Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

SsiSsiSsiSsi t1_j29howv wrote

The US has a long arm when it comes to clawing back stolen funds, make sure you account for every penny of that money, Bahamas.

361

terremoto25 t1_j29m5yu wrote

They could just drop it in a bank account and earn one and a half percent. Ballpark $4.3 million a month...

96

sakurakhadag t1_j29o9lx wrote

Don't worry they'll keep that $2 billion safe

39

A40 t1_j29opcd wrote

Safekeep it away quick before it's only $3.50!!

6

GodlessAristocrat t1_j29rvbo wrote

Crypto assets. So, in other words, they seized $0 of real value.

34

dblan9 t1_j29tsvs wrote

That is amazing that they were able to seize 2.2 I mean 1.8, I mean 1.3 billion dollars.

−7

USFederalReserve t1_j29ukkh wrote

Replying to mishap1 (#1,189,233)

You'd never sell it into FIAT to garner returns. You'd collateralize it for liquidity at an interest rate that still nets you a return based on whatever your strategy is. The same idea is at play when CEOs use their company shares as collateral for liquidity.

3.5 billion is a lot of money and I'd suck a million miles of dick and cup a hundred million balls for 480k. There's a financial instrument for every risk profile so in the event that these seized funds were used for passive income while being held (they aren't and won't) there would definitely be someone willing to provide liquidity on that crypto, even with consideration for it's volatility.

25

Detachabl_e t1_j2a6ypa wrote

Replying to doubleboinger (#1,191,760)

So 10,562,000,000 dicks in a million miles of dicks for ::checks notes:: $480,000. Seems like a) he'd be dead well before getting to the end of those dicks and b) that just seems like a terrible pay rate for giving blowjobs. This guy needs a business manager...or a pimp.

24

mces97 t1_j2aawjm wrote

And what are they going to do with the 1 billion they seized?

−3

surfe t1_j2afv5y wrote

I thought there was less than 1bn at the time of bankruptcy. How is there 3.5bn now?

1

gravescd t1_j2akrpw wrote

Replying to USFederalReserve (#1,194,012)

But IS it $3.5 billion? Was that the value today or when it was seized? Will that be its value tomorrow? Collateral is collateral because it has definable value. If the value is uncertain, then its value as collateral would be the likely minimum liquidated dollar value. When it comes to crypto, that minimum is getting closer to $0 by the day.

It just doesn't make sense to borrow against something that's losing value continuously, that's a recipe for a margin call.

10

USFederalReserve t1_j2alq3n wrote

Replying to gravescd (#1,195,956)

> But IS it $3.5 billion? Was that the value today or when it was seized? Will that be its value tomorrow?

This is why I called it volatile. The price fluctuates within an expected range.

> Collateral is collateral because it has definable value.

Not true. The lender of the FIAT will undoubtedly charge a risk premium-- that is how they will make money when the owner of the crypto hypothetically pays them back. It would likely be negotiated in such a way that the wallet is moved to escrow which would allow the lender of the FIAT to recoup whatever they are owed from the wallet itself before returning the difference to the owner of the crytpo.

The more volatility, the larger the risk, the more risk premium that can be charged. Say you are a billionaire investor who wants to take on a billion dollars in crypto-- you would definitely be willing to lend your FIAT with the crypto as collateral. Best case, you make free money when the crypto owner pays you back up. Worst case, you can obtain a large quantity of crypto in bulk off exchange via the middle man.

That's just the birdseye view. One man's risk is another man's opportunity.

> When it comes to crypto, that minimum is getting closer to $0 by the day.

Crypto may be overvalued but its definitely not going to 0 anytime soon.

−9

cloud_coder OP t1_j2ao7zo wrote

Replying to surfe (#1,194,771)

Good question. We don't know for sure (yet) but things are a mess (bad/missing records) with complex transactions and money flows. I imagine that either one of the defendants provided information or the new CEO and his forensic accountants have identified additional funds. It could also be that was the funds that were in Bahamian firms. This will be an on-going process of discovery and claw back.

3

failbotron t1_j2avxrl wrote

Replying to asetniop (#1,188,411)

Well, it was about that time I begin to get suspicious. I said, "Bahamas, my boy, why do you need tree-fitty?" He said, "My imaginary friend Boo-Boo the dinosaur wants it." So I went to my tax haven's island, and sure enough, there was that damn Loch Ness Monster!

26

MisterBlud t1_j2aw9dq wrote

I don’t know why people think this is sketchy.

The Bahamas have assured everyone that the 3 billion they have taken into custody will be safeguarded. The person in charge has also passed along a guarantee that none of the 2.5 billion will be touched. They even split the 2 billion in half and have two separate teams watching the dual portions of 500 million so it will all be accounted for…

22

allanbc t1_j2axpcj wrote

Replying to ShellOilNigeria (#1,189,014)

Yeah, I know when I'm transferring billions of dollars in vulnerable digital assets I always make sure to recite all relevant facts over an unsecured phone call, while using an unsecured web connection to do the transfer.

−2

gravescd t1_j2b3xga wrote

Replying to USFederalReserve (#1,196,197)

Collateral IS the risk premium. It defeats the purpose of asking for collateral if the collateral is itself so risky it has to be offset with higher interest or can only reliably back a tiny percentage of its nominal value.

We literally just witnessed one of the most spectacular financial implosions since Lehman Bros because of this magical thinking that Crypto is stable enough to back real financial assets.

6

USFederalReserve t1_j2b5b0r wrote

Replying to gravescd (#1,200,733)

> Collateral IS the risk premium. It defeats the purpose of asking for collateral if the collateral is itself so risky it has to be offset with higher interest or can only reliably back a tiny percentage of its nominal value.

First, let me remind you that this is a hypothetical that we are discussing. That being said, the volatility is not this needle that moves from $0 and Current VAL.

If I have 3.5 billion dollars worth of BTC or 3.5 billion dollars worth of TSLA shares and I want to have 500 million dollars of liquid FIAT, I'm not going to sell 500 million in BTC on the open market nor am I going to sell 500 million in TSLA shares on the open market. I'm going to find a market maker and use the assets as collateral for a loan from a market maker. I'm going to pay them interest and likely negotiate a deal which specifies how obligations are to be paid by X date if there is not Y payments made or if the BTC/TSLA shares drop Z%.

This isn't a rare or unusual thing and it depends entirely on what the assets are, the size of transaction, as well as the private individuals involved in the deal, along with their perceived capabilities of repayment.

0

ShellOilNigeria t1_j2bduxv wrote

Replying to USFederalReserve (#1,201,386)

Again, I understand that but the vast majority of the population does not use encrypted data and those that do, are probably using something that is backdoored by the NSA like Tor nodes and over the counter software like Windows. Not hard to tie things together. Especially when you have a gigantic budget.

https://theintercept.com/2014/05/19/data-pirates-caribbean-nsa-recording-every-cell-phone-call-bahamas/

7

USFederalReserve t1_j2bfpkb wrote

Replying to ShellOilNigeria (#1,203,239)

> Again, I understand that but the vast majority of the population does not use encrypted data and those that do,

iMessage is end to end encrypted, among other popular communication software. While metadata and cellular phone calls may be intercepted, I think that's a far cry away "all data".

> and those that do, are probably using something that is backdoored by the NSA like Tor nodes and over the counter software like Windows.

This is a gross oversimplification of the security surface of today. Outside cellular phone calls and SMS messaging, the majority of communication happens with VoIP/internet, which is typically encrypted.

> Not hard to tie things together. Especially when you have a gigantic budget.

It's not hard to tie together because your definitional scopes are too vague IMO.

0

gravescd t1_j2bi8gf wrote

Replying to USFederalReserve (#1,201,100)

I understand how this works, but you're missing the point here that is specific to crypto: that its value is too volatile (and in the wrong direction) to be effective as collateral. It's like trying to get a HELOC while your house is on fire.

6

rauls4 t1_j2bjhl0 wrote

I really hope BC just drops to zero and we never have to hear about it again.

2

Solkre t1_j2bvwsr wrote

Well if it's like the crypto I'm holding, it's worth less every day. I wonder what coins they actually are.

2

Ruark_Icefire t1_j2cpnni wrote

Replying to yawetag12 (#1,214,929)

Yeah we don't use a gold standard or even a silver standard anymore but I would argue that fiat currencies are still essentially I.O.U.s. Just now it means that you are owed a certain amount of goods instead of being owed silver or gold.

1

ceribus_peribus t1_j2cxhe8 wrote

Funny, people originally gave that crypto to FTX for 'safekeeping'.

1

allanbc t1_j2czett wrote

Replying to ShellOilNigeria (#1,200,682)

Sure, but it's not a crazy assumption that this government agency uses an encryption that the NSA can't just walk past, especially considering they definitely know the NSA will try to look in on it.

1

spinjinn t1_j2d5ahr wrote

Shouldn’t that be “bahaman” or “bahamanian?”

1

NikoKida t1_j2dbkno wrote

At least the scammer behind FTX doesn’t have it. As long as he’s not using the money he stole to get out of this or pay newspapers to suck his dick, I don’t care who has it or what they’re doing with it

1

skippyspk t1_j2dfvna wrote

They are preparing to send all $3.0bn to aggrieved parties.

1

outerproduct t1_j2dgsss wrote

I'm glad they got all $2.5 billion of it, I was worried it was going to disappear.

1

Miffers t1_j2edz2q wrote

Crypto assets going down with the market, make that $3B now

2