Celsius 破产文件披露:狂买矿机7.5亿 向Tether借款8.4亿被清算

吴说区块链Опубликовано 2022-07-15Обновлено 2022-07-15

Введение

根据 Celsius 咨询合作伙伴 Kirkland & Ellis 提交给纽约南区美国破产法院的文件,这个拥有170万用户的公司是如何破产的细节信息被广泛披露。

根据 Celsius 咨询合作伙伴 Kirkland & Ellis 提交给纽约南区美国破产法院的文件,这个拥有170万用户的公司是如何破产的细节信息被广泛披露。

截止2022年7月,Celsius 拥有170万注册用户和30万余额超过100美元的活跃用户,支付了大约5%的理财奖励。Celsius 有 23000 个零售借款人与4.11亿未偿还贷款与7.65亿抵押品;公司有47个机构借款人与9300万未偿还贷款和 9850 万抵押品。

文件显示,Celsius 持有 43 亿美元的资产和 55 亿美元的负债,即存在 12 亿美元的缺口。其中⾮⽤⼾资产仅为 7.8 亿美元。此前 FTX 曾考虑收购 Celsius,但在了解其财务状况后放弃,它认为 Celsius 资产负债表存在 20 亿美元漏洞。

文件显示,Celsius 将其大量客户资金(7.5 亿美元的信贷额度)投资于自身的采矿业务,截至 5 月底,有 5.76 亿美元未偿还。目前拥有80850台矿机,43632台正在运营。值得注意的是,Celsius 矿机大多购买于2021年,目前这些矿机的价格正在大幅下降超过50%。

2021年,Eth2 质押服务提供商 StakeHound 的失误导致 Celsius 损失了超过 38000 个 ETH。

由于快速撤回 UST,Celsius 在 LUNA 崩盘事件中损失较小,仅损失了 1580 万美元。但由于关于 LUNA 的市场谣言,造成 Celsius 在5天内被提现了超过 10 亿美金造成挤兑。

Celsius 提供了两笔总额为 7500 万美元的贷款给三箭资本,当 3AC 未能满⾜追加保证⾦要求时,Celsius 清算了 3AC 拥有的抵押品,产生了 4060 万美元的损失。

Tether 提供给了 Celsius 高达 8.41 亿美金的贷款。在清算时 Celsius 产生了 9700 万美金的损失。在2020年312时 Tether 曾经给予贝宝超过常规的时间去持续偿还贷款。但在此次下跌时,Tether 很明显直接进行了清算而没有再次扮演“白衣骑士”。

2019年到2021年,Celsius 向一个私人借贷平台借钱,但2021年当 Celsius 试图偿还贷款时,对方表示无法偿还抵押物。导致该借贷方欠 Celsius 3.61 亿美金和3765个比特币。文件没有披露这一平台的名称。

文件说:尽管公司(Celsius)的指令是只进行市场中性的交易部署,但在其意外的资产增长期间做出了某些资产部署决定,事后证明这是有问题的。虽然公司采取了必要的措施来“解除”这些部署,但不幸的是,损害已经造成。

加密律师 @wassielawyer 说,比较 Voyager 和 Celsius 提交的声明,Voager 犯了一个巨大的错误(3AC Loan)并拥有它。Celsius 则是进行了一系列垃圾交易,他们将目前的困境归咎于价格下跌和负面新闻。

Похожее

Bitcoin Trading Strategy Breakdown: Celebrity Predictions and Classic Models All Fail, Only These Four Indicators Remain

Analysis of Bitcoin Trading Strategies: Why Celebrity Forecasts and Classic Models Fail, Leaving Only These Four Reliable Indicators This analysis examines the failure of common Bitcoin prediction methods and identifies four reliable indicators for constructing a trading strategy. The author reviewed all major BTC prediction approaches from 2017-2025, categorizing them into three groups: celebrity price targets (consistently over-optimistic), analytical models like Stock-to-Flow (broken post-2022), and on-chain signals. The key finding is that more data often creates confusion, not clarity. The strategy discards unreliable elements: celebrity predictions (incentivized to be extreme), pure models (invalidated by post-ETF market changes), and the Fear & Greed Index used alone (too many false signals). Four reliable indicators were selected: 1. **MVRV Z-Score:** Accurately identifies cycle bottoms when entering its green zone (e.g., 2018, 2020, 2022). Note: Its ability to call tops is now ineffective post-2024. 2. **SOPR (28-day MA):** Consistently signals bottoms when below 1.0, indicating holders are selling at a loss. 3. **ETF Net Flow:** A crucial post-2024 metric showing institutional momentum (e.g., sustained inflows = buying). 4. **Macro Liquidity (Fed policy & M2):** Sets the overall directional bias (e.g., bullish during easing cycles). The core strategy involves waiting for a multi-signal共振 (resonance). For example, a bottom signal requires MVRV in the green zone + SOPR < 1.0. A top signal requires overheated on-chain data + sustained ETF outflows. Macro policy sets the overall direction. The Fear & Greed Index is only used as a weighted confirmatory signal, never alone. Action is only taken when three or more indicators align. The author automated this into a monitoring system that sends Telegram alerts only when signals trigger. As of the article's date (April 15, 2026), the system showed a strong bottom signal: extreme fear (F&G=12), MVRV in the buy zone, and SOPR < 1.0. The only contrary signal was weak ETF flows. Historically, such triple on-chain共振 has preceded 100%+ returns. The conclusion emphasizes building a personal framework over relying on external predictions, allowing for iterative improvement and customization based on individual risk tolerance.

marsbit12 мин. назад

Bitcoin Trading Strategy Breakdown: Celebrity Predictions and Classic Models All Fail, Only These Four Indicators Remain

marsbit12 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片