CoinDeskPolicyPublicado em 2024-05-02Última atualização em 2024-05-03

Resumo

The defunct crypto lender filed for bankruptcy in 2020.

Three former executives with bankrupt crypto lender Cred were indicted Thursday on charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, wire fraud and engaging in financial transactions for illicit purposes.

Daniel Schatt, a Cred co-founder and former CEO, Joseph Podulka, former CFO, and James Alexander, the former chief capital officer, were indicted by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Northern District of California. Schatt and Podulka were arrested and made their initial appearances in a San Francisco court earlier in the day, according to a press release published Friday.

Cred filed for bankruptcy in November 2020, estimating its liabilities to be between $100 million and $500 million at the time, but saying it had less than $100 million in estimated assets. At the time, the company blamed its failure on "irregularities" in how "specific corporate funds" were handled. A reorganization plan was later approved by a federal judge, according to court records.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Cred was among the first of a slate of high-profile crypto lender bankruptcies – preceding 2022's Celsius and Voyager bankruptcies by around two years.

Similar to these other failed companies, Cred offered a lending program, "CredEarn," that accepted deposits from investors and offered market-leading interest rates before it filed for bankruptcy without enough money to pay back creditors. Depositors had entrusted more than $100 million worth of crypto with Cred by the time it collapsed.

"[T]he defendants lured customers to make investments by promising to return a significant yield on cryptocurrency investments—the defendants did not disclose, however, that virtually all the assets to pay the yield were generated by a single company whose business was to make unsecured micro-loans to Chinese gamers," the U.S. Department of Justice said in a press release.

"Contrary to the defendants’ assurances, Cred engaged in lending that was neither collateralized nor guaranteed. Moreover, Cred’s hedging strategy did not protect the company’s investments against volatility," the statement read.

"The Cred Liquidation Trust and its professionals have been working tirelessly to pursue recoveries for creditors. We spent a lot of time and effort cooperating with law enforcement. We are thankful for the hard work and diligence by the DOJ and FBI, which resulted in indictments of the key executives responsible for the first major crypto bankruptcy case in the United States," said attorneys Darren Azman and Joseph Evans with McDermott Will & Emery LLP, who are the lead counsel for the Cred Inc. Liquidation Trust.

Advertisement
Advertisement

In its 2020 bankruptcy filing, Cred put most of the blame for its collapse on the failure of an outside investment manager, Quantcoin, with whom Cred entrusted 800 BTC – worth around $10 million at the time. Later on, the Cred Liquidation Trust alleged in a lawsuit that most of the lost customer funds had, in fact, been quietly loaned out to the Chinese micro-lender MoKredit, which ultimately failed to repay its debts.

MoKredit made most of its money from unsecured loans to Chinese gamers, and its relationship with Cred – along with the fact that the two companies shared a co-founder – was not properly disclosed to Cred creditors, according to Friday's indictment.

The Cred Liquidation Trust has separately alleged that Cred funneled users into CredEarn through the retail-oriented crypto exchange Uphold, which at one point counted Cred Founder Dan Schatt as a board member. '"Uphold drove thousands of retail customers to lend cryptocurrency to the CredEarn program by falsely marketing it as 'safe,' 'secured,' 'insured,' and 'fully hedged,'" the suit read.

According to the suit, which was dismissed earlier this year, CredEarn was initially supposed to be called "UpholdEarn" but was renamed to avoid regulatory risk.

"Uphold knew that Cred was implementing a highly risky hedging strategy, and that there was regulatory risk associated with cryptocurrency yield earning programs," read the suit. "Rather than take on all of these risks, Uphold and Schatt decided to shift the risks away from Uphold by running ['Earn'] through Cred."

Advertisement
Advertisement

Uphold denied the claims in the lawsuit and said Schatt was removed from its board involuntarily. Although the lawsuit from Cred's Liquidation Trust was dismissed (that dismissal was upheld on appeal), an additional class action suit from Cred's creditors against Uphold is still pending.

Leituras Relacionadas

Preferred Stock Is Not the Trigger for Corporate Bankruptcy, MicroStrategy's Dollar Reserves Can Cover Dividend and Interest Payments Until February 2027

Preferred Shares Are Not the Catalyst for Corporate Bankruptcy; MicroStrategy's Dollar Reserves Can Cover Dividend and Interest Payments Until February 2027. This article analyzes the nature of preferred shares used by MicroStrategy (MSTR). Legally equity but economically similar to debt, these shares, including its Bitcoin-linked STR convertible preferred notes (STRC), offer fixed or floating dividends. Crucially, MicroStrategy's preferred shares lack rigid redemption clauses, meaning they are not classified as traditional debt. This eliminates principal repayment pressure and means missed dividends do not constitute default or trigger bankruptcy, creating a "self-contradictory virtuous cycle." The article clarifies that if funds are short, MicroStrategy can defer or suspend preferred share dividends (except for non-cumulative types like STRD) without immediate risk. The real potential crisis point lies with its convertible bonds. If a prolonged bear market prevents conversion, MicroStrategy might need to sell Bitcoin to repay these bonds starting from the earliest maturity in September 2027, potentially creating a downward spiral. Preferred dividend suspensions would only exacerbate market panic in such a scenario. Recent financial activity shows MicroStrategy strengthened its position through four weeks of common stock (MSTR) issuances, raising over $851 million without issuing new preferred shares. It increased its dollar reserves to approximately $1.4 billion, which is sufficient to cover all preferred share dividends and interest until around March 2027. While Bitcoin purchases slowed recently, this prioritization of cash reserves enhances the company's near-term financial safety. The analysis concludes that if the Bitcoin bear market ends by early 2025 as anticipated, MicroStrategy can resume issuing MSTR stock in a rising market to replenish reserves and manage future dividend obligations, thereby reducing the long-term pressure from its preferred share structure.

marsbitHá 33m

Preferred Stock Is Not the Trigger for Corporate Bankruptcy, MicroStrategy's Dollar Reserves Can Cover Dividend and Interest Payments Until February 2027

marsbitHá 33m

Giants Wage the Context War, Reconstructing AI Moats

The article "Giants Launch the Context War, Reconstructing AI's Moat" discusses how leading AI companies—OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google—are shifting their competitive focus from model size to acquiring, managing, and utilizing user context (Context). Initially, Context referred to the length of text a model could process, leading to a "arms race" for longer context windows. However, the competition has evolved through three key phases: expanding text capacity (long context windows), enabling memory across sessions, and finally, integrating AI into real user environments like browsers and desktops to capture dynamic task states. Each company is pursuing a distinct strategy. OpenAI is building Context around the ChatGPT account, turning it into a central hub that accumulates user understanding across various integrated applications and tools. Anthropic, lacking a major user base, focuses on high-value verticals like coding, empowering its Claude model to actively gather Context through GUI interaction (Computer Use) and system connections (MCP protocol). Google, with vast existing user data from products like Search and Gmail, faces the challenge of restructuring this data into actionable, AI-understandable Context for its Gemini model within its ecosystem. The core argument is that the nature of competitive advantage in AI is changing. The internet era prized network effects—connecting more users. The AI era values "individual depth": the ability to build deep, task-specific understanding of a user. This creates a new moat through 1) the compounding value of accumulated Context, 2) deep integration with user tools and permissions, and 3) the establishment of trust for complex tasks. Therefore, the battle for Context is fundamentally about capturing "task entry points" and converting existing digital ecosystems into environments where AI can effectively understand and act, rather than merely scaling user numbers.

marsbitHá 1h

Giants Wage the Context War, Reconstructing AI Moats

marsbitHá 1h

Foundation Steps Back, Ethlabs Steps Forward: Ethereum Undergoes Its Largest Restructuring in History

On June 23rd, the Ethereum ecosystem witnessed two major shifts, signaling a significant governance realignment. First, former Ethereum Foundation researchers established Ethlabs, a new independent non-profit. Backed by major ETH holders like Bitmine and SharpLink, Ethlabs aims to address practical needs for institutional adoption, including faster settlement, native asset issuance, cross-chain transactions, and mainnet scaling. Secondly, the Ethereum Foundation announced a major restructuring, laying off 54 employees (20% of its staff) to become a leaner entity focused on protocol governance and maintenance rather than being the primary builder. This move represents a pivotal correction. Criticisms had mounted over the Foundation's perceived slowness, lack of clear strategy, and over-reliance on Vitalik Buterin's influence. Ethlabs emerges as a more execution-oriented, "industrialized" layer focused on market adoption—bridging the gap between research and real-world use. Notably, Vitalik Buterin is absent from its list of supporters, interpreted as an intentional step to avoid excessive personal endorsement and allow the organization to build independent credibility. The Ethereum Foundation's downsizing and redefinition mark a retreat from its former central coordinating role. It now aims to share the "privilege of stewarding Ethereum" with other emerging groups like Ethlabs, the Ethereum Applications Guild, and The Ethereum Economic Zone. Analysts frame this dual shift as the Foundation ensuring Ethereum remains "correct" (credibly neutral), while Ethlabs must prove it remains "effective" (competitive and attractive for capital and adoption). This addresses community "shareholder-like anxiety" about ETH's market performance. While risks exist—such as concerns over shifting from Foundation centrality to large-holder influence—the consensus is that the greater risk for Ethereum was inaction, caught between technical idealism and organizational inertia. These steps aim to create a more multi-stakeholder, execution-driven future for the network.

链捕手Há 8h

Foundation Steps Back, Ethlabs Steps Forward: Ethereum Undergoes Its Largest Restructuring in History

链捕手Há 8h

Second Half of U.S. Crypto Policy: The Clarity Act Aims for 60 Votes, CFTC's "One-Person Commission" Becomes Biggest Variable

In a pivotal year for US crypto policy, the "CLARITY Act" is advancing in the Senate but faces a high hurdle, needing 60 votes to pass. Key challenges include bridging partisan divides on ethics and swaying undecided Republican senators within a tight legislative calendar of only about 40 working days. The policy "second half" involves intense negotiations on a broader framework for Web3 and DeFi, including crypto tax reforms and the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act. A significant uncertainty is the understaffed CFTC, operating with four commissioner vacancies, which complicates regulatory clarity. Meanwhile, the departure of key "crypto champions"—SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce and Senator Cynthia Lummis—will impact ongoing policy efforts. Industry experts are cautiously optimistic but realistic. Sara K. Weed notes that while progress is being made, CLARITY is unlikely to pass this Congress, pushing agencies like the SEC and CFTC to provide more guidance. Sulolit Mukherjee suggests meaningful crypto tax legislation is more likely to be attached to larger must-pass bills. Rashan Colbert discusses the jurisdictional debate over prediction markets, emphasizing the need for a regulatory framework that fosters their development as financial tools rather than treating them broadly as gambling. The clock is ticking, but opportunities remain for substantive progress through continued bipartisan dialogue and pragmatic efforts.

marsbitHá 11h

Second Half of U.S. Crypto Policy: The Clarity Act Aims for 60 Votes, CFTC's "One-Person Commission" Becomes Biggest Variable

marsbitHá 11h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片