3 ms·

Tether skeptics always point to this, and then say even that 74% wasn't all in cash, a lot of it was in Bitcoin. If that's true, and it Bitcoin has tripled sin

Tether skeptics always point to this, and then say even that 74% wasn't all in cash, a lot of it was in Bitcoin. If that's true, and it Bitcoin has tripled since then, doesn't that mean they could be over-collateralized now? I don't mean to defend Tether here because I don't have evidence either way, but the skeptics would be more believable if they followed their own accusations to their logical conclusions.

mcintyre1994 6y ago
To be honest I don't really know enough about their model to follow it to its logical conclusions - I'm just a bit skeptical of any non-audited company that claims to have 11x its cash on hand in 20 months. I didn't know that people say some of the apparent cash was in Bitcoin, I was assuming that 74% was all in cash. Even if we assume the entire $1.85b all in bitcoin though, the tripled price only takes you to ~6b. And they've apparently now put out 8x as many tether, which means they (if I understand correctly) claim to have 8x as much cash/assets on hand. I don't understand how Bitcoin holdings would cover that increase, and I even less understand how anything they could claim was cash could. To be honest I just don't get the model, which is why I'm not making any claims or trying to follow it to a logical conclusion. I just don't get why they can't prove they hold ~$20b in ~cash if the entire point of tether is that they do so.