6 ms·

The SEC's complaint. It's a brutal read if you're Sam: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2022/comp-pr2022-219.pdf https://www.sec.gov/litigation/compla

by c0m 4y ago

The SEC's complaint. It's a brutal read if you're Sam: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2022/comp-pr2022-219.pdf https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2022/comp-pr2022-2...

clintonwoo 4y ago
I read the whole thing, it's a damning account and he's never going to work in finance again.
- dereg 4y ago
  This is the biggest understatement of the century.
- Bayko 4y ago
  I highly doubt Sam needs to worry about his career prospects sir. But if he is would love to see solve some LC hards
  - astrange 4y ago
    He'd be a popular poker player since he'd always be giving his money away.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
blitzar 4y ago
> 31. From the inception of FTX, Bankman-Fried diverted FTX customer funds to Alameda, and he continued to do so until FTX’s collapse in November 2022 I assume they have the evidence, and while what SBF was saying (we never touched customer funds etc.) was never particularly credible - it blows up the narative that he has maintained to date. Indeed much of the case is built on his public statements (and testimony) being false.
- lovehashbrowns 4y ago
  They have SBF’s own idiot mouth as evidence when he claimed, multiple times, that Alameda was created first, got its bank account, and FTX used that Alameda bank account when FTX was created. He alludes to it here: https://youtu.be/4o_jPzBZSIo https://youtu.be/4o_jPzBZSIo at 11:58 or so, where he mentions “before FTX had its own bank account.” I know there’s a longer explanation, but that’s the best citation I can come up with off the top of my head. In the longer explanation, he specifically says that creating a bank account for a new company can be difficult, so they used Alameda’s bank account as they waited for a bank account specifically for FTX. This goes specifically with point 31 in the document. Of course, they’ll have better evidence once they go through discovery, but this moron has been on a self-incrimination tour. I’d call it a wild success!
  - dboreham 4y ago
    I'm just an engineer, but even I know that if you create an entity and expect to perform financial transactions as that entity, you need a bank account. Corporations, LLCs, HOAs, clubs, lemonade stands. Well, perhaps not lemonade stands... If you don't have the bank account open yet, then don't initiate any transactions. It stretches credulity very far to believe someone running a financial institution did not know this.
    - scotcha1 4y ago
      I think the assumption you're making is: 1) SBF cared about traditional rules of banking/finance 2) SBF cares about doing things the 'right way' He may have been doing it purposefully wrong, or he may have just wanted to do it as fast as possible ("Move Fast and Break Things") and so he skipped the requesite steps to get to what he wanted done, faster. Not a justification for his actions, but simply why he may have done it
      - blitzar 4y ago
        > 1) Crypto cared about traditional rules of banking/finance They do not - they actively reject such rules > 2) Crypto cares about doing things the 'right way' In crypto, the "right way" is the way that you make money - the "right way" is also the traditional way.
heurisko 4y ago
Just a few days ago, he was hoping to "make people's money back". [1] It's a bit sad, as he appears delusional. A less forgiving viewpoint would be that his background cultivated his sense of being untouchable; that it was just a case of having another go. But not as sad as the people who lost money they couldn't afford to lose. [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63911363 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63911363
- tehwebguy 4y ago
  > he appears delusional Yeah, he thinks he'll look better as delusional than criminally greedy and apparently he's right
dang 4y ago
Thanks - we've changed the URL from https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-219 https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-219 to the actual complaint, which has more information.

by c0m 4y ago

The SEC's complaint. It's a brutal read if you're Sam: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2022/comp-pr2022-219.pdf https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2022/comp-pr2022-2...

clintonwoo 4y ago

I read the whole thing, it's a damning account and he's never going to work in finance again.

dereg 4y ago
This is the biggest understatement of the century.
Bayko 4y ago
I highly doubt Sam needs to worry about his career prospects sir. But if he is would love to see solve some LC hards
- astrange 4y ago
  He'd be a popular poker player since he'd always be giving his money away.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

blitzar 4y ago

> 31. From the inception of FTX, Bankman-Fried diverted FTX customer funds to Alameda, and he continued to do so until FTX’s collapse in November 2022 I assume they have the evidence, and while what SBF was saying (we never touched customer funds etc.) was never particularly credible - it blows up the narative that he has maintained to date. Indeed much of the case is built on his public statements (and testimony) being false.

lovehashbrowns 4y ago
They have SBF’s own idiot mouth as evidence when he claimed, multiple times, that Alameda was created first, got its bank account, and FTX used that Alameda bank account when FTX was created. He alludes to it here: https://youtu.be/4o_jPzBZSIo https://youtu.be/4o_jPzBZSIo at 11:58 or so, where he mentions “before FTX had its own bank account.” I know there’s a longer explanation, but that’s the best citation I can come up with off the top of my head. In the longer explanation, he specifically says that creating a bank account for a new company can be difficult, so they used Alameda’s bank account as they waited for a bank account specifically for FTX. This goes specifically with point 31 in the document. Of course, they’ll have better evidence once they go through discovery, but this moron has been on a self-incrimination tour. I’d call it a wild success!
- dboreham 4y ago
  I'm just an engineer, but even I know that if you create an entity and expect to perform financial transactions as that entity, you need a bank account. Corporations, LLCs, HOAs, clubs, lemonade stands. Well, perhaps not lemonade stands... If you don't have the bank account open yet, then don't initiate any transactions. It stretches credulity very far to believe someone running a financial institution did not know this.
  - scotcha1 4y ago
    I think the assumption you're making is: 1) SBF cared about traditional rules of banking/finance 2) SBF cares about doing things the 'right way' He may have been doing it purposefully wrong, or he may have just wanted to do it as fast as possible ("Move Fast and Break Things") and so he skipped the requesite steps to get to what he wanted done, faster. Not a justification for his actions, but simply why he may have done it
    - blitzar 4y ago
      > 1) Crypto cared about traditional rules of banking/finance They do not - they actively reject such rules > 2) Crypto cares about doing things the 'right way' In crypto, the "right way" is the way that you make money - the "right way" is also the traditional way.

heurisko 4y ago

Just a few days ago, he was hoping to "make people's money back". [1] It's a bit sad, as he appears delusional. A less forgiving viewpoint would be that his background cultivated his sense of being untouchable; that it was just a case of having another go. But not as sad as the people who lost money they couldn't afford to lose. [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63911363 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63911363

tehwebguy 4y ago
> he appears delusional Yeah, he thinks he'll look better as delusional than criminally greedy and apparently he's right

dang 4y ago

Thanks - we've changed the URL from https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-219 https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-219 to the actual complaint, which has more information.