6 ms·

I frankly don't care about the donations. What matters is the sheer scale of the fraud and the fact that it doesn't seem to be getting pursued aggressively by

I frankly don't care about the donations. What matters is the sheer scale of the fraud and the fact that it doesn't seem to be getting pursued aggressively by the US. I mean they announced a ticketmaster anti-trust investigation due to the Taylor Swift ticket fiasco, but $10B in fraud isn't enough to elicit a more notable and vocal response? I'm sure it will be pursued but where is the outcry?

bfgoodrich 4y ago
yunwal 4y ago
Sure is strange how the guy who makes nearly 100 mil in donations to government figures seems to get preferential treatment from the government.
- adam_arthur 4y ago
  It can be pursued by those he didn’t donate to just as well. E.g the republican controlled house The DoJ and AG do seem focused on particularly bias driven matters though Edit: funny the negative response this comment elicits. Everybody in their own bubble these days
  - batch12 4y ago
    > the republican controlled house Isn't the house still controlled by Democrats with the new congress starting in Jan?
    - adam_arthur 4y ago
      Yes, so 1-2 months from now. They can start planning now
      - daveguy 4y ago
        Apparently, from your bubble, you did not previously know that FTX also contributed to republicans.
        mc32 4y ago
        They did but to a certain group of them.
  - listless 4y ago
    It’s the second sentence. I know the optics are bad, but there has to be evidence to back up a statement like that. And for the record, I agree with you. But if it’s just a “gut feeling” it’s not an argument I can put forward.
  - scythe 4y ago
    Everyone knows Merrick Garland is a huge Taylor Swift fan. Haven't you seen the hidden camera video of him singing "Trouble" a capella?
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > It can be pursued by those he didn’t donate to just as well. E.g the republican controlled house That's why the co-CEO donated millions to them.
    - nightski 4y ago
      I’ve heard at theory that some are donating to extreme candidates on the other side to increase their odds of winning.
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
        You can review his donations at https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/donor_detail/2022?id=U0000004758&type=I&super_only=N&name=Salame%2C+Ryan+D https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/donor_detail/20.... Millions to the Senate and House leadership funds; that's not going to lost-cause races.
      - njarboe 4y ago
        "some" include the Democratic National Committee[1]. This type of action sure reinforces feelings that politics in America is gravely corrupt and some sort of reset is needed. [1]https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2022/democrat-ad-spending-republican-trump/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2022/dem...
  - matthewdgreen 4y ago
    As others have pointed out, the FTX team donated to politicians of both parties in a very calculated way. There's a great diagram in this article that shows how the money flowed [1]. But as gross as all this is (and I think our political system's legalization of bribery is extremely gross) I tend to think that political cynics are also being insufficiently cynical about the current dynamics: If the FTX donors were a potential future source of funds, I have no doubt that there might be some political soft-touching going on. But that's not the case. SBF et al. are never going to be a significant source of political donations in the future. (Even if they somehow manage to recover some personal wealth, they're all politically radioactive.) There's no percentage for any politician to do them political favors at this point, and a huge amount of political downside. I think what you're seeing in the Bahamas right now is mostly to be expected: a whole bunch of agencies competing to figure out who will get jurisdiction and access to any remaining funds. This requires forensic acounting and some cooperation from the principles. SBF et al. being in jail (as opposed to being free but closely watched) will just make this early process much harder. [1] https://www.ft.com/content/428c7800-c72d-4c59-9940-4376fea6e263 https://www.ft.com/content/428c7800-c72d-4c59-9940-4376fea6e...
    - jjeaff 4y ago
      Is there a way to read that article without a financial times subscription?
      - stuxnet 4y ago
        https://archive.ph/8FX5V https://archive.ph/8FX5V
  - BryantD 4y ago
    As I mentioned in another comment, the House Financial Services Committee -- currently chaired by Maxine Walters (D) -- has already announced hearings. I don't mean this as an attack, but I find it's useful to occasionally examine my own bubble.
njarboe 4y ago
Um, maybe the donations are the answers to your questions?
throwawaysleep 4y ago
Is it an American fraud? I thought they were based in the Bahamas.
- adam_arthur 4y ago
  I have no doubt there is precedent and law on the books that would allow the US to prosecute this
  - gruez 4y ago
    In what way? They specifically avoided entering American jurisdiction by having a separate site ftx.us.
    - KptMarchewa 4y ago
      Which is dead too.
      - gruez 4y ago
        It's dead but my understanding is that the balance sheets are mostly fine, because it was subject to US regulations.
chitowneats 4y ago
No. This is a widely repeated misconception. That investigation was opened months ago: https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/1593729594921713670#m https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/159372959492171367... I'm trying to find the original source for this but I can't. Matt Stoller is literally The Anti-Trust Guy on Twitter though. Also, the U.S. is currently engaged with the Bahamas in a jurisdictional battle for SBF's seized funds: https://www.reuters.com/technology/bahamas-regulator-says-it-assumed-control-digital-assets-ftx-2022-11-18/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/bahamas-regulator-says-it...
- adam_arthur 4y ago
  It’s irrelevant anyway. There should be a loud and clearly vocalized response from a Government department stating they will prosecute the fraud. Has fraud ever been more obvious and clear cut than in this case?
  - thinkharderdev 4y ago
    Several investigations have been opened: https://www.reuters.com/technology/manhattan-us-attorneys-office-investigates-ftx-downfall-source-2022-11-14/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/manhattan-us-attorneys-of.... It's likely a very complicated case, so I would imagine it will take some time. It took what, 2-3 years to bring the case against Elizabeth Holmes over Theranos?
    - adam_arthur 4y ago
      I’m aware that probes have started, but with very little fanfare or pomp behind them. Perhaps people prefer that approach, but to me this is a situation that calls for vocal messaging from the top. The fraud is public for all to see and pretty much indisputable. It’s far worse than Bernie Madoffs scheme ever was Evidence needs to be gathered before any formal prosecution sure, but would like to see more of a verbal acknowledgement of the clear wrongdoing from regulators
      - 4y ago
chiefalchemist 4y ago
The two aren't mutually exclusive, for the exact reason you mentioned. That is, the donations are why no one wants to do the right thing. Maybe it's fear? Maybe it would mean The Politics Industrial Complex would be acknowledging its dirty little secret? Oh...and suddenly...look at that...what perfect timing...Let's go get Ticketmaster. You've got all the right dots, just need a bit of a remix on understanding how to connect them.
fredgrott 4y ago
People are missing the underlying corruption There is a connection between the Chief of Trading at the FTX trading company and the actual Org over-seeing FTX via the licenses that FTX and its Trading company held. Rumor is that there was a look-away rather than investigate order involved. And that involves the SEC and another agency. Given the demand to regulate from both political parties this is not going away. But still the core thing is transparency and how the block-chain really does not provide that at all as it's just a transaction book and does not enforce any relationships beyond the transactions.
zosima 4y ago
I think you should care about the donations: He seems to have donated massively to media and political parties, and they appear to not so easily forget who has been their good friend.
jmull 4y ago
> it doesn't seem to be getting pursued aggressively by the US I don't think you'd be able to tell yet, for a real investigation. You've got to realize, the Taylor Swift stuff is "for the cameras". An investigation and prosecution around something as convoluted as the FTX collapse will take years of real work. I also think there won't be a lot of heat around the FTX collapse because it was widely assumed to be a scam... a case of people playing with matches getting burned. (I think that's unfair in many, many cases, and uncompassionate, but nevertheless will affect the priority of prosecuting this.)
williamscales 4y ago
FWIW, the Justice Department investigation into Live Nation / Ticket Master was ongoing before the events of this last week. Personally I was heartened by this fact. I think there is quite a bit of outcry about FTX, it's in every newspaper. The SEC is investigating and I'm sure many other investigations are being spun up. I can't imagine this will be let go lightly.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
BryantD 4y ago
I think it's being pursued aggressively in the US. WSJ reports that the Manhattan US Attorney's office is investigating[1]. The US and the Bahamas are discussing extradition[2]. The House Financial Services Committee is having at least one hearing[3]. And unsurprisingly there's already at least one class action lawsuit. [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/ftx-sam-bankman-fried-sit-in-the-crosshairs-of-u-s-prosecutors-11668398012 [2] https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/us-may-extradite-sam-bankman-fried-ftx-collapse-investigation-report [3] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-to-probe-ftx-collapse-e2-80-98expects-e2-80-99-sam-bankman-fried-to-testify/ar-AA14bt9d
TedShiller 4y ago
> I frankly don't care about the donations. What matters is the sheer scale of the fraud They're connected
basch 4y ago
I was trying to contextualize how big of scale that number is. And I was reading the NYTimes piece on ATT/TW/WB. "That amounts to a loss of about $47 billion for AT&T shareholders, based on AT&T’s $109 billion valuation of the deal at the time it was announced." AT&T lost its shareholders $47 billion in 4 years. Obviously you need to divide both numbers by stakeholders, but even still. IT is really hard to just fathom how much $10B, $15B $47B is. At these scales, numbers just mean different things.
ploppyploppy 4y ago
> I frankly don't care about the donations. then > it doesn't seem to be getting pursued aggressively by the US. ?
slim 4y ago
I frankly don't care about the donations maybe the donations have changed the election outcome? what would you think if you found out that Joe Biden operated a scam to fund his campain for example ? because the outcome is the same
bogomipz 4y ago
The anti-trust investigation was not due to the Taylor Swift ticket fiasco. This is a misconception and I think it's the result of the media reconnecting the dots. What's new is that some states Attorneys General have looking into Ticketmaster. The DOJ actually began looking into Ticket Master/Live Nation's practices months before the Swift fiasco: >"Members of the antitrust division’s staff at the Justice Department have in recent months contacted music venues and players in the ticket market, asking about Live Nation’s practices and the wider dynamics of the industry, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is sensitive."[1] And in many ways this is a continuation of their anti-trust probe that began in 2018/2019. [2] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/technology/live-nation-ticketmaster-investigation-taylor-swift.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/technology/live-nation-ti... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/01/arts/music/live-nation-ticketmaster.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/01/arts/music/live-nation-ti...
bogomipz 4y ago
>"I frankly don't care about the donations." >"What matters is the sheer scale of the fraud and the fact that it doesn't seem to be getting pursued aggressively by the US." Do you not believe there might be a relationship between these two things? Both parties in a two party system were on the receiving end of these donations. There's likely a lot of people on both side's of the aisle that don't want to talk about this. I think those same people want this framed as a regulatory failing instead of large scale fraud. I think the details and extent of all this are still coming to light however and that this story is likely not going away.

bfgoodrich 4y ago

yunwal 4y ago

Sure is strange how the guy who makes nearly 100 mil in donations to government figures seems to get preferential treatment from the government.

adam_arthur 4y ago
It can be pursued by those he didn’t donate to just as well. E.g the republican controlled house The DoJ and AG do seem focused on particularly bias driven matters though Edit: funny the negative response this comment elicits. Everybody in their own bubble these days
- batch12 4y ago
  > the republican controlled house Isn't the house still controlled by Democrats with the new congress starting in Jan?
  - adam_arthur 4y ago
    Yes, so 1-2 months from now. They can start planning now
    - daveguy 4y ago
      Apparently, from your bubble, you did not previously know that FTX also contributed to republicans.
      - mc32 4y ago
        They did but to a certain group of them.
- listless 4y ago
  It’s the second sentence. I know the optics are bad, but there has to be evidence to back up a statement like that. And for the record, I agree with you. But if it’s just a “gut feeling” it’s not an argument I can put forward.
- scythe 4y ago
  Everyone knows Merrick Garland is a huge Taylor Swift fan. Haven't you seen the hidden camera video of him singing "Trouble" a capella?
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > It can be pursued by those he didn’t donate to just as well. E.g the republican controlled house That's why the co-CEO donated millions to them.
  - nightski 4y ago
    I’ve heard at theory that some are donating to extreme candidates on the other side to increase their odds of winning.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      You can review his donations at https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/donor_detail/2022?id=U0000004758&type=I&super_only=N&name=Salame%2C+Ryan+D https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/donor_detail/20.... Millions to the Senate and House leadership funds; that's not going to lost-cause races.
    - njarboe 4y ago
      "some" include the Democratic National Committee[1]. This type of action sure reinforces feelings that politics in America is gravely corrupt and some sort of reset is needed. [1]https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2022/democrat-ad-spending-republican-trump/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2022/dem...
- matthewdgreen 4y ago
  As others have pointed out, the FTX team donated to politicians of both parties in a very calculated way. There's a great diagram in this article that shows how the money flowed [1]. But as gross as all this is (and I think our political system's legalization of bribery is extremely gross) I tend to think that political cynics are also being insufficiently cynical about the current dynamics: If the FTX donors were a potential future source of funds, I have no doubt that there might be some political soft-touching going on. But that's not the case. SBF et al. are never going to be a significant source of political donations in the future. (Even if they somehow manage to recover some personal wealth, they're all politically radioactive.) There's no percentage for any politician to do them political favors at this point, and a huge amount of political downside. I think what you're seeing in the Bahamas right now is mostly to be expected: a whole bunch of agencies competing to figure out who will get jurisdiction and access to any remaining funds. This requires forensic acounting and some cooperation from the principles. SBF et al. being in jail (as opposed to being free but closely watched) will just make this early process much harder. [1] https://www.ft.com/content/428c7800-c72d-4c59-9940-4376fea6e263 https://www.ft.com/content/428c7800-c72d-4c59-9940-4376fea6e...
  - jjeaff 4y ago
    Is there a way to read that article without a financial times subscription?
    - stuxnet 4y ago
      https://archive.ph/8FX5V https://archive.ph/8FX5V
- BryantD 4y ago
  As I mentioned in another comment, the House Financial Services Committee -- currently chaired by Maxine Walters (D) -- has already announced hearings. I don't mean this as an attack, but I find it's useful to occasionally examine my own bubble.

njarboe 4y ago

Um, maybe the donations are the answers to your questions?

throwawaysleep 4y ago

Is it an American fraud? I thought they were based in the Bahamas.

adam_arthur 4y ago
I have no doubt there is precedent and law on the books that would allow the US to prosecute this
- gruez 4y ago
  In what way? They specifically avoided entering American jurisdiction by having a separate site ftx.us.
  - KptMarchewa 4y ago
    Which is dead too.
    - gruez 4y ago
      It's dead but my understanding is that the balance sheets are mostly fine, because it was subject to US regulations.

chitowneats 4y ago

No. This is a widely repeated misconception. That investigation was opened months ago: https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/1593729594921713670#m https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/159372959492171367... I'm trying to find the original source for this but I can't. Matt Stoller is literally The Anti-Trust Guy on Twitter though. Also, the U.S. is currently engaged with the Bahamas in a jurisdictional battle for SBF's seized funds: https://www.reuters.com/technology/bahamas-regulator-says-it-assumed-control-digital-assets-ftx-2022-11-18/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/bahamas-regulator-says-it...

adam_arthur 4y ago
It’s irrelevant anyway. There should be a loud and clearly vocalized response from a Government department stating they will prosecute the fraud. Has fraud ever been more obvious and clear cut than in this case?
- thinkharderdev 4y ago
  Several investigations have been opened: https://www.reuters.com/technology/manhattan-us-attorneys-office-investigates-ftx-downfall-source-2022-11-14/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/manhattan-us-attorneys-of.... It's likely a very complicated case, so I would imagine it will take some time. It took what, 2-3 years to bring the case against Elizabeth Holmes over Theranos?
  - adam_arthur 4y ago
    I’m aware that probes have started, but with very little fanfare or pomp behind them. Perhaps people prefer that approach, but to me this is a situation that calls for vocal messaging from the top. The fraud is public for all to see and pretty much indisputable. It’s far worse than Bernie Madoffs scheme ever was Evidence needs to be gathered before any formal prosecution sure, but would like to see more of a verbal acknowledgement of the clear wrongdoing from regulators
    - 4y ago

chiefalchemist 4y ago

The two aren't mutually exclusive, for the exact reason you mentioned. That is, the donations are why no one wants to do the right thing. Maybe it's fear? Maybe it would mean The Politics Industrial Complex would be acknowledging its dirty little secret? Oh...and suddenly...look at that...what perfect timing...Let's go get Ticketmaster. You've got all the right dots, just need a bit of a remix on understanding how to connect them.

fredgrott 4y ago

People are missing the underlying corruption There is a connection between the Chief of Trading at the FTX trading company and the actual Org over-seeing FTX via the licenses that FTX and its Trading company held. Rumor is that there was a look-away rather than investigate order involved. And that involves the SEC and another agency. Given the demand to regulate from both political parties this is not going away. But still the core thing is transparency and how the block-chain really does not provide that at all as it's just a transaction book and does not enforce any relationships beyond the transactions.

zosima 4y ago

I think you should care about the donations: He seems to have donated massively to media and political parties, and they appear to not so easily forget who has been their good friend.

jmull 4y ago

> it doesn't seem to be getting pursued aggressively by the US I don't think you'd be able to tell yet, for a real investigation. You've got to realize, the Taylor Swift stuff is "for the cameras". An investigation and prosecution around something as convoluted as the FTX collapse will take years of real work. I also think there won't be a lot of heat around the FTX collapse because it was widely assumed to be a scam... a case of people playing with matches getting burned. (I think that's unfair in many, many cases, and uncompassionate, but nevertheless will affect the priority of prosecuting this.)

williamscales 4y ago

FWIW, the Justice Department investigation into Live Nation / Ticket Master was ongoing before the events of this last week. Personally I was heartened by this fact. I think there is quite a bit of outcry about FTX, it's in every newspaper. The SEC is investigating and I'm sure many other investigations are being spun up. I can't imagine this will be let go lightly.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

BryantD 4y ago

I think it's being pursued aggressively in the US. WSJ reports that the Manhattan US Attorney's office is investigating[1]. The US and the Bahamas are discussing extradition[2]. The House Financial Services Committee is having at least one hearing[3]. And unsurprisingly there's already at least one class action lawsuit. [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/ftx-sam-bankman-fried-sit-in-the-crosshairs-of-u-s-prosecutors-11668398012 [2] https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/us-may-extradite-sam-bankman-fried-ftx-collapse-investigation-report [3] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-to-probe-ftx-collapse-e2-80-98expects-e2-80-99-sam-bankman-fried-to-testify/ar-AA14bt9d

TedShiller 4y ago

> I frankly don't care about the donations. What matters is the sheer scale of the fraud They're connected

basch 4y ago

I was trying to contextualize how big of scale that number is. And I was reading the NYTimes piece on ATT/TW/WB. "That amounts to a loss of about $47 billion for AT&T shareholders, based on AT&T’s $109 billion valuation of the deal at the time it was announced." AT&T lost its shareholders $47 billion in 4 years. Obviously you need to divide both numbers by stakeholders, but even still. IT is really hard to just fathom how much $10B, $15B $47B is. At these scales, numbers just mean different things.

ploppyploppy 4y ago

> I frankly don't care about the donations. then > it doesn't seem to be getting pursued aggressively by the US. ?

slim 4y ago

I frankly don't care about the donations maybe the donations have changed the election outcome? what would you think if you found out that Joe Biden operated a scam to fund his campain for example ? because the outcome is the same

bogomipz 4y ago

The anti-trust investigation was not due to the Taylor Swift ticket fiasco. This is a misconception and I think it's the result of the media reconnecting the dots. What's new is that some states Attorneys General have looking into Ticketmaster. The DOJ actually began looking into Ticket Master/Live Nation's practices months before the Swift fiasco: >"Members of the antitrust division’s staff at the Justice Department have in recent months contacted music venues and players in the ticket market, asking about Live Nation’s practices and the wider dynamics of the industry, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is sensitive."[1] And in many ways this is a continuation of their anti-trust probe that began in 2018/2019. [2] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/technology/live-nation-ticketmaster-investigation-taylor-swift.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/technology/live-nation-ti... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/01/arts/music/live-nation-ticketmaster.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/01/arts/music/live-nation-ti...

bogomipz 4y ago

>"I frankly don't care about the donations." >"What matters is the sheer scale of the fraud and the fact that it doesn't seem to be getting pursued aggressively by the US." Do you not believe there might be a relationship between these two things? Both parties in a two party system were on the receiving end of these donations. There's likely a lot of people on both side's of the aisle that don't want to talk about this. I think those same people want this framed as a regulatory failing instead of large scale fraud. I think the details and extent of all this are still coming to light however and that this story is likely not going away.