> otherwise everyone would have lost their money.

It's a bit early to speculate on this one.

> bit early to speculate on this

We’ve seen the balance sheet. The facts have been on the table for FTX as much as they are for Tether.

I can’t say when they will fail. But as soon as we saw the Alameda books and Alameda and FTX’s responses (the former, an irrelevant statement about other assets; the latter, a claim of solvency without proof), the endpoint was sealed. Insolvent, leveraged entities don’t pay out junior creditors absent a bail-out.

I think the parent was pointing out that this is just an intent to acquire and could fall through.

And looks like it did.

What it actually revealed that they embezzled customer funds? It's still speculation as far as I can tell (your sources say nothing about customer funds)

> still speculation

They've admitted to illiquidity transforming into insolvency. That doesn't happen if you aren't betting client assets.

It could be a hack or losing keys