4 ms·
It wasn’t a Ponzi scheme, at least based on what’s publicly known. This is just investing with client funds, which the US learned the hard way must be carefull
by jnwatson 4y ago
It wasn’t a Ponzi scheme, at least based on what’s publicly known.
This is just investing with client funds, which the US learned the hard way must be carefully restricted. The US has the Glass-Steagall Act, and deposit insurance to try to prevent bank runs like this.
- jjulius 4y ago>It wasn’t a Ponzi scheme, at least based on what’s publicly known. >This is just investing with client funds... This is just plain not true.
- acdha 4y agoThe investing with client funds part is probably the easiest charge but his self-description sounds Ponzi-like: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-25/sam-bankman-fried-described-yield-farming-and-left-matt-levine-stunned https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-25/sam-bankm...
- tartoran 4y agoThis sounds like Napoleon Dynamite type of reasoning
- acdha 4y agoMe, as a kid: “the emperor’s new clothes is nonsense, nobody would go along with something that obviously wrong” Me, after watching people sell no-hope dotcoms, dubious real estate, and cryptocurrency: “… unless they thought they could cash out before the other fools wised up”
- roywiggins 4y agoThey were talking about stuff like Celsius. I don't think FTX was itself offering yield-farming products, just letting people trade those tokens. "Yeah, the stuff people trade on my platform are probably Ponzis" is definitely not great publicity, but it's not obviously admitting to your own crimes.