➽ is apparently paying > $40,000 per $BTC
➽ turned off their brand new facility for "cold weather" (wtf? cold cools!)
➽ says it's for "safety of team" (wtf? its #bitcoinmining. $RIOT can't administer it remotely?)
Something smells.
🧵2/Ω
The price of energy in Texas as reported by ERCOT is rising.
Texas taxpayers have, in their ∞ wisdom¹, decided to pay $RIOT a bunch of money to turn off during times of peak demand.
🧵3/Ω @WSJ article 2 weeks ago put the #SEC etc. filings of 22 publicly traded cryptocurrency companies through an AI tool that checks for anomalies. The vast majority were flagged as suspicious.
🧵4/Ω @WSJ article singled out @RiotBlockchain for particular scrutiny because they seem to keep screwing up the very basic task of accounting for revenue correctly.
🧵5/Ω
Remember this facility $RIOT is turning off is brand new. Massive capital costs went into getting it turned on and depreciation is running at a staggering rate.
Put together with the borderline fraudulent financials this fact pattern suggests something worse may be afoot.
🧵6/Ω
Remember from 1/Ω that in good times $RIOT is paying $14K per $BTC... JUST FOR POWER.
Adding in depreciation they are paying $40K per $BTC. That's not counting taxes, salaries, rent, capital costs for mines, or the fact that a $675mm mkt cap co. tried to pay execs $90mm/yr
🧵7/Ω
If I were a betting man I'd bet that @RiotBlockchain probably turned off their brand new facility because they can't afford to run it and are using "cold weather" and "safety of the team" as an excuse.
The problem is those excuses don't make any goddamned sense. $RIOT
🧵8/Ω
$RIOT was barely squeaking by paying $14K per bitcoin mined. Now that the price of energy is rising in that part of Texas they are probably paying more than each coin is worth *just for energy*.
🧵9/Ω
For anyone who thought that $RIOT needed to turn off because the ERCOT grid was under strain: it's not and it wasn't at any point. But it is pretty expsensive out there right now... ercot.com/gridmktinfo/da…
cc: @bardicworks@NachshonPeleg
h/t: @CCofNavarro
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵1/Ω
It’s that time again. Gather round, children, for a thread about the closing arguments in the trial of Sam Bankman-Fried. #FTXTrial #FTXScam
Ω👇Ω
🧵2/Ω
The govt’s case revolves around a few things but fundamentally it’s about risks that were not disclosed to customers/investors.
According to the govt not only were these risks not disclosed SBF took steps to conceal them. Which is, you know, a crime
Text from my 📌 twt 👇
🧵3/Ω
It’s conceded by everyone including SBF himself that there were undisclosed risks so the question becomes one of intent. The govt’s argument is that the many steps taken to conceal the risks reveal ill intent. SBF's argument is basically "being irresponsible is not illegal"
🧵1/Ω
Thoughts from SBF’s 2nd day of cross examination:
Today went very, very badly for Mr. Bankman-Fried but it was still kind of a shame the jury didn’t get to witness the absolute train wreck of his first attempt especially this part:
🧵2/Ω
Things got off to a rough start when SBF tried to say that the million and one times he claimed that Alameda was just like any other FTX customer in every way he secretly was communicating that “every way” meant “one way”: Alameda didn’t front run FTX's customers.
🧵3/Ω
Cue AUSA bringing up approximately a bazillion tweets, emails, slack messages, etc. where SBF said Alameda was just like any other customer followed by the question “does it say ‘in terms of frontrunning customers’ here?”
1. I never imagined it would be so grimly satisfying to watch a man hang himself before my eyes. The only disappointing part was that today wasn’t in front of the jury.
🧵2/Ω
SBF’s “my view from the perspective of the data I had available to me at the time” and “I’ll try to answer the question I think yr asking”¹ schtick did not play well with the judge.
¹ he actually said this, after which the prosecutor said “you didn’t answer my question".
🧵3/Ω
His testimony today was about whether he would be able to use the “but my lawyer said it was OK” defense in front of the jury. Let me summarize how it went:
🧵1/Ω
Things I Learned From Caroline Ellison's Testimony That CoinDesk Has Declined to Mention, a Thread:
1. The billion dollars that SBF had to bribe Chinese officials to give back was held on Huobi and OKX.
🧵2/Ω
That bribe was for $150 million.
🧵3/Ω
Multiple people at FTX/Alameda had family ties to the Chinese government. One of those people thought the bribe was a bad idea and quit shortly thereafter. The other one was the guy who suggested the bribe.
🚨Ω🚨
Pumping my bags: another issue of #TheCryptocalypseChronicles is out on The Blogging Site That Shall Not Be Named concerning the actions of one #AxosFinancial AKA "#Binance's new US bank".
Link in bio because Elmo is pathetic and demonetizes links to That Other Site. $AX
🧵2/Ω
Perhaps unsurprisingly Axos Financial / $AX appears in the list of #FTX creditors.
🧵3/Ω
Also looks like the infamous #ReggieFowler, Crypto Capital Corp's main money launderer, invested $1.3 million with $AX according to court documents filed by #Tether / #Bitfinex begging for their money back.
Also $5 million to something related to Wacky Cathie's $ARKK? lol.
🧐 Just stumbled on this "FIAT INTEGRATION AND REVOLVING LOAN AGREEMENT DATED 10/16/2020" from #iFinex in the list of #FTX's assets from a few days ago.
🧵2/Ω
If you think through what that means... given that it appears in the FTX list of assets it appears that Tether had an open line of credit where they could borrow money from FTX?
1. What assets were they borrowing? 2. Why does a stablecoin issuer need to borrow anything?
🧵3/Ω
This might explain it... (h/t @ParrotCapital)