Recursive trades between the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust and the Three Arrows Capital hedge fund allegedly inflated assets, according to an open letter from the Gemini co-founder. 3098 Total views 27 Total shares Listen to article 0:00 News Own this piece of history
Collect this article as an NFT Cameron Winklevoss, co-founder of the cryptocurrency exchange Gemini, has penned an open letter to the board of Digital Currency Group, or DCG, saying CEO Barry Silbert was unfit to run the company.
In a Jan 10. letter, Winklevoss claimed Silbert and Genesis Global Capital a subsidiary of DCG had defrauded more than 340,000 users who were a part of Geminis Earn program. The letter followed a Jan. 2 appeal on Twitter to Silbert directly, in which the Gemini co-founder said Genesis owed Gemini $900 million, accusing the CEO of hiding behind lawyers, investment bankers, and process.
According to Winklevoss, Genesis lent more than $2.3 billion to Three Arrows Capital, a move which ultimately left the crypto firm with a loss of $1.2 billion once the hedge fund failed in June 2022. He claimed Silbert, DCG, and Genesis orchestrated “a carefully crafted campaign of lies” starting in July 2022 in an effort to show DCG had injected the funds into Genesis by including a 10-year promissory note as part of its assets.
Winklevoss alleged Genesis CEO Michael Moro was complicit in this duplicity, by issuing false and misleading statements on social media regarding DCG providing capital to Genesis. In addition, he claimed certain DCG personnel had worked behind the scenes to cover the lack of adequate capitalization at Genesis.
Related: Crypto investors sue Winklevoss twins over interest accounts on Gemini
According to the Gemini co-founder, any accounting irregularities of which DCG and Silbert had been a part might have been overlooked had FTX not collapsed within a matter of months. He alleged there were recursive trades between Three Arrows and the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust in what he called effectively swap transactions for Genesis of Bitcoin (BTC) for GBTC a move in which Genesis eventually lost and did not adequately report on its balance sheets.These misrepresentations […] were a sleight of hand designed to make it appear as if Genesis was solvent and able to meet its obligations to lenders, without DCG actually committing to the financial support necessary to make this true. DCG wanted to have its cake and eat it too.
Earn Update: An Open Letter to the Board of @DCGco pic.twitter.com/eakuFjDZR2 Cameron Winklevoss (@cameron) January 10, 2023
Unlike in his Jan. 2 letter, Winklevoss directly called on the DCG board to remove Silbert in an effort to provide a resolution for Earn users. In response to that letter, Silbert claimed DCG did not borrow $1.675 billion from Genesis and never missed an interest payment to Genesis and is current on all loans outstanding.
“There is no path forward as long as Barry Silbert remains CEO of DCG,” said Winklevoss. “He has proven himself unfit to run DCG and unwilling and unable to find a resolution with creditors that is both fair and reasonable. As a result, Gemini, acting on behalf of 340,000 Earn users, requests that the Board remove Barry Silbert as CEO.
Cointelegraph reached out to Barry Silbert, but did not receive a response at the time of publication. #Business #Barry Silbert #Gemini #Cryptocurrency Exchange #Cameron Winklevoss Related News How to create an ERC token without coding, explained Remote work could redefine the global workforce for good Genesis and DCG seek path for the recovery of assets amid liquidity issues 3 reasons why it could be a rocky week for Bitcoin, Ethereum and altcoins Grayscale ETH trust nears record 60% discount as nerves continue over DCG
The SEC’s new approach to staking is a turning point for US crypto regulation, showing that genuine, tech-savvy engagement can build smarter policy and keep blockchain innovation onshore.
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who proposed the legislation, was seen crying in the chamber as it went through.
Campaign group Dignity in Dying hailed the result as “a landmark moment for choice, compassion and dignity at the end of life”.
“MPs have listened to dying people, to bereaved families and to the public, and have voted decisively for the reform that our country needs and deserves,” said Sarah Wootton, its chief executive.
The bill will now go to the House of Lords, where it will face further scrutiny before becoming law.
Due to a four-year “backstop” added to the bill, it could be 2029 before assisted dying is actually offered, potentially coinciding with the end of this government’s parliament.
The bill would allow terminally ill adults with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
Image: Campaigners with Dignity in Dying protest in favour of the assisted dying bill. Pic: PA
Ms Leadbeater has always insisted her legislation would have the most robust safeguards of any assisted dying laws in the world.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:35
MP: ‘Surreal’ moment as assisted dying passes Commons
Opening the debate on Friday she said that opposing the bill “is not a neutral act. It is a vote for the status quo”.
She warned that if her plan was rejected, MPs would be asked to vote on it again in 10 years and “that fills me with despair”.
MPs have brought about historic societal change
A chain of events that started with the brutal murder of an MP almost 10 years ago has today led to historic societal change – the like of which many of us will never see again.
Assisted dying will be legalised in England and Wales. In four years’ time adults with six months or less to live and who can prove their mental capacity will be allowed to choose to die.
Kim Leadbeater, the MP who has made this possible, never held political aspirations. Previously a lecturer in health, Ms Leadbeater reluctantly stood for election after her sister Jo Cox was fatally stabbed and shot to death in a politically motivated attack in 2016.
And this is when, Ms Leadbeater says, she was forced to engage with the assisted dying debate. Because of the sheer volume of correspondence from constituents asking her to champion the cause.
Polls have consistently shown some 70% of people support assisted dying. And ultimately, it is this seismic shift in public opinion that has carried the vote. Britain now follows Canada, the USA, Belgium, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Australia. All countries with sophisticated health systems. Nowhere has assisted dying been reversed once introduced.
The relationship between doctor and patient will now also change. The question is being asked: Is an assisted death a treatment? There is no decisive answer. But it is a conversation that will now take place. The final answer could have significant consequences, especially in mental health settings.
There are still many unknowns. Who will be responsible for providing the service? The NHS? There is a strong emotional connection to the health service and many would oppose the move. But others will argue that patients trust the institution and would want to die in its arms.
The challenge for health leaders will be to try and reconcile the bitter divisions that now exist within the medical community. The Royal Colleges have tried to remain neutral on the issue, but continued to challenge Ms Leadbeater until the very end.
Their arguments of a failure of safeguards and scrutiny did not resonate with MPs. And nor did concerns over the further erosion of palliative care. Ms Leadbeater’s much-repeated insistence that “this is the most scrutinised legislation anywhere in the world” carried the most weight.
Her argument that patients should not have to fear prolonged, agonising deaths or plan trips to a Dignitas clinic to die scared and alone, or be forced to take their own lives and have their bodies discovered by sons, daughters, husbands and wives because they could not endure the pain any longer was compelling.
The country believed her.
The assisted dying debate was last heard in the Commons in 2015, when it was defeated by 330 votes to 118.
There have been calls for a change in the law for decades, with a campaign by broadcaster Dame Esther Rantzengiving the issue renewed attention in recent years.
Supporters have described the current law as not being fit for purpose, with desperate terminally ill people feeling the need to end their lives in secret or go abroad alone, for fear loved ones will be prosecuted for helping them.
Ahead of the vote, an hours-long emotionally charged debate heard MPs tell personal stories about their friends and family.
Maureen Burke, the Labour MP for Glasgow North East, spoke about how her terminally ill brother David was in so much pain from advanced pancreatic cancer that one of the last things he told her was that “if there was a pill that he could take to end his life, he would very much like to take that”.
She said she was “doing right by her brother” in voting for it.
How did MPs vote?
MPs were given a free vote, meaning they could vote with their conscience and not along party lines.
The division list shows Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer voted in favour of the bill, but Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch voted against.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, who will have to deliver the bill, also voted no.
Opponents have raised both practical and ethical concerns, including that people could be coerced into seeking an assisted death and that the bill has been rushed through.
Veteran Labour MP Diane Abbott said she was not opposed to the principle of assisted dying but called the legislation “poorly drafted”.
Former foreign secretary James Cleverly echoed those concerns, saying he is “struck by the number of professional bodies which are neutral on the topic of assisted dying in general, but all are opposed to the provisions of this bill”.
Recently, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Pathologists and the Royal College of Physicians have raised concerns about the bill, including that there is a shortage of staff to take part in assisted dying panels.
However, public support for a change in the law remains high, according to a YouGov poll published on the eve of the vote.
The survey of 2,003 adults in Great Britain suggested 73% of those asked last month were supportive of the bill, while the proportion of people who feel assisted dying should be legal in principle stood at 75%.