The $850 million was covered with an emergency equity injection (organized among large Tether customers), but I think industry observers have not yet cottoned onto the practical equivalency of that seizure and a fine for money laundering.
Tether has held out hope, including when raising the equity (the LEO token), that the money seized from Crypto Capital Corp's accounts will be restored to them after they demonstrate that they are the beneficial owners. Many people seem to believe this is the natural outcome.
I think the natural outcome is closer to "Oh if you are indicted by multiple governments for money laundering including for Columbian cartels then whichever jurisdiction the money was seized in will probably keep it and maybe, maybe, maybe we investigating governments divvy it."
"But you, no, you're not getting it back. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. If you had anything approaching clean hands here, like say the Mt. Gox bankruptcy administrator vis their US money laundering subsidiary, maybe we would offer 50 cents on the dollar for a release."
"But we don't even need a release from you, because you don't even have a claim. There wasn't even a contract between you and your money launderer. Because you were laundering. Which we take exception to in the most stringent possible terms."
And so there is this superposition of Tether's "We didn't do anything wrong and the investigation is over!" and the governments'/financial system's read "Oh the org fined +/- a billion dollars for money laundering where the criminal fireworks haven't even kicked off yet."
Speaking of clean hands: Tether is the central bank, clearing bank, investment bank, commercial bank, counterparty, etc etc, of *the entire ecosystem.*
There's a bet being made that there is safety in numbers there. And, well, that is certainly a bet.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It always struck me as absolute madness back in my software days a) how much working on the checkout drove sales relative to any product thing I could do for equivalent work and b) why I had to do this, because shouldn’t it be a solved problem.
The fundamental thesis of Stripe Checkout is that if you have less than a thousand engineers working for you there is no way to have a sufficient number of them working on your payments UX.
We centralize this engineering effort to keep you and your team free to do actual work.
This also lets us get returns to specialization, chase marginal opportunities which make no sense for most individual customers given effort involved but which are great probabalistically across network (“+1 bps for all Japanese customers transacting in dollars? AMAZING”), etc.
Note the non-disparagement clause in the order that Tether will, with absolute night follows day certainty, break, and probably within the next 48 hours.
A Japan anecdote on the hospitality industry: after being shown our seat at a hotel’s (very nice) buffet it was explained:
“While of course your children are welcome to anything at the buffet if they are hungry and you don’t want to be rushed we could give them prepared plates.”
“Oh sure.”
“Would you like a plate built around [fish / meat / curry / other mains]?”
“Two of the noodles.”
*They arrive in under a minute.*
“Please take your time in browsing the buffet.”
And of course because Japan they’re nutritionally balanced and presented well. (Someone cared about making the colors pop.)
Many people kinda sorta want to grow tomatoes, but few people really, really care about the supply chain for vegetables relative to the importance to humanity that tomatoes end up in the usual places at the usual times for the usual prices.
And thus you can have a career pretty much entirely based on “I care more about the tomato supply chain more than anyone you’ve ever met.”
It’s surprising, but maybe not, how much Social Network and Big Short impacted peoples’ views on the typical behavior within the depicted industries and the metaphors and memes they used to refer to them in the future.
“It’s just like X said in…”
“You realize that person does not exist.”
“No it’s the story.”
“No that person literally did not exist. That character is a dramatic convenience. Their lines are not historical evidence.”
And a truly surprising number of technologists of my acquaintance learned everything they know about investment banking from the scenes designed to make investment bankers look like incompetent / corrupt actors.