3 ms·

Wouldn't that mean that he basically embezzled all customer deposits, by design?

• dragonwriter 4y ago
  At a minimum, failed to account for them in a way which very much enabled embezzlement, but, yes, the massive set of accounting and other record keeping irregularities at the FTX family of companies would look like a deliberate setup to enable fraud and embezzlement even if you just looked at what wasn’t recorded, and not at SBFs explicit instruction to others to use self-destructing messages for company business to avoid a permanent record. Everything was set up in a way which complicates being able to prove exactly who involved stole what (lack of records of assets and debts, particularly customer accounts, lack of records of bank accounts controlled by the various corporations, lack of records of who the employees of the various corporations were, and what their terms of employment were, unprotected group email account with keys for corporate crypto wallets–which coincidentally a large sum was transferred out of right around the time of the bankruptcy, etc.), but in a way which makes it very hard to imagine that it was anything but deliberately structured for exactly that purpose.