Yellen Works with Regulators to Address Silicon Valley Bank Collapse

On March 10, 2023, California’s financial watchdog shut down Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) following an announcement of a significant sale of assets and stocks to raise $2.25 billion in capital to shore up operations. As a result, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was appointed as the receiver to protect insured deposits. While the FDIC only insures up to $250,000 per depositor, per institution, and per ownership category, concerns are mounting about the impact of the collapse of SVB, particularly on small businesses that employ people across the country.

In response to the situation, United States Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is working with regulators to address the collapse of SVB. In a recent interview with CBS News, Yellen stated that they are designing “appropriate policies to address the situation” at the bank. She also noted that they are not considering a major bailout, citing the reforms that have been put in place since the financial crisis. However, Yellen emphasized that they are focused on protecting depositors and are working with regulators to address their concerns.

One of the challenges facing depositors is the fact that most accounts at SVB are unsecured. Yellen acknowledged this issue and stated that regulators are “very aware of the problems that depositors will have.” She also expressed concern about the possibility of contagion to other regional American banks, stating that “the goal always is supervision and regulation is to make sure that contagion can’t- can’t occur.”

SVB is one of the top 20 largest banks in the United States and provides banking services to many crypto-friendly venture firms. According to a Castle Hill report, assets from Web3 venture capitalists totaled more than $6 billion at the bank, including $2.85 billion from Andreessen Horowitz, $1.72 billion from Paradigm, and $560 million from Pantera Capital. Yellen’s comments indicate that regulators are well aware of the significance of the collapse of SVB and are working to mitigate its impact.

Regarding the options available to the FDIC, Yellen noted that they are considering “a wide range of available options,” including acquisitions from foreign banks. She also emphasized that they are working to address the situation in a timely way.

In conclusion, Yellen’s remarks highlight the seriousness with which regulators are approaching the collapse of SVB. While a major bailout is off the table, protecting depositors, particularly small businesses, is a top priority. Regulators are exploring a range of options, including acquisitions from foreign banks, to address the situation and prevent contagion to other regional American banks.

Source

Tagged : / / / / /

It is in Talks with “Interested Parties” for Bailout, Says Zipmex

Zipmex, a cryptocurrency trading platform, is looking ahead as it has confirmed that it is in talks with interested parties who would like to bail out the platform from its recently identified woes. 

ZIP2.jpg

In an announcement it shared on its official Twitter account, Zipmex implied it was not at liberty to disclose the name of the potential backers as it is not bound to do so by a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) already signed.

“Our conversations with various interested parties have progressed significantly. One of those parties has offered terms in an MOU which includes confidentiality obligations to be able to commence Due Diligence,” the firm said in the Tweet.

It is unclear how or in what capacity the noted “interested parties” will want to help the firm considering the halt of its activities was hinged on the financial difficulties of its partners. The South Asian crypto app revealed that it had massive exposures to two of the most distressed crypto lenders in the industry, including Celsius Network and Babel Finance, respectively.

Zipmex revealed that it had an unsecured loan of $48 million extended to Babel Finance and $5 million to Celsius. While the company said, it is willing to write off its minimal exposure with Celsius against its own balance sheet.

The due diligence being conducted by the interested parties in Zipmex’s business mimics the type Nexo is currently conducting on Vauld Group, another distressed crypto lending platform that halted its withdrawals a few weeks back.

Exploring equity takeovers and significant loan extensions have been one of the most sought-after bailout approaches that distressed crypto firms are willing to secure as the ecosystem’s future is unsure with the current sweeping liquidity crisis. Firms like FTX Derivatives Exchange are at the forefront of this bailout, with one extended to BlockFi and Voyager Digital, respectively.

Image source: Shutterstock

Source

Tagged : / / / / / /

FTX Proposes Joint Proposal to Bailout Bankrupt Voyager’s Customers

FTX crypto exchange announced on Friday that its plans to give Voyager Digital’s customers access to some of their funds.

According to a joint proposal between FTX and Alameda Ventures, a trading firm founded by Bankman-Fried, Voyager customers will be able to claim a part of their funds that were frozen more than three weeks ago. It is, however, unclear how much each customer will be able to receive.

As per the joint plan, Alameda Ventures will buy all of Voyager’s digital assets and digital asset loans, except Voyager’s loans to the bankrupt crypto hedge fund Three Arrows Capital.

Voyager’s clients could then get some of their funds if they open an account with FTX. Such customers could either make withdrawals of their cash balance immediately or use the funds to buy digital assets on FTX‘s platform, FTX said.

Customers are expected to participate voluntarily, the company added.

FTX expects to close the deal in early August, subject to the requirements of the Chapter 11 process and the need for court approval.

In a statement on Friday, Sam Bankman-Fried, said: “Voyager’s customers did not choose to be bankruptcy investors holding unsecured claims. The goal of our joint proposal is to help establish a better way to resolve an insolvent crypto business – a way that allows customers to obtain early liquidity and reclaim a portion of their assets without forcing them to speculate on bankruptcy outcomes and take one-sided risks.”

As per the joint proposal, FTX would not buy Voyager’s loans to Three Arrows Capital or others under litigation claims. The joint proposal expects Voyager to pursue its rights with regards to Three Arrows Capital matters and use any recoveries to supplement fund distributions to customers, whether or not such clients open accounts with FTX.

Helping Failing Crypto Firms

The joint proposal comes two weeks after Voyager filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy less than a week after suspending trading and withdrawals due to the current crypto market crash.  

The move comes days after the company issued a default notice to the bankrupt hedge fund firm Three Arrows Capital (3AC) for failure to make required payments on a loan.

Many recent problems within the crypto industry can be traced back to the spectacular collapse of TerraUSD stablecoin in May. And contagion spread across risky crypto projects. Crypto firms like Celsius, BlockFi, Voyager capital, and Three Arrows Capital (3AC), among others, became exposed to insolvency fears

Late last month, Sam Bankman-Fried announced that they had given some crypto firms who suffered due to 3AC liquidation a line of credit worth $750 million. FTX offered a bailout worth $750 million to keep two crypto lenders solvent: $500 million for Voyager and $250 million for BlockFi.

On June 22, Voyager signed an agreement with Alameda Ventures for a revolving line of credit and gaining access to additional capital to meet its customers’ liquidity needs.

Image source: Shutterstock

Source

Tagged : / / / /

FTX Still Has a Few Billion to Spare for Struggling Crypto Firms, Sam Bankman-Fried Says

FTX, a leading crypto exchange, is willing to splash a few billion to help struggling companies amid the present cryptocurrency winter, according to the exchange’s CEO and founder, Sam Bankman-Fried.

Bankman-Fried has recently emerged as the white knight in the crypto sector because he has been giving different digital asset platforms a lifeline by bailing them out.

For instance, he recently injected $250 million in capital into the troubled crypto lender BlockFi with the option of acquiring it. As a result, BlockFi CEO Zac Prince revealed that the company was on track to bolster its balance sheet and general platform strength.

Various firms have found themselves on the receiving end with the crypto market experiencing a bloodbath based on tightened macroeconomic factors.

FTX has been getting requests for help from different companies. “We’re starting to get a few more companies reaching out to us,” Bankman-Fried said.

Through his crypto-trading firm Alameda Research, Bankman-Fried also rescued cryptocurrency brokerage firm, Voyager through a $200 million loan in June. 

The FTX CEO acknowledged that the objective of the bailouts was to eliminate panic in the crypto ecosystem and protect investor assets. He pointed out:

“Having trust with consumers that things will work as advertised is incredibly important and if broken is incredibly hard to get back.”

This revelation comes days after Bankman-Fried acknowledged that he was willing to bailout jittered crypto miners who had been borrowing for the past two years to spur expansion plans, Blockchain.News reported. 

Unforeseen circumstances like the Ukraine invasion of Russia and the collapse of LUNA and UST tokens have triggered a downtrend in the crypto market, whose value has dropped to less than $1 trillion from nearly $3 trillion recorded in November last year. 

Furthermore, Bitcoin (BTC) has lost at least 70% of its value from the all-time high (ATH) price of $69K recorded in November 2021.

Therefore, Bankman-Fried’s bailout plans are a welcome move in the crypto sector because they are reigniting the fire. 

Image source: Shutterstock

Source

Tagged : / / / / /

Morgan Creek Digital to Raise $250m, Balancing BlockFi’s Bailout from FTX

Bailing out the crypto lending platform BlockFi has become one of the most significant endeavours for early investors in the company such as Morgan Creek Digital.

Webp.net-resizeimage (52).jpg

According to an exclusive Coindesk report, the crypto investment manager has been wooing investors in a bid to raise $250 million to counter the offer from FTX Derivatives Exchange.

The Coindesk report was centred on a leaked call made by Morgan Creek Digital’s managing partner, Mark Yusko.

Per the reviewed call, Yusko was learned to have explained the details of the BlockFi and FTX’s offer, which he said, if finalized, may cost early investors like Morgan Creek their investments as FTX can acquire the firm at almost zero cost. To prevent this from happening, Yusko solicited immediate funding from investors to make a counter offer that could at least benefit the investment firm should BlockFi declare bankruptcy amidst the encompassing crypto winter.

Yusko noted that BlockFi co-founders had to pitch tents with FTX because the exchange was the only one that offered a bailout in which clients’ funds are protected. Additional details of the deal are notably being discussed at the moment. 

“We are still negotiating the terms of the deal and cannot share more information at this time,” a BlockFi spokesperson told CoinDesk on Saturday. “We anticipate sharing more on the terms of the deal with the public at a later date.” 

Bailouts are now becoming a major lifeline for the crypto startups that are most hit by the ongoing crypto market meltdown. With Celsius Network also on the brink of declaring bankruptcy, Goldman Sachs is reportedly raising funds to acquire the embattled crypto lender should it come to that. 

Mark Yusko is flexible in his bid to pilot Morgan Creek into becoming a part-owner of BlockFi, and he said he is open to a joint takeover with Sam Bankman-Fried if it comes to that.

 

Image source: Shutterstock

Source

Tagged : / / / /

Morgan Creek Digital to Balance BlockFi’s Bailout from FTX

Bailing out the crypto lending platform BlockFi has become one of the most significant endeavours for early investors in the company such as Morgan Creek Digital.

Webp.net-resizeimage (52).jpg

According to an exclusive Coindesk report, the crypto investment manager has been wooing investors in a bid to raise $250 million to counter the offer from FTX Derivatives Exchange.

The Coindesk report was centred on a leaked call made by Morgan Creek Digital’s managing partner, Mark Yusko.

Per the reviewed call, Yusko was learned to have explained the details of the BlockFi and FTX’s offer, which he said, if finalized, may cost early investors like Morgan Creek their investments as FTX can acquire the firm at almost zero cost. To prevent this from happening, Yusko solicited immediate funding from investors to make a counter offer that could at least benefit the investment firm should BlockFi declare bankruptcy amidst the encompassing crypto winter.

Yusko noted that BlockFi co-founders had to pitch tents with FTX because the exchange was the only one that offered a bailout in which clients’ funds are protected. Additional details of the deal are notably being discussed at the moment. 

“We are still negotiating the terms of the deal and cannot share more information at this time,” a BlockFi spokesperson told CoinDesk on Saturday. “We anticipate sharing more on the terms of the deal with the public at a later date.” 

Bailouts are now becoming a major lifeline for the crypto startups that are most hit by the ongoing crypto market meltdown. With Celsius Network also on the brink of declaring bankruptcy, Goldman Sachs is reportedly raising funds to acquire the embattled crypto lender should it come to that. 

Mark Yusko is flexible in his bid to pilot Morgan Creek into becoming a part-owner of BlockFi, and he said he is open to a joint takeover with Sam Bankman-Fried if it comes to that.

 

Image source: Shutterstock

Source

Tagged : / / / /

Bailout Might Not the Best Option for Saving Poor Crypto Projects, Says CZ

Binance Chief Executive Officer, Changpeng Zhao (CZ) shared a note on Thursday that bailouts should be conducted conditionally, some of the projects might not be worth to be saved due to their poor performance amid the crypto winter.

Webp.net-resizeimage - 2022-06-24T120727.157.jpg

Without sentiments, the Binance boss said not all companies are meant to be rescued, and he implied that this current economic meltdown that has rubbed off on the crypto industry is just a way to expose the firms without concrete business models. CZ submitted that some firms just do not deserve a bailout as they have “no product-market fit, are poorly managed, and are poorly operated”.

He noted that while the above inefficiencies are not the challenges of many other struggling businesses, he said excessive spending is what is driving most firms to the ground. Based on these facts, CZ said these badly managed firms do not deserve to be bailed out.

“In any industry, there are always more failed projects than successful ones. Hopefully, the failures are small, and the successes are large. But you get the idea. Bailouts here don’t make sense. Don’t perpetuate bad companies. Let them fail. Let other better projects take their place, and they will,”

Changpeng Zhao noted that its deals team is considering bailouts for some companies that have approached it, however, the merits of the requests will be carefully explored. The whole comment from CZ came following the bouts of bailouts that are currently being dished out to ailing crypto lenders in the space.

While FTX derivatives exchange has come to the aid of BlockFi with a $250 million revolving credit facility, Voyager Digital also secured a $200 million bailout fund from Alameda Ventures, a trend that now seems to be commonplace in the digital currency ecosystem of today.

Image source: Changpeng Zhao Twitter

Source

Tagged : / / / / /

Bitcoin Will Decapitate Zombie Corporations That Are Destroying The Economy

2008 Taught Us Nothing

We have experienced (and some of us grew up) during a very interesting blip within history, starting with the events that transpired in 2008 when the tools of our “innovations” in financialization proved to be the swords upon which we fell. Like the Romans of olde, through mechanisms of sheer greed and euphoria, we brought down our own house upon us. And nearly the entire world with it.

Since that event, regrettably, we have not learned.

What the U.S. governing body, with the help of the Federal Reserve, did in response to this cataclysm of our own design was to provide a bailout to the institutions most drastically impacted by the climax of the global financial crisis via the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA). This bailout was a play to sacrifice future value in exchange for providing immediate value through debt and debasing the purchasing power of the currency. By taking on debt (or a promise to pay back the loan at a later date in exchange for monetary value now), these entities that mismanaged their financials were allowed to remain afloat. Now, yes, doing this allowed some individuals to maintain their livelihoods and avoid doom, but for many others there was no such relief.

Also to be considered: that debt was a debt that was decided upon by the few, but burdened the many. By “the many,” I am referring to the entire population of the United States of America. When we look at the national debt, it is a representation of the sum of the parts; it is not compartmentalized so that, “well, this debt is for those folks to cover, that isn’t my responsibility.” At that moment, all of us shouldered that debt. From the second the bailout was decided upon it became all our problem — from every child to every senior citizen

At that very same time, the bailout did one other thing. It showed the banks and corporations that the U.S. government was willing to push the responsibility off of the “job providers” and onto the labor force (the citizenry) by way of national debt and kicking the can down the road.

Imagine you’re working a job and that job is very competitive. You earn a decent living by it, but it’s so competitive that you must work to make sure that you are staying on top of the competition — working to understand your industry better, learning to be more effective and more efficient with your time. You’re working towards the goal to be the best that you can be in order to prove to the market that your labor is worth the price.

Now, let’s imagine that one day an individual walks into your office or shop and notifies you that your paycheck is now guaranteed each month, that you need not worry about providing for yourself and your family. What happens to your mind? You relax. You don’t need to try as hard because you no longer need to worry about being the best in order to maintain your income. Now there’s no pressure to be the best in order to justify your price for your services — it’s guaranteed! What happens to your work ethic? Do you try as hard? Now, excluding the few individuals in society that are driven to be the best regardless of compensation (which is the very, very few), you don’t try as hard. Why?

You are incentivized to do the opposite. When the reward is guaranteed regardless of the outcome, you’re incentivized to do as little as possible because that’s efficient. It is what makes the most sense! Why do more when you’re compensated equally regardless of the amount of effort that is put forth?

After that little scenario, consider being a company that is in the same position. Let’s even say that the company is still motivated to attempt to be the best, regardless of the income guarantee. There is still one factor that is missing that helps push individuals forward: fear.

If a company no longer has to fear that their decisions may cause the company to fail and lead to the loss of livelihood for their workforce, then what is the likely outcome? In my oh so humble opinion: the company begins to make foolish and reckless decisions. Risk management goes out the window. There’s no longer any risk!

While the incumbent company is lacking in fear because of its guaranteed backstop by the government, it is also not innovating. And yet their protected can’t-fail market position prevents new upstart companies from disrupting their status quo. In a world where these zombie corporations weren’t kept on life support, a new company would be able to gain marketshareas they develop products that are produced more cheaply and more efficiently than those that are currently dominating the market. This is accomplished by newer ways of thought that the current masters were incapable of realizing, otherwise the incumbents would be doing so already. This is a process known as creative destruction, a process known in nature as Darwinism, natural selection or the life cycle.

This is also the process by which wildfires can burn down a forest and clear away the underbrush, allowing for a specific species of plant that requires heat to wake their seeds from dormancy to take root. And so a few short years after the death and destruction of the fire, there is another beautiful, thriving forest. It is a natural process.

The Disruptors Disrupt

This cycle of destructive renewal is akin to a peasant rising from the gutter and becoming the king. But that new king is destined to eventually be overthrown by the next ascendant regime. It is a guarantee of natural life: disruption and chaos. Order leads to chaos, and out of that chaos comes a new order. That new order will be disrupted by a new chaos and the cycle repeats.

Would Facebook or Twitter exist today if AOL or Myspace was given free money to maintain its level of dominance that it experienced in the early days of the internet?

These zombie corporations have become a massive drain on our economy and society. When so many are allowed to exist, life itself stagnates. Remember the days when the new smartphones were all the craze because the next model actually did something new? When was the last time we had a product enter the market that was revolutionary, that caused a buzz of excitement and demand? Tablets don’t count, they’re just an iteration of the touchscreen phone. And don’t you dare come at me with suggesting the latest smartphone “bEcAuSe Of iTz CaMeRa.”

This lack of innovation is a signal that zombie companies are suppressing and handicapping our markets, a signal which is getting ignored at an alarming intensity. Danielle DiMartino Booth added an angle to this topic in her discussion with Michael Ippolito of Blockworks that I had not considered prior: as these companies are kept on life support, our labor market is also being denied entities that would be supplying job creation. This is relevant because, as I mentioned, disruptors enter the market and provide a new way of doing things.

These disruptors provide jobs, albeit jobs that can be deemed as a bit more risky, but they are new sources of employment that were not provided by the existing environment. While the disruptors are disrupting, the established power structure is still operating business as usual. Thereisn’t a rapid cascade of job losses if incumbents are allowed to slide into irrelevance (despite what so many anti-change, anti-innovation fear-mongers like to push). These jobs don’t just disappear in a poof of smoke. Technological revolutions take time. This provides a healthy transition period for employment to move with the evolution of technological advancement.

If we as a species are not being challenged, not allowed to innovate or create better and newer ways, we begin to stagnate and rot. But it is not just our corporations. This plague has gripped every aspect of our societies across the globe.

This is where Bitcoin the network and bitcoin the asset come into play to disrupt this relationship. What would have happened back in 2008 if bitcoin was involved in the funding of public policy? The banks that mismanaged their customers’ funds wouldn’t have been saved without recourse. Naturally the recourse would’ve been the clients that trusted these institutions with their hard-earned wealth would have lost their funds or the bank itself would have to pay the price tag of facilitating the withdrawal of all client funds from their products, effectively killing the business. Due to the fact that bitcoin is sound money of which there will only be 21 million, no bailout would have been possible. If you violate your customer’s trust to the point of resulting in damage to your customer, you should have to pay for it. It only seems fair.

Now what if those bankers were actually held accountable for their mismanagement of their customers’ funds? This would’ve been the best outcome, had it happened. But it didn’t. And now we’re living in a society where this activity is incentivized because the precedent has been established: if you do stupid sh*t with your money, the taxpayers will foot the bill and you need not worry.

Why is this important? Well, which taxpayers pay the most for this bill? The ones paying taxes now or the ones that will be paying taxes in the future? It is our children and our children’s children that will pay this price. As national debt accumulates, there has to be a vehicle of balancing that debt. Whether it be through restructuring the revenue of the country or a default. We cannot continue like this forever. And this is the important aspect: who will be the ones to sacrifice the most? We’re witnessing a divide starting with the Millennial generation; they are pushing off family formation in a manner that America has never seen before.

The cost of having a family is leading an entire generation to push off reproducing until a later time or even indefinitely. When this happens, not only do we have a generation that is resisting the natural order of life — grow up, find a mate, reproduce and continue propagating the species — but it is also a massive loss to the nation and civilization. When demographics turn negative, there are fewer children than the previous generation. This also means that there are fewer laborers for the workforce and fewer buyers in the economy.

Of even grander scale than these metrics? The more children that are born each day with the freedoms bestowed upon us here in America, increases the prospect of a limitless future, allowing the species and society to advance in ways that none of us can imagine. Each soul that is capable of leaning in on their passions is an opportunity for a new approach at a technology or methodology that no other in history has ever attempted before.

The Path Forward

Bitcoiners are the last optimists in the world, it would seem. This is the best part of the Bitcoin community — we refuse to settle into nihilism and accept that the world is doomed. If you don’t want to work to make our world a better place for the future, that’s fine. We will fix the world one way or the other, but we’d really prefer not to shoulder this burden alone. If we are going to effectively provide a better future, we have to not only fix our current problems, but we also have to uplift our youngsters with our knowledge and experience so that they can start from a better position than we did. From a higher vantage point, a better understanding of the landscape can be achieved and a more accurate map can be devised. The better the map, the better the path forward.

This process is how we advance as a people. We push our children to chase their dreams. We have to fix the money so that we can prevent these psychopaths in charge from stealing the future from these kids. Once we fix the money, we can begin to fix our schools. It is for this reason that I will be looking into education next.

This is a guest post by Mike Hobart. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC, Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.

Source

Tagged : / / / / /
Bitcoin (BTC) $ 26,490.10 0.35%
Ethereum (ETH) $ 1,589.54 0.24%
Litecoin (LTC) $ 64.24 1.29%
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) $ 206.79 0.76%