Quote from: arabspaceship123 on Today at 02:03:56 PM

The FTX doc on Bloomberg had ppl say SBF tried to get FTX regulated but he was being asked for full disclosure. Binance owned 20% so each time he asked for credentials CZ refused he didn't give them to SBF so he couldn't get FTX regulated. They paid Binance $2.1B to buy back their shares but it was too late it didn't save FTX.

Bloomberg doc question's why did CZ purchased 20% ownership in FTX if didn't want it to collapse.

Quote from: Mate2237 on November 29, 2023, 09:08:13 PM

Sam Bankman Fried of FTX and Changpeng Zhao of Binance cases are of different ones. Though they are all criminal cases but Sam Bankrman project collapsed while Cz project is still active. Therefore if they will have punishment they will not have it in an equal way. Binance former CEO was fined to pay $4.3B for the crime committed. This money laundering issues that are coming up rampantly this days in the cryptocurrency ecosystem is the new method the government is using to shot down some projects and companies. Though it is good because it will make the cryptocurrency ecosystem free from money laundering.

We just thank God that Binance did not shot down the company because if they did, people would have lost money more than FTX.

Are missing some kind of a link when you are referring to the "Bloomberg doc" because I am unclear about the reference, and the way you are describing the matter of Binance's/CZ's stake in FTX seems strange too. My understanding is that Binance/CZ helped to get FTX started, so it was a kind of loan that FTX paid back by using some real assets, but also by partially paying Binance/CZ with their FTT tokens. which was part of the reason that Binance/CZ had so many FTT tokens.

There is likely nothing that conspiratorial about one exchange investing in another exchange, and then once the newer exchange becomes successful to thereafter pay back the loan that they received... so Binance's 20% ownership in FTX was ONLY for a period of time, and yeah, when FTX had gotten into trouble, Binance/CZ said that they would look at the possibility of rescuing them or buying the company.. but only after a few days Binance/CZ determined that FTX was too messed up to even consider getting involved in buying it or bailing them out.

Even though Sam was continuously seeming to court favors from various kinds of regulators, it really must be questionable the extent to which they were trying to get regulated - except in kinds of scammy and scummy backdoor ways that would likely blow up sooner or later, which surely should cause many of us to pause in our thinking regarding how much we don't really know about the various back room relations that FTX had and whether politicians (and regulators) were merely involved in any kinds of ways with FTX/SBF based on their own use of FTX as ways to launder money and/or to potentially attack bitcoin and/or crypto... I am surely not claiming to understand very much, even though surely there are a lot of folks who have lost money through FTX, so they may be more motivated to look into what matters that they are able to attempt to figure out from various sources already out there, including maybe trying to figure out various kind of relationships that are still not known and/or potentially being covered up... which maybe part of the reason that some folks might be wanting the second trials against sam and maybe some others to go forward... which may or may not end up helping to bring some more of the facts to light in terms of what kinds political influence behaviors were taking place.. which truly Sam's parents and maybe even some of his family have way more culpability in their various behaviors than what is being investigated into (at least from what we know about any investigations into Sam's parents and/or relatives).