Documents have appeared in X requesting a review of the FTX bankruptcy case.
Former head of data analysis — Dan Chapsky — stated under oath:
⏺ The exchange was experiencing a serious liquidity shortage
⏺ But it remained solvent
⏺ Allegedly, the assets were enough to cover client deposits
⏺ Recovery could have taken months if the company hadn't entered comprehensive bankruptcy proceedings.
Now let's do this without emotions.
📌 Liquidity is 'is there money right now?'
📌 Solvency is 'whether assets exceed liabilities.'
FTX might have been 'alive on paper', but dead in the moment.
When a bank run starts, theory dies faster than balance.
Let's not forget that client funds were used through Alameda Research.
And then — freezing of withdrawals, panic, regulators, collapse of trust.
And in crypto, this is key:
Loss of trust = instant insolvency, even if the numbers in Excel look good.
Interestingly, such statements appear after some time.
Is this a legal tactic? An attempt to mitigate the consequences?
Or did the market really bury the company too quickly back then?
The story with FTX is not just about finance.
It's about the speed of panic and the price of trust.
#FTX #CryptoNews #bitcoin #CryptoRegulation #MISTERROBOT
Subscribe if you want to see the crypto market without illusions.
