Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Connect with us

E-Financial

The Collapse of FTX

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Oluseyi Akindeinde

FTX recently valued at $32 billion dollars, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the US. The filing in Delaware federal court on Friday 11th November, 2022 included the main FTX international exchange, FTX US a US crypto marketplace, Sam Bankman-Fried’s proprietary trading group Alameda Research and about 130 affiliated companies.

In this piece I try to dissect what went wrong at FTX, and discuss possible ramifications for the crypto industry.

The Players

  • Sam Bankman-Fried aka SBF (The self proclaimed Crypto White Knight and member of the inner caucus. Darling of Washington DC).
  • Caroline Ellison aka CE (His Girlfriend).
  • Changpeng Zhao aka CZ (The Outcast Dark Crypto Lord).

The Entities

  • Alameda Research (AR). The Trading company founded and OWNED by SBF but managed by CE. Revenue earned through market making (ie providing liquidity to crypto exchanges) as well as trading/speculating on cryptocurrency futures using a high degree of leverage.

– FTX (FTX.com). Cryptocurrency

Futures Exchange (brokerage and derivatives platform) OWNED and CONTROLLED by SBF. Revenue earned through customer transaction fees who trade and speculate on cryptocurrency futures and derivatives(day traders). The trading platform was called FTXPro.

–  Binance. A rival crypto Exchange OWNED & CONTROLLED by CZ. The Biggest cryptocurrency spot exchange in the world by volume.

Quick Summary

  • AR and FTX were meant to be separate entities even though they were founded by the same person SBF.

–             FTX had a market-cap (networth) of $32 billion having raised funding from well known

VCs in Silicon Valley including Sequoia Capital.

  • AR allegedly owed FTX $8 billion after taking loans apparently funded by deposits of FTX customers.
  • AR used these borrowed funds to trade cryptocurrencies with leverage and also to bail out struggling crypto companies (Voyager and BlockFI) who had liquidity issues.

–            FTX declared bankruptcy with loads of customer funds gone with it.

How Money Disappeared – Summary

–             SBF founded AR and FTX.

–             FTX also issued FTT tokens which they gave to early investors that included AR.

–             As an exchange, customers deposited their funds on FTX to trade with.

–             SBF basically gave these customer deposits to AR as loans to be used for their trading activities and in return accepted FTT tokens (originally issued by FTX) as collateral for the loan.

–  A report then came out that pointed out that AR’s balance sheet was basically made up largely of FTT tokens issued by FTX.

– CZ (who once bought a stake in FTX but later divested because he had a bone to pick with SBF) upon getting wind of this development announced he would de-risk his entire $500M of FTT position.

  • On the back of this, other customers also started to dump their FTT tokens and immediately started withdrawing their funds on FTX. It led to a bank run.
  • AR then started selling assets presumably on other exchanges to send back to FTX to shore up capital in order to meet the customer shortfall.
  • When SBF realized the liquidity squeeze, he then reached out to CZ for a bail out of FTX wherein CZ accepted the offer of bail out subject to corporate due diligence.
  • CZ later pulled out of the deal because his due diligence on FTX had come up short.
  • FTT price tanked as FTX had no liquidity in reserve to meet customer withdrawal obligations and subsequently paused withdrawals.

–             From being illiquid, FTX became insolvent since the value of the collateral held (FTT) had fallen below the value of their liabilities.

  • SBF basically thought he could print money (FTT) out of thin-air using FTX as the mechanism and use it as collateral against real assets.
  • FTX, AR and SBF filed for bankruptcy protection post- haste.

How Money Disappeared – Details

Background

  • SBF, an MIT physics graduate and a former Wall Street futures trader made a lot of money trading crypto arbitrage. He founded AR but gave CE the reins of power when he founded FTX a crypto futures and derivates trading company.
  • FTX as part of its operations issued a token called FTT. It is like airline miles or reward points as you don’t get any ownership stake in FTX itself.
  • FTT token allowed the holder to obtain discounts on trading fees when they trade on FTXPro. It could also be pledged as collateral for futures trading on FTXPro.
  • FTX used a portion of profits (trading fees) generated to buy back and burn a portion of FTT in circulation.
  • So indirectly FTT token was tied to the profitability of FTX – that is the more profitable FTX was, the more FTT tokens FTX would buy back leading to an increase in the price of the FTT tokens (the reverse was also the case if FTX wasn’t profitable).

–             Burning FTT would also lead to reducing its supply which further increases its price. This also made FTT behave somewhat like a company stock. But it wasn’t legally a stock.

–             There were over 400,000 holders of FTT at the last count.

–             Word got out about AR’s balance sheet which had $14.6 billion but it’s biggest asset was

$3.7bn worth of “unlocked FTT” and its other biggest asset was

$2.2bn worth of FTT that were pledged as collateral. Basically nearly half of AR’s balance sheet was made up of FTT tokens – an asset created by FTX.

  • AR’s balance sheet liability also carried $7.4bn worth of liabilities (loans).
  • From purely a risk management point of view, this was rather bad because AR was using it’s own equity as collateral for borrowed money. If the company became unprofitable, this would be bad in itself but if the collateral (FTT tokens) backing those loans were to fall in value, this would become a disaster for AR.

Relationship Between FTX and AR

  • SBF founded both companies. FTX being the exchange. AR was the trading company using FTX to conduct its trading activities.
  • FTX and AR claimed they were completely separate entities. Speculation however started to spread on social media that the two companies were one and the same and customer funds on FTX were finding their way to AR behind the scenes.

–  It was later gathered that FTT token’s price was being propped up by AR. Not only that, AR was further using FTT it got issued by FTX as collateral to the same FTX to fund its own operations.

– It was bad enough that AR carried a lot of illiquid assets on their books (FTT), it became even worse when FTX started giving a huge portion of their customer funds to AR as loans which were collateralised and secured by the very same FTT tokens issued by FTX.

–  Remember that FTX issued FTT tokens in the first place. So, they were getting back what they issued as collateral. Like plugging an extension plug into itself. Simply means if the price of FTT went down, FTX would be seriously impacted.

Crisis Brewing

  • FTX’s primarily business was being a broker dealer. They were listing and selling

perpetual crypto futures and allowing AR and other traders/ speculators to trade crypto derivatives often with huge leverage.

  • As a result, they needed a reserve of money to lend to AR and speculators.
  • And because FTX and AR were one and the same, customer funds deposited on FTX were diverted to AR for leveraged trading operations.
  • Once suspicion started to filter

through that FTX didn’t have enough crypto on hand to honour all customer withdrawals, customers started demanding for their funds and FTX started having liquidity issues as there wasn’t enough reserve on hand to meet up with customer’s withdrawals.

  • AR in turn started withdrawing funds (stable coins and crypto)

they had on other exchanges to send to FTX. This served to further confirm that FTX was really facing a liquidity crisis.

Denials

  • SBF denied the liquidity crisis and basically said everything was fine and customer funds were intact. He even claimed it was all the work of competitors trying to spook them.
  • At the same time CE (who ran AR) took to twitter to say that AR had $10bn in liquidity not reported on the balance sheet.

Enter CZ

  • CZ who was a former investor in FTX had over $500M worth of FTT. It was paid in part as

settlement when CZ divested from FTX in 2021.

  • Actually SBF bought back CZ’s stake in FTX and paid him $2.1bn in BUSD and FTT tokens.
  • When CZ got wind of the report of AR’s balance sheet and its asset makeup, he made a public declaration to offload his entire $500M worth of FTT in what he called a “de-risking” process.
  • This piece of public declaration naturally spooked the markets as speculators who held FTT tokens started de-risking (selling) as well.

 

The Death Spiral

  • With speculators selling, FTT price began to plummet.
  • It was made worse when CE incredibly made a public offer to CZ that AR were willing to buy Binance’s entire FTT stake at $22 each over-the-counter.
  • This further fuelled the fire that AR and FTX were using FTT as collateral for crypto loans and feared getting liquidated.
  • This caused hundreds of millions of dollars in FTT liquidations on FTX and because

of low liquidity it further crashed the price. AR and FTX also started selling off the other crypto assets they held to prevent FTX from collapsing.

This caused other cryptocurrency prices to tank. A ripple effect.

  • Traders also started rushing to pull their funds off FTX exchange for fear that the exchange would collapse. This essentially led to a bank run.

The Aborted Rescue Mission

  • People just couldn’t believe that FTX, a company that had raised a combined $1.8bn in VC money could be facing insolvency.
  • The unthinkable then happened – SBF publicly reached out to CZ and asked to be bailed out.
  • CZ accepted by signing a non- binding letter of intent (LoI) to buy FTX pending due diligence.

This served to further confirm that FTX was indeed neck deep in trouble.

  • The following day, however, CZ through Binance made it known that they wouldn’t be taking up the offer of buying FTX as the issues were simply too many.

FTX had failed their process of corporate due diligence.

Binance also cited risks related to pending regulatory investigations on FTX and reports of internal FTX funds mismanagement.

  • FTX then paused withdrawals of customer funds. There was already an $8bn shortfall.
  • SBF attempted a last ditch effort at raising funds but no offer of a bail-out was forthcoming.

Bankruptcy Filing

  • FTX and AR are now insolvent and SBF has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
  • They imploded in a wave of scuttlebutt and were brought down in truly exceptional circumstances.
  • The fallout of this is still unravelling and will most likely take a few months to sort out. Until then there will still be blood on the crypto streets so tread with caution. Brace yourselves for more bloodbath.
  • A lot of people lost loads of money on FTX. Here’s a Never leave your funds on an Exchange. Get a non-custodial wallet and move your funds there. Exchanges are centralized entities.

Wrap up

Naturally people will be more skeptical of crypto but this, in fact isn’t crypto problem.

This was caused by a few self- absorbed, irresponsible and incompetent individuals like SBF and CE running centralised entities engaging in blackbox-like business practices, mis-using customer funds to run opaque financial institutions under a cloak of invincibility with no oversight regulation.

These guys basically ran a huge fraudulent operation which could have gone undetected for a long time.

The system needs sanitization. Some regulation needs to be enforced to bring a semblance of order to the industry.

A lot of Nigerians lost money in this debacle and I truly sympathize with you if you did. These are truly extraordinary times.

At the end of the day nothing is wrong with crypto. It’s just a medium and a tool in the hands of nefarious individuals. Going forward though, always remember: Not your keys. Not your coins.

I round off with these words from CZ

Oluseyi Akindeinde is the Chief Technology Officer, Digital Encode.


Kindly share this post

Dear Reader, Your support matters. But we believe that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. That is why, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and finance and how they affect lives. Our incisive and analytical view of how technology news affects the daily life help individuals and organizations make up their minds. Quality journalism costs money. Today, we're asking that you support us to do more. Kindly support our effort to deliver technology and finance journalism to everyone in the world. Donate as little as N1,000. Bank transfers can be made to: UBA Plc 1017156876 Communication Week Media Ltd

E-Financial

Zumax Files N4.1Bn Suit against CBN over ‘Fraudulent’ Receivership

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Zumax Nigeria Limited, an oil services company, has filed a N4.1 billion lawsuit against the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), alleging gross negligence and complicity in what it calls a fraudulent receivership imposed by the apex bank.

Zumax Files N4.1Bn Suit against CBN over ‘Fraudulent’ Receivership

In the case, which is before the Federal High Court, Lagos, Zumax claimed that the CBN failed in its statutory duty to supervise banks and protect customers’ interests.

At the hearing of the matter on Tuesday before Justice Akintoye Aluko, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) told the court that the Plaintiff (Zumax) had an application dated February 20, 2025, asking the court to hear the application.

He urged the court to allow him to move the application as the defendant had responded.

Olanipekun also told the court that the Plaintiff and defendant’s preliminary objections can be consolidated and heard together.

He stated that the priority of which application to be heard first shouldn’t arise as the Plaintiff has not opposed the hearing of CBN’s preliminary objection.

But Adeleke Agboola (SAN), counsel, counsel, told the court that the defendant has a preliminary objection in the suit, which commenced as a writ of summons challenging the jurisdiction of the court.

He argued that CBN filed its notice of preliminary objection within time and that the Plaintiff has responded to it.

Agboola said: “This preliminary objection has priority over any other applications. The Plaintiff’s application is not meritorious.

“There is no suggestion by the claimant that we did not file within time. We are saying that this court does not have the jurisdiction to hear this matter. I urge your lordship to allow us to argue this matter.

“There is no doubt that preliminary objection takes precedence; it says it must be heard first, and determining our objection is very serious; we have complied strictly by the rules.

“We urge this court to hear the preliminary objection and dismiss the Plaintiff’s application.”

In his response, Olanipekun said: “My learned friend said the application we filed is not meritorious. It is the court that can make any pronouncement on that.

“My lord, even when we talk of being tidy, we are not saying the court should not hear his preliminary objection. He is now the one saying that our application should not be heard.

“The court has to determine whether the objection has to be heard first or the Plaintiff’s application dated February 20, 2025, has to be heard first.

“It’s no longer the law; in fact, it has never been the law that when there is a preliminary objection, the court will say let’s take it first. We urge your lordship to take our application that has not been contested by the defendant.”

After listening to the submissions and arguments of both parties, Justice Aluko adjourned the case till April 22, 2025, for ruling on which application to hear first.

According to court documents, Zumax had and maintained its account with the defunct IMB International Bank Plc., which, under several mergers and consolidations of banks, ultimately fused into the much larger banking institution known as First City Monument Bank (FCMB).

The Plaintiff said it obtained a facility from IMB International Bank, an overdraft facility of N50m, which was later increased to N200m in/or at the first half of 1998.

However, the bank allegedly inflated the company’s debt and, by December 6, 2002, claimed it had risen to N465.6 million, the claim which was vehemently disputed by Zumax.

Zumax contends that FCMB, under its former Managing Director Edwin Chinye, took control of its foreign currency earnings held in a JP Morgan Bank account through its sister company, Redsear Limited.

According to the plaintiff, the Bank’s Managing Director not only insisted upon and got shares in Redsears Limited and a directorship of that company as a condition precedent for the loan, he also allegedly inserted himself as the lone signatory for the company’s bank account with JP Morgan Bank.

The plaintiff further alleged that “the bank misappropriated $ 4 million from this account, a shortfall discovered during an audit.

“Rather than addressing the dispute, FCMB appointed receivers to take over Zumax’s operations, a move the company described as fraudulent.

“The receivership, which lasted from December 2002 until 2022, led to severe financial losses, including the collapse of Zumax’s business and the loss of contracts with multinational oil companies such as Chevron.

“The company claimed it was unable to operate for two decades due to the receivership, which was based on what it describes as an entirely fabricated debt.

“Zumax further alleged that despite repeated petitions, the CBN failed to investigate FCMB’s actions or intervene to prevent the alleged financial mismanagement.

“The company maintained that a 2007 CBN report confirmed that it had paid over N547 million to FCMB, proving it was never in debt to the bank.

“Additionally, the Court of Appeal ruled in December 2021 that the consent judgment upon which the receivership was based was fraudulent and should be set aside.”

The plaintiff is seeking a court declaration that the CBN was negligent in its duty to regulate Nigerian banks.

It’s also asking for special damages amounting to $ 41 million, including lost income and asset depreciation; general damages of N2 billion, exemplary damages of N2 billion, and legal costs amounting to N100 million.

But the CBN’s preliminary objection is challenging the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the matter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Financial

FG to Harmonise Fiscal Data Across MDAs

Published

on

Mr Wale Edun, minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy,
Kindly share this post

Efforts to harmonise fiscal data across government institutions have commenced in earnest, with Mr Wale Edun, minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, spearheading the meeting to achieve the mission.

Mr Wale Edun, minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy,

Key stakeholders, including the Minister of State for Finance, Dr Doris Uzoka-Anite; the Accountant General of the Federation, Shamsedeen Babatunde Ogunjimi, and the Director General of the Budget Office, Mr Tanimu Yakubu, met on Monday with Edun, a statement issued by Director of Information in the ministry Mohammed Manga, said.

The said discussions centered on discrepancies in fiscal data across government institutions, which have affected Nigeria’s credit ratings and borrowing capacity.

The Minister emphasised the need for synergy between agencies such as the Budget Office, the Accountant General’s Office, and the Debt Management Office (DMO).

“Delivering accurate and comprehensive fiscal data is critical to economic stability and investor confidence,” Edun said Attendees agreed on the establishment of a Fiscal Data Coordination Framework, which includes a main committee, a subcommittee, and technical teams dedicated to standardising fiscal reporting methodologies and economic assumptions.

The Minister affirmed that Nigeria must take ownership of its fiscal data credibility, reducing dependence on external institutions.

The meeting concluded with a firm commitment to implementing the framework, reinforcing transparency, strengthening investor confidence, and enhancing Nigeria’s economic outlook.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Financial

Mastercard Announces Bold Investments to Propel Africa’s Digital Payments Economy Towards $1.5 Trillion Goal by 2030

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Africa’s digital payments economy is set to grow from strength to strength according to a Mastercard-commissioned report by Genesis Analytics stating that the digital payments economy is expected to reach $1.5 trillion by 2030.

As a longstanding technology partner to Africa, Mastercard continues to strengthen its commitment to the continent’s digital growth through strategic investments, public-private partnerships, and innovation initiatives that drive financial health and economic growth. By fostering collaboration with key stakeholders, Mastercard aims to enhance digital connectivity, expand economic opportunities, and enable millions of people and businesses to thrive in the digital economy.

Driving Africa’s digital growth

Mastercard’s investments will focus on three key areas to further accelerate digital adoption and financial inclusion:

  1. Enabling Africa’s Micro, Small and Medium Businesses (MSMEs)
  2. Empowering Africa’s fintech sector
  3. Scaling remittances and cross-border payments

“Africa is filled with immense possibilities, and its people have the potential to shape the global economy in the decades ahead. Mastercard remains deeply committed to driving digital transformation across the continent, working closely with entrepreneurs, merchants, banks, start-ups, telcos, and governments. By increasing our investments, expanding innovation, and fostering inclusion, we are helping build a more connected and accessible digital future,” said Dimitrios Dosis, president, Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa at Mastercard.

 Africa’s digital transformation is underpinned by rapid advancements in internet penetration and financial inclusion, two of the fastest-growing enablers of digital payments across the continent. According to the report, internet penetration in Africa is projected to grow at a compound annual rate of 20%, while financial inclusion is set to expand at 6% per year​.

These trends signal a strong shift towards digital transactions, with businesses and consumers increasingly embracing contactless solutions, further accelerating economic participation and financial accessibility across the region.

“For over five decades, Mastercard has worked alongside African governments, businesses, and communities to advance financial inclusion and economic development. With Africa projected to host nine of the world’s 20 fastest-growing economies, we are focused on leveraging our expertise and technologies to support the continent’s continued digital transformation. Our investments today will help build a more resilient economy for the future,” said Mark Elliott, division president, Africa, Mastercard.

1.    Enabling Africa’s Micro, Small and Medium Businesses (MSMEs)

Recognizing that MSMEs account for over 50% of Africa’s GDP, Mastercard continues to provide digital solutions that empower small businesses and drive economic expansion.

This commitment is reinforced by the Mobilizing Access to the Digital Economy (MADE) Alliance: Africa, in partnership with the African Development Bank Group. The initiative aims to extend digital access to critical services for 100 million individuals and businesses over the next decade. As part of its broader goal to bring users onto Community Pass, Mastercard has set a target to register 15 million users in Africa within five years. Community Pass is a social enterprise initiative that digitizes and connects remote, and rural communities to governments, NGOs, and private sector services.

To further fuel the potential of Africa’s MSMEs, Mastercard will accelerate easy access to its proprietary solutions such as Tap on Phone and SME-in-a-Box. The technology company will also continue to enable access to finance through its Track Micro Credit Program, which has already benefited thousands of micro merchants. Furthermore, African entrepreneurs will continue to gain knowledge on how to thrive as business owners through free learning resources such as The Entrepreneur’s Odyssey and Mastercard Trust Center.

2.    Empowering Africa’s fintech sector

Africa’s fintech ecosystem is a key driver of digital transformation and economic progress. Nearly half of all fintech firms on the continent have been founded in the last six years, collectively raising $6 billion in equity financing since 2000.

Mastercard is partnering with banks, telcos, and other service providers across Africa and internationally to help accelerate fintech growth and expansion in new markets. For example, Mastercard’s partnership with M-Pesa in Kenya and MTN Group Fintech has enabled millions of unbanked individuals to access digital financial services through mobile money platforms.

Similarly, Mastercard’s collaboration with digital wallet providers and e-commerce platforms has facilitated the integration of payment solutions into digital ecosystems, enabling seamless transactions for consumers and merchants alike. For example, Mastercard’s global Fintech Express program provides fintech companies with an end-to-end experience for card issuance. By combining its identity, biometric, AI and open banking capabilities, Mastercard helps protect consumers across the spectrum of internet and payments scams.

3.    Scaling remittances and cross-border payments

Seamless cross-border transactions are essential for Africa’s economic mobility. According to the World Bank, Africa received approximately $100 billion in remittances in 2023, accounting for about 6% of the continent’s GDP.

Mastercard is playing a key role in enabling the infusion of funds into local economies. Through a single, secure point of access, Mastercard CrossBorder Services allow people and businesses to remit money securely, and with certainty.

Local partnerships such as the recent agreements with Africa’s Access Bank and Equity Bank, are enabling Mastercard to make cross-border payments more simple, convenient, and accessible. Furthermore, they are enabling customers in multiple markets to make cross-border payments globally via bank accounts, mobile wallets, cards, and cash.

Mastercard remains committed to driving Africa’s digital growth through investment, innovation, and partnerships. By enhancing financial inclusion, expanding digital transactions, and strengthening cross-border connectivity, the company is helping to build a more inclusive and resilient digital economy for the African future.

 


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending