Nowhere does it say that FTX invested in Alameda.

Alameda invested in FTT which is minted by FTX which is not the same thing.

> Alameda invested in FTT which is minted by FTX

FTX issued FTT to Alameda. We have no idea what Alameda gave them as collateral, but it's clear it wasn't cash. Lending is a form of investing.

How can you say it's clear it wasn't cash? What's the source?

Also, FTX minted FTT out of nothing - effective cost zero - so no matter what they received in exchange, even if they had received nothing that is not an investment unless they received Alameda equity. I agree that lending is a form of investment but nothing says that they received a loan in exchange.

You could still be right, but it's all speculation :)

> How can you say it's clear it wasn't cash?

FTT spiraled and FTX went insolvent.

Doesn't mean they never received any cash. Maybe the CEO spent it all on crack and hookers.

I know the SEC is struggling to stay on top of the crypto market, but it certainly seems like SBF should be in an absolutely huge amount of legal jeopardy right now. And if he isn't, then the crypto market is beyond saving and deserves to die.

> SEC...it certainly seems like SBF should be in an absolutely huge amount of legal jeopardy right now

FTX U.S. is fine. To the degree Americans are hurt, it's investors in the international entity. If anyone deserves regulatory scrutiny, it's the institutional investors betting fiduciary assets on crypto.

I wonder if SBF became one of the largest political donors in the country, not for altruistic reasons like he claims, but for protection from the SEC.