Tether and Northern Data. Part II: the partnership

  • By Amy Castor and David Gerard
  • If you like this post, please tell one other person. It really helps!
  • To encourage more posts, here’s Amy’s Patreon, and here’s David’s. For casual tips, here’s Amy’s Ko-Fi, and here’s David’s.

AI is the hottest thing in 2024. Nvidia GPU chips are in high demand and shortages are common, so many AI startups rent computation from cloud providers instead of buying their own chips. 

If you’re an AI cloud provider, you could stand to make a lot of money.

CoreWeave, once a little-known bitcoin miner, is now a $19 billion purported value unicorn that provides GPU access to AI startups. Other crypto miners, Hut8, Core Scientific, Hive, and Riot, are trying to tap into the AI gold rush by converting their data centers to AI. [FT, archive]

Northern Data also wants to get in on the gold rush, so it devised a cunning plan: pivot to AI and get rich in an IPO. 

But Nvidia won’t take diluted shares of company stock for its cards. So Northern Data needed a partner with lots of cash. They found one in Tether, everyone’s favorite stablecoin issuer.

And in Northern Data, Tether found … a banker of sorts.

We talked about the history of Northern Data in part I of our series. Here, we’ll discuss their partnership with Tether and plans to strike it rich in an IPO. In part III, we’ll dig into the lawsuit against Northern Data by its former directors. 

A perfect backer

Northern Data had a plan: pivot to “AI” and IPO for billions.  

But first, they needed Nvidia cards to grow their cloud computing business — and convince investors that their money-losing operation had profit potential if they spun it off.

If you believe their unaudited claims, Tether is sitting on piles of cash. They’ve been boasting about huge profits from interest earned on US Treasury holdings and market gains on bitcoin and gold. They claim to be so loaded up now that they’re looking for investments.

In June 2024, Tether said they planned to put $1 billion into investments over the next twelve months. In the last two years, they’ve invested $2 billion, with Northern Data as their single largest beneficiary. [Bloomberg, archive]

What is Tether getting in return? Northern Data wants to combine its cloud business and its data center business. If they can IPO the new entity, the stock could be worth multiples of the current value of the two divisions.

Tether also has the prospect of gaining access to the bank accounts of a publicly traded company with businesses in Europe and the US.  (Northern Data AG is listed on the Munich Stock Exchange.) 

Tether’s banking dilemma

Tether has 112 billion tethers (USDT) sloshing around in the crypto markets, allegedly backed 1:1 with US dollars and also with squirrels and confetti. But quite a bit is Treasury bills and things very close to actual cash.

US banks really, really hate Tether — they’re not happy with all the crime, money laundering, and sanctions evasion. Even if Tether has the cash they claim, they still have the problem of moving money to and from customers without banks freezing their accounts.

Tether was cut off from the US banking system in 2017. This has left Tether resorting to clown banks like Deltec and playing cat-and-mouse games to keep banking access. If Tether wants to stay afloat, they need to find ways to move large sums of money from parts of the world where they don’t need it to low money laundering risk countries, like the US, where they can more easily wire funds to other jurisdictions.

After a few years of problems (that lost them $850 million), Tether made very good friends with Sam Bankman-Fried, who founded crypto exchange FTX and its trading arm Alameda Research. Bankman-Fried and Tether formed a partnership that fueled a new bitcoin bubble. In 2021 alone, Tether printed $60 billion worth of tethers, pushing bitcoin to new all-time highs. FTX grew to become the third-largest crypto exchange in the world. 

Before it collapsed like a clown car, FTX  served as Tether’s main financial launderette. Alameda Research was one of Tether’s largest non-exchange customers. Between 2020 and 2022, Alameda received almost 40 billion tethers directly from Tether. [Bloomberg, archive]

“These guys were running a one-way USD to USDT bureau de change,” Jonathan Reiter (Data Finnovation) of ChainArgos told Bloomberg. 

FTX and Tether used the same money launderers and they all worked together to prop each other up. Their shared bank, Deltec, is also alleged to have falsified invoices on behalf of FTX and Alameda to other banks. 

FTX was functionally Tether’s banker. But in November 2022, FTX blew up. Tether needed something new.

Tether pivots to AI

Tether announced a “strategic investment” in Northern Data in September 2023 — in what turned out to be a convoluted capital raise. (Tether swears they didn’t dip into the alleged reserves for Tether, which would have been abusing customer money.) [Tether, archive]

In June 2023, Tether set up a subsidiary in Ireland, Damoon Designated Activity Company, and funded it with “the equivalent of 10,000 Nvidia H100 GPUs,” worth 400 million euros. The key word here is “equivalent,” so potentially neither GPUs nor actual money.

A few weeks later, Tether and Northern Data announced they had entered a formal agreement. Northern Data would buy Damoon and Tether would get Northern Data stock — valued at 400 million euros. Before the sale closed, Damoon would acquire the “equivalent” in Nvidia chips: [Press release]

The valuation of EUR 400 million for 100% of Damoon is equivalent to the purchase value of the associated hardware without any up-writing. In essence, on completion of the transaction, Northern Data will have acquired latest-generation GPU hardware for a value of EUR 400 million.

In November, Northern Data also secured a 575 million euros ($610 million) debt-financing facility from Tether — a line of credit — “to drive further investments across its three business lines.” The debt facility is unsecured and has a term until January 1, 2030, meaning Northern Data had six years to draw on the funds. [Press release]

We know little else about the terms of the loan. Does Northern Data even have to pay interest on this?

Northern Data completed its stock-for-stock acquisition of Damoon in January 2024, bringing Tether’s total exposure to Northern Data to 1.1 billion euros — or the “equivalent” of that. [Press release, archive, Bloomberg, archive]

In an interview with Benzinga, Northern Data CEO Aroosh Thillainathan explained the transaction: [Benzinga, 2023]

Through our acquisition of a company called Damoon, a special-purpose investment vehicle owned by crypto giant Tether, we have acquired 20 NVIDIA Pods, each with 512 H100 GPUs. The transaction has been done as a contribution in kind, in return for issuing new shares, at exactly the valuation that these pods would have cost us if we had bought them directly from NVIDIA. 

That is: yet again, Northern Data spun up the stock printer to buy a company.

Tether now owns 51% of Northern Data’s stock. So they now have majority control of a German-listed public company.

How the money, if any, flows 

We can’t find third-party evidence that Northern Data has acquired or installed the 10,240 GPUs that it says Damoon purchased. Press releases state that Northern Data now have the GPUs — but it’s utterly unclear how Tether, of all the companies, could have even paid for them.

We wondered how Tether got banking in Ireland when most banks hate Tether, and realized: well, maybe they didn’t. 

Let’s run a pure hypothetical on how you might buy GPUs without moving money.

Tether could have placed an order for Nvidia chips — without paying for them. Companies do this all of the time.

They would have just needed to show that Damoon was creditworthy. Tether would then negotiate the purchase, issue a purchase order to get in the queue for delivery, and then, before Nvidia delivered the chips, sell Damoon for diluted Northern Data stock. This would release Tether from needing to underwrite the purchase or take delivery.

In this scheme, no money has flowed from Tether or Northern Data to any account in Ireland or to Nvidia, but now Tether has $400 million in clean receivables in Ireland.

That is: Northern Data bought a company with no assets or operations other than an incoming Nvidia delivery. 

This is a scenario that could have happened. Certainly, third-party evidence could exist to the contrary.

Northern Data said in January that they now “own” 18,000 Nvidia H100 GPUs and had started deploying them in December. The move “strengthens Taiga Cloud’s position as Europe’s first and largest dedicated Generative AI Cloud Service Provider.” [Press release, archive]

It’s possible Northern Data actually do own 18,000 Nvidia GPUs! From somewhere. It would be a big deal for a public company to flat-out lie in a press release, especially a company that’s already had run-ins with BaFin.

But there’s good reason to doubt the GPUs were paid for using dollars from Tether.

Get rich quick

Now that Northern Data has acquired its AI chips — or at least the “equivalent” as part of a Tether subsidiary — they can move to the next phase of their plan. 

Northern Data wants to combine two of its divisions — its Taiga cloud computing division and its Ardent data center division — and list the resulting company on the Nasdaq in the first half of 2025. (A third business division, Peak, still focuses on bitcoin mining.) [Bloomberg, archive]

The hope is that an IPO in the current AI bubble will lure in enough suckers to pull in a massive pile of cash. The new company wants to IPO for $10 billion to $16 billion — even though Northern Data’s entire market cap is only $1.4 billion. 

The immediate beneficiaries will be Northern Data CEO Aroosh Thillainathan, the largest employee shareholder, and Tether, who now owns 51% of Northern Data.

Reuters columnist Yawen Chen says the IPO “sounds more like valuation voodoo than financial reality.” [Breaking Views, paywalled, archive]

I’m totally good for it, bro

It also could be that Tether really do need the cash — if there were some sort of issues with the heaps of money they claim to have.

If Tether have $112 billion backing their USDT, they could make literally billions in the current high interest rate environment just from Treasury notes and similar. They don’t need to make risky investments.

So why is Tether even making these investments?

In “Lying for Money,” Dan Davies describes how financial frauds tend to grow exponentially over time as the gap between real dollars and fake dollars in the system widens. That’s because compound interest is the enemy of fraud.

In a legitimate business, money increases, gets invested back into the business, and grows over time. In a fraudulent business, that process works in reverse:

The reason for this is that unlike a genuine business, a fraud does not generate enough real returns to support itself, particularly as money is extracted by the criminal. Because of this, at every date when repayment is expected, the fraudster has to make the choice whether to shut the fraud down and try to make an escape, or to increase its size; more and more money has to be defrauded in order to keep the scheme going as time progresses.

Riding a spiral of fraud is a tempting explanation for Tether’s rapid growth, especially since 2020 when Tether put the tether printer into overdrive. 

Fraudsters also often turn to get-rich-quick schemes in the hope that they can miraculously dig themselves out of their ever-deepening money pit.

So we suspect Tether is short on actual cash dollars. They think they can turn $1 billion into $10 billion by entering a deal with cash-strapped Northern Data.

And when Tether needs to move dollars around, despite their limited access to proper banking, they’ll have their very good friends at Northern Data to help them.

We see an interesting future for Northern Data and its CEO Aroosh Thillainathan. We’re just not sure what that will look like.

Image: “A rendering provided Wednesday, March 9, 2022, by technology company Northern Data, MidAmerica Industrial Park, Grand River Dam Authority and the Oklahoma Commerce Department shows plans for Northern Data’s planned data center and North American operations headquarters at the industrial park in Pryor, Okla.” [KTUL]

Read more:
Tether and Northern Data. Part III: the whistleblowers

Amy and David answer your questions on crypto! (Part 1)

  • By Amy Castor and David Gerard

Crypto is still hungover from New Year’s and there’s no news. So we asked readers what they were curious about in crypto. [Twitter; Bluesky]

Keep your questions coming for part 2, some time or other!

Sending us money will definitely help — here’s Amy’s Patreon, and here’s David’s.

Q: I keep wondering what’s keeping the circus alive, given that the retail dollars are practically gone, and the last remaining on/off-ramps are all but down the drain. [Tomalak on Bluesky]

The circus is fed by dollars — real and fake — and its product is hopium, the unfaltering belief that number will always go up. The hopium runs on narratives, such as the current story that a bitcoin ETF will result in a magical influx of fresh dollars.

In crypto, the retail dollars have largely gone home — but too many people have large piles of crypto accounted as dollars to let the number go down. So they deploy fake dollars to keep the crypto flowing.

There are currently 93 billion dubiously-backed tethers sloshing around the crypto markets. We expect that to go over 100 billion as we get closer to the bitcoin mining reward halving in April.

The circus is advertised by the crypto media, which functions as PR outlets for the space. The CoinDesk live-wire feed on any given day is about half hopium, for instance. There are no respectable media outlets in a crypto winter.

(Except us, of course. Subscribe today!

Q: Why can’t or wouldn’t the average investor make money in crypto? We criticize it, and rightfully so, but why should the person looking to make a profit care? [King Schultz on Twitter]

There is no source of dollars other than fresh retail investors. Old investors can only be paid out with money from new investors.

Crypto isn’t technically a Ponzi scheme — it just works like one. So investing in crypto will always be a slightly negative-sum game.

Functionally, crypto is a single unified casino, run by a very small number of people, with no regulation. Binance is the tables, Coinbase is the cashier window. The flow of cash is from retail suckers to very few rich guys at the top.

There are many, many complicated mechanisms in the middle, and they’re fascinating to look at and describe and watch in action. But the complex mechanisms don’t change what’s happening here — money flows from lots of suckers to a few scammers.

Some people make money in crypto, just like some people make money in Las Vegas — but gambling in Vegas isn’t an investment scheme either. And the house always wins.

You can make money in crypto if you’re a better shark than all the other sharks in the shark pool, who built the pool. It can be done! Good luck!

Q: be interested in reading about money laundering [Broseph on Bluesky]

Money laundering is when you try to turn the proceeds of crime into money that doesn’t appear to be the proceeds of crime. Laundering money is also a specific crime in itself.

With money going electronic, it’s harder to obscure the origins of ill-gotten gains and avoid unwanted attention from banks and the authorities. Many crooks have attempted to launder money by using crypto as the obfuscatory step.

Bitfinex money mule Reggie Fowler set up a global network of bank accounts. He told the banks the accounts were for real estate transactions. He was sentenced to six years in prison.

Heather “Razzlekhan” Morgan and Ilya Lichtenstein tried laundering the bitcoins from the Bitfinex hack through the Alphabay darknet market. This would have completely covered their trail! Except that the police had pwned Alphabay by then, and Lichtenstein’s transactions were all right there for the cops to track him. Whoops.

We also highly recommend Dan Davies’s fabulous book on fraud, Lying for Money.

Q: Not so much baffled but curious as to how law enforcement can and does identify people using blockchain. Also, do some coins not have a public blockchain? [Bob Morris on Twitter]

Cryptocurrencies run on publicly available blockchains. In theory, you can trace the history of every transaction on a blockchain right back to when it started.

The hard part for authorities is linking someone’s real-world identity to a specific blockchain address. Achieving this was the key to busting Heather Morgan and Ilya Lichtenstein, for instance. The hardest part for crooks is cashing out successfully without being busted.

The trail can be difficult to trace, especially if the crook has put effort into obfuscation — e.g., running transactions through a mixer such as Tornado Cash. But specialists can get good at tracing blockchain transactions and several companies sell this as a service.

Privacy coins like Monero and ZCash try to obfuscate the traceability of transactions on the blockchain itself. But users often give themselves away by other channels — e.g., transaction volumes elsewhere that coincidentally correspond to amounts of Monero sent to a darknet market.

Even if you can protect yourself cryptographically, one error can leave your backside hanging out — and crypto users are really bad at operational security.

Q: nfts aren’t really relevant these days but I’ve never been clear on what ‘mint events’ are and how they relate to the icos. Are users generating new nfts paid for by using the coins they previously bought? [Robert Kambic on Bluesky]

Initial coin offerings (ICOs) were huge in 2017 and 2018 — but the SEC came down hard on them because they were pretty much all unregistered offerings of penny stocks.

Since that time, crypto has tried to come up with other ideas for doing unregistered offerings while making them look at least a little less illegal. There were SAFTs, airdrops, and now NFT mint events. These are all about creating fresh tokens out of thin air and promoting them as an investment in a common enterprise that will make a profit from the efforts of others.

A “mint event” is when you buy into an NFT collection early — when it first mints — hoping the value will increase astronomically over time.

But these are not securities, no, no, no. Yuga Labs wasn’t selling you shares in a company — they were selling you ape cartoons! You weren’t getting dividends, you were getting Mutant Apes, dog NFTs, and ApeCoins! You’re not investing in a speculative startup, you’re buying art!

The SEC has so far sued one NFT company, Impact Theory, after it raised $30 million through NFT sales. The SEC said the NFTs were promoted as investment contracts and not registered. [Complaint, PDF]

We didn’t say too much about NFTs in our 2024 predictions, but we expect that the SEC will go after more NFT projects this year, as they clear their backlog of violators.

Q. I’d like a definitive explanation on the amount of apes you can feed with a single slurp juice. [Etienne Beureux on Twitter]

Slurp juices were popularized in a tweet about Astro Apes, a Bored Apes knockoff, which also featured tokens called “slurp juices” that you could apply to your Astro Ape tokens to generate more Astro Ape tokens and get rich for free.

The tweet was posted on May 4, 2022 — just a few days before Terra-Luna exploded and popped the 2021-2022 crypto bubble.

Also, the guy who tweeted about slurp juices is a neo-Nazi. Welcome to crypto. [BuzzFeed News]

Q: I’ve often wondered why new languages like Solidity were necessary for smart contracts. [David John Smailes on Twitter]

The Ethereum team originally just wanted to use JavaScript, but it didn’t quite do what they needed in terms of functionality and data types — so they created Solidity, a new language based on JavaScript.

A blockchain is an extremely harsh programming environment. It’s hard or impossible to modify your code once deployed — you must get it right the first time. It’s about money, so every attacker will be going after your code.

In situations where programming errors have drastic consequences, you usually try to make it harder to shoot yourself in the foot — functional programming languages, formal methods, mathematical verification of the code, not using a full computer language (avoid Turing completeness), and so on.

Solidity ignores all of that — and the world’s most mediocre JavaScript programmers moved sideways to write the world’s most mediocre smart contracts and cause everyone to lose all their money, repeatedly. Smart contracts are best modeled as a piñata, where you whack it in the right spot and a pile of crypto falls out.

Other blockchains saw Ethereum-based projects making a ton of money (or crypto) and wanted that for themselves — so they tend to just use the Ethereum Virtual Machine so they can run buggy Solidity code too.

There are other, somewhat better, smart contract languages — but Solidity is overwhelmingly the language of choice, which keeps the comedy gold flowing nicely.

Q. Miner extracted value? [Cathal Mooney on Twitter]

Miners — or now validators — supposedly make money from block rewards and transaction fees.

There is a third way for validators to make money. Smart contract execution depends on the order of transactions within a block. Since the validator controls what transactions they can put in a block and how they order those transactions, they can front run the traders — the validator sees an unprocessed transaction, creates their own transaction ahead of that one and takes some or all of the advantage that the trader saw.

The term “Miner Extractable Value” was coined in the paper “Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus Instability” in 2020. [IEEE Xplore]

Front-running is largely illegal in real finance. But since the Ethereum Foundation couldn’t stop their validators from front-running their users, they decided to claim it was a feature, which they have renamed “maximal extractable value.” [Ethereum Foundation]

Q: What do you think will eventually happen to all the Satoshi Nakamoto Bitcoin wallets? [Steve Alarm on Twitter]

Quite likely nothing. We suspect the keys, and thus the million bitcoins, are simply lost. Nobody has heard anything verifiably from Satoshi since April 13, 2011, when he sent a final email to bitcoin developer Mike Hearn. [Plan99]

If the Satoshi coins ever did move, there would be a lot of headlines. But we don’t think the crypto trading market would be affected much — the market is so thin, there are multiple large holders who could crash the market any time they felt like it, and the market is already largely fake. We think everyone will just pretend nothing happened and everything is fine.

Q. Did Do Kwon actually sell all his BTC to prop up Luna? [Saku Kamiyūbetsu on Twitter]

Terra (UST) was an algorithmic dollar stablecoin and luna was its free-floating twin. Terraform Labs ran the Anchor Protocol, which promised 20% interest on staked UST. At peak, there were 18 billion UST in circulation.

It turned out there was money to be made in crashing UST — so in May 2022, someone did. There is a strong rumor (and DOJ investigations) that it was Alameda. Other parties who collapsed because of Terra-Luna left the gaping hole in Alameda that eventually killed FTX. If Alameda fired the first shot directly into their own leg, that would be extremely crypto, as well as extremely funny.

UST was crashing, so Terraform Labs tried to prop up Terra-Luna. The bitcoins came from the Luna Foundation Guard, which promised to deploy $1.5 billion worth of bitcoin to defend UST. This didn’t work. [Twitter, archive]

We haven’t found a smoking gun that Luna actually spent the bitcoins on buying up UST or luna. In 2023, the SEC charged Terraform Labs and Do Kwon and said that Kwon and Terraform took over 10,000 BTC out of Luna Foundation Guard in May 2022 and converted at least $100 million into cash.

Q: I’m baffled at the lack of interest from crypto critics that the DoJ will not be pursuing additional charges against SBF. Specifically, the charges that could make some politicians very uncomfortable. [Amer Icon on Twitter]

The issue was specifically whether to further prosecute Sam Bankman-Fried. The prosecution letter to the judge quite clearly explains their reasons why a second case wouldn’t do anything useful in this regard. [Letter, PDF]

The evidence that Sam was the guy who made these bribes was presented in the case that just concluded and will be considered when he’s sentenced in March — they don’t need a second trial to nail those facts down.

Hypothetical other evidence that might have come to light about other parties wasn’t a factor in considering what to do about Sam Bankman-Fried. It’s quite reasonable to want to get those guys, but you will probably need a more direct method than a side factor in an additional case against a guy who is already likely going to jail forever.

Q. snarkier memes would be worthy [Chris Doerfler on Twitter]

“Esto no puede ser tan estúpido, debes estar explicándolo mal.”

We did a follow-up on this story. Part 2, though not labeled as such, is here!

Image: Amy Landers and Dear David reading today’s Web 3 Is Going Just Great