Now let's drill down on #tether's financial alchemy.
In a diminishing market (which has just got a whole load smaller) "secured loans" increased by nearly $1.64B (nearly 40%).
Yet we know nearly $1B of its secured loans to #celsius were liquidated. It's worth noting that the 130% over collateralised loans were likely to have a far higher LVR under the terms of the lending agreement.
Assuming the typical LVR is at least 50%. i.e., when you borrow $1 you require $2 of collateral.
by end of Jun 2022 #tether held $4.5B of collateral. 8 days later after the #celsius smash and grab this was down $3.2B.
84 days later they had managed to nearly double the secured loans to $6.14B...
Which is awesome.... right? That's good business...lend your stable coin worth $1 for $2 of security.
Well, a #tethertruther might point out $6B of securities backing $3B of #tether that on redemption there would be a $3B hole in the balance sheet
and a hardcore truther might wonder how the fuck #tether managed to have $3B of tether to lend in the first place. As the only way #tether could have tether to lend is if it issued tether against its own balance sheet....So is that a $6B hole?
ok let's be fair - it's not a hole as the $6B is and will always be backed by #tether's reserves which of course includes the $6B of tether that it is backing itself. Industry standard #playbook
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So while non-binding LOI are well non-binding they often have some binding provisions (well at least the one's I've been a party to) specifically 'confidentiality' -
something like parties agree not to make public statements without prior consent of the other parties unless required by law. it's really not great form to bitchslap the other party after they came to you on their knees begging to be saved.
tbf @sbf_ftx was more than happy to hand out a couple of limp wristed #bitchslap's from his ivory tower (e.g. #celsius $2B).
Its kinda like it was always the intention of the LOI
yesterday I flagged the flaky wording used by #celsius in their suspension of services memo to its members. ""Activated a clause" in their Terms of Use....without actually stating which clause they were referrring to.
Having read through the Terms of Use it appears one reason for not specifying the clause the clause they have 'activated' is there are more than one clause they are relying upon to effect the suspension
one for Custody [you retain ownership of the asset] (Custody only began 15 April 2022) and the other clause(s) are for the balance of all accounts [you relinquish ownership to Celsius].
If you have a rental property. You make a return by finding some nice people who need a place to live they undertake to pay you x return per week and as long as they dont wreck the place or stop paying everyone is happy.
Essentially you are entrusting your asset to a third party on the promise that they will make payments in the future as agreed. If they stop paying you kick them out.
So imagine your shock and horror. that those nice people started to have some financial issues because they werent getting paid by someone else and gave you a heads up by email refering to a bit of html on a website. Essentially we will get back to you when we can sort you out.
yesterday I threw out an off the cuff question to @bitfinexed
How much of the redeemed #tether was used to recover and maintain its peg?
The obvious answer is whatever they had to.
I've spent a big chunk of today crunching data to see what answers I could come up with.
Last night I scratched out my hypothesis - to maintain its peg...#tether would need to tap its own cash...can only do that via redemptions and the 'tell' will be burning the tokens like they never existed.
Basis for this thinking is pretty simple. That's what they do when they need cash and lots of it. Remember back in 2018 #novogratz was swooning over the orderly redemption of $700m by #tether.