{"id":15220,"date":"2022-12-07T04:15:55","date_gmt":"2022-12-07T04:15:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/crowdfundjunction.com\/blog\/wikipedia-editors-list-ftxs-questionable-blunder-as-the-top-trading-loss-of-all-time-bitcoin-news\/"},"modified":"2022-12-07T04:15:55","modified_gmt":"2022-12-07T04:15:55","slug":"wikipedia-editors-list-ftxs-questionable-blunder-as-the-top-trading-loss-of-all-time-bitcoin-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/crowdfundjunction.com\/blog\/wikipedia-editors-list-ftxs-questionable-blunder-as-the-top-trading-loss-of-all-time-bitcoin-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Wikipedia Editors List FTX’s Questionable Blunder as the Top Trading Loss of All-Time \u2013 Bitcoin News"},"content":{"rendered":"

(Originally posted on : Bitcoin News )<\/b>
\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/header>\n
\n<\/div>\n

Following the collapse of FTX at the beginning of November, two top executives from FTX and Alameda Research \u2014 Sam Bankman-Fried and Caroline Ellison \u2014 have been listed among traders with the top trading losses worldwide on Wikipedia. According to the Wiki page, Bankman-Fried\u2019s and Ellison\u2019s so-called \u2018trading loss\u2019 of 51 billion nominal U.S. dollars is at the top of the list in terms of the highest nominal amount of funds lost by trading.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Wiki Article Prematurely Suggests FTX Fiasco Was a $51B \u2018Trading Loss,\u2019 Despite Ongoing Investigations<\/h2>\n

The FTX fiasco has been a big deal and according to data, it was one of the largest losses in the financial world in quite some time. In fact, according to Wikipedia\u2019s page called the \u201cList of Trading Losses<\/a>,\u201d FTX co-founder Sam Bankman-Fried<\/a> (SBF) and Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison<\/a>, have been added to the top of the list for purportedly losing $51 billion. The so-called trading loss tied to SBF and Ellison eclipsed the former largest trading loss, which took place in 2021. Prior to the FTX collapse, Archegos Capital Management reportedly lost $10 billion in total return swaps, and Archegos founder Bill Hwang reportedly lost it all in two days.<\/p>\n

Below the FTX and Archegos trading losses was Morgan Stanley\u2019s and bond trader Howie Hubler\u2019s loss of $9 billion in 2008, as the company and trader lost the money from credit default swaps. Four years later, JPMorgan Chase and Bruno Iksil lost $9 billion as well from credit default swaps. This year, the Chinese firm Tsingshan Holding Group tried to short the commodity nickel and lost $8 billion from the bad bets. Below China\u2019s Tsingshan, Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 G\u00e9n\u00e9rale and J\u00e9r\u00f4me Kerviel lost $6.12 billion in 2008. FTX\u2019s losses, however, surpass the individually listed trading losses by a long shot, and Wikipedia editors explain that the list includes \u201cboth fraudulent and non-fraudulent losses.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"Wikipedia<\/p>\n

Interestingly, the Wikipedia editors detail that the funds associated with Bernie Madoff\u2019s Ponzi scheme were not included. Madoff\u2019s scheme reached around the $50 billion range, similar to FTX, but Wikipedia editors say \u201cMadoff did not lose most of this money in trading.\u201d In recent times, a few people have painted many similarities<\/a> between Bernie Madoff and SBF.<\/a> What\u2019s interesting about Wikipedia\u2019s article is that editors make the judgment call that Madoff\u2019s tumble would not be included because it was a Ponzi scheme, but the FTX fiasco is included in the list. This is despite the fact that FTX investigations are still ongoing, and the case has not been settled in court.<\/p>\n

Did FTX Really Lose $51 Billion in Bad Trades?<\/h2>\n

There\u2019s a slew of information that claims FTX\u2019s and Alameda\u2019s executives were \u201cinexperienced and unsophisticated individuals<\/a>,\u201d and another report that shows it was possible that Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison was allegedly a horrible margin trader<\/a>. Further, there\u2019s a lot of speculation that FTX\u2019s and Alameda\u2019s operations were Ponzi-like systems. Some have remarked that Alameda didn\u2019t even really trade crypto,<\/a> but rather \u201c\u2018invested\u2019 $8B across 448 venture-stage startups, most of which have \u20181-10\u2019 employees and zero documentation.\u201d Furthermore, according<\/a> to nakedcapitalism.com\u2019s Yves Smith, no one from the media has asked what happened to the $3.3 billion reportedly lent to SBF by Alameda. The alleged loans Alameda Research made totaled $4.1 billion, with most going to SBF, and the data was disclosed in a report<\/a> published by the Financial Times (FT).<\/p>\n

The FT report says SBF got a personal loan for $1 billion, and $2.3 billion was funneled to an SBF entity called Paper Bird. Former Mt Gox CEO Mark Karpel\u00e8s created an FTX entity list<\/a>, which shows Paper Bird is one of the top companies under SBF\u2019s wing. So far, nakedcapitalism.com\u2019s Smith says reporters interviewing SBF have not asked him where the $3.3 billion went. Furthermore, SBF never really explains in his interviews why top FTX and Alameda execs were given such \u201clarge personal lines of credit.\u201d Instead, SBF has described<\/a> a strange margin trading process, and reports claim<\/a> top executives or \u201ccertain accounts\u201d did not have to borrow or provide collateral to participate in FTX\u2019s odd margin trading system.<\/p>\n

With an ongoing investigation and the courts just getting involved in the FTX fiasco, it\u2019s quite possible that Wikipedia\u2019s judgment call to include FTX\u2019s alleged \u2018trading error\u2019 in the top trading losses list may be wrong. There\u2019s a possibility that Wikipedia editors may have to re-categorize the FTX case, in the same manner that was applied to Madoff\u2019s $50 billion blunder. The point is, as of right now, there\u2019s not enough evidence to say the FTX and Alameda fiasco was in fact a legitimate \u201ctrading loss,\u201d or that most of the $51 billion cited in Wikipedia\u2019s article was lost in trading mistakes.<\/p>\n

\n
\nTags in this story
\n<\/h6>\n
Alameda Research<\/a>, alleged trading losses<\/a>, Archegos Capital Management<\/a>, Bernie Madoff<\/a>, Bill Hwang<\/a>, Bruno Iksil<\/a>, Caroline Ellison<\/a>, ftx<\/a>, FTX case<\/a>, FTX collapse<\/a>, FTX entity list<\/a>, Howie Hubler<\/a>, JPMorgan Chase<\/a>, Largest Trading Loss<\/a>, Madoff Ponzi<\/a>, Mark Karpeles<\/a>, morgan stanley<\/a>, nakedcapitalism.com<\/a>, Paper Bird<\/a>, Ponzi Scheme<\/a>, Sam Bankman-Fried<\/a>, sbf<\/a>, Societe Generale<\/a>, Top Trading Loss<\/a>, Trading Loss<\/a>, Trading Loss Worldwide<\/a>, Tsingshan Holding Group<\/a>, Wiki Article<\/a>, Wikipedia<\/a>, Wikipedia Editors<\/a>, Yves Smith<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

What do you think about Wikipedia editors prematurely calling the FTX disaster a $51 billion trading loss? Let us know what you think about this subject in the comments section below.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n
\n
\nJamie Redman <\/h6>\n

\nJamie Redman is the News Lead at Bitcoin.com News and a financial tech journalist living in Florida. Redman has been an active member of the cryptocurrency community since 2011. He has a passion for Bitcoin, open-source code, and decentralized applications. Since September 2015, Redman has written more than 6,000 articles for Bitcoin.com News about the disruptive protocols emerging today.

\n
\n
\n<\/a>
\n<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Image Credits<\/b>: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Disclaimer<\/strong>: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com<\/a> does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n