Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cbenneh 1595 days ago
Not really bailing out retail. There was enough liquidity for retail users to exit the tokens at risk without a penalty.

On the other hand the VCs themselves that are large owners of the tokens in Solana ecosystem would incur large losses, and that's excluding additional losses from reputation in future. It just shows how successful Jump VCs are when they put up $320M in a few hours. Maybe a month of their PnL?
1 comments
im_down_w_otp 1595 days ago
I don't see how this is an indicator of that. They didn't put in USD. They put in ETH. Which is a thing that has no requirements to be backed by fungible legal tender reserves. So, they're not actually putting up cash as a replacement. It's more like they're putting up assets as a replacement, but it's not even that concrete really. They're not the same thing.

They're trading in chits, not money, when things like this happen. At least that's the case for as long as you can't regularly and commonly transact in ETH. The spot price/value of ETH multiplied across all the ETH that exists doesn't seem to be a description of total USD (or EUR or whatever) reserves available to convert ETH to USD, et al. as far as I can tell.

link
ludamad 1595 days ago
You overcomplicate things. There is plenty of liquidity to sell 120k eth; the opportunity cost of doing this is near $300 million
link
antocv 1595 days ago
2 days ago Jump had 93 000 ETH, today they do not have 93 000 ETH.

By casting a spell, today they also have 93 000 extra ETH. They are saving some of their potions for later time to cast wider spells.

link
ludamad 1595 days ago
Your spell metaphor doesn't serve you being this handwavey. What are you even saying happened on the ethereum blockchain during this?
link
antocv 1595 days ago
On ETH blockchain a transaction was confirmed, the transaction which moved 93 000ETH from Jumps account into hackers account.

Jump has stated they now still have 93 000ETH since they wish it it is so.

link
im_down_w_otp 1595 days ago
The point I'm making is that this says absolutely nothing about their ability to eat a $320M loss because they didn't eat a $320M loss if what they put up was ETH because they can't transact in ETH, they don't fund their operations in ETH, they don't pay their LPs returns in ETH, etc. etc. etc.

It might well be that they can eat a $320M loss on the regular, but if so, this situation isn't any kind of indicator of it.

link