>negative $8bn entry described as “hidden, poorly internally labled ‘fiat@’ account”
probably had something to do with the loan as that seems to be roughly the amount and the description literally makes no sense.
I think the running bet is there is no full accounting.
The problem with this is that the customer funds are also not present on their balance sheet. Levine opined about this yesterday; Like 3 of the biggest assets are coins ftx didn't pay for - so where did the money go?
That's why the Alameda explanation is likely, in one way or another. Money had to go somewhere.
> Meanwhile, at a meeting with Alameda employees on Wednesday, Ms. Ellison explained what had caused the collapse, according to a person familiar with the matter. Her voice shaking, she apologized, saying she had let the group down. Over recent months, she said, Alameda had taken out loans and used the money to make venture capital investments, among other expenditures.
> Around the time the crypto market crashed this spring, Ms. Ellison explained, lenders moved to recall those loans, the person familiar with the meeting said. But the funds that Alameda had spent were no longer easily available, so the company used FTX customer funds to make the payments. Besides her and Mr. Bankman-Fried, she said, two other people knew about the arrangement: Mr. Singh and Mr. Wang.
[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/14/technology/ftx-sam-bankma...
This is what I initially suspected. But we can see FTX's balance sheet [1]. There is no loan to Alameda. "FTX shot its customer money into some still-unexplained reaches of the astral plane" is the best explanation we have for billions of missing dollars [2].
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/0c2a55b6-d34c-4685-8a8d-3c9628f1f...
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-11-14/ftx-s-...