[HelloNurse]

> If the liabilities are collateralized by assets on their balance sheet, then the financial risk is not to Alameda but the lender!

Fair point, but why do you seem to think you are defending Alameda? Collateralizing loans from fools with your own brand of worthless bullshit is the very definition of a Ponzi scheme.

[paulusthe]

It's not a fair point. If Alameda goes down, then ftx goes down, and if ftx goes down and is clearly wash trading (the most interesting finding in the article imo), then prices will plummet.

It's not just a problem for the bank, it's threatening to the crypto ecosystem. Just as it would be if the binance tether thing ever implodes

[cryptoanon]

What if the loans are minted DAI? How is that a Ponzi?

[polygamous_bat]

The current circulating supply of DAI is slightly above 6B, so what you claimed is literally impossible.

The average case scenario is some of it is ponzi mixed in with other non ponzi, and in my book I'll call even a "10% ponzi", a ponzi scheme. Maybe you have a different bar to calling something a ponzi, so knock yourself out.

[mring33621]

Please explain further what this means and how it helps.

[HelloNurse]

Loans are money. Collaterals can be "minted DAI", whatever it is, or anything else that a fool can be convinced is valuable: that is the opportunity for Ponzi schemes.