New detail on how the turmoil at Coinbase has hit the company's efforts to secure its Bitcoins.
Among the people who resigned this fall - to protest new internal policies - were 4 of the 7 people on the most critical security team, the "key management team," sources told me.
The "key management team" is responsible for securing the cryptographic keys to Coinbase's cold wallets, where most of the company's crypto tokens are held -- somewhere in the neighborhood of $30 billion I was told.
No job is more fundamental to the company's success.
These jobs require incredibly specialized expertise and are not easy to replace. I was told that losing more than half the team has set back new projects and required lots of internal scrambling to backfill roles.
It's interesting that these crypto experts, with such specialized technical expertise, were among the most willing to protest the new no-politics policy that the company's CEO, Brian Armstrong, put out in September.
My recent story has more on the impact that the new internal policy had on the company.
While several high-ranking employees left, lower paid employees said they would have a harder time finding a new job and so couldn't leave even if they wanted to.
I previously provided an unintentionally glib summary of the company’s comment on these departures, from one of the top security people. I’ll just post his thread and leave it at that.
This was only briefly mentioned in today's story about Coinbase, but managers surveyed Black employees at the end of a summer of turmoil to see how they were feeling
The resulting report did not paint a pretty picture.
In one period -- in late 18, early 19 -- almost all of the company’s Black employees left in a short period of time, with nearly a dozen of them making complaints to managers and HR before leaving.
“Most people of color working in tech know that there’s a diversity problem. But I’ve never experienced anything like Coinbase," Alysa Butler, who worked in recruiting at Coinbase, told me.
Just got this slide from a confidential Circle presentation. It does more to explain Circle's acquisition of Poloniex than anything I have seen today.
Takeaway: the SEC did indeed informally indicate to Circle that regulators would "not pursue any enforcement action for prior activity" at Poloniex as long as Circle cleans up Poloniex and turns it into a regulated exchange.
The SEC seems to be saying here that it's okay if you broke the rules, as long as you get acquired by a legitimate player before we crack down on you.