4 ms·
I mean, I don't see how it could've been losing money. Even if it had less users surely the fees they take more than make-up for the costs the exchange itself h
by Tenoke 4y ago
I mean, I don't see how it could've been losing money. Even if it had less users surely the fees they take more than make-up for the costs the exchange itself has.
- jandrese 4y agoThey were paying out guaranteed 15% returns "with no risk" to investors. Basically a textbook Ponzi scheme pitch and yet again it worked. https://www.theblock.co/post/186187/alameda-promised-high-returns-with-no-risk-in-2018-pitch https://www.theblock.co/post/186187/alameda-promised-high-re...
- Tenoke 4y agoAgain, that's the Alameda arm, I'm talking about the exchange.
- jandrese 4y agoThey were all connected at the hip. You can't talk about only one because it's all one big fraud spit across a bunch of domains to dazzle investors. There is some evidence that they "passed" the audits by moving all of the money around the companies while auditing them one at a time using a hidden money transfer function written by SBF.