News: Tether surpasses 50B, Coinbase lists USDT, reported $2B crypto scam in Turkey

Bitcoin is sitting at around $54,000, and Tether has hit a new milestone: 50 billion tethers in circulation, something it’s quite proud of. “Will we reach $100B before 2022?”

So far, in April, Tether has issued 9 billion tethers—and the month isn’t even over yet. Tether has been minting 2 billion tethers at a time—the largest single batches we’ve seen to date.

Per the NY AG settlement agreement, Tether is supposed to provide a breakdown of its reserves in May. And they are already whining about how unfair and unjust this is.  

Stuart Hoegner, Tether’s general counsel, complained on Twitter: “The second-biggest stablecoin issuer [USDC] doesn’t give a breakdown of their reserves, either. Observers should ask why our detractors are pushing one rule for them and another for us.”

Oh, I don’t know, Maybe because USDC wasn’t caught hiding the fact it lost access to $850 million?

(USDC—a stablecoin bootstrapped by Coinbase and Circle—has issued 13.5 billion USDC to date, not quite the level of Tether, but it’s working its way up there.)

Coinbase debuts on Wall Street, then lists USDT

Coinbase, the largest crypto exchange in the U.S., debuted on Wall Street on April 14. Trading opened at $381 a share—a 52% increase over a $250 reference price set by Nasdaq. COIN swung as high as $429 that first day. (Though, now it is at $291.)

It was the moment Coinbase execs and its VC backers had all been waiting for. They didn’t waste any time dumping their shares on retailers, according to data from Capital Market Laboratories. 

Insiders sold off $4.6 billion in COIN on the first day of trading, and Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong sold shares worth $292 million. (SEC filing) (Cointelegraph)

Less than two weeks later, Coinbase—being the respected operation that it is—dropped the bomb that it is listing tether on Coinbase Pro.

Ecstatic bitcoiners claim the move legitimizes Tether. Actually, the move delegitimizes Coinbase.

Listing tether makes Coinbase look shady, like they’ll do anything to boost profits and keep share prices up so insiders can continue their sell-off. (My blog post)

Tether is a wildcat bank, operating with no oversight. It has been largely responsible for boosting the price of bitcoin because it allows unregulated crypto exchanges to thrive and funnels them a steady stream of dubiously backed tethers.

Thanks to Tether, Coinbase had a hugely profitable Q1. And thanks to Tether, Brian Armstrong is a wealthy man indeed. 

Was it a coincidence that BTC tapped a new all-time high of $63,275 the day before Coinbase went public? Or was that simply irrational exuberance?

When Tether gets taken down, liquidity will evaporate and crypto markets will crash. Those who get hurt will be naive retailers, who didn’t understand the system was rigged from the get-go. 

Bernie—gone but not forgotten

Bernie Madoff died in jail on the same day that Coinbase went public. He ran the biggest Ponzi scheme in history, and it went on for 25 years. Paper losses totaled $64.8 billion. Madoff took billions from investors and simply stole the money instead of investing. 

Why didn’t the SEC catch Madoff sooner? Why didn’t they step in and do something to protect investors? They were tipped off eight years before, and yet they failed to act.

Here we are watching a similar drama unfold with Tether. All the red flags are waving. And no regulator or authority has stepped in to take strong action. 

If you are wondering how fraudsters live with themselves—they rationalize and minimize. 

David Sheehan, a trustee who worked to recover money stolen from investors, met with Madoff a dozen times. He told WSJ: “[Madoff] didn’t think he was harming anybody. He actually thought his scheme would work, that it just got out of hand and he couldn’t control it.”

$2 billion crypto scam in Turkey?

When Thodex, one of the largest crypto exchanges in Turkey, suspended trading on April 18 for five days of “maintenance,” users began to complain they couldn’t access their funds. 

Now a manhunt is underway for the exchange’s 27-year-old founder, Faruk Fatih Özer, who has reportedly fled to the capital of Albania with $2 billion in investors’ money. 

Turk authorities have detained 62 people and issued detention warrants for 16 more.

Meanwhile, Özer is claiming that Thodex is the target of a “smear campaign.” He says he was on a jaunt to meet with foreign investors, nothing more.

We’ve seen this film before. It’s called “Crypto exchange operates as a Ponzi scheme.” Last time, the protagonist was Gerald Cotten, the founder of Canada’s QuadrigaCX. And instead of going to meet with “foreign investors,” he went to India and died under suspicious circumstances. 

Now another Turkish crypto exchange—Vebitcoin—has shut down amid accusations of fraud. Turkish authorities have blocked its bank accounts and detained four people. (Reuters)

These stories come at a rotten time for crypto users in Turkey. Starting April 30, the country’s central bank will ban the use of crypto for payments and prevent payment providers from providing fiat onramps to crypto exchanges. (CBRT press release)

Bitcoin promotes green energy!

Bitcoin mining is destroying the planet. Lately, the world’s most popular cryptocurrency is getting a lot of bad press on its massive carbon footprint—like this article in the New Yorker

Yet, despite hard evidence to the contrary, people with big bets on bitcoin will stare you right in the face and tell you it ain’t so. Bitcoin is green!

Jack Dorsey’s Square and Cathie Wood’s ARK Invest published a delusional white paper titled “Bitcoin is Key to an Abundant Clean Energy Future.” They want you to believe bitcoin mining encourages the use of wind farms, solar energy, and other such nonsense. (Bloomberg)

ARK has investments in Square and Coinbase shares. And Square invested $50 million in bitcoin last year. Square’s Cash App also lets users buy and sell bitcoin. Dorsey is a bitcoin bro at heart.

Companies who care about the planet, don’t invest in bitcoin.

FT Alphaville countered Dorsey and Wood’s claims in a post titled: “The destructive green fantasy of the bitcoin fanatics.” 

Bitcoin skeptic Kyle Gibson responded with a satirical “Bitcoin Is Green Energy” commercial, where we learn that “solar panels can’t work without bitcoin,” and “this baby penguin’s first word was ‘bitcoin’.” 

Other newsworthy stuff

On April 22, the negative premium of GBTC reached -18.92%, a record low. It’s since rebounded to -10%, according to Ycharts, but the arbitrage opp for big investors is a distant memory.

No doubt many funds who entered the “risk-free” trade are feeling the squeeze. Despite that, Grayscale has added $283 million in assets to GBTC. (The Block)

Tougher AML laws in South Korea are forcing crypto exchanges to shutter. Turns out, several were using shell bank accounts. “…they are having difficulties to get real-name accounts from local banks.” Sounds like the Bitfinex/Tether model. (Korean Herald)

The NFT bubble is bursting. Trading volume on OpenSea is down 22% in the past month. CryptoPunks volume is down 26%, NBA Top Shot is down 61%. (Decrypt)

Edward Snowden can’t make money on books and speeches anymore, so he sold an NFT for $5.4 million. He is donating the funds to the Freedom of the Press Foundation. (He sits on the nonprofit’s board of directors.) (Coindesk)

Artists and celebrities continue to pile into NFTs, because it’s the thing to do. Eminem partnered with Gemini’s Nifty Gateway to launch his first series of NFTs. (Decrypt)

A hacker-artist figured out how to make “crypto-verified” fakes of most art-connected NFTs. It’s called “sleepminting” and he used Beeple’s “Everydays” as a test case. (Artnet) 

Quote from “Black Swan” author Nassim Taleb: “If you want a hedge against inflation, buy a piece of land, grow—I don’t know—olives on it. You’ll have olive oil if the price collapses. With bitcoin, there’s no connection.” (Decrypt) 

The SEC is officially reviewing a bitcoin ETF application from Kryptoin Investment Advisors. It’s one of three bitcoin exchange-traded fund proposals now under review—WisdomTree and VanEck are the other two. (SEC filing notice) (Decrypt)

The overlap between the bitcoin bros and Musk fanboys is strong. Nicholas Weaver wrote up a Twitter thread on why Musk sucks—i.e., his environmental credentials are bullshit; “Go to mars because we are going to destroy the earth” is lunacy; His cars are crap, etc.

The IRS knows you’re out there. It’s launched “Operation Hidden Treasure” to find taxpayers with unreported income from bitcoin transactions. (Accounting Today)

Stablecoins are reminiscent of the dollar substitutes that triggered the 2008 crisis. Déjà vu? (New Money Review)

If you enjoy my work, please support my writing by becoming a patron.

Coinbase lists tether, the world’s dodgiest stablecoin

Coinbase, the largest crypto exchange in the U.S., just announced it is listing tether (USDT), the world’s dodgiest stablecoin. 

Tethers, for the uninitiated, are a stand-in for real dollars, used mainly on offshore crypto exchanges that can’t get proper banking. Now tethers can be found on Coinbase, a banked exchange—overseen by the SEC.

The timing of this is incredible, only a week after Coinbase debuted on Wall Street. 

Nobody knows for sure what is backing the nearly 50 billion tethers sloshing around in the bitcoin markets—maybe cash, maybe third-party loans, maybe hot air. But the price of Coinbase shares (COIN) is slipping, and so is the price of bitcoin. Desperate times call for desperate measures, so what can Coinbase do?

Why not list tether? That way, Tether (the company that issues tethers) looks legit, and more people can pile into bitcoin without worry. When BTC goes up, demand for $COIN follows. Problem solved!

Starting immediately, you can now send your dubiously backed tethers to Coinbase Pro—Coinbase’s online platform for professional traders. (Coinbase has a separate platform for casual traders called simply “Coinbase,” but tether is limited to Coinbase Pro for now.)

You will be allowed to trade tethers in every jurisdiction that Coinbase supports except for New York state, which Tether was recently hoisted out of by the NY attorney general.  

Coinbase only supports ERC-20 USDT, a reference to the nearly 24 billion tethers that live on the Ethereum blockchain. (Another 26 billion are on Tron, with a smattering on Omni, Algorand, EOS, Liquid, SLP, and Solana.)

Trading begins on April 26 at 6 p.m. Pacific Time—if liquidity conditions are met, meaning if someone is on-hand and willing to sell their bitcoin or ether to you for tethers, as opposed to real money. [Update: Coinbase has delayed USDT trading twice, first to April 27, now to May 3.]

Coinbase Pro will list the following trading pairs: 

  • BTC/USDT
  • ETH/USDT
  • USDT/EUR
  • USDT/GBP
  • USDT/USD
  • USDT/USDC

At the moment, you can only transfer USDT onto Coinbase Pro; you cannot move tethers off the exchange—although there is some expectation that could change once trading is established. 

What does this mean?

This is a terrible, dumb, bad move for Coinbase. 

The exchange clearly wants to rake in as much business as possible before the regulators step in and throttle its trading. (Regulatory ambiguity is written into the company’s S1 risk factors.) And right now, business is slipping.

Coinbase started selling its shares on Nasdaq on April 14. Its stock has since taken a dip, going from $381 at opening (and as high as $429 in the first few minutes of trading) to $293 when markets closed on April 22. 

At the same time, BTC has also taken a hit. Just ahead of Coinbase’s direct listing, BTC reached an all-time high of $63,700. Now it’s below $50,000. 

Tether has been trying to lift up the price of BTC with larger and larger issuances of tethers—prints of 2 billion at a time, bigger than anything we’ve seen before—but nothing seems to be working.  

At some point, it won’t matter how much USDT Tether prints. It won’t be enough to make up for all the real money that is exiting the bitcoin ecosystem on a daily basis. (The real money that investors put into the system, goes to pay the bitcoin miners who are selling 900 newly minted BTC per day for cash.)

Legitimizing Tether?

Bitcoiners are ecstatic over Coinbase’s listing of USDT. They say the move legitimizes Tether.

This is absolute madness. How do you legitimize a company that has been full of shenanigans since day one? The reverse is true: Tether is delegitimizing Coinbase.

Here is the irony: Coinbase—an exchange that has a BitLicense (issued by the New York Department of Financial Services) to operate in the state of New York—is listing a token sanctioned by the New York attorney general. 

The NYAG began investigating Tether for fraud in late 2018, claiming that Tether and its sister company Bitfinex, a crypto exchange, lied to customers in saying that tethers were fully backed, when in fact, they were not. 

“Bitfinex and Tether recklessly and unlawfully covered-up massive financial losses to keep their scheme going and protect their bottom lines,” the NYAG said.

The companies settled with the NYAG in February. Under the terms of the settlement, starting in May, Tether has to publish the categories of assets backing tethers. It also has to specify the percentages of each category, and spell out whether a category constitutes a loan or receivable.

This is a level of transparency that Tether has never lived up to before, and it could spell disaster for the BVI-registered company, if it’s revealed that Tether is simply printing money out of thin air.

If the Department of Justice decides to shut down Tether like it did Liberty Reserve in May 2013—which is what several nocoiner luminaries predicted will happen this year—what does that say about Coinbase listing this coin?

Three other U.S. crypto exchanges—Kraken, Binance.US, and Bittrex*—also list tether, but Coinbase’s public listing means the SEC is watching a lot more closely. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong is well aware of this.

“We’re going to increasingly be having scrutiny about what we’re doing,” he told CNBC. 

Based on that reasoning alone, Coinbase’s listing of tether seems shortsighted at best, but maybe that’s the plan? If COIN crashes, Armstrong—along with Coinbase backers like Andreessen Horowitz, Union Square, and Ribbit Capital—will have made their riches, while retailers will be stuck holding the bag.

(*Updated to include Bittrex as another US exchange that lists USDT.)

If you enjoy my writing, please support my work by becoming a patron for as little as $5 per month.

News: Coinbase Q1 earnings, Signal integrates MobileCoin, GBTC premium in the toilet, Reggie Fowler’s new lawyer  

Bitcoin rose above $60,000 again. It only took 6 billion tethers to make that happen since the last time it hit $60,000 in March—less than a month ago. We now have 44.5 billion tethers in circulation. 

Coinbase set to debut on Nasdaq

Everything looks rosy for Coinbase’s debut on Nasdaq on April 14. The company is worth $91.5 billion, securities filings show. It reached that valuation even before releasing Q1 results of $1.8 billion—9x that of a year ago. (WSJ)

All that glitters is not gold, however. If Coinbase’s regulatory status were to change (and regulatory ambiguity is clocked in the company’s S1 risk factors), the company could be forced to drop many of its hugely profitable activities or be forced to operate at a much higher capital cost. (FT)

Signal, a good thing going bad

Signal is one of the best apps we’ve got for secure communication. But that could all change, as the encrypted app moves into payments with the integration of MobileCoin.

Techies are upset because they associate cryptocurrency with frauds and scams. They don’t want to see Signal become a sketchy money transmitter business. 

A beta version of Signal Payments is now available to UK customers. It’s not available in the U.S., probably because MOB looks like an unregistered security. MobileCoin says it hasn’t worked out all the regulatory stuff yet.  

Turns out, Signal’s creator Moxie Marlinspike has deep ties to MobileCoin. I wrote about the money flows, and David Gerard followed with a story explaining the tech. (My blog) (David Gerard) 

In a blog post titled “Et tu, Signal?,” Stephen Diehl reminds us that we’ve seen this film a few times before.

Telegram tried the same thing in an ICO that imploded when the SEC shut them down. Facebook tried and failed to monetize WhatsApp. And when encryption app Keybase did an airdrop of Stellar lumens, crypto spammers invaded the app, ruining the user experience.

“This association weakens the entire core value proposition of the Signal app for no reason other than making a few insiders richer,” he said.

Grayscale wants to convert GBTC into an ETF

GBTC once enjoyed a healthy premium but is now trading at 9.72% below NAV. Virtually nobody is buying GBTC on secondary markets. 

Can shareholders redeem their GBTC for bitcoin? No, they cannot. Once bitcoin gets locked up in the trust, it is in there for good. (GBTC has ~649,130 BTC locked up to date, roughly 3% of all BTC.) 

In March, Grayscale announced it was going to shore up the discount to GBTC’s NAV with a $250 million buyback. Now, it plans to convert GBTC into an ETF. The conversion would mean GBTC shareholders no longer have to pay a hefty 2% annual management fee. 

For some reason, Grayscale is confident the SEC will approve an ETF, even though the regulator had rejected every single Bitcoin ETF proposal put before it to date. I’m not sure why Grayscale is any different. (Coindesk) (GBTC announcement)

Currently, the SEC is reviewing two active bitcoin ETF applications: the VanEck bitcoin ETF and WisdomTree’s bitcoin ETF.

Fowler has a new lawyer

Reggie Fowler has finally found himself a new lawyer after his previous defense team withdrew from the case because he failed to pay them. His new lawyer is Ed Sapone of Sapone & Petrillo in New York.

Fowler is the Arizona businessman tied to hundreds of millions of dollars in missing Tether/Bitfinex money. He was indicted in April 2019, along with Israeli woman Ravid Yosef, who is still at large. 

Judge Andrew Carter has yet to set a new trial date. He is giving Sapone three months to get up to speed on the case first. And he warned Sapone: “You are going into this with your eyes wide open.” Meaning if Fowler doesn’t pay him, Sapone will not be allowed to withdraw from the case.

Other newsworthy items

Christie’s is grabbing the NFT bull by the horns. The prestigious auction house is selling NFTs of nine rare CryptoPunks by Larva Labs alongside work by Andy Warhol and Jean-Michel Basquiat in a marquee auction.

The single lot—estimated to fetch between $7 million to $9 million—will be sold at Christie’s 21st Century Evening Sale on May 13 in New York. (Artnet) (Christie’s)

Former BitMEX CEO Arthur Hayes has surrendered to authorities. He flew to Honolulu to appear before a judge on April 6. Pursuant to an earlier agreement, he was released on a $10 million bond, secured by $1.5 million in cash, pending future proceedings in New York. 

Six months ago federal prosecutors in New York accused Hayes and his BitMEX co-founders of violating anti-money laundering rules. Hayes is a US resident. Previously, he was living in Hong Kong, but he has been living in Singapore with his Singaporean wife since January 2020. (Bloomberg) (Lawyers’ proposal) (Bail conditions)

The New York Excelsior Pass is a COVID-19 vaccine passport system. It proudly proclaims its use of secure technologies, like blockchain and encryption but it’s doing the wrong thing and badly. (David Gerard)

If you are tracking central bank digital currencies, John Kiff updated his CBDC “explorers” table with new developments out of Russia, Sweden and Trinidad & Tobago. (John Kiff)

Who needs a bitcoin ETF anyway? MicroStrategy just purchased another 253 BTC for $15 million in cash at an average price of $59,339. Saylor’s firm now holds 91,579 bitcoins acquired for $2.2 billion at an average price of $24,311 per bitcoin. (Press release)

HSBC will no longer allow customers to buy Microstrategy stock due to its newly changed policy on virtual currencies. (Tweet)

The rising tide of bitcoin is good for everyone. Following in the footsteps of Coinbase, Kraken is considering going public in 2022, after record trading volumes in the first quarter (CNBC)

BitClout, the decentralized social network that tokenizes Twitter accounts, uploads your keys to their server on every API request. Any employee with access to that server can steal all the money on the platform at any time. Like I said earlier, this project appears to be one bad idea piled on top of another. (Tweet)

Phillips, another London auction house, smaller and slightly younger than Christie’s, is getting into NFTs with the sale of an artwork called REPLICATOR.

The NFT market has been a bust for Mike Winkelmann in so many ways. Now he is coming out with a book on Amazon.

Sleep with Kate. Drive with Kate. Walk with Kate. Model Kate Moss is featuring her own series of NFTs on Foundation. Proceeds go to charity. (Vogue)

Super Bowl champion Tom Brady is launching his own NFT platform called Autograph. (CNBC)

This tweet of a nothing sandwich from the Fyre Festival will be sold as an NFT. The original tweeter will use the money to help pay for a kidney transplant. The sale on OpenSeas ends on April 24. If any NFT deserves your money, this one does. (Verge) (GoFundMe)

Feature image: Beeple everyday posted on Twitter

Like my work? Support my writing by becoming a patron for as little as $5 once a month. Think of it as buying me a cup of coffee to say thank you.

Signal adopts MobileCoin, a crypto project linked to its own creator Moxie Marlinspike

Many technologists today were disappointed to learn that Signal, an encrypted messaging service, is adopting MobileCoin (MOB), a new cryptocurrency that went live in December, for payments. 

Signal is hugely popular in the tech world. I use it, and many of the people I correspond with use it as a safe and secure way of communicating. And many prefer it over WhatsApp and Telegram.

Now, the non-profit wants to take the next step into becoming a payments service—so you can send money, and nobody will know who you are sending it to, or why. Here’s the blog post announcing the beta build.

Andy Greenberg wrote up a story in Wired covering the main points of the announcement yesterday. The idea is to have a cryptocurrency designed to work efficiently on mobile devices while protecting users’ privacy—and anonymity. For now, Signal’s payment feature will be available only to users in the UK, and only on iOS and Android—not the desktop. 

What is worth underscoring is that Moxie Marlinspike, the creator of Signal and CEO of the nonprofit that runs it, was a paid advisor to MobileCoin. In fact, he was the original CTO of the company, according to an early MobileCoin white paper.

Insider trading?

The price of MOB surged from $7 to $68 in the last week, according to Coinmarketcap—possibly because word of the announcement had leaked—before taking a dump overnight, dropping to $39. (MOB trades mainly on FTX, an Antigua and Barbuda-based cryptocurrency exchange.)

The price movements look a little like insider trading—just a little.

Interestingly, Signal kept their server code closed-source for a year to hide the integration. It only just recently re-open-sourced it, so who could have possibly known this big announcement was forthcoming?

Marlinspike told Wired he does not hold any MOB, which is hard to believe, given he was involved with the coin’s early development. (It is common practice in crypto for advisers and developers to get paid with the crypto of the projects they are involved in.) But who knows? Maybe he can’t hold any coins right now for regulatory reasons.

Most technologists, except for a vocal few, don’t like cryptocurrency, and for good reason. The space is rife with fraud and scams. So you can start to understand why they are unhappy.

“Signal users are overwhelmingly tech savvy consumers and we’re not idiots, Stephen Diehl, a UK-based software engineer, wrote in a blog post. “Do they think we don’t see through the thinly veiled pump and dump scheme that’s proposed? It’s an old scam with a new face.”

“Signal isn’t integrating just any random shitcoin, it is integrating Moxie Marlinspike’s random shitcoin. Gee, what a coinkidink. I wonder how much he’s unloaded on suckers already as a result of this pump & dump?,” said Nicholas Weaver, a researcher at the International Computer Science Institute in Berkeley.

Funding

One item the Wired article failed to mention: In April 2018, MobileCoin took $30 million in BTC and ETH from Binance Labs, the blockchain incubator of Binance—another popular offshore crypto exchange.

(Both FTX and Binance are huge Tether customers, by the way.)

The money is flowing in from elsewhere, too.

Last month, the project got an additional $11.35 million from venture capitalists Future Ventures and General Catalyst.

MobileCoin is a pre-mined coin. It has a total fixed supply of 250 million MOB. The project sold 35.7 million coins to private investors for $0.80 per coin in order to raise $30 million, according to its 2017 white paper. 

So who is holding the rest of the coins?

Joshua Goldbard, the project’s founder, recently said on Hacker News that half the coins have now been sold, leaving MobileCoin in control of at least half the supply.

“MobileCoin has made over 50% of the coins available for purchase. We are currently figuring out how to give away coins while remaining regulatory compliant,” he said.

A centralized payment system

If Signal is trying to create a private payments system, is MobileCoin even the best choice? There are serious questions about how secure and decentralized it is. 

Mobile is based on the Stellar code, originally derived from Ripple. Stellar is centralized, and has some major security issues. The platform is unproven, even if it’s still resilient.

MobileCoin took the Stellar codebase and added some stuff, including using Intel SGX—a chip that acts as a digital vault for securing users’ sensitive information. That means that users have to put 100% of their trust in Intel chips rather than software-based cryptography.

Also, MobileCoin is running on centralized powerhouse Azure, a cloud computing service created by Microsoft.

Further, if you look at MobileCoin’s “Trusted Nodes,” you’ll see that three entities are handling all of the consensus—and “MobileCoin Worldwide” is one of them. It’s hardly decentralized.

Signal’s non-profit status?

Signal Foundation was founded in April 2018 by Marlinspike and Brian Acton. It is registered as an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit, meaning it has been approved by the IRS as a tax-exempt, charitable organization.

The firm’s non-profit status is now being called into question, after it became clear it will be getting handouts from MobileCoin.

Goldbard flat-out admitted on Hacker News: “I started MobileCoin to fund Signal. That’s it.” 

Many Signal users are concerned that this represents a conflict of interest. Here you have a non-profit (in this case Signal Foundation) directly integrating MobileCoin in their app as a quid pro quo.

MobileCoin Radio

Just to add another slice of weirdness: MobileCoin has a MobileCoin Radio because “creation” needs privacy. I have no idea how this fits in with anything Signal or MobileCoin is doing. I’m not sure MobileCoin does either.

Here is how they explain it:

“MobileCoin Radio is a place for artists to share their creations with the world, in hopes that our shared struggle with the human condition inspires a heightened exploration of our cultural landscape and of ourselves.”

In any case, Signal is probably going to lose some fans as a result of its foray into crypto. And why use MobileCoin in the first place when there are a host of battle-tested privacy coins to choose from? It makes no sense.

Security expert Bruce Schneier thinks it’s an incredibly bad idea that “muddies the morality of the product, and invites all sorts of government investigative and regulatory meddling: by the IRS, the SEC, FinCEN, and probably the FBI.” He thinks the two apps—crypto and secure communications—should remain separate. In his mind, this is going to ruin Signal for everyone.

And let’s not forget the disaster that ensued when Facebook tried to create Libra (now Diem). Regulators shot that idea down pretty quickly. Why does Signal think it will fare any better?

(Update April 7: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that the Wired article failed to mention that Marlinspike was a paid advisor to MobileCoin. Actually, it does mention that he is.)

If you enjoy my work, please support my writing by becoming a patron. 

News: Coinbase set to go public, Tether releases meaningless attestation, are NFT sales slipping? 

Happy Easter! NFTs of this disturbing Easter bunny series are available on OpenSea. I was looking for more NFT bunnies but couldn’t find too many. Maybe I wasn’t looking hard enough.

In any case, Bitcoin is now at $58,000 and Tether has more than 42 billion tethers in circulation. Here’s the news:

Coinbase set to go public

Coinbase, the largest crypto exchange in the U.S., will start selling shares on Nasdaq on April 14. The company will trade under the ticker symbol “COIN” and offer 114.9 million shares as part of its direct listing. Share price will be determined by orders coming into the stock exchange. 

Currently valued at $100 billion, Coinbase is going public during the biggest Bitcoin bubble yet. The event will make Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong—who owns 39.6 million of the company’s shares—a very wealthy man indeed. And the VCs backing the company will realize huge profits, as they all dump their shares on retailers.

On April 6, the exchange is expected to reveal its first quarter financial results and full year outlook. (CNBC) (Coinbase statement)

Tether’s meaningless attestation

In its latest PR move, Tether published an attestation verifying that it had $35 billion in assets backing a similar amount of tether for a blink in time on Feb. 28. The attestation was produced by accounting firm Moore Cayman, based in the Cayman Islands.

Bitcoiners are head over heels about this, but the report is meaningless. The document explicitly states that this does not mean tethers were fully backed at any other time—or are now. And the report doesn’t fit what the NYAG required Tether to publish by mid-May, because it doesn’t break out each category of backing asset by percentage. What’s backing tethers could be mainly bitcoin and toxic assets, for all we know. (David Gerard)

Days after Tether produced the attestation, it printed 1.2 billion tethers—one of its largest issuances ever. What’s a few billion more when bitcoiners think you are legit?

The wonderful world of NFTs

Are NFT sales slipping? Average prices for NFTs have fallen almost 70% from a peak in February to about $1,400, according to Nonfungilble.com, which tracks NFT marketplaces.

The NFT bubble hit its all-time high around the time Metakovan bought Beeple’s “Everydays—The first 5000 days” for $63.9 million on Christie’s. (Bloomberg) 

Cointelegraph also reports that the NFT market is experiencing a silent crash. While we can always see what the price of bitcoin is up to, tracking the movements of illiquid markets is trickier. When it comes to NFTs, buyers simply evaporate and sellers fail to move their wares. 

What is causing the drop in prices? “I suspect it is because the secondary sales have evaporated, so the dream of ‘greater sucker’ has gone away in about the same timeframe as the Crypto Kitties NFT bubble,” Nicholas Weaver said.

Meanwhile, Shares of Funko, a toymaker in Washington, are rising after the company acquired a majority stake in TokenWave, a developer of TokenHead, a mobile app for showing NFT holdings. Funko plans to launch its own NFT offerings this summer. (CNBC)

Other companies are jumping into the space. NFT platform Recur announced a $5 million seed round led by the DeFi Alliance, Delphi Digital, Ethereum co-founder Joe Lubin, and Gemini, among others. (Cointelegraph)

Justin Sun, the CEO of Tron, is now buying serious high art. He bought a Picasso for $20 million at Christie’s in London on March 23, where he also picked up an Andy Warhol for $2 million.

Sun, if you recall, was the second highest bidder for the Beeple “Everydays—the first 5,000 days” piece, driving up the price for Metakovan. Apparently, the Christie’s team in Asia reached out to Sun after the NFT sale to talk him into buying real physical art with all his spare change. (ArtNews)

How does OpenSea, an online market for NFTs, deal with copyright violations? They pocket the buyer’s money and tell them they should have done their own research. Buyer beware! (Vice)

John Cleese’s auction for an NFT of a speedily drawn Brooklyn Bridge ended on April fools’ day. The proud owner is now JeffBezosForeskin who paid $35,000 in ETH for it on Mintable.  

SNL is selling an NFT to their NFT skit an OpenSea. The top bidder gets two tickets to a live taping of the show. This gimmick just does more to promote NFTs, imho. (Decrypt)

Other newsy bits

A DOJ investigation into Representative Matt Gaetz and Joel Greenberg—the former tax collector in Seminole County, Florida—is focused on the pair recruiting women for sex. Greenberg is a bitcoiner. At one time, he wanted to start his own blockchain company, but was accused of dipping into public funds to do so. (The Daily Beast)

Greenberg has made a lot of headlines in recent years.

Terror-linked groups in Syria’s war-torn Idlib are changing their crypto tactics to avoid detection by Western law enforcement. (Wired)

Me, quoted in the news

After I wrote my story revealing the mystery Beeple art buyer, I got a lot of calls from the media asking me for comments about NFTs. 

I am featured in Voice of America: “Cryptocurrency Fuels Digital Art-Buying Frenzy”

Ben Munster quoted me in an article for The Art Newspaper: “NFT art bubble? 2017 crypto bust could spell out the future of current boom”

Kenny Schachter quoted me in an opinion piece for Artnet: “Professor Kenny Schachter Is Here to Teach You More About NFTs (and Put the Crypto Critics in Detention).” David Gerard is quoted in the same story. Kenny refers to us as “curmudgeons.” 

I was also interviewed by the Verge: “NFT mania is here, and so are the scammers.”

(Updated April 4 to add info about Recur.)

Feature image: Scary bunny on OpenSea

If you enjoy my work, please support my writing by becoming a patron. I need all the support I can get!

News: I’m writing a book, people are minting NFTs for the lulz, Chuck Tingle calls NFTs a ‘scoundrel plot’

I’m working on a book on NFTs and how they became the tulip mania of crypto. As of now, the plan is to self-publish on Amazon, hopefully before the bubble explodes like this dead whale.

I’ve finished the outline—which I’ll continue to update in coming weeks—and I’m playing with ideas for a catchy title. 

If you have thoughts for a title, send them to me! I need as many ideas as possible. Only one rule: it has to be SEO-friendly, so we need the words “NFT” and “art” in there somewhere. Also, I can add a long subtitle stuffed with keywords, too. Here are a few thoughts:

NFTs: The art of the steal

NFTs: When crypto bros entered the world of high art

Since I’m working on a book about NFTs, I won’t be talking about much else for the next few months. Hence, this newsletter is mostly about NFTs. (I promise I’ll return to talking about Tether when this book is finished.)

My goal: 500 high-quality book words a day, starting today. 

Here the news:

BitClout’s content creator tokens are NFTish

I was going to write a big section here on BitClout, the social-media-on-a-blockchain experiment, because I initially thought the project’s creator coins were NFTs, but they’re not really. They are similar to NFTs due to their artificial scarcity and being a way to trade influence. But they are fungible tokens, and it turns out they are HYIPish.

If you want more details on BitClout, I wrote everything up in a separate blog post. Also, note that at least one BitClout investor, Social Capital CEO Chamath Palihapitiya, is building a big portfolio of NFTs.

NFTs don’t convey ownership, case in point

NFTs don’t convey ownership of a digital art piece in any form, shape or fashion. You can create an NFT of a piece of art even if you are not the creator. You can also create multiple NFTs of the same digital art. 

Where this really becomes a problem is when you mint an NFT, auction it off for an absurd amount of money, and then someone claiming to be the rightful owner of the underlying art steps forward. 

This is what happened when an NFT for a virtual house sold on SuperRare for $500,000 worth of ETH. Now the artist and the visualizer—who worked together on the Mars House—have locked horns over the copyright.

Mateo Sanz Pedemonte, a 3D modeler who created the virtual abode for artist Krista Kim, calls the project “a fraud.”

“Krista Kim never owned this project fully,” he said. “I have created the project with my own hands, combined with her direction. I do possess the full intellectual property.” (Dezeen)

People are minting NFTs for the lulz

People are minting NFTs and selling them as a joke. 

A New York Times writer minted a column as an NFT and sold it on Foundation to demonstrate the insane amounts of money people are willing to pay for these things. A bidder going by @3fmusic bought the piece for 350 ETH, worth $560,000. (NYT)

Recently, John Cleese put up an NFT of a drawing of the Brooklyn Bridge on OpenSea. The highest bid is now $35,000 by JeffBezosForeskin.

“The world has gone terminally insane,” Cleese told VanityFair, adding that “This all reminds me of Henry David Thoreau, when he said, ‘Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end.’”

Author Chuck Tingle put off by NFTs

Chuck Tingle, a self-published writer whose focus is satirical gay porn, looked at the NFT phenomenon and was appalled. He proposed doing a “tingler” as a single reproduction with an NFT, but when he read up on NFTs, he summed up his horrified thoughts in an ebook the same day—now available on Amazon for $2.99.

The title of the book is: “Not Pounded By My Book ‘Pounded In The Butt By My Non-Fungible Tingler That Is Literally This NFT’ Because Of The Current Catastrophic Environmental And Ethical Impact.”

David Gerard wrote up a review of the book. Of course, he had to explain who Tingle is first, because not everybody knows. I sure didn’t, but Tingle is apparently quite popular.

As for Tingle, he thinks NFTs are a “scoundrel plot,” where promoters are “taking money from buds of less means.”

In a separate tweet, he suggested, “instead of trying to support art by buying digital plaques with your name on it that has no meaning or actual connection to the art JUST SUPPORT ARTISTS BY BUYING THEIR ART. NFTs are good example of trying to fix problem that already has had very easy solution for 1000s of years.”

Other newsworthy bits

NFTs are so big and bubblish they’re even featured in an SNL skit. This is a funny skit but sadly it only serves to promote more of the NFT nonsense.

Edmund Schuster, an associate professor of corporate law at the London School of Economics, debated Andrew Steinhold, partner of NFT fund Sfermion. The motion for the debate: “NFTs are dumb.” (The Blockchain Debate)

In a separate debate, David Gerard took on Josh Petty, CEO of startup Twetch. Petty has been experimenting with NFTs for limited edition Twetch hats, which you can buy with BSV tokens. “A crypto token has no intrinsic value,” Gerard argued. “It is a race to the bottom for these things.” (Coingeek)

As I’ve stated, NFTs are simply pointers. And if the thing it points to moves, there’s always a chance down the line that your NFT could point to “ERROR 404!” for the rest of its life.

Verge reporter Jacob Kastrenakes makes a similar point: “NFTs are fundamentally built on trust—trust that a seller won’t screw you over, trust that these tokens magically have value—and that holds true even at the deepest level of the system.”

Is FinCEN aiming for NFTs? FinCEN issued a blue box notice to let art and antiquities traders know they will be held to the same reporting standards as financial institutions. This means that they will have to submit suspicious activity reports, or SARs, for antiquities trade. The question is: Will NFTs be categorized as art? (FinCEN notice, OCCRP)

Do NFT buyers even care about art? Computer scientist Jorge Stolfi thinks not. “If you make an NFT out of your work, its market will be restricted to a few million crypto believers worldwide. And they are mostly not the type of person who appreciates art. The billions who do not care for crypto will not be able to buy it.”

Finally, if you are tired of watching NFTs sell for millions of dollars in crypto and want to see some real art, here’s your chance. The Louvre just put its entire collection online for free.

If you enjoy my work, please support my writing by becoming a patron. I need all the support I can get!

BitClout’s social media experiment is one bad idea on top of another

BitClout, a social-media-on-the-blockchain project, is selling a type of token (called “creator coins”) tied to influential Twitter accounts—without account holders’ permission.

And folks are getting understandably pissed off. 

At first, I thought these creator coins were NFTish due to their artificial scarcity and being a way to trade influence. But it turns out they are more HYIPish.

Creator coins are fungible, similar to ERC-20 tokens on Ethereum. And each BitClout creator coin has its own supply. Elon Musk’s creator coin is worth $84,000, for instance, and there are currently 434 of them in circulation.

The BitClout “one-pager” tells us a little bit more about how these creator coins work:

“Creator coins are naturally scarce, with fewer than 100 to 1,500 coins in existence for each profile. This is because as more people buy a profile’s creator coin, the price of the coin goes up automatically at a faster and faster rate. This means that, eventually, it could take billions of dollars to mint even one more coin.”

According to the paper, if you want to buy new coins associated with a creator, the profile will “happily mint them out of thin air” and sell them to you according to a price curve.

Like a lot of things in this project, the formula for calculating the price of creator coins is complicated and hard to follow:

Price in BitClout = .003 * creator_coins_in_circulation^2
Price in USD = .003 * creator_coins_in_circulation^2 * bitclout_price_in_usd

Essentially, what you need to know is, the price of the creator coins goes up exponentially based on demand, thus, you are encouraged to buy early and hold on to your coins for as long as possible. However, the only value in the coins comes from new investors. The coins themselves are intrinsically worthless.

It all sounds very much like a Ponzi scheme, where folks who get in at the ground level are able to cash out, but the news is not so good for late investors. (Eventually, you run out of suckers, and someone gets stuck holding the bag.)

BitClout token

BitClout also has its own blockchain and its own BitClout token (BTCLT). The project actually did a premine of 2 million BTCLT for founders and investors.

If there is an expectation of profits from an investment in a common enterprise based on the efforts of others, that’s generally a good sign something is a security, according to our friend Howey.

The project mints creator coins of Twitter profiles and assigns them dollar values, but you can only buy creator coins with BTCLT. And if you want BTCLT, you have to buy it with bitcoin via the BitClout website.

Your money goes in, but how does it get back out again? The BitClout token so far is not listed on any major exchange. But there is good reason to believe that could change soon, based on the influencers behind the project.

Big-name investors

BitClout controls a wallet containing nearly $190 million worth of bitcoin, most of it raised from notable VCs, including Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), Coinbase Ventures, Digital Currency Group, and the Winklevoss twins.

Social Capital CEO Chamath Palihapitiya was recently on a podcast discussing how BitClout is funded by him and others.  

Aside from Coinbase Ventures itself backing the project, a16z is one of the major investors behind Coinbase, so I’m sure there is a plan here somewhere to get that token listed pronto. And it’s not like Coinbase isn’t already listing a slew of coins that resemble securities.

Diamondhands

BitClout’s pseudonymous founder, who refers to himself as “Diamondhands”—meaning someone who is willing to take risks and hold on to an asset to the bitter end—is allegedly Nadar Al-Naji, the former Basis founder. And we all know how well that project went. 

Basis was a “price-stable cryptocurrency with an algorithmic central bank,” according to its white paper. After raising $133 million, Al-Naji eventually shut Basis down blaming regulatory constraints. He ended up returning 90% of the money. (Andressen Horowitz was also an investor in Basis, by the way.)

Basis and BitClout share a lot in common. Both projects are totally confusing. And they both appear to have the same founding team and the same investors. “We are investors. Same team behind Basis [from] a few years back,” Tyler Winklevoss of Gemini Capital told Decrypt.

You could be forgiven for thinking this is just grifters jumping between grifts.

Robert Stevens wrote up a great report in Decrypt describing how BitClout works and where the funds are getting shuffled off to. Brady Dale also penned a good story in Coindesk.

By the way, I love how Diamondhands told Coindesk that BitClout is not a company, it’s a blockchain. As if that will spare it from an SEC enforcement action. Everything about this project is dumb and bad.

Anyhow, last week crypto law firm Anderson Kill sent a warning letter to Nadar Al-Naji on behalf of Brandon Curtis, the product lead for decentralized token exchange Radar Relay, for using Curtis’ private information without his consent. I have no idea why VCs are pumping money into this project.

Updated on March 29 to add Tyler Winklevoss’ quote from Decrypt.

If you like my writing, please support my work on Patreon!

News: Metakovan unmasks himself, FATF goes after DeFi and NFTs, Coinbase pays CFTC $6.5M over wash trades

I’ve been traveling around the U.S., visiting friends on the East and West Coasts and in between, and this is my first newsletter since the end of February.

This week has been a busy one, full of interviews and talking to reporters about nonfungible tokens. Who knew NFTs would become the next tulip mania? I’ve gained nearly a thousand more Twitter followers and several more patrons, which is wonderful because I can certainly use the support.

Peanut exploring a stream in Texas

As I write, Bitcoin is above $57,700, after reaching an all-time-high of $61,742 on March 13. Meanwhile, there are now 39.6 billion tethers in circulation—that’s 4.5 billion new tethers in the last three weeks, all helping to prop up the BTC price.

In my last newsletter, I said I didn’t think BTC would ever see $57,000 again. I was wrong, but I also didn’t expect Tether to keep blatantly printing billions more tethers—each one representing a dollar on an offshore exchange—after the NYAG settlement. It just shows this nonsense can go on a lot longer than any of us imagined.

Some quick updates—at the end of February, I did an all-day film interview for another QuadrigaCX documentary. I can’t tell you any more than this, unfortunately, but yes, more documentaries. (Still waiting for someone to do a Tether documentary and an NFT documentary, but we know those are coming.)

Also, fellow nocoiner David Gerard and I got a full viewing of the upcoming CBC Quadriga documentary. It was over a year ago that we met in Vancouver to film this. However, it feels like the Quadriga story is still unfinished, and will be until we know for certain that’s Gerald Cotten’s body buried in Halifax.

Here is the news. 

Metakovan reveals himself

The art world was beside itself on March 11 when a person going by “Metakovan” bought an NFT by Beeple for $69.3 million in ETH—making it the third most expensive* ever sold by a living artist, behind Jeff Koons’s “Rabbit” and David Hockney’s “Portrait of an Artist (Pool with Two Figures)”—if you can get past the fact that it was paid for with magic beans.

In a blog post that went viral, I revealed that Metakovan was Vignesh Sundaresan, an Indian crypto entrepreneur who ran Coins-e, a shady, now-defunct Canadian crypto exchange. My post got 20,000 hits the first day. 

Four days later, Sundaresan admitted he was Metakovan in a blog post on the Metapurse website. Metapurse is his crypto investment fund.

We already know who you are. The question is, why were you using a pseudonym in the first place?

He claims that it wasn’t a pseudonym, just an “exosuit.” He did it, he says, because he wanted to prove to the world that people of color can buy high-art, too. He then delved into a rags-to-riches story about how he made it big in crypto. (This is a common bitcoiner fairytale: buy crypto, and you, too, can become fabulously wealthy.)

In an online auction, I’m not sure a pseudonym proves anything. But it does look like maybe you were trying to hide or distract from something, like the questionable past projects you’ve been involved with?

Also, if Metakovan wanted to make a point about social justice, why did he buy an NFT representing a collage full of angry, racist, misogynistic images? That makes no sense.

Art critic Ben Davis spent an entire day digging through Beeple’s magnum opus—a collection of 5,000 images. His findings, written up in an article for Artnet News, aren’t pretty. In one example, Hilary Clinton with a set of gold teeth and the caption: “Senator Clinton’s last-ditch effort to reach black voters.”

That just tells me Metakovan could care less about the art. He only cares that he gets publicity and can make money off the NFT by packaging and reselling it—in the form of B20 tokens—to retail suckers.

If you are wondering where Metakovan got all that ETH to buy the Beeple NFT—he claims he was an early investor in the Ethereum ICO. Anyone who bought into that ICO and hodled, could easily be a millionaire today.

But remember, Metakovan and business partner Twobadour (aka Anand Venkateswaran) also raised 50,000 ETH in an early 2018 ICO for their Lendroid project. LST (stands for Lendroid Support Token) is a dead shitcoin that never got listed on any exchange.

NFTs are garbage

Since I wrote my Metakovan blog post, I’ve been getting pushback from artists who want to believe that NFTs bring value to the art world. They don’t want to hear that NFTs are a scam. It’s sad to see artists getting sucked into the crypto cesspool. 

I wrote another post last week where I explain why NFTs are worthless—and how they have opened the door to fraud and money laundering. The only real value of NFTs is speculative—i.e., what the next sucker is willing to pay you for them. 

Artists want to believe that NFTs are an avenue for them to get paid for their work, but in truth, NFTs are simply pointers, expensive URLs on the blockchain. And if the object they point to moves or disappears, those URLs will forever point to nothing.

Some NFTs contain a hash of the artwork they represent. But as computer scientist Jorge Stolfi explains: Copies of a physical work of art are clearly distinct from the original. They are not the same atoms that the artist himself put on the canvas. In contrast, copies of a digital file are exactly the same bits. There is no ‘original’ of a digital file.

In other words, any copy of a digital artwork will have exactly the same hash, so putting the hash on the blockchain is useless.

FATF takes aim at DeFi/NFTs

The Financial Action Task Force, a global anti-money laundering watchdog, released an update of its Draft Guidance on a Risk-Based Approach to Virtual Assets and Virtual Asset Service Providers.

Decentralized exchanges, the platforms behind decentralized finance (DeFi) apps, are now considered virtual asset service providers—or VASPs.

The DeFi app, or smart contract, is not a VASP, but the owners and operators of the DEX are, which means they are obligated to ensure these platforms meet the same anti-money laundering requirements as other financial institutions.

This is a clear aim at DeFi founders, investors and VC firms. 

The FATF adds that NFTs that can be converted or exchanged for fiat currency or other virtual assets remain in scope.

In their analysis of the new guidance, blockchain analytics firm CipherTrace said that NFTs that can facilitate money laundering and terrorism financing are “virtual assets” as viewed by the FATF.

As I wrote in my NFT explainer piece, NFTs open the door to money laundering—big money coming from mysterious people to buy outrageously overpriced NFTs with cryptocurrency—so its no surprise that the FATF has NFTs on its radar.

Charlie Lee, the mystery Coinbase wash trader?

Coinbase settled with the CFTC for $6.5 million over claims that between January 2015 and September 2018 the exchange “recklessly delivered false, misleading, or inaccurate reports concerning transactions in digital assets.” 

The CFTC also claims a former Coinbase employee was wash trading LTC/BTC pairs on Coinbase’s GDAX platform between August and September 2016. (GDAX, meant for professional traders, was later renamed Coinbase Pro.) Wash trades are illegal because they make it look like there’s a lot of trade volume when there’s not. (Verge, CFTC press release and order)

The order doesn’t mention who the employee is but we know that Charlie Lee, the founder of litecoin, was working as an engineer at Coinbase at the time—and it looks very much like he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. 

LTC wasn’t worth more than a few dollars even after it got listed on GDAX in August 2016. The price really took off when litecoin was listed on Coinbase’s retail exchange—called simply “Coinbase”—in May 2017.

Lee left a month later to focus on his litecoin project and then dumped his LTC at the top of the market in December 2017, when LTC saw highs of $360. That was during that last crypto bubble.

Lee got a lot of flak for that. Ironically, he later claimed that he sold because “holding LTC made it a situation where I may do something to pump the value short term. but is bad for the long term success of Litecoin.”

Bizarrely, LTC has never seen the highs in the 2021 bubble that it did in 2017. It’s only at $200 now.

Whistleblower Bitfinexed suspected Lee of wash trading all along. He wrote up his suspicions in a blog post in 2018, which is well worth the read now.

If Coinbase—the leading crypto exchange in the U.S.—allowed a former employee to wash trade up to 99% of the daily volume of a shitcoin, you can bet this is standard practice on all crypto exchanges. 

Coinbase has delayed its public listing to April, according to Bloomberg. Its latest valuation is $68 billion.

Other newsworthy bits

Photographer/writer Andy Day says NFTs are a pyramid scheme. “To many, it’s a means of overthrowing the existing regime; when you look a little closer, you realize that it’s just an extreme manifestation of neoliberalism.” (Fstoppers)

If you still think NFTs are the greatest thing since sliced bread, Monty Python’s John Cleese has a bridge to sell you, specifically a drawing of the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT. You can buy it on OpenSea. The highest bid so far is for $35,671. (Previously the top bid was $50,000.) (Decrypt)

Not a month goes by where we don’t hear of another DeFi rug pull. TurtleDex, a DeFi app running on the Binance Smart Chain, drained $2.5 million in crypto from liquidity pools on Ape Swap and Pancake Swap. (Who comes up with these names?) The owners immediately deleted TurtleDex’s telegram, the official website, and the Twitter page. (Decrypt)

USDC, the stablecoin issued by CENTRE, a project backed by Circle and Coinbase, has surpassed 10 billion. (The Block)

BofA published a report called “Bitcoin’s Dirty Little Secrets,” wherein analysts said there is no good reason to own bitcoin “unless you see prices going up.” David Gerard reviews the report in full on his blog.

First Trust Advisors and hedge fund SkyBridge Capital, led by former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci, are pushing for a bitcoin ETF in the U.S. The prospectus for the “First Trust SkyBridge Bitcoin ETF Trust” was published on Friday. While a bitcoin ETF opened in February in Canada, U.S. regulators have repeatedly rejected attempts to introduce them, citing concerns about market manipulation.  (The Block)

Want to flush all your money away? Toilet paper company Charmin has an NFT.

*Update on March 22 — Third most expensive, not first.

WTF is an NFT? Here’s a rundown of the basics

NFTs are all over the news lately.

Recently, I was having drinks with a friend, who knows zip about crypto, and out of the blue, she started asking me about “non-fungible tokens.” 

The next day, a musician friend posted an amateurish drawing of a guitar on Facebook, proudly announcing, “This will soon be available as an NFT.”

If initial coin offerings were the crypto grift of 2017 and decentralized finance (aka “DeFi”) was the grift of 2020, then “nifties” are the grift of 2021, and they do just what crypto grifters need them to do: lure more dumb money into crypto.

How do they do this? By convincing artists that by “tokenizing” their digital art, they can prove ownership and make oodles of money for their work. They just need to buy crypto first, and then sway their friends into believing that crypto and NFTs are the wave of the future. Also, by convincing investors that NFTs are the hottest new thing.

If you are trying to get up to speed on this nonsense, you’ll find answers to your most basic questions below.

What’s an NFT?

NFT stands for non-fungible token. Fungible means interchangeable. It’s the idea that one asset can be swapped out for another and nothing is lost.

Bitcoin and ether, the two most popular cryptocurrencies, are examples of fungible tokens. One bitcoin works like every other bitcoin; likewise with ether.

A non-fungible token is different because only one ever exists. Each NFT contains unique data, so NFTs are not interchangeable with each other. They are not divisible either, whereas fungible tokens are.

This is a wonderful play on bitcoiners’ idea of scarcity. There will only ever be 21 million bitcoin—and there will only be one NFT! Scarcity clearly means something is valuable. Grab it while you can.

Most of the ICO tokens in the 2017 crypto bubble ran on Ethereum and were based on the ERC-20 token standard, so exchanges and wallets would know how to integrate them. NFTs on Ethereum also have their own standard: ERC-721. 

Other blockchains, like Tron, Binance Chain, EOS, and Polkadot, support NFTs but Ethereum is by far the most popular and widely used.

Because NFTs are unique, they are hyped as “collectibles,” rare one-of-a-kinds that will only go up in value over time. 

What are you actually buying?

An NFT is only a pointer to something else on the web. It could be an image, a music or video file, or even a tweet. The object itself does not live on the blockchain.

In fact, the server holding the object could go away or it could change what is displayed at that location—and then your NFT would point to nothing or something totally different, like a rug.

Really, an NFT is simply proof that an object exists.

It doesn’t convey copyright, or for that matter, any legal rights at all. If anything, it is akin to a “certificate of authenticity,” which says this is where this thing is located. Unless you have a contract that specifically spells out you own the rights to this object, you literally just bought the pointer.

In addition to a slew of hitherto unknown auction houses where NFTs are sold, big-name auction houses are getting in on the game. Sotheby’s recently announced it will be selling its first-ever NFT on behalf of digital artist Pak in April.

And last week, Christie’s auctioned an NFT of Beeple’s “Everyday: The First 5000 days” for $69.3 million in ETH. Christie’s even made the unusual decision of accepting its premium in magic beans.

In its conditions of sale, Christie’s carefully points out that NFTs carry no rights:

“You acknowledge that ownership of an NFT carries no rights, express or implied, other than property rights for the lot (specifically, digital artwork tokenized by the NFT). You understand and accept that NFTs are issued by third parties, and not by Christie’s itself.”

Even if you own an NFT, that doesn’t mean you can restrict other people from seeing the object it points to. 

Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s billionaire CEO, is selling an NFT to his first tweet. The bidding is now up to $2.5 million. But you don’t need an NFT to see the tweet. (It’s worth mentioning that Dorsey is a big fan of crypto. His company Square invested $50 million into bitcoin last year, so it’s no wonder that he is shilling NFTs.)

When you buy an NFT, what you are buying is the private key to a crypto-token. The value is mainly speculative. You will only get for it what someone else is willing to pay—if you can find a buyer, and there is no guarantee that you will, when the time comes to cash out.

The problem is that people’s perceptions of what they are buying when it comes to NFTs don’t always mesh with the legal realities. And marketplaces involved in these sales are not always transparent about what they are selling. In fact, the more questions you ask about the real underlying value of an NFT, the vaguer the responses become.

How to create an NFT

If you are an artist who wants to create an NFT to auction, first you want to download a digital wallet that supports the ERC-721 token standard, such as MetaMask, Trust Wallet, or Coinbase Wallet, and put a little ETH in it to pay for “gas.” Plan on spending $50 to $100 worth of ETH to cover the costs of creating your token. 

After that, there are plenty of sites, including OpenSea, Mintbase, and Rarible, that will take your money and step you through the process of “minting” your NFT.

Connect your wallet to one of those sites. Write up a description of your artwork, upload your image, and voila, you’ve created your first NFT.  

Unfortunately, many struggling artists find their NFTs simply languish on these auction sites, and they’ve sunk $100 into nothing when they could have gone out and bought groceries instead.

A short history of NFTs

Where did NFTs spring from? Although the technology for NFTs has been around almost as long as bitcoin, NFTs hit the mainstream in 2017 with CryptoKitties, a game that allowed people to buy and “breed” limited-edition virtual cats with crypto. CryptoKitties was the first NFT to use the ERC-721 standard.

Last summer, game developers got into NFTs in a big way. NFTs enabled gamers to win in-game items (e.g., a digital shield, a digital sword, or digital skins), transfer their assets from one game to another, and then sell their in-game NFTs in blockchain marketplaces—sometimes for impressive sums.

Soon after, NFTs found their way into the art world, hyped by celebrities who weren’t always up to speed on crypto. Lindsay Lohan minted her own token on Rarible, based on an image of her face.

Hours after she put her NFT up for sale, she tweeted, “Bitcoin is the future, happening now,” even though her NFT lived on Ethereum. Lohan sold the image for over $17,000. It was quickly resold for $57,000.

Here are some NFTs making the news in the last two months:

Keep in mind, most of these NFTs don’t sell for real money, they sell for ETH, and the trick is then converting your ETH into fiat, so you can spend it in the real world.  

What are the risks?

NFTs open the door to fraud and general funny business. This is because 1) money is involved, usually in the form of crypto; and 2) regulators haven’t caught up with grift. 

Crypto bros promote NFTs as the ultimate stamp of authenticity, yet for many artists, the NFT market has done the opposite: it’s opened the door for swindlers. Here’s what can happen:

You can create an NFT of someone else’s work. There are no protections in place to ensure that an NFT you are buying was created by the actual artist. Digital artists, ranging from 3D renderers to pixel painters, have all discovered their art on online marketplaces. 

There are literally dozens of bots on Twitter that will allow you to create an NFT of a tweet simply by tagging it, and Twitter has thus far made no moves to block these accounts.

The problem got so bad that Corbin Rainolt, who designs detailed paleo art, had take down all of his dinosaurs and repost them with watermarks. 

“I tried to block all NFT accounts but it seems I can’t block everyone of these accs,” he said on Twitter.

Illustrator Chris Moschler doesn’t get the buzz around NFTs.

“Art theft has never been this aggressive and rampant ever before,” he tweeted, after blocking dozens of Twitter accounts trying to mint NFTs based on his tweets. “I cannot understand how this is still being called a revolutionary movement in the art world.”

It is also possible to create an NFT of a piece of work on one auction site, and then create NFTs on the same piece of work on a plethora of other auction sites. What’s to stop you?

Some NFT marketplaces do better due diligence than others, but they take a cut of anything sold and can easily wash their hands of it afterward.  

Your NFTs can also be stolen. Not your keys, not your crypto, as the saying goes, and when you leave your NFT on an auction site, they have control of the keys.

Recently, several Nifty Gateway customers reported a hacker breaking into their accounts and stealing their NFTs. Some of the victims also said their credit cards on file were used to purchase additional NFTs, which were then transferred to a hacker’s account. (Nifty said those users did not have 2FA turned on.)

Also, NFTs open up big-time opportunities for money laundering. Art is an attractive vehicle to launder money, to begin with. Transactions are often private, and valuations of art can vary widely for unexplained reasons. Art prices can also be extremely high, so there is no reason not to expect that NFTs will be used for the same purpose.

Right now, the NFT bubble is a big one. Crypto grifters promote NFTs because it’s a new avenue to bring fiat money into the world of crypto and to pump up their bags. The problem is, all bubbles eventually pop, and when this one does, retailers will be left holding the bag. 

Feature image: Beeple’s artwork from “Everydays: The First 5000 days.” Courtesy, Christie’s

If you enjoy my writing, please consider supporting my work by subscribing to my Patreon account for as little as $5 a month. 

Metakovan, the mystery Beeple art buyer, and his NFT/DeFi scheme

Last week, a crypto whale going by the moniker “Metakovan” bought a Beeple artwork via Christie’s auction for $69 million—$60 million in ETH and $9 million in fees, also in ETH*—outbidding a surprised Justin Sun, founder of the Tron blockchain, in the last minute.

After the barest amount of digging, I am going to hazard a guess that the mystery Beeple buyer is Vignesh Sundaresan, a crypto entrepreneur who has been in the crypto landscape for about seven years.  

It’s pretty obvious, really. Metakovan has given a few audio interviews. And if you compare those to previous Sundaresan interviews, like this one, it’s the same voice—and the same crypto origin story.

In a recent interview with the Good Time Show, for instance, Metakovan says he got into crypto in 2013, lived in Canada for several years, and then left for Singapore in 2017 because crypto regulations in North America were too “unclear.” That’s basically Sundaresan’s background as well.

Putting aside the matter of why Sundaresan would want to keep his real identity cloaked in the first place, the next question is the grift—how is he spinning a profit off of non-fungible tokens, or NFTs?

I’ll get to that in a moment, but first… 

Who is Sundaresan? 

According to the bio on his website, Vignesh Sundaresan is behind several crypto startups. 

He co-founded BitAccess, an early bitcoin ATM company in Canada. BitAccess was accepted into the Y Combinator startup accelerator in June 2014, according to Coindesk.  

And then, in January 2017, he founded the Singapore-based Lendroid Foundation. The firm raised $47.5 million (50,000 ETH) in a two-day initial coin offering in February 2018, according to CryptoRank. 

He also founded consulting firm Portkey Technologies and claims to have backed several popular crypto projects, including Ethereum, Polkadot, Dfinity, Omisego and Decentraland.

Going back further, Sundaresan launched crypto exchange Coins-e in Ontario in 2013. (Coincidentally, the same year that Gerald Cotten and Michael Patryn launched their failed Canadian crypto exchange QuadrigaCX.)

Coins-e, a defunct Canadian exchange

Several Coins-e users have taken to social media to complain about losing money on Coins-e, calling it a scam and warning others to watch out. (See Reddit—here and here—and BitcoinTalk.)  

The posts on r/dogecoin are the most alarming. Coins-e clients report having their dogecoin disappear. Wireguysny described watching 1.3 million DOGE evaporate and the frustration of being unable to reach tech support to get to the bottom of the matter.

Xclusive2 wrote: “I’ve had just about enough of of Coins-e millions of coins missing, no reply from support ever! the reason is because it’s a one man operation. the problem is this joker is stealing and trading everyone’s coins when and how he feels to make himself rich he knows that Doge is worth a lot of BTC in large volumes.”

Sundaresan denies being the guy who allegedly ripped people off. According to him, Coins-e was sold to a company called Casa Crypto in Waterloo. The transfer was overseen by law firm LaBarge Weinstein, he claims.

“Since it was sold, I have not been associated with Coins-E. Allegations of a scam are FUD,” he told me.

I am so far unable to confirm that sale. I can’t find any announcement or press release on the sale. The Coins-e website no longer exists, and an archive of the site’s “About” page from 2016 doesn’t reveal who is behind the operation. I can’t find a company called “Casa Crypto” in Waterloo either.

Sundaresan offered to show me proof of the sale via a video call. I told him I was open to that, but he hasn’t gotten back to me to set up a time. He did not comment on whether he was Metakovan.

Meanwhile, I’ve looked up the domain registration for Coins-e.com. The site was registered in May 2013 and the only update was in May 2020—after customers complained about their coins vanishing.

The site was originally registered to Ramesh Vinayagam—the name of a famous Indian composer, per Reddit user xclusive2. Another alias perhaps? And, according to a Paste from January 2014, the site was registered to the man himself shortly before the registration was made private and Sundaresan entered the Y Combinator program.

The NFT connection

NFTs are the big thing now. They took over as the latest grift when decentralized finance, or DeFi, ran out of steam last year. Fellow nocoiner David Gerard wrote a blog post explaining how NFTs work and why digital ownership of art is utter nonsense.

“NFTs are entirely for the benefit of the crypto grifters,” he said. “The only purpose the artists serve is as aspiring suckers to pump the concept of crypto — and, of course, to buy cryptocurrency to pay for ‘minting’ NFTs.”

Stepping back, we first see the connection between Sundaresan’s startup Lendroid and NFTs in a blog post titled “Why DeFi Needs NFTs.” The post, written by his business partner Anand Venkateswaran, describes how NFTs solve the problems of DeFi, such as flash crashes, volatility, and governance. (Venkateswaran, a comms person, also has a pseudonym—he goes by Twobadour Pannar.)

Lendroid powers WhaleStreet, an Ethereum-based platform for swapping ERC20 tokens—that’s the standard for fungible Ethereum tokens. WhaleStreet has its own native “yield-farming token” called Shrimp.

Metakovan is also behind Singapore-based Metapurse, a crypto-based investment firm. Metapurse’s mission, according to its website, is to “democratize access and ownership to artwork.” The firm has been acquiring NFTs. It purchased Beeple’s “Everdays: 20 Collection” artworks for $2.2 million in December.

Metapurse has taken Beeple’s multiple artworks, or NFTs, along with three virtual museums, and combined everything into a “massive bundle.” Would you like to invest in this wonderful package? You can. All you have to do is stock up on Metapurse’s new B20 token.*

This blog post on the Metapurse substack lays out the grand plan:

“We believe we truly achieved this with B.20 — the name of a massive NFT bundle we are fractionalizing so that everyone can have ownership over the first large scale public art project within the metaverse. It is important to note that we’re fractionalizing ownership, not the assets themselves. These fractions will be available as 10 million B.20 tokens, and can be referred to as the “keys” to this digital vault.”

Number go up

The name of this game is “number go up.” This is about pumping B20, so holders and Metapurse can benefit when they go to sell the token—i.e., get more ETH, buy more NFTs, rinse, repeat.

The token distribution is something to pay attention to. Metakovan has 59% of all the B20 tokens. Why does he own the majority of tokens? As he explains it, that is to prevent any single person from owning more than half of B20 tokens—and snatching up all this wonderful artwork for themselves. The idea is to decentralize and democratize art, only Metakovan controls the token supply.

What’s interesting is that Beeple, the creator of the artwork, is actually a business partner of Metakovan’s. He owns 2% of all the B20 tokens. I’m sure there is no conflict of interest here.

WhaleStreet hosted the B20 sale on Jan. 23. Apparently, 1.6 million B20 tokens were sold to the public for $0.36 per token. After the Christie’s auction, B20 shot up to $23. It’s now down to around $16, according to Coinmarketcap. That’s a nice profit for anyone who got in early—and worth over $3 million for Beeple, if he dumps his coins quickly and there’s enough liquidity to actually sell them.

At the end of the day, this is a straight-up initial coin offering-style index fund to speculate on NFTs, with a twist: Metakovan owns most of the tokens—and he has an existing business relationship with the artist.

I wonder if Metakovan anticipated having to pay this much ETH to Beeple for his “Everydays: The First 5000 Days”? Metakovan knew he needed the artwork for his index fund. But did he expect Sun to keep bidding the price up to the very last second?

Also, in an earlier version of this post, I questioned why we can’t see the blockchain transaction—which was supposed to be 42,329.453 ETH. If we can’t see the transaction, how do we know that Beeple actually got paid for the sale and is not in cahoots with Metakovan to make number go up?

I now have a theory.

As Christie’s spells out in its conditions of sale, the transaction needs to come directly from a digital wallet maintained with Coinbase Custody Trust, Coinbase, Fidelity Digital Assets Services, Gemini Trust Company or Paxos Trust Company. And it sounds like the funds may even have gone into Christie’s escrow wallet.

Anyhow, if both parties had Coinbase accounts, the exchange could just change the database records off-chain to flip account balances. In this way, Coinbase acts like a second layer, and you wouldn’t see the ETH transaction.

When all was said and done, the Christie’s auction turned out to be a sweet deal for Beeple who now has a reason to shill crypto to his 2 million Instagram followers. And Metakovan gets publicity for his ICO project, so his own personal B20 holdings rise in value.


Since I published this article, Sundaresan has written to me and asked me to take it down. I refused, but agreed to make edits if he could point to anything specific that was wrong—so far, he hasn’t.

I’m posting Sundaresan’s full comment on the matter below:

Hello Amy, I am replying to address your concern about coins-e as relating to me. Definitely there are several factual inaccuracies in your blog post and your tweets. I would appreciate if you would temporarily pull down the posts until you have the facts right, as such a post causes unnecessary FUD and obviously it is your choice to not take it down. But if you do it will show that your intentions are in the right place and that you are looking to have a conversation. Regarding coins-e, it dates back to days when the crypto industry was very unorganized and the service itself was quite small and did not warrant a press release when the sale was done. The service was not even big enough to attract the crypto media attention, the service started growing bigger as the Casa crypto was taking over. The transfer happened through a well documented process with assistance from lawyers on both sides. Post the sale I had moved on to build Bitaccess, backed by YCombinator and I have had no link to Casa Crypto after the sale and I have repeatedly addressed this issue via newsletters and Q&As. For the other parts of your question, I believe it shall be better answered by contacting @metapurse and @twobadour directly.

————-

*Beeple’s “Everydays: The first 5000 days” is not part of the B.20 collection. Metakovan and Twobadour told the NYT, they have no plans to monetize the 5,000-image collage “yet.” The B20 collection is anchored by a different set of 20 Beeple artworks that Metapurse acquired in December for roughly $2.2 million on Nifty Gateway.

(March 14, 2021—This article has been updated to add comments from Sundaresan and more detail about Coins-e. Additional updates made later in the day to theorize on why the transaction did not show up on the blockchain, add some Gerard quotes and spruce of the ending a bit.)

(*March 15, 2021—Christie’s accepted its fees in ether—the native crypto of the Ethereum network. When Christie’s originally announced the sale, the auction house said it would accept crypto as payment, but the buyer’s premium had to be in real money. Later it changed its policy to accept ETH, according to Bloomberg.)

Related articles:

WTF is an NFT? Here’s a rundown on the basics

News: Metakovan unmasks himself, FATF goes after DeFi and NFTs, Coinbase pays CFTC $6.5M over wash trades

If you enjoy my work, please support me by subscribing to my Patreon.

NYAG to crypto companies: ‘Play by the rules or we will shut you down’

The New York attorney general issued a stern warning to crypto companies and crypto investors on Monday. Crypto firms doing business in the state must play by the rules or face consequences, she said. And to investors, she underscored the hazards of dabbling in the crypto markets.

The two-part warning from NY attorney general Letitia James comes on the heels of a settlement agreement with Bitfinex and Tether, wherein the two closely related companies agreed to pay an $18.5 million penalty. And an effort to shut down Coinseed, a crypto-trading app that prosecutors allege ignored securities laws and defrauded thousands of investors. 

An unstable market

In a warning to investors, the NY attorney general underscored the numerous risks of investing in bitcoin. Namely, volatility, difficulty in cashing out, conflicts of interest, market manipulation and limited protection from fraud.

“I’m warning New Yorkers and investors across the country that investing in this unstable market is not prudent and could cause devastating losses,” she said in a tweet.

“Many operators of virtual currency trading platforms are themselves heavily invested in virtual currencies, and trade on their own platforms without oversight. The financial interests of these operators may conflict with your interests,” she said.

She went on to add that “even if you purchase a well-established virtual currency from a more reputable trading platform, the price could crash in an instant.”

In effect she appeared to be saying that even if you are buying bitcoin on a regulated exchange, such as Coinbase in the U.S., your money could be here today, gone tomorrow.

Heed the law

In the second part of her warning, an industry alert, the NY attorney general warned crypto firms that deviation from the law will not be tolerated.

“If you don’t play by the rules, we will not hesitate to shut down your operations,” Attorney General James in a tweet.

Commodity broker-dealers, salespersons, and investment advisors in New York need to register with the Office of the Attorney General. And under the law, virtual currencies qualify as commodities—or securities. New York crypto firms that don’t register with the OAG, are in violation of the Martin Act.

Penalties include “permanent injunction from selling, offering to sell, or acting as a broker or investment advisor concerning securities or commodities in New York, as well as disgorgement of profits and restitution to victims.”

What does this mean?

Before the hammer comes down on Tether, which could cause a crash in the price of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, we can expect to see more warnings from regulators and prosecutors about the perils of investing in crypto.

If Tether is shut down and the price of bitcoin collapses as a result—regulators want to make sure that investors are well aware of the risks they face in buying bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency.

The NY attorney general isn’t the one done playing around. Treasury Security Janet Yellen issued a warning about bitcoin last week, saying it is inefficient for transactions and often used for “illicit finance.”

And if Gary Gensler is confirmed as the new chair of the SEC,* we may see a slap down on coins that fail the Howey test—including some of those listed on Coinbase, a firm that is planning to go public soon.

Updated March 2, 2021, to clarify that Gensler is Biden’s pick for chair. He still needs to be confirmed.

If you enjoy my work, please support me by subscribing to my Patreon.

News: NY gives Tether the boot, Tether leaks, Coinbase financials, MoneyGram dumps Ripple

February is coming to an end. I’m waiting to get vaccinated, so I can travel without worry again. Maybe I’ll go to some crypto conferences later this year? I still have fond memories of Coindesk’s Consensus in May 2018—when you could hear the rumble of lambos coming through midtown Manhattan—and sitting in a coatroom with scant Wifi and a broken water cooler. (It was a big coatroom, but a coatroom nonetheless, and that’s where non-Coindesk journalists were put.)

If you appreciate my writing, consider supporting my work by subscribing to my Patreon at the $5, $20, or $50 level. At times, I’ve even had folks donate $100. I don’t publish these articles in mainstream media, so my patrons are important!

So, what’s new? Tether now has close to 35 billion tethers in circulation—the last print was on Feb. 21 and nothing since. Also, the price of bitcoin is $46,300. That’s down 18% from last week. I’m not sure we will ever see bitcoin reach $57,000 again. The nonsense could ebb and flow for a while, but I do think the end is nigh for Tether.

NY shuns Bitfinex/Tether

Last week I said likely nothing earthmoving would happen in the NY attorney general’s probe of Bitfinex and Tether this month, other than maybe a status update, according to what Bitfinex said in its January letter to the court. I was wrong.

In an unexpected turn of events, Tether and Bitfinex reached a settlement with the NY AG.

According to the terms of the settlement, the sister companies agreed to a penalty of $18.5 million—without admitting guilt. They are also banned from doing business in New York, and they have agreed to an impossible level of transparency.

I wrote two stories on this—an overall story covering the details of the agreement and deeper observations. You should read both and also the settlement agreement, which is very readable. 

The bitcoiners are jumping for joy over the settlement because they interpret this to mean that Tether is liberated and we’re back to business as usual. This could not be further from the truth.  

The NY AG has given Tether enough rope to hang itself—with Tether agreeing to publish quarterly updates on what’s backing tethers. I mean, how crazy is this: Bitfinex and Tether are also supposed to reveal who their payment processors are. These payment processors are called shadow banks for a reason.

But the real punishment is not the fine imposed on Tether. The real punishment is that Tether and Bitfinex are banned from doing business in New York—the beating heart of finance and banking in the U.S.

They are prohibited from serving any person or entity in the state—defined as “any person known or believed to reside in or regularly conduct trading activity from New York,” and any business “that is incorporated in, has its headquarters in, regularly conducts trading activity in, or is directed or controlled from, New York.”

If the CFTC and the DoJ follow up—and you can bet they will—then Tether could soon be banned from the entire U.S.—a penalty much more significant than an $18.5 million fine.

In the meantime, the Tether printer has mysteriously paused. The settlement agreement was signed on Feb. 18, and the last Tether print was on Feb. 21 for 800 million USDT.

Why has Tether stopped printing? It may be that providing the transparency reports is proving more onerous than they expected. If they pop out another billion tethers, they have to show what is behind those—cash, a loan, crypto, or whatnot. 

But this is a problem. Tethers are the main source of liquidity on unbanked exchanges where the price of BTC is largely determined. If Tether stops printing tethers—or otherwise ceases to function—the price of bitcoin could take a serious dive.

Tether Leaks

Recently, a Twitter profile called @deltecleaks emerged and posted what looked like evidence of a database dump from Deltec, the Bahamian bank that Bitfinex and Tether have been using since 2018. That Twitter account was quickly suspended.

Then @LeaksTether appeared and posted several presumably leaked emails—conversations between Deltec and Tether execs.

These leaks are unverified. I am not completely convinced they are real, but I am also not convinced they are fake either.

Some of the alleged emails look interesting. Trolly wrote up a thread on one—in an email (archive) from Tether to Deltec, dated May 28, 2020, Tether asks for help in “presenting their reserves in the best possible light.” Their reserves, according to the email, are crypto and stakes in other crypto companies. Trolly calls this email a “crucial piece of the puzzle.”

Around the same time that the email was sent, crypto exchange Binance—one of Tether’s biggest customers—switched from BTC to USDT as collateral for leveraged trading. In return, Trolly believes Tether got a stake in Binance.

This could explain why USDT’s 1:1 peg never falters. Tether is in cahoots with the exchanges, who are in charge of maintaining the peg, Trolly believes.

In another allegedly leaked email, Tether talked about allowing the exchanges to “ignore the peg and move the price upwards.” If this is real, it means Tether is getting ever desperate to find ways to make money out of thin air.

Oddly, Deltec has removed the bios from their About Us page. (This is silly, because we have the archive.) And Tether has released its official word on the leaks, calling the leaks “bogus” and implying it is an extortion attempt.

Tether adds that “those seeking to harm Tether are getting increasingly desperate.” This is typical of Tether and Bitfinex. They blame “Tether FUDers” for all their problems—as opposed to being upfront and honest about their dealings.

David Gerard wrote a blog post, going into detail on the alleged leaks.

Coinbase releases financials

Coinbase is going public via a direct listing on Nasdaq under the symbol COIN. The San Francisco-based company published its  S-1 filing on Thursday, after confidentially submitting the filing to the SEC in December.

The filing lays out Coinbase’s finances, including a profitable 2020 driven by a huge surge in the price of bitcoin. Coinbase brought in $1.2 billion in revenue in FY2020 for a profit of $322 million—the first time it has turned an annual profit.

In 2019, Coinbase incurred a net loss of $30 million.  

Brian Armstrong, Coinbase CEO, also did well last year, taking home $60 million in salary, stock options and “all other compensation.” He also received $1.78 million to cover “costs related to personal security measures.”

There is no doubt that the skyrocketing price of bitcoin—boosted by 17 billion tethers issued in 2020 alone—helped Coinbase’s profits. But there are many unknowns ahead.

If the price of BTC continues to drop, if Tether gets taken out by the DoJ, or if the SEC cracks down on some of the coins Coinbase lists—many of which appear like they may not pass the Howey test—Coinbase profits could take a hit.

No doubt, Coinbase is timing its listing carefully. The exchange has received more than $500 million in funding, with backers including Andreessen Horowitz, Y Combinator and Greylock Partners. And the VCs will want to dump their Coinbase shares on retail suckers before the bitcoin market collapses.

MoneyGram dumps Ripple

MoneyGram was supposed to have been a big success story for Ripple. Now, it’s just another sign of Ripple’s failures.

Ripple agreed to invest up to $50 million in the money transfers business. In return, MoneyGram was shilling Ripple by saying it would use the startup’s XRP currency and platform in its back office for moving funds across borders.

MoneyGram was essential because it gave XRP a supposed use case, so Ripple execs could argue their business was legit and not simply a way for them to line their own personal pockets with $600 million.

Last year, MoneyGram received $38 million from Ripple, representing about 15% of its adjusted earnings. But after the SEC announced it was suing Ripple, charging that XRP was an unlawful securities offering, MoneyGram stepped back, saying it faced logistical challenges in using the platform—as well as legal risks.

Now MoneyGram is putting its Ripple partnership on hold. That means MoneyGram, which saw declining revenues from 2015 to 2018, is losing a key income stream. (WSJ, MoneyGram PR)

Other newsy bits

After stiffing his previous defense team, Reginald Fowler still appears to have no defense team. He was given until Feb. 25 to line up a new law firm, but so far, no attorney has filed a notice of appearance with the court. (Court filing)

A rumor is afoot that the SEC is investigating Elon Musk for his dogecoin tweets that helped pump the market. Musk says a probe would be “awesome.” More lulz for Musk. (Teslarati)

Fedwire, the system that allows banks to send money back and forth, went down for several hours on Wednesday. Bitcoiners thought this was marvelous, because bitcoin is decentralized, see? How quickly they forget bitcoin is valued in USD. (CNBC)

Grayscale’s GBTC premium went negative for the first time in years. (It was close to 40% at one point in December.) When the premium is down, the arbitrage opportunity for institutions in buying bitcoin dries up—and that means less real money flowing into the system. (Hedge funder Harris Kupperman wrote a blog post last year explaining how the arb works.) (Decrypt)

FT poked fun of Anthony Pompliano, cofounder of Morgan Creek. Pomp is forever shilling bitcoin but his tweets have been inconsistent. At one time he called Tether “the biggest racket ever.” Now he has changed his tune. Apparently, he’ll say whatever to make “number go up.” (FT)

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is warning people about bitcoin. She doesn’t think it’s used widely as a payment system. “To the extent it is used, I fear it’s often for illicit finance. It’s an extremely inefficient way of conducting transactions, and the amount of energy that’s consumed in processing those transactions is staggering.” (CNBC)

Jack Dorsey’s Square purchased another 3,318 bitcoins for $170 million. This adds to Square’s October purchase of 4,709 bitcoins. The company has already lost $10 million on its latest investment. (Coindesk, Square press release)

The Securities and Exchange Board of India tells company owners: before you IPO, sell your crypto. (Economic Times India)

Kraken is reportedly in talks to raise new capital. (Coindesk)

NYAG/Tether, Bitfinex settlement reveals commingling of funds, years of shenanigans

I wrote a quick article this morning about the New York attorney general settlement, wherein Bitfinex and Tether agreed to pay $18.5 million in penalties, stop servicing New York customers, and submit quarterly transparency reports. 

But there are more details to highlight. Namely, the settlement agreement reveals the games Bitfinex and Tether have played over the years—games they will keep on playing until someone puts an end to their shenanigans. 

It also reveals how the firms have long misled the public about Tether’s reserves. From 2014 until late February 2019, Tether advertised that tethers were fully backed 1:1 by cash in some bank accounts somewhere—but that was not true. 

Tether now has 34 billion tethers in circulation—a number that is growing by leaps and bounds every day.

Here are my random thoughts and notes from the 17-page agreement.

Phil Potter

In the agreement, the office of the NY attorney general writes: “During the time period relevant to the OAG’s investigation, and as late as early-to-mid 2018, one of Bitfinex and Tether’s senior executives lived in, and conducted his work from, New York.”   

I’m assuming this is Phil Potter, Bitfinex and Tether’s chief strategy officer, and one of its three top execs. Potter allegedly stepped away from the company in mid-2018, about the time the NY attorney general started its investigation. Though the public did not learn of the investigation until April 2019.

The fact that Bitfinex and Tether had one executive and large customers in the state—and no BitLicense—opened the door to the NY attorney general’s probe. Per the terms of the settlement, Bitfinex and Tether can no longer do any business in the state, which means New York crypto firms can no longer use tethers. 

Previously, although Bitfinex and Tether claim to have barred New York residents (retail investors) in January 2017, they still served eligible contract participants, meaning individuals or trading firms with assets in the millions.

Commingled funds

Tether and Bitfinex lost their banking in March 2017 when they were cut off by Wells Fargo, a correspondent bank. Subsequently, their banks in Taiwan also dumped them.  

Two months later, when Tether had 108 million tethers in circulation, Bitfinex opened an account at Noble Bank in Puerto Rico. (Noble Bank, by the way, was co-founded by Brock Pierce, the child star who also created Tether.)

Tether, however, did not open an account at Noble—or at any bank—until September 2017, according to the office of the NY attorney general’s findings.

Instead, Tether deposited the “vast majority” of its cash into a trust account held by its general counsel, Stuart Hoegner, at the Bank of Montreal in Canada. The account never held more than $61.5 million dollars.

The rest of Tether’s money was mixed in with Bitfinex customer money at Bitfinex accounts at Noble Bank. Between June 1 and September 2017—Bitfinex held hundreds of millions of dollars in Tether’s funds in its accounts, the prosecutor said.

Commingling of funds is a terrible idea—legally and logistically. (Failed crypto exchange QuadrigaCX also commingled funds. And its now-allegedly-deceased CEO used customer money like his own personal slush fund.) 

Mystery NY trading firm

Because Tether had no bank account between March and September 2017, it could not directly take money for tethers. At the same time, according to the NY attorney general, “neither the Tether website or Bitfinex allowed for the direct purchase or exchange of tethers in exchange for any other virtual currency, including the two most popular virtual currencies, bitcoin and ether.”

Between June and September 2017, “Bitfinex’s Noble Bank account received USD deposits from only two institutional trading firms, one of which was located in New York. Neither of those firms purchased tethers directly from Bitfinex or Tether during this time period.”

This part of the NY attorney general’s findings puzzles. Why were these trading firms sending money to Bitfinex if they were not getting tethers in exchange? What were they getting instead? And who was the New York firm?

Mike Novogratz’s Galaxy Digital is based in New York. And we know it was onboarding as a Bitfinex customer in October 2018, based on court documents that point to letters Galaxy sent to Bitfinex. But it is not clear if Galaxy was a customer of Bitfinex or Tether in 2017. (In April 2019, Novogratz claimed Galaxy had “zero exposure” to Bitfinex and Tether.)

Staging the Friedman audit

According to the office of the NY attorney general, until September 15, 2017, the only U.S. dollars held by Tether backing 442 million tethers in circulation was $61 million at the Bank of Montreal. 

Whatever other money Tether had was held in Bitfinex accounts.

In the summer of 2017, rumors were afoot that tethers were not fully backed. To quash those rumors, Tether and Bitfinex arranged for accounting firm Friedman LLP to perform an attestation on September 15, 2017.

They had to move quickly to set things up though.

On that morning, Tether opened an account at Noble Bank. And Bitfinex transferred $382 million from Bitfinex’s account at Noble Bank into Tether’s account at Noble Bank. Friedman conducted its verification of Tether’s assets that evening.

“No one reviewing Tether’s representations would have reasonably understood that the $382,064,782 listed as cash reserves for tethers had only been placed in Tether’s account as of the very morning that Friedman verified the bank balance,” the NY attorney general wrote. The attestation included the money at the Bank of Montreal as well. 

Friedman’s relationship with Bitfinex ended a few months later. 

It’s never a good sign when your auditor quits. Worse, there was no official announcement—Friedman simply deleted all mention of Bitfinex from its website, including past press releases.

Massive loss of funds

In 2017 and 2018, Bitfinex began to increasingly rely on Crypto Capital to handle its customer deposits and withdrawals. Oz Yosef, was Bitfinex’s contact at the Panamanian payment processor.

By 2018, Crypto Capital held over $1 billion of Bitfinex funds. That’s when the real trouble started.

In April 2018, the government of Poland froze a Crypto Capital bank account holding $340 million. Adding to that, Oz told Bitfinex that a Crypto Capital account in Portugal containing $150 million of Bitfinex client funds also had been frozen. 

These events threw Bitfinex into a liquidity crisis. And in the summer of 2018, Bitfinex began dipping into Tether’s cash reserves to fund customer withdrawals. Bitfinex told customers that rumors of its insolvency were false, but behind the scenes, the crypto exchange was pleading with Oz to release the money. 

(Later we learn that another $350 million in missing Crypto Capital funds were linked to 60 accounts held by Arizona businessman Reginald Fowler, who was indicted in April 2019 for bank fraud. Some of these accounts were frozen in 2018. Oz’s sister, Ravid Yosef, was also indicted for her role in assisting Fowler set up those accounts. She is still at large.)

(And in October 2019, Crypto Capital President Molina Lee was arrested by Polish authorities in connection with laundering money for Columbian drug cartels via Bitfinex.)

Deltec Bank & Trust

In October 2018, Bitfinex and Tether ended their relationship with Noble bank. Soon after, they announced they were banking with Deltec in the Bahamas. 

In a letter dated Nov. 1, 2018, Deltec said Tether’s account held $1.8 billion, enough to back the tethers in circulation at the time. The letter was signed but had no name under the signature. The signature itself was illegible.

The following day, Tether began moving hundreds of millions of dollars out of its bank account at Deltec to Bitfinex’s bank account at Deltec. And as part of a “loan arrangement,” between the two closely related firms, Tether assumed Bitfinex’s losses on its own balance sheet. (We can’t be sure of the total loan amount, but an estimate is $750 million.) 

Tether’s misrepresentation that tethers were fully backed continued to Feb. 2019 when it updated its terms of service to say that tethers are backed by “traditional currency and cash equivalents and, from time to time, may include other assets and receivables from loans made by Tether to third parties, which may include affiliated entities.”

Bitfinex says it paid off the loan to Tether in January, and the firms now claim tethers are fully backed—but the question is, backed by what? Loans? Bitcoins? We’ll find out in 90 days when Tether and Bitfinex publish their first transparency report. Per the terms of the settlement agreement, the firms will need to publish these reports quarterly for two years.

Also, $18.5 million—the amount of the settlement—is no small number. We have no idea how much cash Tether and Bitfinex actually have on hand.

The bitcoin community is calling the settlement a win for Tether and Bitfinex. They say the fine is nothing but a slap on the wrist. In reality, it’s another way for Tether and Bitfinex to buy time. The NY attorney general has set its trap; now we wait.

Updated Feb. 24 to note that Novogratz claimed zero exposure to Bitfinex and Tether in 2019.

Also read: NYAG to crypto companies: ‘Play by the rules or we will shut you down’

If you benefit from my writing, and my research helps you do your job, please consider supporting my work by subscribing to my Patreon account for as little as $5 a month. 

Tether, Bitfinex to pay $18.5M to NYAG, cease trading in New York

Bitfinex and Tether have settled with the office of the New York attorney general in an investigation that began two years ago. 

The sister companies will pay $18.5 million in penalties to the state for violations of the Martin Act, according to a statement issued by the NY attorney general. Per the terms of the settlement agreement, Bitfinex and Tether are banned from trading in the state and must submit quarterly reports to ensure they are complying with the prohibition.

Tether claimed that tethers were backed by real dollars, when they were not backed by real dollars, the NY attorney general alleges.

“Bitfinex and Tether recklessly and unlawfully covered-up massive financial losses to keep their scheme going and protect their bottom lines,” NY Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. “Tether’s claims that its virtual currency was fully backed by U.S. dollars at all times was a lie. These companies obscured the true risk investors faced and were operated by unlicensed and unregulated individuals and entities dealing in the darkest corners of the financial system.”

The investigation was made public in April 2019, when the NY attorney general revealed that Bitfinex, an unregulated crypto exchange, dipped into Tether’s cash reserves to cover up the fact that it had lost access to $850 million held by its Panamanian payment processor Crypto Capital. Having lost access to those funds, Bitfinex struggled to meet customer withdrawal requests. 

Tether and Bitfinex neither admit or deny the findings in the settlement. And their attitude is one of “We have put this matter behind us now.” Here is their official statement, which emphasizes that they have repaid their loan to Tether—an estimated $750 million—though they still won’t say how much they “borrowed” exactly. 

Per the terms of the settlement, the office of the NY attorney general cannot bring any claims or lawsuits against Tether or Bitfinex for matters relating to findings in the petition. However, it still has the right to enforce the settlement, if the companies fall short.

And falling short is something that could well happen.

If you read closely, these provisions are a big ask from two companies that have been highly secretive about their financial dealings from the get-go. To continue on, they will need to submit to an impossible level of transparency.

For the next two years, Tether and Bitfinex will have to show proof that they segregate client, reserve, and operational accounts. The NY attorney general claims the firms have commingled funds in the past—and at one point, $61.5 million of Tether’s reserves were kept in a trust account held by its general counsel at the Bank of Montreal.

On a quarterly basis, the two firms have to publish the categories of assets backing tethers—e.g., cash, loans, securities, etc. They will also need to specify the percentages of each category, and spell out whether a category constitutes a loan or receivable.

This is something Tether has never done before. It has never been clear about what is backing tethers, whether those are third-party loans, cryptocurrencies—such as bitcoin—shares in a Bahamian bank, or whatever.

Tether and Bitfinex also need to provide the office of the NY attorney general a list of their payment processors, along with location and contact information for those entities, and information regarding what due diligence procedures they are putting in place to ensure the payment processors don’t leave them high and dry as before. They will also need to provide that same information to their customers upon request when associated with a deposit or withdrawal. 

Crypto payment processors run shadowy operations, and this stipulation is going to make Tether and Bitfinex a difficult client. Recall, the firms had no formal agreement with Crypto Capital when they handed over $1 billion for safekeeping.

Crypto media outlets and bitcoiners are painting the Tether and Bitfinex settlement like it is a big win and $18.5 million is pennies for a company that has so far issued $34 billion worth of tethers—but I could not disagree more.

The NY attorney general is effectively saying, pay the fine and go right ahead with your legitimate business. The problem is, Tether and Bitfinex may have no legitimate business—and fulfilling these obligations may turn out to be impossible.

Related stories:

NYAG/Tether, Bitfinex settlement reveals commingling of funds, years of shenanigans

NYAG to crypto companies: ‘Play by the rules or we will shut you down’

I have a Patreon account. If you enjoy my work, please become a supporter.

News: MicroStrategy needs more cowbell, Tether surpasses $34B, those laser eyes, Tether collapse doomsday scenario

I nearly ventured to Austin Wednesday, but my flight was canceled due to the storm, havoc, and general disaster in the area. I found another flight later in the day and was headed out the door, when I thought, nah. Turned out to be a good decision, since I probably wouldn’t have survived more than a day without wifi.

Last week, Tether issued another 2.2 billion tethers, so you can buy bitcoin with real cash at a higher price. As of today, Feb. 21, there are now $34 billion worth of tethers in circulation—all backed by Tether’s good word. Oh, and they just printed another 800 million this morning.

More lulz for Mr. Musk—this time a double entendre.

Bitcoin is over $57,000. Why? Because it is a Ponzi scheme, and people who put their money into a Ponzi or MLM scheme get excited when numbers go up because they think they are getting hilariously rich. When bitcoin reached $1 trillion market cap earlier this week, it was an occasion for celebration in the bitcoin world. All of the bitcoiners on Twitter gave themselves laser eyes—in the hopes of pushing bitcoin to $100,000—and posted pictures of raw, juicy steaks.

Market cap, as I have explained, is a delusional number when it comes to crypto. A trillion-dollar market cap assumes everyone who owns bitcoin bought it for $55,000 and could sell it for that. That is nowhere near the truth. Many bitcoiners bought bitcoin for a fraction of what it is today. And if everyone sold at once, the market would collapse. It’s all fantasy.

My weekly reminder that I have a Patreon account. Thank you to my new patrons, who pushed me up over $600 last week. You can subscribe for as little as $5 a month. It’s like buying me a beer or a latte every four weeks.

Okay, let’s talk about bitcoin’s newest crazy god, who also has laser eyes on his Twitter profile.

MicroStrategy: More cowbell

Every single day, MicroStrategy chief Michael Saylor is on Twitter—or elsewhere—shilling bitcoin. This has literally been his new day job since he staked the future of his entire company and his reputation on “number go up.” His tweets are bizarre and often make no sense. Lately, he has been taking random quotes from famous people and attributing them to bitcoin.

In his latest move, Saylor has taken MicroStrategy deeper down the debt hole. Last week, the company sold $1.05 billion in convertible senior notes, which it plans to invest in more bitcoin. The notes mature in February 2027. (Decrypt, MicroStrategy PR)

This is on top of the firm’s $650 million bond offering in December, which MicroStrategy also used to buy bitcoin. Those notes mature in December 2025. The company owns 72,000 bitcoin per a February regulatory filing. And don’t forget, Saylor has his own personal stash of bitcoin, though we don’t know how much he still has—or if he was selling when MicroStrategy was buying.

If the price of bitcoin collapses, MicroStrategy could literally go bankrupt. But remember, Saylor owns 70% of the company’s voting stock, so he calls the shots. The other MicroStrategy board members can only sit back and watch in horror.

Big companies buying bitcoin and putting them into cold storage means more bitcoin getting pulled out of circulation so that the already small supply of circulating bitcoin grows smaller and the market becomes easier for whales to manipulate—even if those whales bought their hoards of BTC via alias accounts funded with tethers.

So what if MicroStrategy puts another $1 billion into bitcoin and Tesla buys $1.5 billion worth? Tether issues that much fake money in a week. Meanwhile, all the real cash in bitcoin goes out the door as miners sell their 900 newly-minted bitcoin per day for fiat. Bitcoin itself generates no revenue. It’s simply investor money going in one end and out the other.

Jorge Stolfi, a Brazilian computer scientist, estimates that the accumulative amount that bitcoin investors have lost so far is at least $15 billion. When you invest in bitcoin, you immediately lose money, just like all those who invested in Bernie Madoff’s fund, though they went on for years thinking they were making money.

NYAG / Bitfinex—status update

We should be hearing something soon on the New York attorney general’s investigation into Bitfinex/Tether, but probably nothing big, or earth moving—not yet at least.

Bitfinex’s law firm Steptoe filed a letter on Jan. 19, saying Bitfinex/Tether needed more time to send in their documents. Here is what they said exactly: “We will plan to next contact the Court in approximately 30 days to either provide a final status update or to schedule a conference with the Court to discuss any open items.”

The office of the attorney general still has to take a position on the material it receives, and Bitfinex boasted that it had spammed them with some 2.5 million documents. My guess is that Bitfinex, like failed Canadian crypto exchange QuadrigaCX, hasn’t kept accurate records of their financial dealings and they are flying by the seat of their pants. Quadriga operator Gerald Cotten kept no books, commingled funds, and viewed customer money as his personal slush fund.

Tether doomsday scenario

Some people—Nouriel Roubini in particular—have predicted that Tether will get taken down this year, though it will take a much larger effort than the NY AG alone. Still, what will happen if Tether’s operators are arrested and its bank accounts seized? If Tether collapses, we may see something like the following unfold:

  • Panic ensues on offshore exchanges, like Binance and Huobi, as traders begin dumping USDT and buying up BTC at any price.
  • The price of BTC on banked vs. unbanked exchanges begins to diverge. BTC goes up on unbanked exchanges and drops on banked exchanges, like Coinbase, as people start selling their BTC for cash en masse.
  • Banked exchanges face liquidity crises as they can’t keep up with withdrawals. We start to see system outages and paused trading—similar to what happened with Robinhood on Jan. 28.
  • The price of BTC collapses to the point where bitcoin miners cannot pay their monstrous power bills.
  • At some point, the bitcoin hash rate will drop, and bitcoin will go into a death spiral. When miners can’t pay their electric bills, they unplug from the network. This leaves bitcoin vulnerable to attacks, and the virtual currency becomes worthless.

Mind you, bitcoin will never die off completely. Unlike other Ponzi schemes, which disappear when they collapse, bitcoin will spring back to life from time to time. This is the fourth—and by far the biggest—bitcoin bubble since 2009.

Bitcoin’s sick energy consumption

After Tesla announced it bought 1.5 billion worth of BTC, bitcoin’s grotesque energy consumption has come under fire. Based on some estimates, the network consumes as much energy as the entire country of Argentina with 45 million people. Christmas lights are literally a more productive use of electricity to bring joy to people’s lives than bitcoin. (This is a joke. In 2018, bitcoiners claimed that Christmas lights consumed more energy than bitcoin.)

Bitcoiners like to argue this is all green energy, but that is simply not true. Two-thirds of bitcoin mining is based in China, a country that relies heavily on coal-fired electricity. Some miners in the Sichuan province get power from hydro, but only during the wet season. The rest of the time, they turn to fossil fuels. (My blog)

And for those still claiming bitcoin uses clean energy, Trolly had a few more points to add: 

  • The Three Gorges Dam—a gargantuan structure straddling the Yangtze River in China’s Hubei province—has long been criticized for its environmental impact and displacement of two million people. The dam generated a record 112 terawatt hours of electricity in 2020. According to Digiconomist, bitcoin consumes 79 TWh of electricity per year—more than half that.
  • You need one million Bitmain’s Antminer 19s Pros to reach the current bitcoin hashrate of 110M TH/s. That means there are at least one million nodes on the bitcoin network—more if miners are using Bitmain’s outdated S17 model. These machines are good for two years max before they get tossed into landfills and replaced with more efficient ASIC rigs.
  • Bitcoin processes 300,000 transactions per day. The all-in cost of a single bitcoin transaction is $20 for infrastructure and $40 for electricity. Miners currently break even when the BTC price is $20,000. (That’s based on energy and other costs.)

Coinbase behind Tesla’s BTC purchase

Coinbase facilitated Tesla’s recent $1.5 billion purchase of bitcoin, according to The Block. An unidentified source told the outlet that the San Francisco-based crypto exchange made the purchase on behalf of Tesla over the course of several days in early February. The price of BTC in the first week of Feb. was around $38,000.

Similar to how it helped MicroStrategy make its big BTC purchase, Coinbase broke up Tesla’s order into small pieces and routed those to over-the-counter trading desks to minimize the impact on the overall bitcoin market.**

Coinbase wrote up a case study on how it bought bitcoin for MicroStrategy.

Motley Fool’s ship of fools

Another ship of fools has headed off to sea.

The Motley Fool is a private financial and investing advice company based in Alexandria, Virginia. It’s been around since 1993, so you would think they actually do their due diligence. Apparently not. Also, regular folks rely on them for sage investment advice, which is why I was shocked to learn Motley Fool was putting $5 million into bitcoin. (Fool announcement)

Motley Fool justified the investment with these three reasons:

  1. We believe it will store value more effectively than gold over the long term.
  2. We believe it may become a medium for transactions, as/if pricing stabilizes in the decade ahead.
  3. We believe it can act as a productive hedge against inflation.

All three reasons are blitheringly stupid. Medium for transactions? If the price stabilizes in the future? Name one time in the past decade where the price of bitcoin has stabilized. As I explained earlier, the more people who hodl bitcoin, the less stable it becomes. It will never be a stable asset. And you can’t call bitcoin a “store of value” if you get only 20% of what you paid for it.

At least one sensible Motley Fool contributor explained why investing in bitcoin is a horrible idea.

GameStop hearing #1

I spent two hours on Thursday watching the first half of a five-hour GameStop House Financial Services Committee hearing. Most of the questions were not that interesting. This is the first of three hearings. I’m not sure I can watch anymore, unless someone from the SEC, such as Gary Gensler, joins in on the questioning.

The nut is that Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev apologized to his users for stopping customer trading during the peak of the madness, but says he wasn’t colluding with hedge funds. “We don’t answer to hedge funds,” he said. “We serve the millions of small investors who use our platform every day to invest.” (NPR)

He also would not admit there was a liquidity problem when he limited trades in January.

David Portnoy doesn’t like Vlad’s hair. He thinks it makes him look untrustworthy.

And Keith Gill (Roaring Kitty), who made $48 million from a $53,000 investment in GameStop, came off as a likable, honest guy. Although, he may need those profits to defend himself against at least one proposed class-action. (Complaint)

Other newsy bits

Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) added laser eyes to her Twitter profile pic, confounding the political press and turning bitcoiners into a bunch of cooing babies (Slate)

A few years ago, the SEC shut down the entirely fraudulent ICO market. A sudden shutdown of the DeFi money market (DMM) may be the start of the next regulatory wave. (David Gerard)

The U.S. Treasury Department accused crypto payments platform BitPay of facilitating over 2,100 transactions with individuals in sanctioned nations. BitPay will pay $500,000 to settle the charges. (Coindesk, enforcement notice)

JP Morgan calls Tether an unbacked wildcat bank. “A sudden loss of confidence in USDT would likely generate a severe liquidity shock to Bitcoin markets, which could lose access to by far the largest pools of demand and liquidity,” analysts said. (Bloomberg)

FTX, one of Tether’s biggest customers, claims on Twitter that its volume and customer numbers are real. All you need is an email to set up an account—no KYC for tier 0, 1 accounts with up to $9,000 USD daily withdrawal,* which means anyone can set up any number of alias accounts. Trading volume is a meaningless number due to robot trading and probably wash trading.

Stephen Diehl on Bitcoin mining: “The Crypto Chernobyl.” (blog post)

BitMEX’s Arthur Hayes—who was indicted in October and is still at large—has resurfaced to argue the Robinhood shutdown was orchestrated by financial elites. This is a sign that retail investors should buy crypto, he said. (Cointelegraph) (Tweet)

*Updated to note FTX has no KYC on both tier 0, 1 accounts. In an earlier version of this newsletter, I said you did not need KYC to withdraw up to $1,000. But it’s actually up to $9,000 per day for high-volume accounts.

**Updated March 2: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that Coinbase routed the Tesla order to OTC desks, so as not to “crash” the price of BTC. This is incorrect. A large order would lift the market. Story has been altered to reflect that.

Feature image: Ship of fools depicted in a 1549 German woodcut

Proof of work—the reason behind Bitcoin’s horrendous energy consumption

Any company that supports bitcoin is making one thing clear: they don’t care about the environment. At a time when global warming is a real threat to the planet, bitcoin is one of the worst offenders. 

The global network of computers that “mine” bitcoin consumes an entire country’s worth of energy in their race to win the next block on the blockchain—and get the 6.25 bitcoin block reward, currently worth $300,000. 

Since PayPal, Square, MicroStrategy, and Tesla got onto the game—and started shilling bitcoin on social media—the price of bitcoin has soared to new heights. And the higher the bitcoin price, the greater the lure for people to invest in warehouses full of power-hungry rigs to mine bitcoin for profit.

Digiconomist’s Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index, run by Alex de Vries, a blockchain specialist at Big Four accounting firm PwC, estimates bitcoin’s energy consumption to be 79 terawatt-hours of electricity per year, on par with the entire country of Chile. Per his index, bitcoin also emits 37 megatons of carbon dioxide per year, comparable to that of New Zealand.  

Researchers at the University of Cambridge Judge Business School figure bitcoin’s power consumption to be even higher. According to their Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index, bitcoin consumes 124 terawatt-hours of electricity a year, bringing it inline with countries like Argentina and Norway.

In October, just before PayPal announced it would allow users to buy and sell bitcoin via their digital wallets, bitcoin’s power consumption was 75 terawatt-hours per year, according to the CBECI. Since then, bitcoin’s price climbed from $10,000 to upwards of $50,000, increasing its energy consumption by 40 percent the process.

In 2018, all of the world’s data centers consumed 205 terawatt-hours of electricity, or 1% of all of the world’s electricity. Bitcoin accounts for half of that.

Can the world’s power grids tolerate this added demand for electricity in the midst of global warming? In the U.S., we are already seeing the impact of extreme weather on our power grids—millions in Texas shivering in cold, dark homes this week. And rolling black outs in California last year. In Iran last month, authorities blamed massive blackouts on bitcoin mining.

Coal powered  

And bitcoin’s energy consumption isn’t green either—though bitcoiners like to say that it is. Bitcoin miners are tuned to profits. That means the fastest rigs and the cheapest energy available, mostly in the form of fossil fuels. 

“Coal is fueling bitcoin,” Christian Stoll, an energy researcher at the Technical University of Munich, told Wired magazine a few years ago.  

In a paper published in Joule in June 2019, Stoll and his researchers examined bitcoin mining based on where miners are located and the types of rigs they use. Two-thirds of all bitcoin mining is centered in China, 17% is in Europe, and 15% in North America, the researchers found. 

In China, bitcoin’s mining is spread throughout the country’s sprawling western provinces, Sichuan and Yunnan, and also in the north, in Xinjiang and Mongolia. In the Sichuan province, where about 58% of the world’s bitcoin mining takes place, miners take advantage of cheap hydroelectric power—but only during the rainy season, which lasts about six months. 

Bitcoin is a 24/7 business, however, and when green energy isn’t available—and the price of bitcoin is high enough to reap a profit in the dry season—the miners in Sichuan turn to coal, the country’s most abundant energy source. Sixty-five percent of China’s electricity comes from coal. Bitcoin miners in the Xinjiang province and inner Mongolia also rely heavily on coal-fired electricity. 

Even when bitcoin uses clean energy, that pushes the use of dirty energy elsewhere. A few years ago, HyperBlock, a bitcoin mine in Missoula County, Montana, struck a deal with a nearby dam for cheap renewable power. They thought they were doing it right, until county officials noted that if energy from the dam went to bitcoin mining, the county as a whole would end up using more coal.

That was the end of that. In April 2019, Missoula required all future mines to purchase or build their own renewable power. And soon after the price of bitcoin crashed in March 2020—slipping down to below $5,000—HyperBlock declared bankruptcy because it could not pay its power bills.

Bitcoin mining and proof of work

Why is bitcoin so inefficient? It turns out that the system uses copious amounts energy not by accident but by design.

Satoshi Nakomoto, bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator, had to figure out a way to solve the double-spend problem. We don’t have this problem with paper money. But with digital money, someone could copy the file and use it to spend the funds over and over, rendering the currency useless. 

In a centralized system, a trusted third-party, like a bank, checks the digital money you spend against a central ledger to make sure there’s no funny business going on. But bitcoin’s ledger (the blockchain) is decentralized, which makes the double-spend problem harder to solve.  

The solution Satoshi came up with was a clever hack that involves bitcoin mining and proof-of-work. In bitcoin, mining is the process of adding new transactions to the blockchain, and proof-of-work secures the network so transactions can’t be reversed. You would need more than half of all the computing power on the bitcoin network to double-spend a bitcoin. 

It wasn’t a perfect solution, but Satoshi solved what computer scientists had long thought was unsolvable: how to build a decentralized payment system. The irony is, unless you are collecting payments for ransomware, bitcoin has proven unusable as a payment system. No merchant wants to risk their profit margin on bitcoin’s volatility.

Today, bitcoin functions mainly as a speculative investment, getting scooped up by retailers and venture capitalists—and now big companies and hedge funds—in the hopes the price will go ever skyward.  

Winning the lottery

Bitcoin miners have their eyes feasted on the bitcoin block reward.

Every 10 minutes, the bitcoin network adds a new block to the blockchain, minting 900 new bitcoins a day in the process. That block reward is reduced by half every four years. Prior to May 2020, the bitcoin block reward was 12.5 bitcoins—double what it is now—and the network produced 1,800 new bitcoins per day. And around February 2024,* the block reward will be 3.125 bitcoins.

When you request a transaction on the bitcoin blockchain, your transaction goes into the bitcoin mempool, a waiting area for unconfirmed bitcoin transactions. Miners select transactions from the pool—usually the ones with the highest transaction fees—and package those into a block ready to process as the next block in the blockchain.

Any server can produce a “candidate block,” but if it were too easy to do, the network would be spammed. So there had to be a financial cost to creating a block, hence the work. 

In the case of bitcoin, that work involves solving a hash puzzle; the cost is computing time and electricity. The hash puzzle is very difficult to solve, but easy for peers in the bitcoin network to verify, so they can prove you did the work and the block is valid.

Some people refer to this puzzle as a complex math problem, but it’s really not. Working out a hash is easy, but in bitcoin, working out a hash that meets certain conditions is tricky. Finding the solution is a bit like winning a lottery.

Solving the hash puzzle

A hash is a fixed-length output calculated from a piece of data. Whether you hash Herman Wouk’s “War and Remembrance” or a grocery store list, the resultant hash will always be the same length. And you will always get the same hash for the same string. But if even one letter changes in “War and Remembrance,” the resultant hash will be different.

Bitcoin uses the hashcash proof-of-work, originally developed by cryptographer Adam Back in 1997 as a way to prevent email spam and denial-of-service attacks, and the SHA-256 hashing function, which has been around since 2001.

When you hash a bitcoin block, you also track the hash of the previous block—which “chains” a block to the one before it, and so on down the line to the first bitcoin block ever created—and a random number called a nonce. The idea is to produce a hash that is lower than the numeric value of the network target. (This target changes periodically to adjust the mining difficulty, thereby assuring only one block gets created every 10 minutes.)

When you mine bitcoin, you repeatedly hash the block while incrementing the nonce. Each time you change the nonce, you also change the value of the resultant hash. The number of hashes that a miner makes per second is called the hash rate; the higher your hash rate, the better your chance of solving the puzzle. A single bitcoin mining rig can make up to 14 trillion guesses per second.

If you discover a hash value that is small enough before anyone else does, you win! Your block is then transmitted to the rest of the network, and the other nodes begin work on the next block using the hash of the accepted block. 

Powerful computers

As bitcoin went up in value over the years, miners found faster and faster ways to win the bitcoin lottery. When bitcoin was first introduced in 2009, you could mine bitcoin with the CPU on your own personal computer.

Those days are a distant memory. As bitcoin mining became more profitable, miners switched to graphic processing units (GPUs). And in 2011, they migrated to field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). But starting in 2013, the field was taken over by application-specific integrated circuit equipment (ASIC) rigs—which is the only way to make a profit mining bitcoin these days. 

Over the past decade, bitcoin miners have set up thousands of warehouses of computer hardware dedicated to performing trial-and-error computations in a race against each other to win the block reward.

The result is a massively inefficient coal-powered monster that consumes the same amount of energy as a country (Argentina) with 45 million people, all in the name of “number go up,”

*This is an approximation. The next bitcoin halvening event could happen before or after this date.

If you like my work, please support my writing by subscribing to my Patreon account. Every little bit helps!

News: Tether prints $1B at a time, Tesla buys bitcoin, Roubini calls Saylor a cokehead, scammers hijack QuadrigaCX website

We are midway through February. Tether has surpassed $32 billion in tethers and appears to be quite proud of the fact. BTC is scratching $49,000 and ETH is over $1,800. There is so much craziness now in the crypto markets with shitcoins pumping galore, and big companies getting in on the bitcoin Ponzi.

In the meantime, I am concerned crypto is going retail again. Friends are calling and asking about bitcoin. One of my friend’s offspring was talking up dogecoin on Facebook. And I am overhearing conversations about crypto in grocery stores and parking lots—flashbacks of 2017, but this is worse. Retailers are going to get hurt all over again.

Another reminder, I have a Patreon account. If you want to support my writing, please consider subscribing. I’m currently making $572 a month on Patreon, which is fantastic because I can now buy decent bottles of wine. But at some point, I would love to bring that up closer to $2,000 or find a way to make a living doing this.

Tether: We’re done with the baby prints

On Thursday and again on Saturday, Tether issued $1 billion in tethers. These are the biggest single prints of USDT ever—and there were two in a row. Previously, the biggest prints were $600 million, which was rare. Normally, bigger prints were $400 million, and if Tether needed more, it would simply issue several in a row. But that’s clearly not enough to feed the monster now. 

By monster, I mean this snowball is getting so big, Tether is struggling to manage it. Seventy percent of bitcoin is traded against tethers, and as real money keeps getting siphoned out of the system, Tether needs to create more and more fake dollars to fill the ever-widening chasm. Tethers are counterfeit. They are not real dollars, but they are treated as such on offshore exchanges.

You can’t have a system built entirely on fake money. Eventually, it will collapse under its own weight. We saw this with QuadrigaCX. As soon as enough people tried to cash out, the exchange’s founder Gerald Cotten flew to India and pulled off what appears to have been one of the most bizarre exit scams in history—unless you believe he is really dead.* I’m still getting calls from reporters and filmmakers wondering what the hell happened.

Tether CTO Paolo Ardoino says the $1 billion prints were for replenishments and chain swaps—wherein a customer sends in tethers and gets them reissued on a different blockchain. If it were a chain swap, you would see a corresponding burn. But we aren’t seeing any burns, meaning those tokens went almost immediately into circulation.

Luca Land tracked the first 1 billion print and found that the entire amount—previously, I said “majority,” but Luca says all of it—went to Bitfinex, Huobi, RenrenBit, Binance, and FTX.** The largest recipient was FTX, followed by Binance. Those of us who follow @whale_alert are accustom to seeing tethers flying off to “unknown wallets.” Luca thinks those unknown wallets serve as intermediate wallets to throw us off the trail.

The Block published a story on Thursday, right after Tether’s first monster print, with lots of quotes from Ardoino, who explains that big companies are buying USDT from over-the-counter desks and high-frequency trading firms. This explains the demand for all these tethers, he claims.

“When clients of these firms want to buy bitcoin, they send USD, and then these firms convert USD to USDT to bitcoin. This method is faster and most convenient,” he told The Block. 

Why would someone go to the trouble of converting cash to USDT to buy BTC when they could simply buy BTC directly with cash on a regulated exchange? That makes no sense—unless it involves money laundering and capital flight. Tether does have a big market in Asia, Ardoino said.

Another explanation is that Tether is printing USDT out of thin air, using those to buy bitcoin with alias accounts on unregulated exchanges and cashing out via banked exchanges and OTC trading desks. Or else, they buy BTC and hold onto it as a way to make the markets more illiquid and easier to manipulate. (If they sold all the bitcoin they were buying with tethers, they would crash the markets, so until a new influx of cash comes into the system, they have to hold onto it.)

Coindesk interviewed Nouriel Roubini on CoindeskTV. Of course, he gave it to them straight, calling Tether a criminal enterprise and Michael Saylor a cokehead. The three reporters broke out into giggles. The questions they asked were naive, for instance, how is Tether printing tethers different from what is going on in Washington with all their dollar printing? Roubini made important points and predicts Tether will be dead within the year—read the transcript on my blog.

NY AG Tether investigation update

Tether has agreed to hand over a slew of documents to the NY attorney general showing how they issue tethers, what’s behind tethers, and so on. The original deadline was Jan. 15, but they needed another 30 days and the NY AG was okay with that. We are looking for another court filing to drop at some point after Feb. 15.

Don’t expect miracles anytime soon, though. The NY AG will still need time to take a position on what she has received. I’m sure her office is working with the Department of Justice in their investigation—and passing all the material along to them.

Someone was asking me on Reddit, what can the NY AG actually do to Tether? Answer: She has sweeping investigatory and prosecutorial powers, and she can issue a cease and desist. But ultimately, the U.S. Department of Justice and Homeland Security will be instrumental in taking Bitfinex/Tether down.

To put things in perspective, Tether has been in operation for six years. It took seven years and the coordinated effort of law enforcement in 17 countries to bring down Liberty Reserve. (ABC News)

Tesla buys BTC with clean car credits

The big news of the week was Tesla purchased $1.5 billion of bitcoin, as revealed in its 10-K filing. Here you have a company dedicated to clean energy buying one of the filthiest assets in the world. The bitcoin network requires the energy of a small country like Argentina, Norway or the Netherlands. Musk doesn’t give a hoot about the planet. (My blog)

Just to be clear, $1.5 billion is peanuts. It will support the bitcoin miners for about a month. Of course, on the news of Tesla buying bitcoin, the price of BTC shot up from 39,400 to 48,000 in less than 24 hours. The higher the price of BTC, the faster real money exits the system when the miners sell their 900 newly minted BTC per day.

Michael Burry, the investor from “The Big Short,” said in a series of deleted tweets (apparently, he routinely deletes tweets) that Musk bought BTC to distract from Chinese regulators looking into quality complaints with Tesla vehicles. Burry is shorting Tesla and has called on the electric-vehicle company to issue more stock at its ridiculous price. (Business Insider)

But wait! It’s green energy!

Most of the world doesn’t realize that bitcoin uses a country’s worth of electricity. They think it’s mainly used for ransomware and by criminals to buy drugs and such, so when they learn about bitcoin’s horrendous CO2 production, they become alarmed.

As a result, bitcoiners are desperately scrambling to declare that bitcoin consumes renewable green energy. Most of what they are spouting is blithering nonsense with no facts to support their claims. They are also trying to say that bitcoin consumes less energy than the rest of the financial system, which is simply dumb, as Frances Coppola points out.

Other interesting newsy bits

Gerald Cotten may be dead and buried—or more likely, sipping cocktails on a beach somewhere—but QuadrigaCX sprung to life again! However, it turns out scammers set up an imitation Quadriga website to lure in potential victims. EY, the trustee for the failed exchange, sent out a warning notice. The website has since been taken down. (EasyDNS)

India is set to ban cryptocurrency investments completely. Investors will be given a transition period of three-to-six months after the new law goes into force to liquidate their investments. (Bloomberg Quint)

Crypto Capital money mule Reginald Fowler has three more weeks to find new counsel after he stiffed his previous attorneys. (My blog)

Dogecoin has been pumping thanks to r/wallstreetbets and Musk and others tweeting about it for the lulz. David Gerard wrote a wonderful piece on dogecoin explaining its unique history. (Foreign Policy, paywalled)

Apparently, Elon Musk was tweeting about DOGE for the lulz back in April 2019. (Financial Times)

Dogecoin creator Billy Markus said on Reddit that he sold all his dogecoin in 2015 after he got laid off. He wanted dogecoin to be a force of good, and he is disappointed to see the nonsense “pump and dumping, rampant greed, scamming, bad faith actors.”

The Sydney Morning Herald did a feature on Australian-born-and-raised Greg Dwyer, one of the founders of Bitmex, who was indicted last year for violating anti-money laundering laws, but is still at large. “As recently as July, social media posts suggested Dwyer was in Bermuda, and enjoying all it had to offer.”

Miami Mayor Francis Suarez (R) wants municipal workers to get paid in bitcoin. Aside from the legal and tax ramifications and all the difficulties in setting this up, I’m sure employees will be so happy to wake up and find their paycheck lost 30% of its value whilst they were sleeping. No, this is a terrible idea. (The NY Post)

BNY Mellon, the world’s largest custody bank, said it will hold, transfer and issue bitcoin and other crypto on behalf of its asset-management clients. The bank will begin offering these services later this year. Because they are a state-chartered bank, they can do this in NY without a BitLicense. (WSJ, Coindesk)

Mastercard is planning to support crypto natively on its network. However, it’s only going to support cryptocurrencies that meet certain requirements—including stability, privacy and compliance with anti-money laundering laws. The problem is that no cryptocurrencies meet Mastercard’s criteria. (Arstechnica, Mastercard announcement)

BitPay’s bitcoin cards can be added to Apple Wallet, giving crypto holders a new way to spend via Apple Pay. BitPay converts your bitcoin to cash, so it’s no different than selling your BTC first, and merchants won’t know the difference. (Business Insider)

This Valentines Day, consider giving that special someone a CryptoFlower! It will only set you back 4 ETH ($7,200). Each flower is genetically unique and immutable. And they don’t need water or sunlight because they live on the Ethereum blockchain. (FT)

Last but not least, the CBC QuadrigaCX documentary is coming soon! It was nearly a year ago that David Gerard and I met in Vancouver for the filming. It was also one of the last times I enjoyed a meal inside a restaurant sitting next to people.

*Update, Feb. 14—Someone on Reddit was giving me a hard time, arguing that I can’t say Cotten pulled off an exit scam unless I explain that he might actually be dead. I won’t believe he is dead until someone exhumes the body and proves it’s him. See my Quadriga timeline for details.

**Update, Feb. 15—The unidentified tether customer in Luca Land’s diagram turns out to be FTX.

Nouriel Roubini: ‘Tether is a criminal enterprise,’ SEC should probe Elon Musk’s bitcoin tweets

Nouriel Roubini, an economics professor at New York University, thinks Tether is issuing fake money. And that nothing short of an audit will prove the $30 billion in USDT the BVI-registered company has spewed out into the crypto markets thus far are even 74% backed. (Stuart Hoegner, the firm’s general counsel, claimed they were three-quarters backed in April 2019 court documents.)

Tether is a “criminal enterprise,” he bluntly told reporters on Coindesk TV. In a 10-minute interview, Roubini predicted Tether’s looming demise, called for the SEC to look into Elon Musk’s bitcoin tweets, and claimed that central bank digital currencies will spell the end for crypto.

Dr. Doom, as Roubini is called, talks quickly, doesn’t mince words, and his face barely changes expression. He has a reputation as a perpetual pessimist. Ask him a question, and he will give you a straightforward, often bleak, answer. Though he might argue, he is simply being a realist.

I am not sure why Coindesk had him on their program. Roubini hates bitcoin and his responses elicited laughter—though it wouldn’t be the first time. Roubini “sounded like a madman in 2006,” when he stood before economists at the International Monetary Fund and announced a crisis of solvency was brewing, IMF economist Prakash Loungani told the NYT in August 2008. “He was a prophet when he returned in 2007.”

Anyhow, I transcribed the talk only because I thought Roubini’s points made sense. He was interviewed by Coindesk’s Lawrence Lewitinn, Christine Lee, and Emily Parker.

Lee: The narrative on bitcoin has shifted from a means of payment to a store of value for some. It is not so much used as a currency as a digital gold. Institutions and public companies are buying this thesis and we are seeing bitcoin hit records as a result. What do you make of this institutional and corporate interest in bitcoin, underlined by Tesla’s $1.5 billion bitcoin investment on Monday? 

Roubini: As you suggested, bitcoin and crypto is not a means of payment. It is not a currency. It is not a unit of account. Is not a scalable means of payment. It is not a single numeraire. Now, people say it is an asset. But think of it. What are assets? Assets like stocks, bonds and real estate give you income or give you some use, like real estate. And, therefore, they give you capital gain. Gold does not give you income but it has other uses,—industrial activity and jewelry—and therefore, has some value. It used to be used as a means of payment. 

In the case of bitcoin, it does not have any income. It doesn’t have any use. It doesn’t have any utility. So the value of it based on what? Based on no intrinsic value and purely a speculative bubble. That is why I argue that bitcoin, like all the other shitcoins, are worth zero. [Coindesk reporters giggle.] 

Actually, negative given the hogging of energy and the environmental cost. If there was a carbon tax on crypto, the value of these assets would be negative. 

So what is the fundamental value? What is the use? What is the utility that justifies the capital gain? None. It is a speculative bubble that is based on pump-and-dump, spoofing, wash trading and manipulation by Tether, which is a total scam. [More giggling from Coindesk crew.]

So, for institutional investors, saying we are going to invest in crypto doesn’t make any sense. You have a failing company that had a flat stock market like MicroStrategy for a decade, and its head was a coke addict who decided to bet the entire house on bitcoin. [CoinDesk crew really losing it.] That is irresponsible behavior. It is not gonna be any corporate head that is going to put his cash, as you point out, into something that is so volatile. You put your cash into something that is stable. 

And for someone like Elon Musk who knows he has a market impact to manipulate to first, take an individual position to bitcoin, pump the price up, and then say that Tesla is invested. And Tesla doesn’t make money yet. It is also irresponsible and it is market manipulation. [Note: Musk was tweeting about BTC, pushing up the price, before Telsa announced it had purchased $1.5 billion worth.]

The SEC should be looking at people that have a market impact that manipulate the price of assets. That is also criminal behavior. It is totally a criminal enterprise. Tether is a criminal enterprise, and a bunch of whales and insiders are manipulating the price of bitcoins and other shitcoins day in and day out. That is a fact.

Lewitinn: Dr. Roubini, always a ray of sunshine, of course. The question about Tether is this: We have known for a while now that it has been backed entirely by dollars. It is something like 70-some-odd percent. That came out a while ago. There have been questions about its backing for some time, for several years. Yet it is still trading on par with the US dollar. Conceivably, they have enough assets at least for a while to keep the peg going with the dollar. How much of a real worry is it for crypto if there is even a small run on tether?

Roubini: First of all, we don’t know if it is backed 70% or not. Their lawyer says 70% but we have no idea. It doesn’t mean any[thing] absolute independent audit of it. [A bit garbled here, but he is saying, outside of a third-party audit, which Tether has never had, there is no way of knowing what’s backing tethers.]

We also know they are really issuing, literally, at an exponential rate, new tethers. In the last year alone, something like 25 billion. And in the last few weeks, a billion per week. So it looks like they are getting desperate, and it is a typical Ponzi scheme, in which you maintain the value of something by issuing more of it and more of it and so on. 

Lewitinn: How different is that from what is going on right now from the money printing happening in Washington? 

Roubini: The money printing in Washington is happening at a rate that is much less than the issuance of fiat by Tether and other shitcoins. If you look at the chart of it, literally, the case of Tether is exponential. Second, central banks, if you know, their assets are matching their liabilities. For every dollar of currency in excess of reserves that are in the central bank balance sheet there is an asset, foreign reserve, or gold or treasury assets. 

So the idea that fiat currencies are not backed by anything is utterly false. If you look at the balance sheet of any central bank, there are assets and there are liabilities. And actually, there is a positive net worth most of the time. But in the case of Tether there is nothing backing it. Again, even 70% is not true. And we know that every fixed exchange rate that is based on not-full-backing and not fully collateralized eventually collapses. 

The entire monetary history, every fixed exchange that is not backed has collapsed. It is only a matter of time. And the trigger is gonna be when the indictments of Tether and Bitfinex are going to occur, and it is only a matter of time this year. Because we know that there are investigations occurring. 

Parker: Let’s move to central bank digital currencies for a moment. We know that China is moving quite rapidly in this area. Do you think that the US dollar will remain the world reserve currency?

Roubini: I think that the Chinese are going to go ahead. [Sweden’s] Riksbank bank is going to go ahead. The [European Central Bank] is going to go ahead. And until now the US was behind the curve, but they realize that the Chinese had a plan to dominate the global financial system. It’s their e-commerce. It is their own platform of private payment systems like AliPay and WeChat Pay and that is going to be the e-RNB. And it is only a matter of time before we are going to phase out cash all over the world. And if the US wants to maintain the role of the US dollar as a major global reserve currency, they will have to move to an e-dollar. 

The problem with that is that people get excited in the crypto world when central banks end up talking about a central bank digital currency. A CBDC, first of all, has nothing to do with blockchain. It is going to be private. It is going to be centralized. It is going to be permissioned. And it is going to be based on a bunch of trusted authority verifying transactions.

It has nothing to do with blockchain. It has nothing to do with crypto. And as a payment system, it is going to dominate, not only crypto, which has absolutely no payment services, but also any private form of payment system that is digital, from credit cards to bank deposits to AliPay to WeChat pay to Venmo to Square to PayPal, and so on. Because it is going to be cheap, it is going to be instantaneous clearing and settlement. It is going to be a system that is going to dominate any form of private money

If and when a central bank currency is going to be introduced, the problem is going to be that any form of private digital payment system is going to be crowded out, starting with crypto, which doesn’t have any payment service in the first place. 

Lee: Dr. Roubini, it sounds like you believe that the technology underlying bitcoin is at least sound and that governments and central banks around the world will adopt it, and if that is the case, what happens to privacy? And you also mentioned something about negative rates becoming the norm. Tell us about that?

Roubini: First of all, I said the opposite of the technology. The central bank digital currencies will not be based on blockchain. They are going to be private, not public. They are going to be centralized, not decentralized. They are going to be permissioned, not permissionless. They are going to be a bunch of central banks and private banks that are trusted verifiers of the transaction, rather than being trustless. So the technology is not going to be blockchain. It is not going to be crypto. That is my point. 

Secondly, the advantage of having a central bank digital currency is that right now, if there is a very severe economic recession, central banks cannot go very negative with the policy rates. That is why they do quantitative easing. They do credit easing. Because if you go lower than, say, 75 basis points, people are going to switch their excess reserves into cash if there is a nominal zero interest rate. So they are not going to pay the tax. 

However, if you phase out cash, then you have no option than to keep your money in the digital form. And then the negative policy rate in a severe recession or depression can go to minus one, minus two, minus three, minus four, minus five, whatever you want it to be. So if and when that happens, and if there is a recession that is severe enough, central bank digital currencies are going to allow you to have much more [of an] easing monetary policy with much more negative policy rates. That is the direction we are going to go. 

Lee: Is there anything that can happen that would change your mind about bitcoin? 

Roubini: So far, no. As they say, it is not a unit of account. It is not a means of payment. It is not a single numeraire. It is not a stable store of value. And with proof-of-work, you get five transactions per second. And if it was to be adopted as a means of payment, you would have deflation. Because the quantity of it is limited in the long run. If you want to create a digital currency that actually works as a means of payment, its growth has to be the growth of nominal GDP, so that the demand can be satisfied by supply that increases as much as nominal GDP, meaning the inflation target plus the growth of the economy. Otherwise, you are going to get permanent deflation on every price in goods and services, so it’s fundamentally flawed even from that point of view. 

Update: In an earlier version of this story, I mentioned Musk had deleted some of his BTC tweets. So far, I haven’t found any hard evidence of that, so I removed my comment.

If you like my work, please support my writing by subscribing to my Patreon account for as little as $5 a month. 

Tesla spent $1.5B in clean car credits on bitcoin, the filthiest asset imaginable

Tesla bought $1.5 billion worth of bitcoin, the company said in a regulatory filing on Monday, effectively putting nearly all of the money it earned on clean car credits towards the world’s filthiest asset.

Where to begin? Let’s start with the firm’s SEC filing. As of January 2021, the Silicon Valley-based company updated its investment policy to allow it more flexibility in diversifying its returns on cash. Those changes allow Tesla to buy bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, which it immediately did.

“Thereafter, we invested an aggregate $1.50 billion in bitcoin under this policy and may acquire and hold digital assets from time to time or long-term. Moreover, we expect to begin accepting bitcoin as a form of payment for our products in the near future, subject to applicable laws and initially on a limited basis, which we may or may not liquidate upon receipt.”

The filing does not say how Tesla bought the bitcoin or how they are custodying it. It also does not tell us how many bitcoin it purchased or for what average price. We only know Tesla bought bitcoin sometime between Jan. 1 and early February, when the price was between $30,000 to $41,000. 

Tesla says its customers will be able to buy its vehicles with bitcoin. However, “liquidate upon receipt” means that if you purchase a Tesla with bitcoins, the company is likely to sell those bitcoins for cash immediately, something that is usually done by sending the funds through a payment processor first.

This is what most large merchants do when they say they are accepting bitcoin. They convert it to cash, so they don’t have to deal with bitcoin’s wild volatility. So if you buy a Tesla with bitcoin in the future, it will likely be the same as selling your bitcoin for fiat and then handing the cash over to Tesla.

Clean car credits for bitcoin

Tesla earns tradable credits under various regulations related to zero-emission vehicles, greenhouse gas, fuel economy, renewable energy, and clean fuel. It then turns around and sells those credits to other automakers when they can’t comply with auto emissions and fuel economy standards.

In 2020, Tesla reported making $1.58 billion in selling these tradable credits it received. And here is the important bit: without those tradeable credits, the company would not have been profitable. Tesla would have lost money. So what does it do with that money? It turns around and buys bitcoin.

Bitcoin is an environmental disaster. The bitcoin network currently burns around 116.87 terawatt-hours (TWh) per year, according to the University of Cambridge’s Centre for Alternative Finance. To give you an idea of how devastating that is to our climate, that is as much energy as a small country or seven nuclear power plants.

Keep in mind, bitcoin’s energy consumption increases right alongside the price of bitcoin. As bitcoin goes up in price, more people want to mine the virtual currency for profit, leading to greater energy consumption as they pile more money into power-hungry ASIC rigs.

Bitcoin is not only filthy for its energy waste but also because it is the currency of choice in underground economies. Ransomware would probably not exist if it were not for bitcoin.

And bitcoin fits the very definition of a Ponzi scheme. It has no intrinsic value—any money new investors put into the system immediately goes out via bitcoin miners selling their 900 newly minted bitcoin per day. Tesla’s massive influx of cash will fund the bitcoin miners for about a month and a half, at most.

Elon Musk shilling crypto

Two years ago, Musk and Tesla paid a combined $40 million penalty to the SEC after Musk’s cryptic tweets about taking Tesla private led to stock fluctuations. The regulator charged him with securities fraud. As part of the settlement, Musk agreed to step down as chairman of the company, although he continued to hold the title of CEO.

Apparently, Musk has learned nothing from that experience. Last month, presumably around the time Tesla was buying up hoards of bitcoin unbeknownst to the general public, Musk caused the price of bitcoin to go up 20% when he changed his Twitter bio to include the word “bitcoin.”

Soon after changing the bio, Musk said in a tweet: “In retrospect, it was inevitable.” In retrospect, that tweet looks like an early hint that Tesla was funneling money into the digital asset.

Will Musk get into trouble for his bitcoin tweets?

It is unlikely, Columbia University Law Professor John Coffee, Jr., told the Wall Street Journal, especially given that a federal judge rebuked the SEC when it sought to hold Musk in contempt in 2019. “I don’t think the commission would dare push it that far,” he said.

The latest Tesla news caused bitcoin to spike 18% this morning, sending the price to over $44,000, and setting a new all-time high.

Updates Feb. 8: Bitcoin topped $44,000 on Monday, even higher than the $43,000 I mentioned earlier. I added that in the SEC settlement Musk agreed to step down as chairman of Tesla. And I added the Coffee quote from WSJ.

If you like my work, please support my writing by subscribing to my Patreon account for as little as $5 a month. 

News: Bitfinex pays off Tether loan, Tether mints $1.8B in a week, Nigerian central bank cuts off BTC services, Elon Musk tweets send DOGE soaring

It’s Feb. 7, a year since the pandemic entered the US, and bored people with lots of stimulus money are gambling it all on crypto casinos and stocks. And to get things extra frothy, Tether spit out more than $1.8 billion in tethers last week—enough to push its market cap over $28 billion.

Amazing how things have evolved. It was big news in December 2017 when Tether reached its first $1 billion in tethers. Now the BVI-registered company is issuing that kind of money every few days. Why? Because they can. So far, nobody has stopped them. Also, because they have to. If they were to stop now, the price of bitcoin would collapse, exposing Tether for what it is—a massive fraud, the likes of which nobody has seen since Madoff. 

The price of bitcoin is now over $40,000, up from $32,800 a week ago. So if you bought bitcoin last week, you made money without ever having to get up off the living room couch. Just remember that you have to actually cash out via a banked exchange like Coinbase to realize those gains.

Bitfinex says it’s paid off Tether ‘loan’

Bitfinex announced on Friday that it’s paid off the remaining $550 million balance of its loan to sister company Tether in one fell swoop—in fiat currency and with interest.

Where did the money come from? Bitfinex won’t tell us. (The announcement was only three sentences long.) They just want us to believe—based on their word alone—that the entire matter is behind them. So I guess the New York attorney general can drop its probe?

That loan was at the center of the NY AG’s investigation into Bitfinex. After losing access to $850 million via its payment processor Crypto Capital, Bitfinex gave itself access to $900 million of Tether’s reserves—without telling its customers. And that’s after years of Tether saying that tethers were backed 1:1 with real dollars.

Nobody knows for sure how much of Tether’s money Bitfinex helped itself to. Bitfinex indicated—here and here—that it had previously paid off $200 million, leaving us to assume that the total loan amount was $750 million. But Bitfinex isn’t being upfront about how much it borrowed. And thus far, we have no audits, loan documents, or other evidence to prove the repayment was anything more than a story-book fantasy.

The fact of the matter is that Bitfinex was insolvent in 2018. Rather than crash and burn, it helped itself to Tether’s customer’s money to cover up for its massive losses. Are we to believe now that those losses magically disappeared? Just as we are to believe that tethers are now fully backed?

Let’s face it, Bitfinex probably started going down the tubes as early as August 2016 after it was hacked to the tune of $72 million worth of BTC and then lost its banking. The company’s operators have been playing a game of cat and mouse ever since. (See my Tether timeline for more details on past shenanigans.)

Mainstream media gets wise to Tether

Tether is getting more coverage in mainstream media. In his WSJ story, “What’s behind the bitcoin bubble,” columnist Andy Kessler covers all the Tether basics, including the NY AG probe and even the “Bit Short” article by Crypto Anonymous. (That story really is getting around, isn’t it?)

Word is getting out. Reporters are asking questions about Tether, and they are starting to document the funny business. Probably as a way to get up to speed on the topic before the shit really hits the fan—a day we all know is coming, wherein Tether gets exposed for what it really is.

In contrast, crypto media is trying desperately to fight the “Tether FUD.” Earlier, we had a reporter from The Block going on a podcast to try and convince us those billions of tethers are all backed with real cash. And I’m seeing nonsensical stories like this one in Bitcoin Magazine on “debunking the Bit Short.” Here’s one in another crypto rag about how the loan repayment will put an end to Tether FUD.

Bitcoiners and many crypto outlets—that are directly funded by the crypto industry—believe that Tether needs to be protected at all costs. How do you defend a company that won’t tell you what tethers are backed by? That refuses to submit to an audit? That is being investigated for fraud by one of the most powerful attorneys in the nation? You can’t, but they do.

I should mention that Jeremy Allaire has also come forward as a Tether apologist. Allaire is the CEO of Circle, which is part of the Centre Consortium, a collaboration with Coinbase that manages the USDC stablecoin.

USDC is growing rapidly. There are now $6.5 billion worth of USDC in circulation. The regulated stablecoin gets monthly attestations—but no full audit. Grant Thornton’s attestations say reserves are in cash and “other approved investments.” We don’t know what those investments are or who approved them. And it’s December attestation is over two weeks late, compared to earlier months. I’m sure it’s nothing to worry about though.

Nigerian banks cut off crypto services

The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) ordered banks on Friday to close the accounts of anyone involved in crypto services and to stop facilitating payments for crypto exchanges.

Bitcoin’s popularity in Nigeria was driven largely by a Russian Ponzi scheme called MMM. This connection, along with a few fraud causes, made African governments and regulators leery of crypto. The CBN warned banks in January 2017 that bitcoin and other cryptos were used primarily for money laundering and funding of terrorist activities. And then in February 2018, CBN warned Nigerian citizens they would not be able to get legal help if the crypto markets collapsed.

The CBN’s recent move impacts fiat on- and off-ramps, but peer-to-peer platforms like OTC desks remain unaffected. As a result, Binance temporarily suspended deposits in Nigeria naira. (Binance letter, Coindesk)

Musk tweets about DOGE, number go up

Dogecoin—a coin that was designed as a joke—made the WSJ after billionaire Tesla chief Elon Musk kept tweeting about it, causing the price to go parabolic.

Musk is doing this for the lulz. Watching people scramble to buy an asset after he tweets about it is his idea of amusement. Imagine, if you will, a rich guy throwing dollar bills onto the street and watching poor, wretched fools dive for it. This is Musk’s sense of humor.

The SEC has warned him that he can’t tweet things about Tesla for the lulz, so he is now applying the same douchebaggery to something he isn’t interested in simply because he can.

Kiss frontman Gene Simmons (the guy with the tongue) also announced he was stocking up on DOGE because he thinks it will increase in value. Why not? If Musk keeps tweeting about it, certainly number will go up.

Other newsworthy stuff

Trolly wrote a blog post about how the “Bitcoin economy” is just an illegal casino run by the mob. Leverage is the lifeblood of crypto, he says. And regulated exchanges like Coinbase are feeding the monster.

David Gerard wrote a blog post spelling out how Tether works for those who are still getting up to speed.

Yearn DeFi was exploited in the usual manner—smart contracts and not-so-smart people. A hacker made off with $2.8 million after draining $11 million from one of Yearn’s deposit pools. For the uninitiated, Yearn.Finance is a “yield aggregator” where users deposit funds in pools, which are then deployed to other DeFi protocols to generate yields for those depositors. DeFi—or decentralized finance—is based on smart contracts—bits of “unstoppable” code that run on a blockchain. (Cointelegraph)

German prosecutors have confiscated more than $60 million worth of bitcoin from a fraudster. But they can’t access the funds because Mr. Fraudster won’t give them the keys. How do you confiscate bitcoin if you have no access to it? (Reuters)

Miller Value Funds, run by veteran hedge fund manager Bill Miller, may invest up to $337 million in GBTC through its flagship fund, the Miller Opportunity Trust. GBTC’s premium to NAV is currently 6.5% — not the great arb opportunity it once was, so I’m wondering how much they will actually invest. (Decrypt)

Antonije Stojilkovic, a Serbian man, along with his coconspirators allegedly defrauded crypto investors out of more than $70 million. He has been extradited to the US. (DoJ press release)

If you like my work, please support my writing by subscribing to my Patreon account for as little as $5 a month. I need all the support I can get! Thank you to the three new patrons I got last week!

News: Tether surpasses $26B, Elon Musk pumps BTC, Gregory Pepin’s magic trick

It’s been three years since the last bitcoin bubble. And as I write this newsletter, I can’t help but feel this is getting so tiring. Where are the regulators? Why did they not step in long ago to put an end to so much nonsense in the crypto space? Things just seem to keep getting crazier.

Tether has now surpassed 26 billion tethers—after minting 1.3 billion last week alone. How does an outfit get away with creating $1.3 billion worth of a stablecoin without being subjected to an audit? Without a cease and desist? It’s been more than two years since the NY attorney general started investigating them.

Bitcoin slipped below $30,000 on Wednesday, but then climbed to $37,800 on Friday after Elon Musk added #bitcoin to his Twitter bio, apparently just for the lulz. The move sparked $387 million worth of short liquidations on Binance, Bitfinex, BitMEX, ByBit, Deribit, FTX, HuobiDM and OKEx.

Today Bitcoin is back down to $32,800.

In general, it’s been a week of madness in the markets. Reddit group WallStreetBets has been pushing up lousy stocks like GME and AMC to squeeze the shorts and wreak havoc on certain hedge funds. And to take the joke even further, they even pushed up the price of dogecoin 800% in a 24-hour period. Unsurprisingly, the DOGE pump was fueled mainly by tethers.

Still sore about that Bit Short story?

Are tethers backed? Nobody will give you a straight answer and certainly not Stuart Hoegner, Tether’s general counsel, who spends all day retweeting tweets and trying to convince folks that tethers are worth real money.

He is apparently still upset about the anonymous “Bit Short” article, which I mentioned in my previous newsletter. He keeps saying it’s all FUD, and now claims it’s not only hurting Tether, but all of bitcoin. Of course, the reason the story is gaining popularity is because it is largely true.

“But beyond its false claims about @Tether_to, this post really amounts to an attack on the entire cryptocurrency ecosystem. Bitcoin has a market cap of above US$600B, and the growing number of major institutions investing in bitcoin is a tribute,” he said in a Twitter thread.

Hoegner keeps complaining. (Also, we already know market cap is nonsense when it comes to bitcoin and the reason institutions have been jumping in is mainly because they see an attractive arb opportunity via GBTC.) But the one thing Tether won’t do is come clean and audit its reserves, which would put the whole matter to bed once and for all. Do those reserves consist of cash that Tether got from real clients? Or is Tether simply buying bitcoin with tethers and selling them for USD on OTC desks and banked exchanges?

Instead of giving out real answers, Stuart and Paolo and their friends at Deltec keep trying to obfuscate, distort, and push the blame on “disbelievers” and “salty nocoiners.”

Gregory Pepin’s disappearing act

Tether is a perpetual PR disaster machine. After delivering a disastrous interview with Laura Shin, where he tries to convince listeners Tether is legitimate, but comes off sounding like a used car salesperson, Gregory Pepin, the deputy chief executive officer at Deltec (where Tether does its off-shore banking), suddenly disappeared from Deltec’s website. But after Twitter noticed and started making jokes, he suddenly reappeared again.

Clearly, Deltec was monitoring Twitter and thought, well, maybe removing Pepin from the website wasn’t such a good idea after all? So they put him back. But his brief disappearance brought up questions: Were Pepin’s colleagues upset with him? Did he even consult with his colleagues before he went on the podcast? Surely they would have worked out a plan for what he would say and all come to an agreement on it. Did he forget to follow the plan? 

For the last time, Tether is NOT regulated

Tether keeps telling everyone that it’s regulated. Well, it’s not. No government agency is overseeing Tether and making sure they behave properly, which is why Tether and its sister company Bitfinex have been for years doing whatever they want. They make up the rules of the game as they go along, and put forth whatever nonsense narrative they feel like, simply because they can.

JP Kroning wrote a piece in Coindesk, where he points out that Tether is not regulated. Tether has made numerous claims that it is regulated because it is registered with FinCEN. But “registered” and “regulated” are two different things. “Tether isn’t regulated by FinCEN,” Kroning writes. A registration is not a seal of regulatory approval, and it shouldn’t be advertised as such. “Yet, this is what Deltec and Tether executives seem to be doing on Twitter and in podcasts.”

Ripple responds to SEC; the XRP pump

As I wrote in a recent post, Ripple responded to SEC charges that XRP is a security. They are using the same lame defense that Kik used to try and convince the SEC that kin wasn’t a security. It’s a strategy that is likely to fail miserably, and Ripple will most likely end up settling. It’s just a matter of when.

In the meantime, a group on Telegram called Buy and Hold XRP pumped the price of XRP to its highest number since December. The group’s membership hit Telegram’s 200,000 limit within hours, forcing everyone to head over to a new channel with a similar title. The granddaddy pump is scheduled to start on Feb. 1 at 8:30 EST. (Update: The organized pump turned out to be a miserable failure.)

Is XRP a security? All cryptocurrencies are investment contracts because they pass the Howey test. You can’t buy anything with XRP, BTC, ETH, or any of them. There is virtually no merchant adoption for crypto. For most people, a cryptocurrency is an investment of money in a common enterprise with an expectation of profit to be derived from the efforts of others. But the SEC has accepted the claim of bitcoin fanatics and cultists that Bitcoin is not a security, therefore, putting BTC outside of its jurisdiction.  

Coinbase going public via direct listing

Coinbase says it plans to go public via a direct listing. The U.S. crypto exchange confidentially filed its registration with the SEC in December. Now we know for sure they are not going the traditional IPO route.

In an IPO, a block of new shares are created and sold to institutional investors at a set price. The advantage of an IPO is it gives companies a way to both go public and bring in fresh capital at the same time. If a company doesn’t need fast cash, it can go with a direct listing, in which only existing shares are sold.

Direct listings have become popular of late because it gives companies a way to go public without the bank’s help. Palantir, Asana, Slack, and Spotify all went public without a traditional IPO. (Coinbase blog, Techcrunch)

The big question: What will Coinbase stock be worth once Tether is shut down and the price of BTC collapses?

If you like my work, please support my writing by subscribing to my Patreon account for as little as $5 a month. 

Ripple shoots back at SEC claims, takes the Kik route

Crypto firm Ripple has filed its response to U.S. Security and Exchange Commission charges claiming that Ripple and two execs conducted a $1.3 billion illegal security offering. Ripple made the filing public on Friday. And its general counsel was tweeting about it. 

San Francisco-based Ripple, which launched its XRP token in 2012, looks to be taking the ineffective Kik route in effectively arguing, “Hey, people use our token like real money; therefore XRP doesn’t satisfy the Howey test for being a security. And also, we are decentralized, so…”

Canadian messenger app Kik initially said it would fight the SEC tooth and nail after the regulator claimed its kin token was a security. But after a lot of bluff and bluster, Kik ended up settling for $5 million in October.

Stephen Palley, a lawyer in the cryptocurrency space, calls Ripple’s response to the SEC “delusional.”

Ripple’s 93-page letter does sound like the long-winded rant of someone with a loose grip on reality. But keep in mind, you need a certain level of hubris to pull something like Ripple off. According to the SEC, Ripple’s Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larson personally pocketed $600 million off the sale of XRP.

And it’s not like they didn’t know they might run into problems down the road. Lawyers warned Ripple early on that there was some risk XRP would be considered an investment contract, the SEC said.

‘Ill-conceived legal theory’

Ripple calls the SEC complaint “unprecedented and ill-conceived legal theory.” It goes on to state that XRP functions as a “medium of exchange,” therefore, the SEC has no authority to regulate it as a security.

Similar to Kik, Ripple will likely have a tough time convincing anyone its token works like money. What can you buy with it? XRP is mainly bought by traders in the hopes “number go up.”

Sometimes it goes up, and sometimes it goes down. In 2017, XRP hit an all-time high of $2.7. It currently trades at $0.27, down from $0.68 in November after several regulated exchanges, including Coinbase, suspended trading of XRP after the SEC filed charges in December.

Ripple also argues that in the eight years that XRP has existed, no securities regulator anywhere has claimed XRP is a security. So what?

That is not an effective defense, said Edmund Schuster, a professor of corporate law at the London School of Economics. He wrote on Twitter: “Regulators operate under resource constraints, so they tend to start paying attention once people lose enough money. In new areas, they take time to pick strong cases and then sequence [enforcement] action strategically.”

What about Ethereum?

Ripple also points to the case of Ethereum, which held an initial coin offering for its ether (ETH) token in 2015. ETH is the second most popular cryptocurrency next to Bitcoin. For a long time, XRP held third place, but recently it slipped to number five.

In its current form, ETH has not been deemed a security. In 2018, SEC official Bill Hinman famously stated that although ETH started out as a security, it is now “sufficiently decentralized,” like Bitcoin so that it no longer is one. (Hinman stepped down from the SEC last year.)

Ripple, on the other hand, started off completely centralized. When it initially created its 100 billion fixed supply of XRP, 80 billion went straight to Ripple and the other 20 billion to Ripple execs. To this day, Ripple still holds a vast quantity of XRP.

But Ripple apparently feels that any rule that applies to Ethereum should also apply to Ripple—and that XRP could also be deemed “sufficiently decentralized.” 

Along with the court filing, the company has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request with the SEC asking how the regulator determined ETH evolved from a-security to not-a-security. The FOIA is a law that requires the disclosure of previously unreleased information controlled by the U.S. government upon request.

“We’re simply asking for the rules to be 1. stated clearly 2. applied consistently,” Ripple general counsel Stuart Alderoty said in a Twitter thread.

Assuming they’re sure that the SEC won’t go after Ethereum, this isn’t that unusual, Schuster said. “Lawyers often say ‘but then X is also A’ when they know X≠A to bring the other side to distinguish and thereby narrow down the attack surface. Unlikely to be of value here IMO, but [I] may be wrong.”

You’ll hurt all our users

Ripple also argues in its letter that calling XRP a security will harm everyone who uses the token. (Probably most especially, Garlinghouse and Larson.)

“To require XRP’s registration as a security is to impair its main utility. That utility depends on XRP’s near-instantaneous and seamless settlement in low-cost transactions. Treating XRP as a security, by contrast, would subject thousands of exchanges, market-makers, and other actors in the gigantic virtual currency market to lengthy, complex and costly regulatory requirements never intended to govern virtual currencies.”

Lawyers for Ripple also claim that XRP is a “store of value,” not a share of Ripple’s profits. The “store of value” narrative stems from Bitcoin. In reality, you can’t call anything a store of value if it loses 60% of its value in two months.

At one point in its letter, Ripple asserts that holding massive amounts of XRP does not, in and of itself, qualify the token as a security.

“Many entities own large amounts of commodities and participate heavily in the commodities markets—Exxon holds large quantities of oil, De Beers owns large quantities of diamonds, Bitmain and other Chinese miners own a large percentage of outstanding bitcoin. Such large commodity owners inevitably have interests aligned with some purchasers of the underlying asset. But there is no credible argument that substantial holdings convert those commodities or currencies into securities, nor has any case so held.”

It’s important to point out that Exxon did not create oil out of thin air, nor did De Beers create diamonds out of thin air. XRP, on the other hand, is a number in a database, and Ripple made up 100 billion of them.

The rest of Ripple’s response consists of going through every one of the 400 paragraphs of the SEC’s complaint and offering a denial or some sort of rebuttal to every claim.

I don’t see how Ripple is going to get anywhere fighting the SEC. The case for XRP being a security is a strong one. And as the saying goes, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it likely is one.

The best Ripple can do at this point is buy time. But ultimately, it will probably wind up settling with the SEC to avoid going to trial, and for a lot more than Kik’s $5 million.   

News: Tether extends doc deadline, resumes printing; GBTC’s premium melts away; Ken Kurson pardoned

We are three-quarters of the way through the first month of the new year. We have a new president in the Whitehouse, and people are getting vaccinated—a glimmer of hope at the end of a long dark tunnel. I’m doing some volunteer work for VaccinateCA, making calls to pharmacies. (I saw @patio11 tweeting about the project and wanted to contribute.)

Maybe toward the end of 2021, we’ll see more in-person crypto conferences, but for now, it looks like Coindesk’s big money-maker Consensus will be virtual again—only $50 to register compared to $2,500 for the real thing in past years. Currently, bitcoin is trading at around $32,000 after climbing to an all-time high of nearly $42,000 earlier this month, and Tether is closing in on $25 billion worth of tethers.

A reminder that I have a Patreon account. If you find my work useful, informative, entertaining, please become a subscriber for as little as $5 a month. I could certainly use the support.

Tether needs 30 more days, restarts presses

Jan. 15, the big document deadline day for Bitfinex/Tether in the NY AG fraud investigation, came and went. On Tuesday, after a three-day weekend, Tether’s law firm requested a 30-day extension to give them more time to turn over documents. The request was on behalf of all parties, so NYAG was apparently okay with this.

We won’t get another status update until mid-February. Until then, Tether has agreed to maintain the status quo, meaning the injunction is still in effect, and Bitfinex cannot dip into Tether’s reserves. (Court filing)

For now, it’s back to business as usual. After what appeared to be a short reprieve, Tether is once again printing tethers with abandon. (On Jan. 19, Tether printed another 400 million USDT.) They literally can’t stop, won’t stop, because they are too deep into the game.

In lieu of an audit, which would put this whole matter of “Are tethers backed?” to rest, Tether continues to recruit reporters, bank execs, and other gullible parties to profess to the world that tethers are fully backed. Meet the next actor in this ongoing charade: Gregory Pepin, Deltec Bank’s deputy CEO. Deltec is an offshore bank in the Bahamas where Tether has been doing its banking since 2018

“Every tether is backed by a reserve and their reserve is more than what is in circulation,” Pepin told Laura Shin on the Unchained Podcast. “We can see it firsthand, so I can confirm that,” he said, while repeatedly dismissing the anonymous “Bit Short” article,” mentioned in my last newsletter, as FUD.

Tethers are fully backed, but backed with what? Before they were called tethers, realcoins were supported by “one-to-one fully auditable stores of dollars,” according to a July 2014 article in the Independent Investor. “The bearer of these realcoins will have the first right to redeem them for subsequent U.S. currency.”

A reasonable assumption at this juncture is that tethers are backed by loans to third parties, bitcoins, equity in an offshore bank, a pile of shit coins, and increasingly fewer real dollars.

So far, we’ve heard from Stuart Hoegner, Paulo Ardoino, and a reporter from The Block, all talking up Tether lately, while the triad—Phil Potter, J.L. van der Velde, and Giancarlo Devasini—have slid off into the hills. (Granted, Potter claims he stepped down a while back.)

Tether invests in Fleet

Tether has invested $1 million of its customer’s money into an ICO. Game publisher Exordium, the company behind Infinite Fleet—a name perhaps borrowed from a popular saline enema product—has launched a public security token offering. It is unclear if Tether invested USDT or real dollars, but public participants can put in euro, BTC, or USDT, according to a company press release. (Decrypt, Infinite Fleet)

Infinite Fleet is Samson Mow’s blockchain game. Coincidentally, Mow is the chief strategy officer at Blockstream, a company responsible for a huge chunk of Bitcoin’s source code. Bitfinex is also a Blockstream investor. These types of incestuous relationships help explain why so many Bitcoin-related company execs are so fiercely defensive of Tether.

Is Tether partnering with startup exchanges?

There is reason to suspect Tether is partnering with startup exchanges by giving them USDT. Over the past year, all kinds of smaller exchanges have been announcing sizable tether giveaways. Alex Dreyfus, CEO and founder of Chiliz, for instance, said he was preparing for a 100,000 USDT giveaway. He also admitted he is a client of Tether and Deltec Bank.

Do a search for “USDT” and “giveaway” on Twitter and plenty will come up. Kucoin is one example. (Binance, an established Tether customer, is also giving away tethers.)

GBTC’s premium melts away

Here is something that hasn’t gotten enough attention. Grayscale Investments has played a role in fueling the bitcoin bubble. By convincing institutional investors they could buy into GBTC at net asset value and sell on secondary markets at a 20% to 30% premium after a six-month lock-up, it has created a self-reinforcing market dynamic.

Accredited investors looking to take advantage of an arbitrage opportunity, bought into GBTC, pushing up GBTC assets under management, which was then used to promote the idea that institutional investors, dominated by hedge funds, were scooping up bitcoin products. All this, in turn, lured more retail suckers into the market. “Look, all the big companies are rushing in! This must be a safe bet!”

But now that premium has dried up as fewer retailers are showing an interest in bitcoin, given the price has dropped by $10,000 in recent weeks. GBTC was recently trading at just 2.8% over NAV, leaving accredited investors stuck with GBTC in an illiquid market. (Bloomberg, Trolly’s thread)

Meanwhile, it looks like Barry Silbert has left the chatroom. He stepped down as CEO two weeks ago.

Just like that, Kurson off the hook

Surprise, surprise. Former Ripple board member Ken Kurson was one of the 74 people Donald Trump pardoned at the last minute on Jan. 19. Kurson is also the co-founder of crypto rag Modern Consensus, where I worked for an intolerable six weeks. It’s just unbelievable this guy, who was criminally charged with cyberstalking, got a pardon. (Full list of pardons, NBC)

While many of Trump’s pardons went to political pals—including Steve Bannon, another pro-bitcoin guy—Kurson’s was an obvious favor to Jared Kushner, whose father, Charles, also received a pardon. Kurson’s pardon stands out, in part, because of the risk it poses to some of the women he stalked and harassed. (The Daily Beast, paywalled) 

“Suffice it to say, what he was actually arrested for was part of an ongoing pattern of abuse, revenge, & sociopathy,” Deborah Copaken, a contributing writer at the Atlantic, said on Twitter. She worked for Kurson in the past, wrote about the experience, and helped the FBI with their investigation. “All jokes aside, I am worried about my own safety. @FBI – How do you protect those who helped you but who are now totally exposed because of a presidential pardon?”

Other newsworthy bits

“How can $24 billion worth of tethers move a $650 billion bitcoin market cap?” The is an insufferably dumb question, and I explain why in a recent blog post. (My Blog)

David Gerard wrote about the history of wildcat banks and early “stablecoins” with excerpts from an 1839 Michigan Bank Commissioner report. (Gerard’s blog)

Craig Wright is at it again. He is now claiming the Bitcoin white paper and Bitcoin.com are his. He is trying to force Bitcoin.org to take down the white paper, which they now refuse to do. (Coindesk)

Balaji Srinivasan outdid himself on Twitter when he compared bitcoin, one of the world’s biggest energy hogs, to a battery, setting off the “bitcoin is a battery” meme.

Stephen Diehl, a programmer, compares crypto to a “giant smoldering Chernobyl sitting at the heart of Silicon Valley which a lot of investors would prefer you remain quiet about.” His thread went viral.

Gary Gensler is officially named for SEC chair. (NYT) We can expect greater crypto oversight from him. (Bloomberg)

Meanwhile, Allison Herren Lee was sworn in as SEC acting chair until Gensler takes over. (SEC, Decrypt)

MicroStrategy bought another 314 bitcoins for $10 million cash. Saylor’s company now holds 70,784 bitcoins acquired at an aggregate $1.135 billion. (SEC Filing, Coindesk)

Circle has surpassed $5 billion worth of its USDC stablecoin. They produce regular monthly attestations. But as Frances Coppola points out, if Circle/Centre were a bank, they would have to produce actual audited accounts.

Updated on Jan 24 with more info on Kurson’s pardon and a quote from Deborah Copaken. Also added the bit about Craig Wright.

‘How can $24B in tethers move a $650B Bitcoin market cap?’ and other mathematically illiterate questions

A question, or some version of it, that keeps popping up on social media lately is, “How can $24 billion worth of tethers move a $650 billion bitcoin market cap?”

This is “a blitheringly stupid question on multiple levels, starting with basic arithmetic,” bitcoin hater David Gerard said on Twitter. “It’s also a perennial dumb question.”

The question is being put forth by bitcoiners in an attempt to put people’s minds at ease about Tether. The thesis is that if tethers were to vanish—something that could happen if the U.S. Department of Justice were to give Tether the Liberty Reserve treatment—it would have little impact on bitcoin’s price, so you should stop worrying and keep buying bitcoin.

Someone posed the query recently on r/buttcoin. I am going to take a stab at sensibly answering the question in three parts starting with, What is market cap?

1. Market cap is meaningless nonsense

Market cap is a nonsensical number when it comes to bitcoin. It’s calculated by multiplying the last transaction price of bitcoin by the number of bitcoins in circulation—currently $35,000 x 18.6 million.

That doesn’t mean that people bought every bitcoin in existence for that price. The vast majority of people who own bitcoin bought it at a far lower price than what it is today. It also doesn’t mean that if everyone suddenly decided to sell all of their bitcoins, each bitcoin would bring them $35,000.

In fact, it doesn’t mean that bitcoin has any value at all other than the hope that some bigger dummy will stroll along who is willing to pay more for it than you did. Bitcoiners like to imagine that bitcoins are valuable because there will only ever be 21 million of them. That makes them scarce.

Beanie Babies were scarce in the 90s, too, with some fetching upwards thousands of dollars on eBay. But by the end of the Beanie Baby bubble, no amount of scarcity could make them desirable. They became worthless

Market cap is just another way to make something that is worthless appear valuable.

Market cap came out of the traditional finance world. And then websites like CoinMarketCap came along and began applying the term to bitcoin. In the stock market, market capitalization refers to the total value of a company’s share of stock. But while companies have an intrinsic value, bitcoin does not. There is nothing behind bitcoin. It’s not a company. It is not a thing. It is simply a number in a database.

Here is an example of how silly market cap is when applied to crypto. Say I create 1 million CastorCoins and start listing them on some little-known offshore exchange for $1. Suddenly CastorCoin has a market cap of $1 million dollars. Does that mean I have a million dollars? No, it does not. 

Or, as u/Ifinallycracked puts it on r/buttcoin: “If a bog roll contains 100 sheets and I manage to sell one sheet for a dollar, that doesn’t make it a $100 bog roll. Apply same logic to Bitscoin market cap. Success.”

Once you grasp that the bitcoin market cap does not mean that people have spent $650 billion on bitcoin, $24 billion worth of tethers—which represents 3% of the total bitcoin market cap—becomes a lot more significant.

2. Price is determined at the margins

The price of bitcoin is determined at the margins. If you want to drive up the price of bitcoin, you don’t have to buy every single bitcoin at the current price level. You simply have to scoop up the ones that are for sale. 

Money flowing into bitcoin is what keeps the price afloat. If demand increases and people are willing to pay more for bitcoin, that pushes the price up. The more dollars people throw at it, the higher BTC will go. And it doesn’t matter if you are buying bitcoin with real dollars on a banked exchange like Coinbase—or fake dollars on an offshore exchange like Binance, Huobi, or Bitfinex.

Image: CoinCompare

Right now, the latter is more prevalent—there are far more tethers flowing into bitcoin than actual dollars. In fact, 55% of all bitcoin is currently traded against tethers while only about 15% trade against real dollars, according to CoinCompare.

This is what makes the current bitcoin bubble different than the last. In 2017, when the price of bitcoin ran up to nearly $20,000, there were a lot more real dollars in the system and only 1.5 billion tethers in circulation. Now, it’s mostly tethers pushing up the price of BTC.

3. Bitcoin is illiquid

Bitcoin is relatively illiquid. According to data from Glassnodes, 78% of all bitcoin are not moving. In other words, of the 18.6 million bitcoins currently in existence, only about 4.2 million are in constant circulation.

At least 3 million bitcoin are lost because people like this guy can’t find their keys. (Just because you are the former CTO of Ripple, that doesn’t make you clever when it comes to safekeeping bitcoin.) And there are still plenty of folks holding on to their BTC in the hopes it will go stratospheric. Strong hands!

As a result, it doesn’t take a large buy or sell request to move the price of bitcoin. Printing billions of dollars out of thin air and using it to put supply-side pressure on a market as thin as bitcoin forces the prices up. Conversely, if enough people were to get panicky and rush to sell their bitcoin—weak hands!—the results could be catastrophic. Literally, the entire market cap can go to zero in a moment.

The whole point of Tether is to push up the price of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, and then move those assets to OTC desks and banked exchanges, where they can be turned into fiat. As @Baskee puts it: “Tether is a ladle; Bitcoin and USD are ashes and bullet casings, respectively.”

You can support my work by subscribing to my Patreon account. Think of it as buying me a cup of coffee, a bottle of wine, or a case of wine once a month, depending on what level you subscribe to.  

News: Tether’s offshore Deltec Bank, the Bit Short, NYAG’s document deadline, Tether truthers compare skeptics to QAnon

Finally, another newsletter! I am trying to find a way to write a crypto newsletter that doesn’t take all day to write. This is a (failed) attempt at that. Going forward, this sporadic newsletter will assume you know a thing or two about the crypto space. (If not, read the articles I link to!)

First some housekeeping—I’ve been working to update my blog and move it over from WordPress.com to WordPress.org. My main challenge is finding a WordPress theme that I like, preferably one that is free. If you have any recommendations, please let me know.

Also, the crap butterfly keyboard on my Macbook Pro is failing me, so I’ve ordered a Mac Air with the M1 chip, which will arrive in a few weeks. I’m hoping it makes my life easier.

If you want to support my work, a reminder that I have a Patreon account. Think of it as buying me a cup of coffee, a bottle of wine, or a case of wine once a month, depending on what level you subscribe to.  

Now, on to the news, starting with Tether.

Tether conversations reveal things

I wrote two blog posts recently—these are both transcripts with annotations. If you are interested in Tether and Bitfinex, I recommend you read both, as they contain a lot of good information.  

The first is an interview with Tether frontmen Stuart Hoegner and Paolo Ardoino hosted by bitcoin maxi Peter McCormack. The point of the interview was clearly to attack the “Tether FUD.”

Remember, it’s very important that Tether keep up the illusion that real money is behind tethers and all is well in Tetherland. If the charade crumbles, so does Tether’s dollar-peg and along with it, the bitcoin market.

To that end, Hoegner is claiming that the now $24 billion worth of tethers in circulation are fully backed. What a switch. He told us in April 2019—22 billion tethers ago—they were 74% backed. The question is what are they backed with? He won’t tell us. (Deltec is their off-shore bank in the Bahamas, by the way.) 

Peter: You mentioned Deltec. Are you shareholders in the bank? 
Stuart: We don’t talk about the investments that we have on the Tether side.
Peter: Okay, so are tethers fully backed?
Stuart: Look. The short answer is yes. Every tether is 100% backed by our reserves. And those reserves include traditional currency and cash equivalents, and may include other assets and receivables from loans made by tether to third parties. 

The second transcript I wrote up hasn’t gotten as many views but it is also interesting. It’s a debate between The Block’s Larry Cermak and blogger Bennett Tomlin. They argue whether Tether is acting in good faith. Cermak thinks they are. He believes tethers are fully backed—and wants you to believe that, too.

One question we have to ask is why Cermak, who was a staunch Tether skeptic in the past, has suddenly pulled a 180 and joined the campaign to prop up Tether? Assuming good faith, it appears he has fallen for the same con one Bloomberg reporter did two years ago.

Questions around Tether’s Deltec Bank

Another curiosity that sprung up from Paolo and Stu’s interview: Who is Deltec’s banking partner? If Tether keeps its reserves at Deltec and its largest customers have accounts there too, one would think Deltec needs a U.S. bank partner to store USD. In other words, a nostro account in a foreign bank. 

This should not be a secret. When Bitfinex was banking with Noble Bank in Puerto Rico, Noble openly stated on its website that it doesn’t actually hold the money. Instead, it used BNY Mellon as its custodian.

Presumably, Deltec has a custodian, too. This might explain why the Bahamian Central bank is not reporting inflows that match what Tether claims to have in its reserves. (The central bank publishes a quarterly statistical digest that looks at the total assets that all the country’s banks are holding.)

Of course, another explanation as to why the country’s central bank isn’t showing a large inflow of funds could be that Tether doesn’t have the reserves it says it does—or else, maybe, a good portion are in BTC?

In a year-in-review video, Deltec’s CIO Hugo Rogers dropped a bomb. He said, with the straightest face you can imagine, that the bank has a “large position” in bitcoin.

“We bought bitcoin for our clients at about $9,300 so that worked very well through 2020 and we expect it to continue working well in 2021 as the printing presses continue to run hot.” (He is referring to the U.S. printing press, but we know Tether has been running hot, too.)

Hoegner denied that any of those funds were Tether’s, according to The Block.

The Bit Short

An anonymous blogger published a Medium post on Tether titled “The Bit Short: Inside Crypto’s Doomsday Machine.” It’s full of great quotes and insights, like this one, describing how Tether’s core moneymaking engine may possibly work:

  1. Bob, a crypto investor, puts $100 of real US dollars into Coinbase.
  2. Bob then uses those dollars to buy $100 worth of Bitcoin on Coinbase.
  3. Bob transfers his $100 in Bitcoin to an unbanked exchange, like Bybit.
  4. Bob begins trading crypto on Bybit, using leverage, and receiving promotional giveaways — all of which are Tether-denominated.
  5. Tether Ltd. buys Bob’s Bitcoins from him on the exchange, almost certainly through a deniable proxy trading account. Bob gets paid in Tethers.
  6. Tether Ltd. takes Bob’s Bitcoins and moves them onto a banked exchange like Coinbase.
  7. Finally, Tether Ltd. sells Bob’s Bitcoins on Coinbase for dollars, and exits the crypto markets.

And this great quote here:

“Forget the activity on the offshore exchanges for a moment, and just think of a simple mental picture. Imagine you could stand at a metaphorical booth, where Coinbase’s exchange connects with the US financial system. If you could do that, you’d see two lines of people at the booth. One line would be crypto investors, putting dollars in—and the other line would be crooks, taking dollars out.”

If you can visualize the image above with Coinbase, you can start to understand why FinCEN is so anxious to push through its proposed “unhosted” wallets rule.

Tether’s document deadline has passed

Jan. 15 was the deadline for Bitfinex/Tether to submit a trove of documents to the NYAG, which has been investigating them for Martin Act violations. A lot of folks were hoping to see a court filing drop on Friday with the NYAG taking a position on the documents that it has received. The injunction, which limits Bitfinex from dipping into Tether’s reserves, also ended Friday, according to the NYAG’s letter from Dec. 8.

(Update: This is a bit confusing. I am not completely sure if the injunction ended on Jan. 15, according to the NYAG’s December letter, or it is implicitly extended until the next court order, per the original order.)

The NYAG hasn’t filed any new court documents yet, but we are waiting anxiously. Tether says they’ve so far sent 2.5 million docs to the NYAG—I believe that’s called a document dump.

In the meantime, Tether has mysteriously stopped printing tethers. The last big print was 400 million tethers on Jan. 12, and prior to that, 400 million on Jan. 9, according to @whale_alert.

Understanding GBTC

There has been some confusion on Twitter as to how Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) works. Grayscale doesn’t buy bitcoin directly. Grayscale customers send Grayscale their bitcoin—or cash to buy bitcoin with—and Grayscale issues shares in return. But why do the shares consistently trade at a premium to net asset value?

This November 2020 article by investor Harris Kupperman explains it well. “Think of GBTC as Pac-Man. The coins go in, but do not go out,” he said, going on to describe how GBTC functions as a “reflexive Ponzi scheme.”

Coinlab cuts a deal with Mt Gox creditors

Coinlab, a former U.S. company that has a $16 billion claim against Mt. Gox, has proposed a deal with Mt. Gox creditors over their claims. If creditors choose to go forward with the deal, they can agree to get back 90% of their BTC ahead of the settlement, according to Bloomberg.

Kim Nilsson of WizSec says Coinlab was never acting in good faith. “CoinLab was insisting on continuing to hold up the process for everyone while they litigate to try to steal everyone’s money, and had to be essentially bribed so as not to obstruct this arrangement.” (WizSec blog)

Other notable news

FinCEN has extended the deadline for comments on its proposed crypto wallet rule. Starting from Jan. 15, you now have 15 days to comment on reporting requirements, and 45 days to comment on proposed rules for reporting counterparty information and record-keeping requirements. (Coindesk, FinCEN notice)

Good-bye and good riddance. Brian Brooks has stepped down as acting commissioner of the OCC. (Coindesk.) The former Coinbase exec recently posted an editorial in the Financial Times shilling DeFi. (FT, paywalled)

The European Central Bank calls for regulating Bitcoin’s “funny business.” (Reuters)

Gary Gensler is reportedly President-elect Joe Biden’s choice to lead the SEC. Gensler is a crypto savvy guy, who taught a course on blockchain at MIT Sloan. Crypto folks can expect greater oversight from him. Hopefully, he will bring the hammer down an all those 2017 ICOs. (Bloomberg)

Tether apologists are now comparing (archive) Tether skeptics to unhinged QAnon conspiracy theorists—an example of what lengths they will go to discredit reasonable questions about Tether’s reserves. Remember, the burden is on Tether to prove they have the assets they say they do.

USDC, a U.S. regulated stablecoin issued by Circle, now has a circulating supply worth $5 billion—far outpacing that of any other U.S. regulated stablecoin.

Frances Coppola debates Nic Carter about bitcoin. (What Bitcoin Did podcast)

Bitcoin mining was partly to blame for the latest blackout in Iran. (Washington Post)

Ripple’s ex-CTO loses access to $200 million in bitcoin. “This whole idea of being your own bank—let me put it this way, do you make your own shoes?” said Stefan Thomas. “The reason we have banks is that we don’t want to deal with all those things that banks do.” (New York Times)

Bitcoin may have helped finance the pro-Trump Capital riots (Decrypt)

Twitter has banned the account of former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne after he posted conspiracy theories relating to the Presidential election. Byrne is a longtime bitcoiner who led Overstock’s decision to originally accept bitcoin and invest in the space. (Decrypt)