They’re probably selling every unit at a loss. A big part of the Amazon smart home stuff also has to be the data it collects and the way it integrates with ordering off the retail site which might not have been counted here.
1,500,000 includes all the hourly workers but my understanding is that the 10,000 is corporate. Still only 3% of corporate workers which is less than they pip every year
But no one knew ftx had written the shitty loans until last week. You can speculate that he was risking billions in depositor funds but there wasn’t really any evidence.
FTX was never doing a ponzi. All the threads are about how everyone was ok with SBF ponzi’ing because the money went to a good cause but that’s just not the case. EA proponents thought SBF was just running a normal exchange, if that was true I don’t see what’s morally wrong with supporting him.
The reality is most people don’t give a shit about animal welfare and unfortunately a huge percentage of the population would have no problem eating tortured meat if it was a bit cheaper.
Eventually the other bank will ask for settlement. Maybe it’s because you owe them a billion dollars and they have a liquidity crisis. Whatever the reason is, you can’t just go on forever “oweing” then money.
You are wrong. Without existing deposits the bank has no money to loan out. They can write numbers on screens, but eventually the money they loaned out will be transferred and the bank that it was transferred to will ask for settlement.
Obviously not op, but it sounds like the issue is that the cure makes you sick in the short term which requires expensive care. If the sickness is inherent to the solution it’s hard to see how this gets cheaper.
The entire point of FTX is that Americans were barred from using it. Now Americans certainly ignored that rule by using vpn’s, but I’m not sure that gives the sec jurisdiction. The Americans using the exchange were explicitly breaking the TOS
So my understanding is that alameda needed more capital to fund its operations that had a track record of success, so sbf created ftx and gave customer assets to alameda to invest. So the business thesis here isn’t “use new user money to pay old users” it’s “steal all the users money to invest and hope the investments continue to be profitable.” I guess they started ponzi-ing once alameda went bust but that wasn’t the original plan, although that’s probably true for most ponzi’s.
Gas exploration is way down. No gas production won't stop, but supply growth seems to be completely stalled while demand is not due to developing countries continuing to get richer. Gas will likely continue to be expensive as we transition away from fossil fuels.
You're just talking about different time frames. Yearly inflation can be positive and prices can also be lower than they were last month. Ergo prices are going down but inflation still positive.
I mean really it seems like FTX’s issue is that it got raided to serve as a hedge funds piggy bank. They’re not stupid, they wouldn’t accept such a massive amount of collateral in their own token if it wasn’t mostly owned by their hedge fund that they want to funnel assets too.
FTX fucked up big time, but if they didn’t allow alemeda to siphon all the customer funds away they’d still be chugging along just fine. The issue is Sam used it as his hedge funds piggy bank.
No, FTX was making bank in fees. They just got greedy and loaned customer funds the SBF’s hedge fund to gamble with. Hedge fund went bust and now the loans default and the collateral which was just funny money to begin with is worthless.
Right so they didn’t invest customer assets, they just loaned them to themselves in exchange for their own token so that they could invest the customer assets.
No, banks loan customer funds out as mortgages. It is not literally created out of thin air. You deposit money, the bank gives it to joe to buy a house, he sends it to the seller. Now the seller has your physical money, and joe owes the bank what the bank owes you.