Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by TheDong 964 days ago
You don't have to pick an exact moment, but there are several clear moments of fraud. The biggest moment of fraud was whenever alameda's FTX account was allowed to have a riskier position than a normal account, including holding a negative balance. This is something FTX specifically allowed and publicly lied about (SBF on twitter said they were treated as a regular account, which we now know is false).

This fraud became worse the more negative the balance became since it became more and more misleading to users to continue to present themselves as a financially healthy business.

What they should have done instead is to not allow alameda to have an account with special rules and negative balances, and to actually operate their business as they claimed. They likely would have grown less quickly or even gone out of business, but sometimes the way you avoid fraud is indeed by going bankrupt instead of lying.

They also could have not lied to users, both about the status of alameda's account, and about the status of FTX's liquidity. Each time they made a statement about their exchange that excluded that materially relevant information was also fraud.

I do say all of this with full awareness that a large fraction of YC startups also "fake it until they make it", i.e. lie about what their product can do, lie about their financials, etc. Most YC startups are also committing fraud on a much smaller scale, and just manage to keep the scale small enough that no one goes to prison.

1 comments

Hold your horses! What startups are lying about what they do? I don’t get the impression this is the case at all. MVP and move fast tactics are not fraud. Saying your SOC2 compliant or something when you are not probably is.
I know first hand of YC founders lying to (corporate) customers on their business size, revenue, etc in order to secure business. Is that fraud? At best its an unethical and dubious business practice.
It is only fraud if a jury of your peers would think it is fraud, which is probably a higher bar than you think.

Most of the fraud you are talking about also wouldn’t have the explicit benefit directly to the founders the way it did with FTX. SBF took money that wasn’t his and spent it on private planes and luxury apartments and hundred million dollar investments _in his name_.

The average startup founder who is trying to close a sale by exaggerating their business a little bit is not going to have that kind of clear gain, because most founders do not use their companies as piggy banks.

> Most of the fraud you are talking about also wouldn’t have the explicit benefit directly to the founders

The "Frank" startup that sold to JPMC because they lied about active users [1] directly contradicts your conclusion. It happens, probably more than we realize, and founders have an incentive to do it so they can reach a liquidity event to cash out.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/former-executives-college-aid-...