It's crypto. It's not like the assets are sitting in traditional accounts that can be force liquidated by court order.
SEC? Lol. If these guys have run off (reading the article it doesn't seem like it), the lenders are screwed. A fraction of $10 billion can buy you a lot of protection especially in crypto safe havens like El Salvador--most of which happen to be hotspots for organized crime.
Or if they've run off (not saying they have). With a traditional account, a court could force the bank to transfer assets. Unless there is a third-party custodian of the accounts, there is no recourse. Not your keys, not your coins after all.
Crypto or not, when a large, heavily leveraged hedge fund implodes, it's really complex to unwind. It was the same when Bill Hwang's Archegos Capital failed last year:
The day they got wiped out, the liquidations caused a 27% drop in share price of ViacomCBS. The various lawsuits and charges of fraud and racketeering will take years to work their way through to completion.
"custodianship", as it is known, does begin to exist in crypto world. The custodian / administrator / prime broker (all related terms) hold the actual keys, and you have something like a limited key that permits some pre-agreed operations. So for example you can only wire funds to pre-approved addresses.
Hedge funds usually have an administrator who holds the money. This is a big, reputable organisation, usually tied to a bank and heavily regulated. it permits the fund to trade within a narrow mandate agreed with fund investors. If the HF managers disappear, the assets, perhaps with heavy losses, remain with the administrator. The administrator answers first and foremost to fund investors.
The article suggests, and it's not uncommon with crypto hedge funds, that funds were held in private wallets. So if Su Zhu disappears one day with his Ledger, that's that.
Having external administrators for classic HFs wasn't the norm until Bernie Madoff (who didn't have an administrator), funny that.
They are not, to my knowledge, being sought for arrest at this time, I don't see any reason why they have to make their physical locations known. Their lawyers are clearly available to be served documents.
24 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 53.3 ms ] threadhttps://www.entrepreneur.com/article/423721
What's the next step here, SEC lawsuits?
SEC? Lol. If these guys have run off (reading the article it doesn't seem like it), the lenders are screwed. A fraction of $10 billion can buy you a lot of protection especially in crypto safe havens like El Salvador--most of which happen to be hotspots for organized crime.
Yes they can unless they want to go to jail.
Crypto hedge-funds money is a cold-wallet protected by a 12 words phrase (some anyway - if they are smart). No one can really get to them.
(yes - the founder can go to jail. But, funds could stay locked forever)
Is this the case here, specifically? (I assume so, just curious)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archegos_Capital_Management
The day they got wiped out, the liquidations caused a 27% drop in share price of ViacomCBS. The various lawsuits and charges of fraud and racketeering will take years to work their way through to completion.
I know it's crypto but it's shocking to see people invest in a suitcase stuffed with dollar bills.
The article suggests, and it's not uncommon with crypto hedge funds, that funds were held in private wallets. So if Su Zhu disappears one day with his Ledger, that's that.
Having external administrators for classic HFs wasn't the norm until Bernie Madoff (who didn't have an administrator), funny that.
https://twitter.com/zhusu/status/1546801270014758912?s=21&t=...