8 Burst results for "Genesis Dcg"
The Breakdown
"genesis dcg" Discussed on The Breakdown
"Welcome back to The Breakdown with me, NLW. It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin, and the big picture power shifts remaking our world. What's going on, guys? It is Monday, September 18th, and today we are talking about anti-CBDC legislation being advanced. Before we get into that, however, if you are enjoying The Breakdown, please go subscribe to it, give it a rating, give it a review, or, if you want to dive deeper into the conversation, come join us on the Breakers Discord. You can find a link in the show notes or go to bit.ly slash breakdown pod. Hello, friends. Happy Monday. Welcome to another week, another frankly weirdly quiet week right now. I don't know. There's something out there. There's some bad juju. I guess it could just be another example of this weird period of the cycle that we're in that's sort of past the worst, but definitely before the good stuff starts again, but I'm excited. But we are not going to dwell on that. Instead, we are going to hop, skip, and jump through a number of things that have happened over the last few days, kicking it off with what has become a surprising political issue this election cycle, which is central bank digital currencies. The House Financial Services Committee will hold a markup section on Wednesday, which will include two bills aimed at preventing the issuance of a US CBDC. The first bill is Tom Emmer's CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act, which would prevent the Federal Reserve from offering any products or services directly to individuals. Fed branches would also be prohibited from keeping accounts for individuals or issuing a CBDC or similar digital assets. Emmer's bill was recently reintroduced during last week's CBDC hearing and now boasts 49 co-sponsors. On September 14th, the House Majority Whip tweeted, A governmental tool for financial surveillance is un-American. We must urgently develop a digital financial system that is 1. Open and freely accessible to all. 2. Without requiring permission from the government or anybody else. 3. Private safeguarding the user's identity. In a separate tweet, he had said, If not open, permissionless, and private, like cash, a CBDC is nothing more than a CCP-style surveillance tool that can be weaponized to oppress the American way of life. The second bill is sponsored by Alex Mooney and is called the Digital Dollar Pilot Prevention Act. That bill is structured as an amendment of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 that would prevent Federal Reserve branches from even conducting CBDC testing and development. Now, of course, senior Fed officials have gone on the record to say they have no plans to issue a CBDC without the approval of Congress. In May, Minneapolis Fed President Neil Kashkari even questioned the need for a CBDC given the existence of instant payment fintech services. He noted that CBDCs would be a powerful financial surveillance tool and could enforce negative interest rates, but questioned why the U.S. government would have any interest in constructing such a system. Now, all that said, some Fed branches still do seem to be interested in the development of CBDC technology. The San Francisco Fed, for example, recently advertised a position for a crypto-architect for a CBDC project, and Project Hamilton was concluded and wound down in December after two years of collaboration between the Boston Fed and MIT. Now, in terms of where this legislation actually is, the markup process allows committee members to comment on the drafting of bills. A vote is then taken on whether or not to approve legislation for a full House vote. Both bills are only a few paragraphs long, so shouldn't drag out to an all-day, contested affair as we recently saw with the stablecoin bill. Instead, the bills could act as a bellwether for congressional sentiment around CBDCs. Multiple Republican presidential candidates have made opposition to a CBDC a part of their campaign. For example, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said at a July event, If I am president, on day one we will nix central bank digital currency. Done. Dead. Not happening in this country. Outsider Democrat candidate Robert F. Kennedy has also been outspoken on the need to oppose the issuance of a CBDC. So given all that, if either of these bills progress to a vote in the House, they could be an opportunity to put members of Congress on record about their support for a CBDC coming into election season. Now, we could spend shows and shows and shows talking about why this seemingly small issue, at least to the rest of the world. Obviously, I'm not talking about for our audience and our community. But this issue, which is for all intents and purposes very small to most people, has become such a central piece of the opposition narrative heading into this election cycle. I think there are probably a few different elements of it. One, I think it feels to many like an extension of government power. And as we've seen and discussed, it is quite clear that how much power governments have is going to be a major issue. And of course, while that's coming from the Republican side of the House, it's also coming from Democrats. And this is perhaps not surprising. It's not surprising because we're still coming off the COVID period, which brought up major questions of how much authority the government has to be involved in people's lives. And so in many ways, this is an extension of that conversation. I think there is also a little bit of nervousness around technology in general. This is something that we've seen in crypto. It's certainly something that we see in AI as well. And while this is technology in the hands of the government, not technology in the hands of big tech companies, it still has that feeling of lots of data, lots of power, lots of information, big black holes, and not a clear way for citizens to exert influence when it comes to this important domain of their lives. Anyway, right now, there's no one who's really actively arguing for a CBDC, which could frankly be another reason why it's a nice political issue. It gets to stay a little bit, at least in the realm of metaphor for some of these larger topics, but it's still something that can be legislated upon with lower stakes than going after government power directly. Anyways, it's one we're going to keep an eye on to see just to what extent it continues to be an issue in elections or whether it's just part of this early narrative testing process at this very nascent point in the election cycle. Next up, we go halfway around the world to Hong Kong, where the Hong Kong Monetary Authority has issued a warning to crypto users that unregistered crypto firms could be presenting themselves as banks. The HKMA, which serves as the region's banking regulator, said that firms which use language associated with the banking industry could be in violation of recently implemented Hong Kong crypto regulations. The regulator said it had become aware of firms using terms including crypto bank and offering quote banking services. They even went so far as to call out firms that use the word deposits or promote their quote savings plans as low risk with high return. The HKMA said in a statement that quote, The regulator noted that these firms advertising themselves as crypto banks were not supervised by the HKMA and are not covered by the region's deposit protection scheme. Now, Hong Kong's crypto regulations coming into force in June was one of the big stories of this year. The rules were intended to permit retail crypto trading on regulated exchanges and they're being administered by the local securities agency rather than the banking regulator. Since then, only a small handful of firms have been granted licenses. This includes HashKey and OSL, who were licensed to provide retail trading exchanges, as well as Swiss-based crypto bank Ciba, which has received in principle approval to offer over-the-counter derivatives trading and asset management services. Now, enforcement of Hong Kong's crypto regulations has also begun in earnest. Last Wednesday, the securities regulator issued a warning against Dubai-based crypto exchange J-PEX. They alleged the firm had been promoting its products and services in Hong Kong without applying for a license. A press release from the securities regulator included allegations that J-PEX were advertising their services using the prohibited terms deposits, savings or earnings. They noted that many J-PEX products had quote, The regulator also accused influencers and local OTC desks of making false and misleading statements on social media that J-PEX had applied for licensing. Following the warning, J-PEX employees seemingly disappeared from their booth at the Token 2049 conference in Singapore, where they were a platinum sponsor. And on Sunday, the exchange ramped up withdrawal fees to $999 and also implemented $1,000 withdrawal limits, essentially being a withdrawal halt. Now, J-PEX addressed this on Sunday, blaming quote unfair treatment by relevant institutions in Hong Kong towards J-PEX. They said that quote, J-PEX said they were currently negotiating with these market makers to resolve liquidity issues. The exchange promised to quote, They claim that emergency withdrawals are still being dealt with manually and also announced that trading on their earned trading platform would be halted on Monday. Now, adding something to the story, on Monday, the South China Morning Post reported that local police had received at least 83 complaints about J-PEX involving assets worth around $4.3 million. They say the securities regulator had escalated investigations to the Commercial Crime Bureau on suspicions of fraud. Follow-up reporting said that lawyer turned crypto influencer Joseph Lamb-Chalk had been arrested on Monday in connection to promotion of the exchange. Sources also said an office building had been raided on Monday morning. Now, there's a lot that's actually really worth watching here. Hong Kong creating this licensing regime is not just relevant for citizens of Hong Kong, although it certainly is for them. This has been seen, rightly so, as a marker of slightly shifting Chinese attitudes towards crypto in general. When these rules were first announced as forthcoming at the end of last year, it was widely anticipated that it would include a retail trading ban. Remember, crypto trading has been banned in China for the last few years. However, in the wake of FTX, and in particular the US's aggressive response to it, it appeared that the Chinese authorities might be reconsidering their position and in so doing using Hong Kong as a vehicle for testing the waters on the market without changing any policy in mainland China. In that light, I don't know exactly what this enforcement action around J-PEX actually signals. Arresting an influencer certainly sends a signal, but to what the ends of that signal are, I'm just not sure. I do think, however, it's probably worth weighting this issue as a little bit more significant than just a regional crackdown, as it may have bigger implications given the unique role Hong Kong plays relative to China when it comes to crypto. Next up, we move back to bankruptcy proceedings in the US where Gemini have slammed the proposed settlement between DCG and their subsidiary, Genesis, calling it misleading at best in a court filing on Friday. Now you'll remember that earlier last week, DCG had filed a proposed deal which would settle approximately $630 million in outstanding loan payments to Genesis. DCG said the deal could result in 90% recoveries for unsecured creditors and recoveries as high as 95% to 110% for Gemini Earn customers who form the largest creditor entity in the Genesis bankruptcy. Gemini said in their court filing, however, that, quote, DCG touts proposed recovery rates that are a total mirage, misleading at best and deceptive at worst. Make no mistake, Gemini lenders will not actually receive anything close in real value terms to the proposed recovery rates under the current agreement in principle, end quote. DCG had proposed a repayment schedule for $1.65 billion in total loans over seven years. Although the agreement had a substantial payment in the first year, criticism of the deal noted that recovery calculations were contingent on crypto-denominated payments becoming more valuable over time. I think the numbers were something like Bitcoin going to $85,000 and ETH going to $8,500. Gemini customers are owed around $1.1 billion and it appears that taking on long-term risks associated with crypto prices and the continued solvency of DCG are simply not acceptable to them. Gemini said in their filing, quote, receiving a fractional share of interest in principal payments over seven years from an incredibly risky counterparty is not even remotely equivalent to receiving the actual cash and digital assets owed today by Genesis to the Gemini lenders. They added that, quote, DCG's proposal is markedly parallel to an attempt to satisfy its significant obligations through the issuance of IOUs instead of paying any real cash and digital assets. Gemini lawyers also slammed DCG's negotiation tactics, claiming they had made efforts to suggest that they would become desperate enough to take a significant haircut just to move on. On their creditors update blog, Gemini put it even more pointedly, stating that, quote, DCG is gaslighting creditors and testing earned users' resolve by baiting them with false promises of high recoveries. Now, hanging over the current state of the Genesis bankruptcy is the firm's right to exclusively propose recovery plans. The judge had granted a 30-day extension to the exclusivity period through to early next month. That order was contested by Gemini and ended up falling short of the 60-day extension requested by Genesis. After the exclusivity period has elapsed, creditors will be able to organize their own proposed deal to bring the bankruptcy to a close. Finally, separately on Friday, Gemini updated their lawsuit against DCG and CEO Barry Silbert. They now include four direct allegations that intercompany loans between DCG and Genesis were designed to, quote, make the market believe it had actually fixed Genesis's cratering financial condition. So there you have it. There are a number of other things that happened over the weekend or around the end of last week that we may touch on in conversations later. Mark Cuban got fished for almost a million bucks, for example. The New York Times leaked parts of a 15,000-word Sam Bankman-Fried ramble that amounts to a very self-pitying reflection on the state of affairs. And Google's head of Web3 is begging the industry to build something actually useful. For now, though, we are going to wrap it there. We're going to get to the hard work of building back this industry from the ground up. I appreciate you hanging out here with me as we go about that work. So until next time, be safe and take care of each other. Peace.
The Breakdown
A highlight from Anti-CBDC Bills Advance in Congress
"Welcome back to The Breakdown with me, NLW. It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin, and the big picture power shifts remaking our world. What's going on, guys? It is Monday, September 18th, and today we are talking about anti -CBDC legislation being advanced. Before we get into that, however, if you are enjoying The Breakdown, please go subscribe to it, give it a rating, give it a review, or, if you want to dive deeper into the conversation, come join us on the Breakers Discord. You can find a link in the show notes or go to bit .ly slash breakdown pod. Hello, friends. Happy Monday. Welcome to another week, another frankly weirdly quiet week right now. I don't know. There's something out there. There's some bad juju. I guess it could just be another example of this weird period of the cycle that we're in that's sort of past the worst, but definitely before the good stuff starts again, but I'm excited. But we are not going to dwell on that. Instead, we are going to hop, skip, and jump through a number of things that have happened over the last few days, kicking it off with what has become a surprising political issue this election cycle, which is central bank digital currencies. The House Financial Services Committee will hold a markup section on Wednesday, which will include two bills aimed at preventing the issuance of a US CBDC. The first bill is Tom Emmer's CBDC Anti -Surveillance State Act, which would prevent the Federal Reserve from offering any products or services directly to individuals. Fed branches would also be prohibited from keeping accounts for individuals or issuing a CBDC or similar digital assets. Emmer's bill was recently reintroduced during last week's CBDC hearing and now boasts 49 co -sponsors. On September 14th, the House Majority Whip tweeted, A governmental tool for financial surveillance is un -American. We must urgently develop a digital financial system that is 1. Open and freely accessible to all. 2. Without requiring permission from the government or anybody else. 3. Private safeguarding the user's identity. In a separate tweet, he had said, If not open, permissionless, and private, like cash, a CBDC is nothing more than a CCP -style surveillance tool that can be weaponized to oppress the American way of life. The second bill is sponsored by Alex Mooney and is called the Digital Dollar Pilot Prevention Act. That bill is structured as an amendment of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 that would prevent Federal Reserve branches from even conducting CBDC testing and development. Now, of course, senior Fed officials have gone on the record to say they have no plans to issue a CBDC without the approval of Congress. In May, Minneapolis Fed President Neil Kashkari even questioned the need for a CBDC given the existence of instant payment fintech services. He noted that CBDCs would be a powerful financial surveillance tool and could enforce negative interest rates, but questioned why the U .S. government would have any interest in constructing such a system. Now, all that said, some Fed branches still do seem to be interested in the development of CBDC technology. The San Francisco Fed, for example, recently advertised a position for a crypto -architect for a CBDC project, and Project Hamilton was concluded and wound down in December after two years of collaboration between the Boston Fed and MIT. Now, in terms of where this legislation actually is, the markup process allows committee members to comment on the drafting of bills. A vote is then taken on whether or not to approve legislation for a full House vote. Both bills are only a few paragraphs long, so shouldn't drag out to an all -day, contested affair as we recently saw with the stablecoin bill. Instead, the bills could act as a bellwether for congressional sentiment around CBDCs. Multiple Republican presidential candidates have made opposition to a CBDC a part of their campaign. For example, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said at a July event, If I am president, on day one we will nix central bank digital currency. Done. Dead. Not happening in this country. Outsider Democrat candidate Robert F. Kennedy has also been outspoken on the need to oppose the issuance of a CBDC. So given all that, if either of these bills progress to a vote in the House, they could be an opportunity to put members of Congress on record about their support for a CBDC coming into election season. Now, we could spend shows and shows and shows talking about why this seemingly small issue, at least to the rest of the world. Obviously, I'm not talking about for our audience and our community. But this issue, which is for all intents and purposes very small to most people, has become such a central piece of the opposition narrative heading into this election cycle. I think there are probably a few different elements of it. One, I think it feels to many like an extension of government power. And as we've seen and discussed, it is quite clear that how much power governments have is going to be a major issue. And of course, while that's coming from the Republican side of the House, it's also coming from Democrats. And this is perhaps not surprising. It's not surprising because we're still coming off the COVID period, which brought up major questions of how much authority the government has to be involved in people's lives. And so in many ways, this is an extension of that conversation. I think there is also a little bit of nervousness around technology in general. This is something that we've seen in crypto. It's certainly something that we see in AI as well. And while this is technology in the hands of the government, not technology in the hands of big tech companies, it still has that feeling of lots of data, lots of power, lots of information, big black holes, and not a clear way for citizens to exert influence when it comes to this important domain of their lives. Anyway, right now, there's no one who's really actively arguing for a CBDC, which could frankly be another reason why it's a nice political issue. It gets to stay a little bit, at least in the realm of metaphor for some of these larger topics, but it's still something that can be legislated upon with lower stakes than going after government power directly. Anyways, it's one we're going to keep an eye on to see just to what extent it continues to be an issue in elections or whether it's just part of this early narrative testing process at this very nascent point in the election cycle. Next up, we go halfway around the world to Hong Kong, where the Hong Kong Monetary Authority has issued a warning to crypto users that unregistered crypto firms could be presenting themselves as banks. The HKMA, which serves as the region's banking regulator, said that firms which use language associated with the banking industry could be in violation of recently implemented Hong Kong crypto regulations. The regulator said it had become aware of firms using terms including crypto bank and offering quote banking services. They even went so far as to call out firms that use the word deposits or promote their quote savings plans as low risk with high return. The HKMA said in a statement that quote, The regulator noted that these firms advertising themselves as crypto banks were not supervised by the HKMA and are not covered by the region's deposit protection scheme. Now, Hong Kong's crypto regulations coming into force in June was one of the big stories of this year. The rules were intended to permit retail crypto trading on regulated exchanges and they're being administered by the local securities agency rather than the banking regulator. Since then, only a small handful of firms have been granted licenses. This includes HashKey and OSL, who were licensed to provide retail trading exchanges, as well as Swiss -based crypto bank Ciba, which has received in principle approval to offer over -the -counter derivatives trading and asset management services. Now, enforcement of Hong Kong's crypto regulations has also begun in earnest. Last Wednesday, the securities regulator issued a warning against Dubai -based crypto exchange J -PEX. They alleged the firm had been promoting its products and services in Hong Kong without applying for a license. A press release from the securities regulator included allegations that J -PEX were advertising their services using the prohibited terms deposits, savings or earnings. They noted that many J -PEX products had quote, The regulator also accused influencers and local OTC desks of making false and misleading statements on social media that J -PEX had applied for licensing. Following the warning, J -PEX employees seemingly disappeared from their booth at the Token 2049 conference in Singapore, where they were a platinum sponsor. And on Sunday, the exchange ramped up withdrawal fees to $999 and also implemented $1 ,000 withdrawal limits, essentially being a withdrawal halt. Now, J -PEX addressed this on Sunday, blaming quote unfair treatment by relevant institutions in Hong Kong towards J -PEX. They said that quote, J -PEX said they were currently negotiating with these market makers to resolve liquidity issues. The exchange promised to quote, They claim that emergency withdrawals are still being dealt with manually and also announced that trading on their earned trading platform would be halted on Monday. Now, adding something to the story, on Monday, the South China Morning Post reported that local police had received at least 83 complaints about J -PEX involving assets worth around $4 .3 million. They say the securities regulator had escalated investigations to the Commercial Crime Bureau on suspicions of fraud. Follow -up reporting said that lawyer turned crypto influencer Joseph Lamb -Chalk had been arrested on Monday in connection to promotion of the exchange. Sources also said an office building had been raided on Monday morning. Now, there's a lot that's actually really worth watching here. Hong Kong creating this licensing regime is not just relevant for citizens of Hong Kong, although it certainly is for them. This has been seen, rightly so, as a marker of slightly shifting Chinese attitudes towards crypto in general. When these rules were first announced as forthcoming at the end of last year, it was widely anticipated that it would include a retail trading ban. Remember, crypto trading has been banned in China for the last few years. However, in the wake of FTX, and in particular the US's aggressive response to it, it appeared that the Chinese authorities might be reconsidering their position and in so doing using Hong Kong as a vehicle for testing the waters on the market without changing any policy in mainland China. In that light, I don't know exactly what this enforcement action around J -PEX actually signals. Arresting an influencer certainly sends a signal, but to what the ends of that signal are, I'm just not sure. I do think, however, it's probably worth weighting this issue as a little bit more significant than just a regional crackdown, as it may have bigger implications given the unique role Hong Kong plays relative to China when it comes to crypto. Next up, we move back to bankruptcy proceedings in the US where Gemini have slammed the proposed settlement between DCG and their subsidiary, Genesis, calling it misleading at best in a court filing on Friday. Now you'll remember that earlier last week, DCG had filed a proposed deal which would settle approximately $630 million in outstanding loan payments to Genesis. DCG said the deal could result in 90 % recoveries for unsecured creditors and recoveries as high as 95 % to 110 % for Gemini Earn customers who form the largest creditor entity in the Genesis bankruptcy. Gemini said in their court filing, however, that, quote, DCG touts proposed recovery rates that are a total mirage, misleading at best and deceptive at worst. Make no mistake, Gemini lenders will not actually receive anything close in real value terms to the proposed recovery rates under the current agreement in principle, end quote. DCG had proposed a repayment schedule for $1 .65 billion in total loans over seven years. Although the agreement had a substantial payment in the first year, criticism of the deal noted that recovery calculations were contingent on crypto -denominated payments becoming more valuable over time. I think the numbers were something like Bitcoin going to $85 ,000 and ETH going to $8 ,500. Gemini customers are owed around $1 .1 billion and it appears that taking on long -term risks associated with crypto prices and the continued solvency of DCG are simply not acceptable to them. Gemini said in their filing, quote, receiving a fractional share of interest in principal payments over seven years from an incredibly risky counterparty is not even remotely equivalent to receiving the actual cash and digital assets owed today by Genesis to the Gemini lenders. They added that, quote, DCG's proposal is markedly parallel to an attempt to satisfy its significant obligations through the issuance of IOUs instead of paying any real cash and digital assets. Gemini lawyers also slammed DCG's negotiation tactics, claiming they had made efforts to suggest that they would become desperate enough to take a significant haircut just to move on. On their creditors update blog, Gemini put it even more pointedly, stating that, quote, DCG is gaslighting creditors and testing earned users' resolve by baiting them with false promises of high recoveries. Now, hanging over the current state of the Genesis bankruptcy is the firm's right to exclusively propose recovery plans. The judge had granted a 30 -day extension to the exclusivity period through to early next month. That order was contested by Gemini and ended up falling short of the 60 -day extension requested by Genesis. After the exclusivity period has elapsed, creditors will be able to organize their own proposed deal to bring the bankruptcy to a close. Finally, separately on Friday, Gemini updated their lawsuit against DCG and CEO Barry Silbert. They now include four direct allegations that intercompany loans between DCG and Genesis were designed to, quote, make the market believe it had actually fixed Genesis's cratering financial condition. So there you have it. There are a number of other things that happened over the weekend or around the end of last week that we may touch on in conversations later. Mark Cuban got fished for almost a million bucks, for example. The New York Times leaked parts of a 15 ,000 -word Sam Bankman -Fried ramble that amounts to a very self -pitying reflection on the state of affairs. And Google's head of Web3 is begging the industry to build something actually useful. For now, though, we are going to wrap it there. We're going to get to the hard work of building back this industry from the ground up. I appreciate you hanging out here with me as we go about that work. So until next time, be safe and take care of each other. Peace.
The Crypto Overnighter
"genesis dcg" Discussed on The Crypto Overnighter
"Genesis Global Capital is facing accusations from its creditors over a proposed $175 million deal with FTX. Creditors, including Gemini and a group called the Fair Deal Group, allege that Genesis is manipulating the bankruptcy process through vote buying. The deal would allow FTX's Alameda Research to claim $175 million from Genesis. That represents a significant drop from the initial $4 billion FTX was looking for. Digital Currency Group is the parent company of Genesis. DCG owes over a billion dollars, adding another layer of complexity to the bankruptcy case. Legal filings indicate that this deal is an attempt to manipulate the voting process, with creditors effectively accusing Genesis of ballot stuffing. A hearing on the Genesis FTX deal is scheduled for September 6th in the Southern District of New York. So what's the real story here? It's about the integrity of the financial systems that underpin the crypto world. These allegations against Genesis aren't just a blip, they're a symptom of a larger issue that could undermine trust in decentralized systems. Genesis is accused of manipulating the very process meant to bring fairness and resolution to financial disputes. If these allegations hold, it's like saying, hey, we're all for a decentralized future, but let's rig the game while we're at it. And let's talk about FTX. Why would they settle for $175 million when they initially sought $4 billion? And then there's the Digital Currency Group, parent company of Genesis. They owe over a billion dollars, and that's not pocket change. That's a significant amount that could impact the entire crypto ecosystem. If DCG defaults, it could send shockwaves through the industry, affecting not just Genesis but other entities as well. So what happened? Five Ethereum staking providers agreed to a 22% cap on their market share. While a positive step for decentralization, Lido finances a refusal to join the PAC, and a lack of enforcement mechanisms cast doubts on its effectiveness. The SEC's attempt to appeal a Ripple case has been met with stiff resistance. This clash highlights the regulatory body's struggle to adapt outdated laws to a modern financial landscape. Federal courts have also signaled that it's time for updated cryptocurrency regulation. The Brix Alliance added six new countries, shaking up the balance of global economic power. While the Chinese yuan isn't replacing the dollar just yet, the decline in Saudi oil exports to the U.S. and discussions of a common currency are signs of change. Yes Bank has integrated with the Reserve Bank of India's Digital Rupee project, making a significant step for CDBC adoption in India. Given India's animosity towards real cryptocurrencies, the centralized nature of CDBC's remains a concern. Genesys Global Capital faces accusations of manipulating the bankruptcy process, raising concerns about transparency and integrity within the crypto financial systems. And that's going to do it for us tonight. I want to thank you, my listeners, because when you stop listening, I will stop talking. If you enjoyed tonight's show, then please like, follow, subscribe, leave a rating or maybe a review. And in the meantime, we'll see you tomorrow night. See you next time.
CoinDesk Podcast Network
"genesis dcg" Discussed on CoinDesk Podcast Network
"Over the last nine plus months, we've seen Genesis, DCG, and Barry Silbert go back and forth with tweets, letters, comments. It's kind of been pretty messy to be honest, but at the end of the day, Genesis earned customers are owed a lot of money and they want it back. And they think that Barry Silbert is the person who needs to pay them. Just of course, the disclosure coin desk is owned by DCG. Jen, I'll throw this one to you. You've been in the hot seat covering this on First Mover. What's been your general takeaway from this whole saga? This is obviously a new level of escalation. Yeah. Well, I think this is just another story that highlights the intermingledness that kind of led to this contagion and domino effect that we're dealing with now. I want to point to one of the tweets in the thread by Cameron Winklevoss. He says, from the beginning, Genesis acted in concert with defendants and with defendants' active support and encouragement, induced the Gemini earned lenders to lend by touting Genesis's purportedly robust risk management practices and a supposedly thorough vetting process of the counterparties to which it relent the assets. The filing said, then he says, those were lies. I think these are really big allegations to be making. And it's interesting that we're seeing this play out on Twitter. Well, like you said, it's been kind of a messy back and forth on Twitter with comments in different filings. And I think that this is maybe a decent strategy to show Gemini earned customers that something is being done. And the Winklevoss twins are taking this very seriously. They are holding the people who they think should be held accountable to the utmost accountability. And they are broadcasting in their own words along the way. For me, that's like the really interesting part to follow with this story, given, you know, all of the lawsuits and bankruptcies we have. This is what stands out in this one. I think I saw your hand go back up, Will. Yes, this has been continuing forever. There's a lot of different entities involved here. It's been very messy. I mean, just think of the Gemini side, right? Everyone who was involved with Gemini was probably an earned customer here that was chasing that 7 .6 % yield. And when that collapsed with the fall of 3AC, all those funds became stuck within this whole program. They're trying to get their money back out. So there is thousands of entities involved with this. I think Gemini was one of the largest retail products out there. At the same time, there was a lawsuit with the SEC, I think back in January or February with the SEC saying that the program that Gemini and Genesis were running together looked like a security. I don't know where that one ended up. I haven't seen any updates recently, but it just goes to the point, like a lot of these products, there's a lot of people involved and there's a lot of...there's no clarity on the situation at all, even on the legal side. Danny? To me, it seems like the base of these allegations stem from the risk management department, Because it's Gemini, right? Yeah, I get that she's mixed up, but Gemini is saying that Genesis induced customers to by having or purported to have a very robust risk management department that really didn't follow through because it didn't catch 3AC. Now, you know, in crypto, it's sort of become a meme, right? When these companies blow up, people buy the t -shirt that says, insert company name here, risk management department, FTX risk management, Genesis risk management, because we always joke these risk management departments just aren't up to snuff. So what I'm excited for in this suit, if it moves forward, is the discovery process because then we might get a chance to better understand how Genesis's risk management department actually operated because that would be at the key of these fraud allegations if it was fraudulent in presenting itself as robust and doing its job or really if it just didn't have the controls that it should have. So that is the big tell that I'm looking toward in this case, even though that's probably months, maybe even years down the line. Yeah. DCG tweeted just as we started the show that the Gemini lawsuit is a publicity stunt. It says that it is blameless and defamatory. It's quite a long tweet, so you can go and read it. I think that this kind of comes back to the fact that it's all being broadcast on Twitter. I think reading like this is a publicity stunt, it's easy to draw that parallel. But at the same time, Dany, I agree with you. I look forward to seeing the discovery and seeing some of the evidence behind the claims that are being made here. Well, last thoughts. It's going to drag on for a while. If you are sitting in Gemini Earned Account, I guess you are on the side of the Winklevice twins, but maybe not. I think the whole industry is watching this one and hoping that there's a peaceful resolution. You've been listening to the hash headlines on the Coindesk podcast network. We would like to hear from you. If you have any questions or comments, please reach out to us at podcasts at coindesk .com subject line, the hash, or leave us a review on your favorite podcast player. Thanks for listening.
CoinDesk Podcast Network
"genesis dcg" Discussed on CoinDesk Podcast Network
"Happy Friday, and welcome to The Hash. You are watching us on CoinDesk TV. And if you're listening to us, you're listening on the CoinDesk Podcast Network. I'm Jen Sanasi here today with Will Foxley and Danny Nelson. Hello guys. Good to be here. Danny, great to see you. Always good to have you, Danny. You are a fan favorite here on The Hash. Will, you got our first story. I do. We talk about Gemini, which the story has been going on for a while. We have no resolution, but we do have some more antics. And that is that Gemini is going to sue Genesis in court. It's going to sue DCG founder Barry Silbert for alleging fraud. They of course owed $1 .2 billion for the fallout after Genesis went into Chapter 11 filings. This all sent back from the collapse of Three Arrows Capital, a huge hedge fund that went under about a year ago this time last year. Three Arrows Capital had a lot of money out on loan from Genesis, and that went up the stack to DCG, which owns Genesis. Over the last nine plus months, we've seen Genesis, DCG, and Barry Silbert go back and forth with tweets, letters, comments. It's kind of been pretty messy to be honest, but at the end of the day, Genesis earned customers are owed a lot of money and they want it back. And they think that Barry Silbert is the person who needs to pay them. Just of course, the disclosure coin desk is owned by DCG. Jen, I'll throw this one to you. You've been in the hot seat covering this on First Mover. What's been your general takeaway from this whole saga? This is obviously a new level of escalation. Well, I think this is just another story that highlights the intermingledness that kind of led to this contagion and domino effect that we're dealing with now. I want to point to one of the tweets in the thread by Cameron Winklevoss. He says, from the beginning, Genesis acted in concert with defendants and with defendants' active support and encouragement induced the Gemini earned lenders to lend by touting Genesis' purportedly robust risk management practices and a supposedly thorough vetting process of the counterparties to which it relent the assets. The filing said, then he says, those were lies. I think these are really big allegations to be making. And it's interesting that we're seeing this play out on Twitter. Well, like you said, it's been kind of a messy back and forth on Twitter with comments in different filings. And I think that this is maybe a decent strategy to show Gemini earned customers that something is being done. And the Winklevoss twins are taking this very seriously. They are holding the people who they think should be held accountable to the utmost accountability. And they are broadcasting in their own words along the way. For me, that's like the really interesting part to follow with this story, given, you know, all of the lawsuits and bankruptcies we have. This is what stands out in this one. I think I saw your hand go back up, Will. Yes, this has been continuing forever. There's a lot of different entities involved here. It's been very messy. I mean, just think of the Gemini side, right? Everyone who was involved with Gemini was probably an earned customer here that was chasing that 7 .6 % yield. And when that collapsed with the fall of 3AC, all those funds became stuck within this whole program. They're trying to get their money back out. So there is thousands of entities involved with this. I think Gemini was one of the largest retail products out there. At the same time, there was a lawsuit with the SEC, I think back in January or February with the SEC saying that the program that Gemini and Genesis were running together looked like a security. I don't know where that one ended up. I haven't seen any updates recently, but just goes to the point, like a lot of these products, there's a lot of people involved and there's no clarity on the situation at all, even on the legal side. To me, it seems like the base of these allegations stem from the risk management department, Because it's Gemini, right? I get that she's mixed up, but Gemini is saying that Genesis induced customers to put money in by having or purported to have a very robust risk management department that really didn't follow through because it didn't catch 3AC. Now, you know, in crypto, it's sort of become a meme, right? When these companies blow up, people buy the t -shirt that says, insert company name here, risk management department, FTX risk management, Genesis risk management, because we always joke these risk management departments just aren't up to snuff. So what I'm excited for in this suit, if it moves forward, is the discovery process because then we might get a chance to better understand how Genesis's risk management department actually operated because that would be at the key of these fraud allegations if it was fraudulent in presenting itself as robust and doing its job or really if it just didn't have the controls that it should have. So that is the big tell that I'm looking toward in this case, even though that's probably months, maybe even years down the line. DCG tweeted just as we started the show that the Gemini lawsuit is a publicity stunt. It says that it is blameless and defamatory. It's quite a long tweet, so you can go and read it. I think that this kind of comes back to the fact that it's all being broadcast on Twitter. I think reading like this is a publicity stunt. It's easy to draw that parallel. But at the same time, Danny, I agree with you. I look forward to seeing the discovery and seeing some of the evidence behind the claims that are being made here. Well, last thoughts. It's going to drag on for a while. If you are sitting in Gemini Earned Account, I guess you are on the side of the Winklevice twins, but maybe not. I think the whole industry is watching this one and hoping that there's a peaceful resolution. So we shall see. Jen, I'll throw it to you for the next story. Okay, so some different drama than we're used to talking about here. Kind of. Kraken co -founder Jesse Powell is under federal investigation on claims of hacking and cyber stalking a nonprofit that he founded. FBI agents searched his L .A. home, probing whether he interfered with computer accounts of Verge Center for the Arts. A lawyer for Powell said he's done, quote, nothing wrong. So this has nothing to do with Kraken. This is all about Powell. But interesting, if you're a conspiracy theorist, Denny, I'll toss it off to you. What do you make of the story? Throw it off to the conspiracy theorist. All right. That's fine. I'll take it. You know, it isn't it isn't related to crypto, right? Like the dispute here stems from this arts organization that Powell founded in 2007. And he was on its board of directors for a long time since. And he left that border. He was pushed out of it, I believe, a year ago because he apparently stopped showing up to meetings. And his political views did not align with the guiding principles of the group. And so they said, get out of here. And when he did get out of there, when they kicked him out, he allegedly made life very difficult for their I .T. department by shutting down the email accounts and stuff like that. It was really making things difficult. And right in that story that I just outlined, you actually get back to the crypto angle because those guiding principles that Powell differed with the arts organization on, that whole kerfuffle came right after he pushed Kraken staff to either stay in line or leave if their political views diverged from Kraken. So Will, I'll toss it over to you. Do you remember that case? Yeah, that was an interesting story that sort of happened around the same time that Coinbase was interacting in similar principles, right, where they said, don't bring politics into the office. We don't want to deal with that. We have a purpose here. That purpose is monetary freedom through cryptocurrency. So let's focus on that. Sort of what Kraken did as well. Kraken, of course, and Jesse Powell have been far more outspoken on that front and has like a long history of like a lot of different things have been spoken about in traditional media with a lot of backlash. That being said, as a tie to this story, it's sort of interesting to look at, like, the traditional way that some of these organizations can run, the fact that you can be kicked out and then working within the crypto space where you can make pronouncements like that. And for the most part, like, you're fine. It's very hard to be canceled within crypto for whatever reason. And a lot of times, even the scammers seem to find their way back into crypto and by no means calling Jesse Powell or Kraken or anyone there in that sense.
Crypto Voices
"genesis dcg" Discussed on Crypto Voices
"I don't know if there's another Alameda or somebody that's just going to vomit. If there was, I think, to answer your question on that, it probably would be DCG if there was Bitcoin to be liquidated, but it seems like an agreement, at least for now. Those three genesis DCG and Gemini. But yeah, that's a good question, indeed. Who still needs to sell? Well, and you see it like, all right, so all the technical people out there are going to get upset. But one kind of anecdotal indicator is people just stop selling on bad news at a certain point in a bear market because there's exhaustion, right? And you see the I forget with it indicator is that it shows the basically the unmoved coins, right? The UTXOs that have aged. And so that number goes up and then people just get sick of the bad news cycle and you kind of hit this low, right? And it does seem like the news cycle is not driving price as much as it was a year ago or even 6 months ago. And we've seen this every time, right? People just get bored of the drama. And then we start moving in the next direction. So I don't know, that's kind of what it feels like to me. But I'm sure someone's going to pull up a chart and tell me I'm wrong. No, I totally agree. The hotter waves look good. Less Bitcoin on exchanges. I think people are more sensitive to counterparty risk than they really ever have been. You know, there's a lot to be excited about. What are we 18 months out from a having? Like, you know, I got an NFTs on the Bitcoin blockchain. We're probably 14 months out from having. Yeah, those rewards are getting small. We need those fees. But look, I think miners from what I've been seeing, you know, we've started to see a little bit of a shift, right? Miners that are able to survive this are now looking at really cheap, you know, asics on the secondary market. And there are some quality projects that probably can be acquired out there. And the mining economics, they go through this. There is this crushing cycle, but I think we're hopefully starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel for this liquidation flush phase. And then you're in that reset as you get closer to the halving. So do you see though this sort of cyclical strong the strong will survive that consolidates or it gives the folks that have balance sheets to go out and acquire things. The ability to consolidate does, where is the other side of that where we get some more venture funding some more kind of green shoots into the new projects in the new entities. Because right now it just seems like consolidation and either you're going out of business or being acquired. Do you see kind of a news cycle on the innovation side coming? Yeah. For sure. I think that people from the energy industry are starting to realize just the sheer abundance of wasted or stranded energy sources, there's a lot of really interesting projects that are trying to raise at the absolute worst time given market conditions like, you know, a lot of the funds in capital formation aspects, particularly for mining operations, it's excruciating. These debt facilities are closed for a while. Selling equity is not the most attractive for mining operations.
The Breakdown
White House Publishes 'Roadmap' to Mitigate Cryptocurrency Risks
"All right guys, so like I said today is a fallout day. This year was always going to be a tough one following up the institutional failures and frauds of last year and we are definitely seeing that across a number of different stories. And where we'll start is with The White House. Last week, The White House published a note entitled road map to mitigate cryptocurrencies, risks. It was co signed by the national economic council director, The White House office of science and technology policy director, the council of economics advisers chair, and the national security adviser. The note walked through the tumultuous events of last year and reflected on what has been done since the Biden administration's landmark crypto executive order in March of last year. It also laid out the work that still needs to be done to improve regulatory safeguards for the industry. The note pointed out that agencies ranging from the SEC and the CFTC through the FDIC, have increased enforcement efforts surrounding industry issues. It also noted the recent joint guidance issued by banking regulators that focused on the need to separate crypto assets from the broader banking system. Now regarding things that still need to be done, the administration says that they will be issuing a statement on priorities for digital assets research and development shortly, which will focus on the need to provide consumer protection by default.
The Breakdown
On Bitcoin's 14th Birthday, the Gemini-DCG War of Words Heats Up
"All right, folks, while I hope you have had a great holiday season in a very happy new year. And boy, this year is off with a bang. Yesterday for most businesses in the U.S. was a day off, which is what happens obviously when new year's falls on a Sunday. But that didn't stop some of the biggest drama in crypto for coming right up to the fore. So a quick recap of the genesis DCG Gemini situation. Genesis is a digital currency group subsidiary. By the way, so is coin desk. And genesis has been caught up in a lot of the crypto institutional failures of this year. In July, court documents from the liquidator of three arrows capital showed that DCG genesis had lent three arrows capital a total of $2.4 billion. Three C had put up approximately $1.2 billion worth of crypto as it was valued at the time as collateral. In the court filings, it showed that DCG claim against three AC was by far the largest at 1.2 billion. The next biggest creditor was Voyager digital whose claim was 687 million, and then there was one more claimant with 302 million and the rest were in the lowly 8 figures. At the time a spokeswoman for DCG said both the DCG and genesis balance sheets remained strong, with no remaining exposure to three hours capital, genesis continues to be well capitalized that its operations are business as usual. How many times was that sort of statement last year proven to be not completely true? So fast forward to the FTX collapse. At first genesis said they had basically no exposure, but then a few days later, that was up to 175 million. However, just a few days after FTX went into bankruptcy, genesis global capital, which is the company's lending unit halted withdrawals. is never a good sign in fact, it's usually the sign that something much bigger is going on than anyone had wanted to let on. The VP of communications and marketing at DCG said at the time, today genesis global capital genesis lending business made the difficult decision to temporarily suspend redemptions in new loan originations. This decision was made in response to the extreme market dislocation and loss of industry confidence caused by the FTX implosion. The decision impacts the lending business at genesis and does not affect genesis trading or custody businesses. Importantly, this decision has no impact on the business operations of DCG and our other wholly owned subsidiaries. Right from then no one thought that was exactly true. But over a couple of weeks, there was much swirling in rumor of potential bailouts and funding rounds.