On-chain analysis: Why is it wrong for Forbes to accuse Binance of "misappropriating 1.8 billion USDC"?
wublock.substack.com
Author: @0xMavWisdom Forbes posted an article on Monday (February 27th) accusing Binance of quietly transferring $1.8 billion in stablecoin collateral to hedge funds including Alameda and Cumberland/DRW last year, and in doing so condemning Binance’s misappropriation of user assets. For a six-month-old statistic, Forbes’ timing of the article is also subtle, as just two weeks prior, Binance was also embroiled in controversy over BUSD. The article on the misappropriation of user assets apparently caused enough of a public outcry that Binance responded the next day, saying, “The institutions mentioned in the Forbes article are spontaneous transfers by institutional users; Binance has never misappropriated user funds, whether they are assets of centralized exchanges or collateral for B-token “.
On-chain analysis: Why is it wrong for Forbes to accuse Binance of "misappropriating 1.8 billion USDC"?
On-chain analysis: Why is it wrong for Forbes…
On-chain analysis: Why is it wrong for Forbes to accuse Binance of "misappropriating 1.8 billion USDC"?
Author: @0xMavWisdom Forbes posted an article on Monday (February 27th) accusing Binance of quietly transferring $1.8 billion in stablecoin collateral to hedge funds including Alameda and Cumberland/DRW last year, and in doing so condemning Binance’s misappropriation of user assets. For a six-month-old statistic, Forbes’ timing of the article is also subtle, as just two weeks prior, Binance was also embroiled in controversy over BUSD. The article on the misappropriation of user assets apparently caused enough of a public outcry that Binance responded the next day, saying, “The institutions mentioned in the Forbes article are spontaneous transfers by institutional users; Binance has never misappropriated user funds, whether they are assets of centralized exchanges or collateral for B-token “.