loss-exit strategy is a net positive in the long run. however, this strategy is counter to natural human behavior. i would like to see this empirical study because as you've described it, it doesn't sound likely that it's accurate. forex is a negative-sum game (once you include the house's cut, like all commodities trading). so it seems much more likely to me that in the particular sample studied that was true, but that if you repeated the game in other samples you would get different results. that would be expected simply based on how you described it, the strategy's effectiveness would swing wildly based on how many rare "hits" you have in the sample size. the only way you can have a net positive strategy in a net negative game like forex is if you have an information advantage (not present here, but you can have it in other circumstances like blackjack card counting), or the other side has managed to develop a strategy provably worse than average and insists on using it (and that seems unlikely). after all if the study you're describing is true, goldman would code it into a bot and let the bot trade, as would its competitors, until all the profit from that strategy was squeezed out of the market.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2022 16:32
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:turns out they converted all the customer money into UST, and the part about spreading their holdings across multiple stablecoins was a lie we mainly invest in USDT, and by USDT, i mean not a penny in USDT
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2022 17:18
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:How the gently caress isn't this a security the SEC has been kinda scared that if they prosecute crypto stuff that hasn't collapsed they'll be blamed for when it does, so they only go after stuff that already failed this is a stupid, stupid position of course and boy have they bought themselves imminent blame for massive losses
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2022 17:19
|
|
|
haveblue posted:the life savings losers are not the ones facing legal exposure, they're the ones taking advantage of it yeah i would expect this company is rapidly going to file for bankruptcy and the creditor's committee is going to sue the bejesus out of everyone involved
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2022 20:13
|
|
|
Shumagorath posted:before i decide if this is good or bad, which state is Ross in denial
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2022 01:20
|
|
|
Powerful Two-Hander posted:don't forget that if the returns go down you have to post more collateral! It's like the loans are arranged in a pyramid shape you see because...... Most of what they describe is ordinary finance stuff including the collateral part. The ponzu scheme is in that none of it is actually true.l about the returns it generates.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2022 13:19
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:oh apparently they come with usage rights now lmao bored apes say the holder of the NFT has the right to create derivative works (they don't own the ape image itself, bored apes still does, but they can create works like an animated show off of it)
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2022 19:15
|
|
|
Powerful Two-Hander posted:lol all this "analysis" is transparently just technical analysis is, basically, entrail reading no matter what it's applied to and who is applying it
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2022 16:12
|
|
, it's no more intellectually valid than a printed pamphlet about how actually aliens built the pyramids and cancer is cured by drinking vinegar as we can see from this graph
|
coinbase is paying their top legal guy 18m a year? gently caress i gotta get one of those gigs even if it only lasts a year before it impodes
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2022 20:52
|
|
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:i mean, he's probably the hardest working dude at the company how hard is it to write official policies on "don't do securities fraud" while ordering IT not to set up an email inbox for you so you can't ever be charged with knowing about all the securities fraud
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2022 21:06
|
|
|
drk posted:acknowledging the tokens they trade are securities in an internal written policy would probably be a poor idea, since they dont follow securities regulations who’s gonna explain that to the execs? not you, that’s for sure!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2022 22:00
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:if any of those people were satoshi, they wouldn't be able to keep their mouths shut. hal finney has absolutely no problem keeping his mouth shut since 2014, about anything at all well it might be open and he can't close it, but either way, no statements about bitcoin or anything else are passing out of it
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2022 19:14
|
|
|
Pigbuster posted:I've seen so many of these that it's just hit me how absurd it is that simply entering your wallet into a website is enough for them to steal everything inside it. I don't have to worry about my bank's account/routing number floating around because without my actual credentials all anyone can do with those is send me money. Do crypto wallets not have that same kind of system or are people genuinely just giving random websites their entire bank credentials just to potentially own a picture of a goblin uh that is not true please don't go around giving out your bank account number with the bank account and routing number you can send an ACH transaction from (not just to) an account - basically write an electronic check. you still have the banks fraud protection and it's harder to get rights to do an ACH than use a cc number but you still don't want that out there
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2022 04:06
|
|
|
man, this seems like a good month to be a bankruptcy attorney who has an odd amount of knowledge about crypto. gonna have to start billing my posting on this subject to business development.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 16:28
|
|
|
The_Franz posted:https://twitter.com/Bitfinexed/status/1536362258741219335?s=20&t=g5piwN5_RKuO2De2--5SOg so i have trouble figuring out how he got this conclusion from the graphs, but pretend it is true what that probably means is that all the suckers who deposited american dollars on bitfinex are about to discover that they have, in fact, decided to purchase bitcoins when this loan gets called. usually, the exchange would sell the collateral - but bitfinex, as a crypto company, is inherently long on crypto so they'll probably do a more sophisticated version of gox's "internet issues" and just decline to liquidate the bitcoins for the lenders. it would not mean bitfinex, itself, is going to get caught holding the bag unless it, too, invests money in this "p2p lending market"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 16:35
|
|
|
SubG posted:bitcoin is crashing, so people are trying to sell. if nobody wants to buy, then the price goes down further until you find a greater fool with money to be parted from this isn't right bitfinex allows you to buy on margin using funds loaned by other market participants. those are the people who are (allegedly) financing this. bitfinex may be playing games with that lending platform to allow this to happen and to avoid it being liquidated, but as long as it's just using those suckers money, they're the ones who will end up holding the bag instead of bitfinex
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 17:06
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:^^^ok, well if it's on-margin then the cash still doesn't exist, right? Like 1/10th of the cash exists? Neito posted:Bitfinex is basically putting numbers in a database with nothing backing them. So yeah, they're just not going to let you cash out. So you have "10,000 USD" but really you have $5 and an IOU for the other 9,995. At best. so here is what I think bitfinexed is saying is going on, based on how margin loans work and what (little) i know about bitfinex. so first you need to understand what a secured loan is: i lend you money, you give me collateral. if you don't pay me back (you default), I own the collateral. this is much easier than the solution for an unsecured loan: I sue you, and spend a while trying to force you to pay me. the collateral is usually worth noticably more than the loan, so I'm sure when i sell it, i get all my money back. the most common example is a mortgage: you don't pay your mortgage, I own your house. a margin loan is a secured loan with a security (or here, crypto). this is a kind of bad secured loan because the collateral can drop significantly in value. as a result, it is standard for a margin loan to have a system where if the collateral drops enough in value, that is a default unless you put up more collateral: i.e. then own your securities, even if you have been paying me. now, the real trick you may be thinking of is you can use the stock you are buying as part of the security. so i want to buy a share of microsoft, it costs $200, i can get a margin loan against that microsoft share to get the money to buy it. obviously nobody's lending me the full $200. but perhaps someone lends me $150, and I put up $50. if the share goes up, i get all the gains - so i get 4x as much. if it drops, i suffer all the losses too - so I lose 4x as much. if it drops to, say, $170 the share probably gets sold before it hits the $150. that's all background you have to understand. the key thing though is, if you are buying on margin, someone put up the rest of the money. it didn't come from thin air. bitfinex offers margin loans, and it gets the cash from people who deposit Actual Dollars at bitfinex. if you have $1,000 sitting there, they say "hey you can earn free money, tick this box" and then they use your $1,000 to fund margin loans. now, this should be relatively risk-free - if crypto is collapsing, bitfinex seizes the collateral (you should have, like, $1,500 worth) and sells it before you take a loss and gives you your $1000 back. but what bitfinexed is saying they're doing is, basically, not taking and liquidating the collateral. they're letting the margin loans ride. goldman sachs would never let you do this because they don't give a gently caress about the price of microsoft stock. they may be long, they may be short, on microsoft but institutionally they do not care, they just want their money. but bitfinex does care, it cares a lot. any crypto business inherently is long on crypto because otherwise they don't have a business. so bitfinex is letting people get short on collateral without calling their loans and letting people buy more bitcoins on margin with insufficient collateral. bitfinex is doing this to try and support the price of bitcoin. if this works, the lenders never notice. but if it doesn't, you thought you had $1,000 in real money in bitfinex. you will wake up to find you have no money. you have crypto collateral. and if bitfinex declares a default and gives you your collateral, they probably won't sell it for you (they don't want to hurt the price of bitcoin). they'll just tell you surprise, you now own $800 worth of bitcoin, sell it yourself. sorry, now $700. sorry, actually you have a shitcoin that went to zero. your money will have gone to the people who sold their crypto and got the money out of bitfinex. bitfinex, assuming they didn't loan their own money, will be fine. they used your money, not theirs, to try and prop up the price. (all of this applies equally if you thought you had tether or some other "stablecoin" instead of Real Money)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 17:41
|
|
|
at the end of the day the big risk everyone ignored in all these dumb crypto financial things is that if you are lending real money against crypto, you are doing so with a business that is long crypto. they have to be: they're a crypto business. crypto goes to $0, they don't have a business, even if the business only generated real money and they didn't buy any crypto (and of course, they did buy crypto). so when crypto stuff copied Real Finance ways of lending against securities, they forgot that banks just care about getting paid and they will call your loan the instant they feel insecure (even if its their client's money, not theirs). they will not let it ride because they don't want to hurt the stock. but a crypto company absolutely will let loans ride rather than liquidate collateral because if they liquidate collateral and depress prices, that hurts them. also personally hurts all their exec's crypto "portfolios" this is why, probably, celsius (which seems to do the same thing: make loans secured by crypto) suddenly is "halting" withdrawals edit: also I really don't understand how the graphs bitfinexed supports his claim to know someone's buying that much bitcoin on margin, i'm just assuming that is true - but I don't know it to be true as opposed to him just misreading a graph. evilweasel fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Jun 13, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 17:50
|
|
|
today's money stuff newsletter (https://newsletterhunt.com/newsletters/money-stuff-by-matt-levine) has some good stuff on celsius such as, it borrowed $500 million from tether, which according to tether's own claimed financials would make tether undercollateralized if it could not be repaid
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 19:27
|
|
|
also that celsius was paying out 17% interest rates which means it was less a dumb collateralized loan thing and more an "open and notorious ponzi scheme" thing
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 19:30
|
|
|
graph posted:youre being r/td on the tooter op fyi oh good another line on my posting resume, posted something worthy of being posted on twitter now let me see what else gets posted on twitter to put that in perspective oh oh no oh dear
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 22:05
|
|
|
coin base is firing 18% of their employees, as I just found out through my feed of news for companies that might go bankrupt soon
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2022 13:27
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:coinbase is firing 18% of their employees, as I just found out through my feed of the post above yours yes but did that tell you reorg research is blasting out email alerts on coin base to bankruptcy professionals 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2022 13:41
|
|
|
i expect to see this little nugget from celsius's terms of service quoted a lot in court filings imminently "Our Earn Service allows you to earn a financing fee from Celsius, referred to as “Rewards,” in the form of Digital Assets (either in-kind, i.e., in the same Digital Asset you transfer, or in CEL Tokens, where permitted) in exchange for entering into open-ended loans of your Eligible Digital Assets to Celsius under the terms hereof. If our Earn Service is available to you, upon your election, you will lend your Eligible Digital Assets to Celsius and grant Celsius all rights and title to such Digital Assets, for Celsius to use in its sole discretion while using the Earn Service."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2022 17:25
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:they also hired citi to help with restructuring. chapter 11 within a week I bet. I've never heard of Citibank acting in this sort of role in a bankruptcy. That's a bizarre choice.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2022 13:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 06:02 |
|
|
Janitor Ludwich IV posted:the lawyers appointed citigroup to help ransack the remaining assets in the company in consulting fees i mean sort of, but citigroup has no expertise there which is why its odd their expertise is more in the needing the bankruptcy help, not offering the help
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2022 17:11
|
|