Conversation

11:50 PM · May 14, 2022Twitter Web App

5) In particular, that she said that Theranos was doing specific things that it wasn't doing; the fraudulent behavior was her pretending to investors that one type of test was another. Luna is different.

Replying to

6) The LUNA/UST mechanism wasn't misrepresented--it was, in fact, very transparent. And, I think it was transparently going to falter at some point. Do Kwon obviously stood by it, morally and in terms of press, long after he should have backed off.

210

1,194

7) But he didn't claim that UST was backed 1:1 by USD. He claimed, accurately, that it was backed by a bunch of volatile assets. It was very publicly clear that those assets might go down, and the rest followed. Again--I don't want to condone the behavior. But it's different.

1,066

8) Luna was a case of mass enthusiasm, excitement, and--frankly--marketing and memes--driving people to believe in something which was going to falter according to publicly available information. That marketing was probably bad. But it wasn't the *same* type of bad as Theranos.

148

991

Plus Token (PLUS) Scam - Anatomy of a Ponzi

9) Similarly, people will now accuse anything that people lose money on of being a ponzi scheme. Sometimes, there are real ponzis! Plus Token was a ponzi scheme: boxmining.com/plus-token-pon.

boxmining.com

"Plus Token" was a cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme disguised as a high-yield investment program. Investors were scammed over $3 Billion USD

749

10) But most bad investments aren't ponzi schemes. Some are fraud, some are bad luck, and some are somewhere in between. Here are a set of investments that would have lost > 50% since the start of the year: 1) NFLX 2) LUNA 3) AMC 4) ARKK

124

166

1,105