5 ms·
They updated the article several hours later with: 'The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission sent subpoenas on Dec. 6 to virtual-currency venue Bitfinex a
by onewhonknocks 9y ago
They updated the article several hours later with:
'The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission sent subpoenas on Dec. 6 to virtual-currency venue Bitfinex and Tether, a company that issues a widely traded coin and claims it’s pegged to the dollar, according to a person familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified discussing private information.'
- g09980 9y agoThis should be much more visible. The market is panic selling on effectively old news.
- onewhonknocks 9y agoAgreed. Thank you for saying so. edit: is there a way to bold text in an HN comment?
- tinus_hn 9y agoThankfully, no there isn’t.
- AlexCoventry 9y ago𝗡𝗼𝘁 𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝘂𝗽𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝘆𝘄𝗮𝘆...
- foobar2020 9y agoUnicode to the rescue! Here's how to make 𝗯𝗼𝗹𝗱 text: http://qaz.wtf/u/convert.cgi http://qaz.wtf/u/convert.cgi Looks a bit ugly, but works.
- dragonwriter 9y agoIt's not “old news” if it wasn't publicly known in the past (and if the market had known it already, no one would be panic selling based on it.)
- g09980 9y agoI'm just not sure why Bloomberg would choose to omit the date until being pestered online. Doesn't this change things quite a bit? If there was a true smoking gun, they would be shut down then and there already instead of continuing to operate/grow, such as issuing more tethers in the past month.
- saas_co_de 9y agoThey don't operate in US jurisdiction or do business with any US corporations so they can run for a while ignoring the subpoenas and the wheels of justice grind slow but it will catch up with them. Look up E-gold if you want to feel the experience of history repeating itself. For bonus points check the dates when E-Gold was shutdown and when bitcoin was created.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> if there was a true smoking gun, they would be shut down then That's...an unwarranted conclusion. If this were all done and resolved, then Bitfinex would have a strong incentive to say that clearly, specifically, and unequivocally. The fact that they aren't and CFTC isn't commenting strongly suggests that the process starting with the subpoena is ongoing.
- ceejayoz 9y agoIt's not old news if we didn't know about it until now.
- tannhauser23 9y agoSo when did the auditor quit? Before or after the subpoena? I wonder if the auditor made a 'noisy withdrawal', basically alerting the regulators that this company is fraudulent.
- ttul 9y agoIf I was auditing and obviously fraudulent operation, the easiest way to cover my ass would be to notify regulators immediately.