The #tether#commercialpaper section has been expanded/updated to show not just the net changes but the new issues/rollovers etc....
The purpose of the #commercialpaper analysis was to highlight that the reported $6.4B reduction in CP was only half the story....and it kinda shits me that the numbers are just trumpeted by most news as is...
Anyone can add/subtract the difference between the reported quarters. But it takes a bit more work to actually drill into the information to work out changes/movements. $7.6B of CP's matured during the Dec Quarter which is $1.2B more than the net reduction.
So if $7.6B of CP's matured....net change is $6.4B where has the additional $1.2B come from.
$726m <90day is either new and/or rolled over.
Of the $824m >80day CP's $509m is new/incoming and the balance is the residual from previous quarter.
From there you can attempt to determine the returns on the matured CP. For example, assuming
(a) that the annualised 90day CP rate is 0.7% (stlouisfed.org).
(b) CP issued at a discount to face value
= $13.2m face value premium on maturity
[0.7% x 90/365=0.17%]
But of course none of these returns can been seen to flow through the attested financials
Not just the CP its also the interest/yield from their other investments and the revenue's that should be being earned including the 0.1% fee on new funds.
57.26B+ of #tether issued CY2021 = $57.26m of revenue, the attested financials do not support this (non-token debt rises QoQ).
Does this infer that assets other than fiat are being accepted as consideration for new tether?
More problematically it appears that assets held/invested by #tether appear not be properly reconciled/revalued. A prime example of this is the #tether's investment in @celsiusnetwork
#tether followed its money in #celsiusnetwork's Series B round of which the investment was made and shares were issued in the Dec21 quarter crystallising a $181m uplift in its investment which if accounted for properly would more than double the reported $137m net assets.
#celsiusnetwork cap table analysis - (a) Series B issues (b) Cap table (all series) (c) pre/post money valuation by round
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So there went my evening. It started off productive but then I saw that someone posted a list of DOGE emails. I noticed that only elon and one other didnt have a doge address. so looked at the eop.gov forward to whitehouse.gov I had previously thought the primary domain was wh.gov but its not.
I had previously thought the primary domain was wh.gov but its not. but I did notice a bunch of tags.
and a load of domain forwards. which reminds me of elevateelon.com for the doge.gov site. I digress..
Ive already posted a number of posts on the overlapping tags and as noted there are a bunch of reasons this could happen so Im not going to repeat them again.
@DOGE a few bits & bobs for you have a look at.
First turn off the ports on your website you are not using and fix the tag vunerability.
But then you should really look at the tracking tag for whitehouse[.]gov and see why there a few overlaps with other entities. like the Albanian government.
This could cloned/reused tags/tag injection or something else.
@DrFranzC @NortheastCash @sprintcat9 @DOGE_GSA @DOGE You idiot. The contract award amount is not paid by the gov agencies it is fully funded by a 3rd party under an ESPC with a performance guarantee by Ameresco as the ESCO, it is self funded through the savings gained through the retrofit/upgrades across the 23 buildings.
@DrFranzC @NortheastCash @sprintcat9 @DOGE_GSA @DOGE So instead of paying zero, the agency will have to continue to maintain aging and legacy equipment the older they get the more expensive O&M is.
@DrFranzC @NortheastCash @sprintcat9 @DOGE_GSA @DOGE So now the agency will have to go through the same process at some stage the agency will have to waste time and resources going through the process again making an assessment between two pathways;
- ESPC; or
- Design-bid-build
Well done DOGE. You have just cancelled a contract for the feasibility study for a ESPC (Energy Saving Performance Contract) the sole purpose of guaranteeing the costs savings to be achieved by the project to secure 3rd party financing which is repaid by the savings generated through the term of the contact.
This contract went through a multistage tender approval process. So by cancelling it you have delayed the project.
@DOGE_GSA the contract is 23 years because the service provider (who guarantees the energy costs savings) provides the O&M services....guess the money comes from....the fucking guaranted savings.
So why does it cost so much to undertake the feasibility studies. because you are shifting the risk from the gov as well as the financing. The provider needs to be absolutely certain that those savings are actually going to be available to repay the 3rd party loan that finance all the capex and has sufficient additional cashflow to fund the O&M.
mate its absolutely achievable. I've done the numbers.
There are only 2 critical success factors; 1. Bitcoin goes to $23m per coin by 2045; 2. A visionary buyer that has accumulated > $20T and has confidence that even after 20 years of 34% CAGR providing the seller with a 350x bagger, that there's sufficient upside to warrant acquiring 1m bitcoin for > $20T.
The analysis;
Current US GDP $29.33T, Debt $35.49T
Using World bank forecast GDP growth of 1.9% and assuming the debt ratio stays the same
2045 debt will be a spritely $51.71B
Just for good measure here's the GDP and debt numbers for the Top 20.
Even after the 50% debt reduction, the US will still have the largest debt of all countries.
For the purpose of the analysis I've distilled the Lummis plan down to;
Buy 1m BTC for $70B using existing cash reserves.
Exit all or part of BTC holdings by 2045 to payout half the total debt.
In estimating how much of the investment would be required to settle 50% of the debt.
Two scenarios: Pessimistic (sell down 100%) and probable (sell down 50% ).
So for months I've been asking the question.
Who is behind the unnamed "private sector" group who are being given prioritised access to delivering food and supplies into #gaza.
I am suprised that literally no one appears to be looking into who this un-named collective that has delivered 25% of all 'goods and services' into #gaza.
I say G&S and not #humanitarianaid as these are commercial arranagements. Not for the starving or needy just for those that can pay.
The previous pie chart falls well short of actually what's happening with the shift to these unknown private groups.
When you look at the data over the last 3 months. Private groups are > 50% and increasing volumes month to month while total deliveries are decreasing.
July they are at 75% of total.