3 ms·
It does when the poor decision is to run a ponzi scheme e: ah, only acting as the middlemen between the end user and a ponzi scheme. Probably that'll give them
by Khoth 4y ago
It does when the poor decision is to run a ponzi scheme
e: ah, only acting as the middlemen between the end user and a ponzi scheme. Probably that'll give them and their VC backers enough plausible deniability to avoid being arrested.
- devoutsalsa 4y agoThis wasn’t a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that pays existing investors with funds collected from new investors. https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/investing-basics/glossary/ponzi-schemes https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/investing-ba...
- charcircuit 4y agoIf anything it was closer to a pump and dump with Luna. I don't get why calling it a Ponzi is so popular when there wasn't something paying returns using other people's money.
- devoutsalsa 4y agoPeople like throwing the word scam around a lot, too. I don't think this was a scam. It was simply a shit financial product based on deluded fundamentals.
- Khoth 4y agoIt's obfuscated by splitting the components into multiple cryptocurrencies with multiple actors, but that's what's going on. People were staking UST for 19.5% returns, and if you cut through the fluff, those returns came from later people putting their money in hoping to get those returns themselves. (and because UST was a stablecoin those returns were (ostensibly) in dollars, not just inflation of the coin value)
- devoutsalsa 4y agoYou just described banks. Banks take deposits & lend the money out at a higher rate. This is what anchor protocol was all about. Pay high interest, and lend at even higher interest.
- djbebs 4y agoExcept anchor was lending at lower rates.