DCG Calls Out Genesis' Settlement With New York as 'Subversive'

CoinDeskPolicy發佈於 2024-02-20更新於 2024-02-21

文章摘要

DCG filed an objection in bankruptcy court to the deal Genesis secured to end the New York attorney general's investigation of fraud and money laundering controls.

  • Digital Currency Group objected to subsidiary Genesis' proposed settlement with the New York attorney general's office.
  • NYAG sued DCG and Genesis – as well as another company – on fraud charges.

Digital Currency Group (DCG) is objecting to the settlement between the New York attorney general and Genesis – the failed crypto lender that was among DCG's array of digital assets businesses.

10

The bankrupt Genesis Global struck a deal with the attorney general's office earlier this month to resolve charges that it had defrauded investors, but its parent company contends that it wasn't a proper settlement.

Genesis "cannot, under the guise of a 'settlement,' take value from lower classes and redistribute it to preferred creditors in violation of absolute priority," DCG argued in an objection filed Wednesday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court Southern District of New York – the court that must approve the New York arrangement.

Advertisement
Advertisement

In a further statement from DCG circulated on Wednesday, the company called the deal "a back-door attempt to circumvent U.S. bankruptcy law," characterizing it as a "subversive arrangement, put together last-minute and in secret."

Jason Brown, a former co-chief deputy of the attorney general's office and a former senior federal attorney in New York, backed DCG's objection to the Genesis settlement with the state, asserting in a court filing that the details of the settlement may not have been arrived at properly.

"In any case of this magnitude, I would expect the parties to have engaged in extensive merits-based assessments of the claims prior to finalization of a settlement," he argued. "It is, in my opinion, not in the usual course to forgo such discussions."

The attorney general's office didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Last month, Genesis also settled a case from the state's Department of Financial Services (DFS), agreeing to pay $8 million and give up its New York BitLicense.

And earlier this month, the DFS amplified its case against DCG and Gemini, saying they were responsible for much more in investors losses – now at $3 billion – than the office first asserted in its fraud lawsuit tied to the defunct Gemini Earn program.

Advertisement
Advertisement

你可能也喜歡

Hyperliquid 正在用力杀死 HyperEVM

近期,围绕HyperEVM是否已死的讨论升温。加密KOL直言它是一个巨大的失败。Hyperliquid是一条独立的公链,内部包含两个引擎:高性能的封闭交易引擎HyperCore和兼容以太坊的应用引擎HyperEVM。 两者表现悬殊:交易端持续吸金,占据了链上永续合约大部分成交量,月手续费达数千万美元;而HyperEVM上所有DeFi协议的费用合计不足600万美元,资金与用户活跃度远低于其他主流公链。应用层资金主要集中在流动性质押和借贷,而去中心化交易所(DEX)生态萎靡,因核心撮合功能已被HyperCore独占,导致DEX缺乏存在意义。 HyperEVM发展缓慢的原因主要有四:1. 架构上,核心撮合与流动性被封闭,应用范围受限;2. 共享流动性机制导致应用层趋向垄断,缺乏多样性;3. 团队坚持“无内部人”的公平理念,未对生态进行有效扶持;4. 跨引擎开发体验不佳,存在异步执行等门槛。 有观点认为,HyperEVM的定位本就是HyperCore流动性的“代币化层”,而非通用公链,其冷清是结构使然。然而,这恰恰说明其生态严重依附于交易引擎,未能形成独立、广泛的应用生态。 结论是,Hyperliquid将资源高度集中于交易业务的战略选择,使其在永续市场取得成功,但也注定其应用层只能作为附属存在。目前HyperEVM链上虽有真实资金流动,但未能培育出具有广度和用户留存的应用生态。问题的核心或许不在于它是否已死,而在于它究竟被期望成为一条怎样的链。

marsbit13 分鐘前

Hyperliquid 正在用力杀死 HyperEVM

marsbit13 分鐘前

交易

現貨
活动图片