ekpyrotic

Non-paywall version: https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url=https://www.ft.com/...

Non-paywall version: https://archive.ph/bEbhJ

Non-paywall link: https://archive.ph/7yuc1

In spite of all the various potential high-tech solutions -- i.e., Google Lens -- I would strongly advise just contacting an antiques brooch specialist. They will know where to look, or may even know the crest from taking an immediate look.

I love the power of technology to make knowledge accessible, but sometimes I feel that we forget that deep expertise exists in people too. There will be someone -- if not a couple of people -- have have likely spent their full life /only/ learning about Bavarian brooches.

This might just be the 'first arrow' from the SEC with much more to be added down the track, but it's interesting to see that they have gone in heavily on defrauding equity investors in the FTX business -- rather than pulling the rug on customers.

Either that's because it's easier for the SEC to prove, and get it to the point of demonstrating fraud? Or the US customers and the FTX US business were relatively untouched throughout this whole process, so there is less to go on for US customer fraud?

Or, perhaps, this is just the first arrow to smoke out more data, informants, etc, with a strategic view to adding further allegations down the track?

It is much safer to get bad news out in your own voice than risk that it leaks some other way, either through a journalist reporting on it or, even, an employee breaking the story on social media.

If the company doesn't get on the front foot to control the narrative, they will wake up to an email from a journalist saying that they are writing an article about 30pc cuts.

At that point, the journalist is likely to have heard the news -- and largely written the story. The company will be able to provide a quote, but by that point they will have lost control of the narrative. They won't be able to put their own headline on it -- as the start-up has done with this blog post.

One story becomes two. Becomes three. Becomes four. Etc. Then a media narrative sets in that the company is on the way to bankruptcy, etc, etc. Investors start calling the CEO, etc, etc.

I know that people find these types of announcements cringe and think that PR is a waste of time. But there is a reason most companies use this playbook: it is safer and it works (most of the time).

For the avoidance of doubt, this isn't a justification for all the language and messaging in this announcement, but a broader justification of the general strategy of communicating openly and in your own voice when you have bad news.

Non-paywall version: https://archive.ph/hsX38

"Of that total, $1 billion went to Bankman-Fried in the form of a personal loan, while $2.3 billion went to an entity he controls, Paper Bird (Bankman-Fried has told Forbes that owns 75% of the entity, with Wang owning the rest)—so that’s another nearly $1.73 billion at Bankman-Fried’s disposal."