Conversation

SBF
@SBF_FTX
Replying to
@SBF_FTX
4) Meanwhile, that entire time, various bankruptcy agents are slowly bleeding the customer's frozen assets dry with consulting fees. This can cost customers hundreds of millions of dollars by the time all is said and done. And, finally, there's an imbedded option.
6
726
SBF
@SBF_FTX
5) See, if a customers had 1 BTC on the platform, and BTC was worth $30k... and then it takes years to go through bankruptcy... what do they get back? 1 BTC, or $30k? Probably, whichever is worth less. So the longer the process drags out, the more optionality customers lose.
15
730
SBF
@SBF_FTX
6) So, what's going on with Voyager? Well, lots of parties were trying to bid $0.10 on the dollar for the assets. If a customer had $100 on the platform, a third party would pay $10 for it, get whatever funds remained (maybe $75), and then the customer... gets back $10.
8
547
SBF
@SBF_FTX
7) And meanwhile, Voyager's consultants would be slowly draining the remaining funds by charging fees every month the bankruptcy process dragged on. This didn't seem right to us. Customers already lost assets; we didn't want them to lose more.
9
629
SBF
@SBF_FTX
8) So we submitted an offer: If accepted, any customer who wanted could come and get back their share of everything that remained, as soon as possible. So the customer above would get back $75 immediately, *and* retain their claim in case more was recovered from 3AC.
29
940
SBF
@SBF_FTX
9) It would let customers--if they chose--get the remaining assets back right away, with no fees or additional haircut.
4
561
SBF
@SBF_FTX
10) So, who's against our offer? Well, it was voluntary--customers wouldn't have to use it! But there are parties that *would* lose from it: third parties who want to take some of the customer assets as fees.
4
649
SBF
@SBF_FTX
11) The consultants, for instance, likely want the bankruptcy process to drag out as long as possible maximizing their fees. Our offer would let people claim assets quickly. Or people who wanted to submit a lower bid--taking a large share of customer assets in the middle.
11
620
SBF
@SBF_FTX
12) As a disclaimer, I also have a stake in this process, but I'm pretty sure our offer hurts the stake; there's a chance equity in Voyager would be worth more (at the cost of customers) if the process drags out. But equity holders aren't who matter right now; customers are.
9
699
SBF
@SBF_FTX
13) Anyway: in the end, we think Voyager's customers should have the right to quickly claim their remaining assets if they want, without rent seeking in the middle. They've been through enough already.
65
1,276
SBF
@SBF_FTX
Replying to
@SBF_FTX
15) ...and the "please give us some excuse to charge more fees on the estate" parade begins: twitter.com/FatManTerra/st Anyway we've made our offer, hopefully customers are allowed to choose it if they want. If not guess it's up to the consultants to ensure prompt liquidity...
Quote Tweet
FatMan
@FatManTerra
You have all heard the terms "hero," "bailout," "rescue," and "help" in reference to FTX saving distressed companies. Voyager, one of the aforementioned companies, disagrees - they think that SBF's deal is extremely predatory and will actually hurt customers even more. twitter.com/kadhim/status/…
Image
Image
152
506
aviel moyal
@AvielMoyal
Replying to
@SBF_FTX
Why are you paying us out in cash, instead of the crypto that we own? As a voyager customer, I would like to avoid any taxable events at all costs. If you were able to pay out customers in crypto, I am sure over 50% would take your offer.
1
6