9 comments

[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 35.8 ms ] thread
Is it weird that the “bankruptcy CEO” is talking quite a lot of sh$t about the company and SBF, or this just normal operating procedure under these sorts of circumstances and trying to be totally transparent etc etc?
Is reporting on the findings considered "talking quite a lot of sh$t"?
Well I guess not, but a statement like “the company engaged in ‘old-fashioned embezzlement’” seems like a little more colored than a vanilla reporting of the findings. This seems like more of a prosecutorial statement.

I guess these bankruptcy “CEOs” are essentially agents of the Justice Dept/govt in any case, though? In that light these sorts of statements make more sense.

It's not real "old-fashioned" embezzlement without some good rye whiskey
He was countering the argument that it was sophsticated like Enron: they didnt cook the books to appear healthy, they just took money from the company accounts to buy houses, with no records.

Zero sophistication, plain old emblezzlement.

They guy dealt with Enron so I would expect this kind of attitude after all the shit he has seen.
Whether FTX US is solvent: “We still have a hole in the U.S., so as we sit here today it is not solvent. That's just inaccurate. And I'm not sure how he would even know that, quite honestly.”

This is a good point. Hard to claim that you don't know anything and lost money accidentally through bad accounting, and also claim that the exchange is solvent.

Read to me like an attempt to blame these bankruptcy handlers for "stealing your money" so they eat the blame when the cards come down and the average person realizes they aren't getting their money back.
That does seem to be literally exactly what happened.

Nothing new or complex. Just the same model people used in the 1200s...