不良资产投资者盯上FTX客户的被套资金,但仅以面值5%左右价格成交

PanewsPublished on 2022-12-12Last updated on 2022-12-12

Abstract

多家信贷投资公司希望从FTX客户手中收购债权,因为客户等待偿还需要数年时间。

多家信贷投资公司希望从FTX客户手中收购债权,因为客户等待偿还需要数年时间。但债权售价仅为面值的百分之几,现在出售意味着要接受巨大损失。信贷投资公司寻求从破产交易所FTX的客户手中收购债权,客户如果等待破产法院的赔付判决,可能需要数年时间。

知情人士透露,众多知名投资公司正在洽谈收购这些债权,包括阿波罗全球管理公司(Apollo Global Management)和Atestor。小型投资公司507 Capital已经从希望快速退出的对冲基金手中购买了几笔债权。出售债权所得可能少于破产程序分配的金额。

作为曾经的加密货币交易所巨头,FTX上个月申请破产保护后,留下了约100万名债权人,欠款达数十亿美元。根据法庭文件,FTX仅拖欠前50名债权人的款项就高达31亿美元。许多人会等待破产程序走完,这个过程可能长达数年,也有人开始接触不良债务经纪商和买家,以求快速脱身。

现在收回资金意味着要承受巨大损失,因为债权售价仅为面值的百分之几。债权收购者则需要耐心等待,才能通过破产程序收回更多现金。

507 Capital创始人Thomas Braziel说:“人人都对这些债权感兴趣,但没人知道他们在做什么。有人居然问我什么是稳定币。”阿波罗和Attestor的发言人拒绝置评。

Braziel在交易此类复杂的加密头寸方面经验丰富,他曾收购总部位于东京的Mt. Gox(门头沟)等崩盘的数字资产公司的债权。但购买基金债权需要十足的耐心:2014年的门头沟黑客事件留下的法律乱局直到八年后才完全厘清。

对冲基金客户

FTX宣称的深厚流动性池吸引了加密对冲基金等机构投资者。Nickel Digital Asset Management首席投资官Michael Hall在上个月的会议上透漏,该公司约有1,200万美元滞留在FTX。波多黎各加密资产管理初创公司Ikigai Asset Management首席投资官Travis Kling在推特上透漏其“绝大多数”资产都被FTX套牢。另一家对冲基金Galois Capital也是如此。

Braziel说基金公司大多都希望及早脱身,而不想应对旷日持久的法庭程序。一些FTX客户也表示希望在年底前完成债权出售,以在报税时进行亏损减记。

Braziel说他以面值5-6%的价格收购了几笔FTX债权,名义价值分别为200万美元、300万美元和800万美元。目前他在就一家新加坡基金经理的约1亿美元的债权进行谈判,并接触了一家涉及2300万美元债权的德国基金。他说这些基金的要价通常接近面值的10%。

不是科学,是艺术

对破产债权未来价值的评估更像一门艺术,而非科学。Braziel说通过粗略计算,你可以对可用的资产和负债有一个大体把握,但巨额回报取决于司法论据。

Braziel在法律策略方面的押注是:美国法院将基于英国信托法,承认客户资产以信托形式持有。他说信托持有的资产将享有优先权利,这意味着其客户有望优先获得偿付。

债权并非都与客户资产有关。一份流传的雇佣合同包含了保证支付后续9年工资的条款。这份FTX US合同签署于2021年8月,流传版本隐去了员工姓名和职位,仅保留签名边缘。合同年薪为525,000美元,且保证每年最低加薪15%,外加奖金。期限为10年,其中一项条款规定,如员工因任何原因被解雇,仍将获得所有未支付的工资,包括年度加薪。

一位拒绝购买这份合同债权的人表示,美国法院不会执行此类条款,未支付的工资在破产索赔中几乎一文不值。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

Vitalik Buterin's recent algorithmic stablecoin proposal envisions using an option-like mechanism to create a stablecoin without the liquidation risks inherent in traditional collateralized debt position (CDP) models. The design splits one unit of ETH into two components: a 'stable' leg (P) that maintains value up to a certain strike price, and an 'upside' leg (N) that captures any appreciation above that price. Together, they always sum to one ETH, eliminating the need for debt or liquidation mechanisms. From an options perspective, the stable leg essentially functions as a synthetic, covered call position. However, significant challenges exist. For the stable asset to maintain its peg, it must continuously roll deep in-the-money call options, leading to potential rollover slippage, predictable trading paths vulnerable to front-running, and liquidity issues. Crucially, the system's scalability depends on a constant demand for the upside leg—a form of leveraged ETH long position without funding rates or liquidation risk. It's unclear if such persistent, specific demand will materialize from speculators or market makers who have simpler alternatives like perpetual swaps. The author, drawing from experience with Rysk, argues that DeFi options have struggled as standalone trading products due to complexity and fragmented liquidity. Their potential lies instead as foundational infrastructure underpinning more complex financial primitives like stablecoins, structured yields, or index products—transforming from a direct product into a core pricing and risk distribution engine for the next generation of on-chain finance.

marsbit1h ago

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

marsbit1h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit4h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit4h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit4h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit4h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片