Is the Binance the next to bite the dust or FUD?

[Franctoshi]

How many more months does everyone speculate does binance.us have? Will it continue to exist after the next halving of bitcoin?

Maybe or maybe not, we don't know the exact time it will bite the dust, but with the recent events happening in the exchange, it will bite the dust soon. Let it survive until the halving first, before we can discuss about after it .

It might also have the same owner as Poloniex if CZ retires hehehehehe.

Even despite all the regulatory troubles that Binance is having, CZ surely wouldn't resign, he will be 'confident' in solving it all, and that all funds are Safu and everything is fud .

The pressure on Binance and its owner CZ is piling up and increasing day after day and no one knows when the balloon will burst.
 Even if the allegations leveled against Binance are true, They will deny it especially when there is no substantial evidence on the ground to prove the case and hence they will try to buy some time to see if they can cover up the shit.

Laying off such a significant number of staff /workers entails something that may happen in time to come.

[1714617629]

1714617629

[1714617629]

1714617629

[1714617629]

1714617629

[1714617629]

1714617629

[1714617629]

1714617629

[bbc.reporter]

How many more months does everyone speculate does binance.us have? Will it continue to exist after the next halving of bitcoin?

Maybe or maybe not, we don't know the exact time it will bite the dust, but with the recent events happening in the exchange, it will bite the dust soon. Let it survive until the halving first, before we can discuss about after it .

It might also have the same owner as Poloniex if CZ retires hehehehehe.

Even despite all the regulatory troubles that Binance is having, cz surely wouldn't resign, he will be 'confident' in solving it all, and that all funds are Safu and everything is fud .

Also after these recent resignations and firings of employees, CZ does not appear to be sharing his fingers 4 fud in social media. He might have real problems now, I reckon.

I also speculate that binance.us might not survive until the halving and what might occur is the exchange's closure might cause the next big dump on our faces hehehe. It might be the last dump, however.

[Rikafip]

@Rikafip. I reckon it might be safe to speculate that Binance will close their doors on the US market, however, binance.com might continue to exist and operate. But it might become a forgotten exchange very much similar to Poloniex by the time the next bull market arrives.

You think that binance.com might go down to those levels so soon? I mean, anything is possible when it comes to crypto, but I don't that to happen before next bull run comes (unless bull run comes much later than we all hope for).


In the other news, SEC keeps pressuring binance.us, this time asking court to approve an inspection.

In a scathing Monday court filing, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) urged a D.C. court to approve an inspection into Binance.US, doubling down on previous accusations that the firm had failed to produce documents sought by the regulator in ongoing legal proceedings.

In June, the watchdog sued Binance.US, the exchange's global parent Binance Holdings and founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, alleging they ran an unlicensed securities exchange. The SEC's findings in the case so far demonstrate "the urgent need for an inspection," Monday's filing said, as the regulator restated its worries about Binance's use of custody platform Ceffu.

The SEC believes Ceffu, rebranded earlier this year from Binance Custody, may also be serving Binance.US, and therefore being used to shift U.S. customer funds out of the country in violation of a previous agreement to not do so.

The agreement was entered into because Binance.US' holding company BAM Trading Services failed to convince the SEC that it controlled its customers' assets, the filing said, adding that such conclusions were "undermined by BAM’s own documents and inability to keep its story straight, [which] did not actually establish that BAM exercised exclusive control over its customers’ assets."

[bbc.reporter]

@Rikafip. 2 years is not soon. Also, when the SEC and all of the other regulators are done on cracking down against Binance and CZ, I am quite certain that Binance will not be the first choice for old and new investors in the next bull market. Also, much of the community might stop recommending Binance because we cannot trust the regulators to stop going after CZ.

CZ can show fingers 4 FUD in social media everyday, however, this will not change the reality that they are losing customers and also might begin losing their dominance.



The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has claimed that Binance has failed to provide sufficient documentation despite previously agreeing to expedited discovery.

BAM, the organization responsible for Binance’s US affiliate, has submitted approximately 220 documents. However, the SEC’s legal representatives have alleged in a new filing that many of these documents consist of “unintelligible” screenshots and lack essential dates or signatures.

In a new twist to the ongoing courtroom drama, the SEC has alleged Binance of not cooperating in the ongoing probe, according to the unsealed documents.

The SEC also voiced concerns about Binance.US’s use of Ceffu, a custody service offered by Binance’s international arm – Binance Holdings Ltd – which appeared to be in violation of a previous agreement designed to prevent the transfer of assets abroad.

Source https://cryptopotato.com/binance-v-sec-lawsuit-update-september-17-problems-with-documentation-and-more/

[bbc.reporter]

There are rumors on social media that CZ's marketmaker Sigmachain had a shorfall. No one knows how much it has lost or how long this has been happening. However, what was reported in mainstream news media on June was Sigmachain was accused of receiving customer funds illegaly from Binance.

I reckon of this rumor is true and if the deficit is big enough to bring Binance to insolvency, we might be witnessing something similar to FTX-Alameda case.



Two offshore trading firms controlled by Binance founder and CEO Changpeng Zhao lie at the centre of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawsuit launched against the world's largest crypto exchange, which highlights concerns over client funds.

Swiss-registered Sigma Chain received customer funds from Binance, the U.S. regulator said in its complaint on Monday, and then engaged in "manipulative trading" to artificially inflate the exchange's trading volumes.

Source https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/zhao-controlled-binance-trading-firms-heart-sec-lawsuit-2023-06-06/

[bbc.reporter]

Will these terrorism funding accusations and allegations get the victory for these politicians and make Binance to bite the dust or is this another FUD only? The clowns of government have been attacking the exchange for more than 1 year and none of them could defeat the defense powers of CZ heheheh.



Republican lawmakers urged the U.S. Department of Justice to figure out the extent to which Binance and Tether might be supporting terrorism funding following attacks on Israel.

Read in full https://www.theblock.co/post/259675/lawmakers-call-on-doj-to-consider-charges-against-binance-further-investigate-tether-over-possible-involvement-in-illicit-finance

[Rikafip]

According to Bloomberg, US Department of Justice asks from Binance $4 billion as a settlement to end criminal case. Sounds more like an extortion to me, after everything that has happened.

Anyway, that's not the amount that could cause issues for CZ/Binance.

In a vital development for the proceedings, the US government is seeking over $4 billion from Binance to end its criminal case. Moreover, the funds would be a key part of the proposed resolution. Subsequently, it would bring an end to an investigation of the cryptocurrency exchange that has been ongoing for years.

Additionally, reports state that criminal charges for Binance founder Changpeng Zhao would be included in a resolution. Specifically, Bloomberg states the resolution plan would “resolve the probe into alleged money laundering, bank fraud, and sanctions violations,” according to sources.

[Z-tight]

According to Bloomberg, US Department of Justice asks from Binance $4 billion as a settlement to end criminal case. Sounds more like an extortion to me, after everything that has happened.

The news says they are deciding against charging Binance due to this reason:

Moreover, the DOJ had debated potentially charging the crypto exchange with fraud, weighing the impact of the industry overall, and a bank run that would have ensued.

Do they now care so much about the crypto industry, to the extent of not charging a service they think has committed fraud, but they rather choose a settlement of $4 Billion to end the case. I don't know what's going on here, but i think this is a resolution that Binance and cz would accept.

[bbc.reporter]

According to Bloomberg, US Department of Justice asks from Binance $4 billion as a settlement to end criminal case. Sounds more like an extortion to me, after everything that has happened.

Anyway, that's not the amount that could cause issues for CZ/Binance.

In a vital development for the proceedings, the US government is seeking over $4 billion from Binance to end its criminal case. Moreover, the funds would be a key part of the proposed resolution. Subsequently, it would bring an end to an investigation of the cryptocurrency exchange that has been ongoing for years.

Additionally, reports state that criminal charges for Binance founder Changpeng Zhao would be included in a resolution. Specifically, Bloomberg states the resolution plan would “resolve the probe into alleged money laundering, bank fraud, and sanctions violations,” according to sources.

This will never be accepted by CZ unless maybe they make an offer that he will be acquitted from all cases. They make CZ pay $4 billion and the US justice department will still make him face criminal charges? What type of clowns gave this offer?

Read Bloomberg's article. It is written much clearer.



Negotiations between the Justice Department and Binance include the possibility that its founder Changpeng Zhao would face criminal charges in the US under an agreement to resolve the probe into alleged money laundering, bank fraud and sanctions violations, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Source https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-20/us-seeks-more-than-4-billion-from-binance-to-end-criminal-case

[Z-tight]

This will never be accepted by CZ unless maybe they make an offer that he will be acquitted from all cases.

I thought this is a total resolution, and that the payment would both be settlement for Binance and its ceo cz, when i read the link shared by Rikafip, that was what i understood:

Additionally, reports state that criminal charges for Binance founder Changpeng Zhao would be included in a resolution. Specifically, Bloomberg states the resolution plan would “resolve the probe into alleged money laundering, bank fraud, and sanctions violations,” according to sources.

Doesn't this mean that criminal charges against cz would be part of the resolution, that is what i understand by the statement above. The link you shared seems to take another turn, and i don't see why cz would agree to a settlement of $4 Billion, when he would still face criminal charges and only the exchange would be free from any charges or investigations.

[bbc.reporter]

It appears I was quite mistaken in my speculation on CZ might reject the DOJ's settlement offer. However, is CZ's surrender enough for the American government to stop the crackdown on Binance or will it bite the dust? CZ's agreement on the settlement might be a decision created to save the exchange.

[serveria.com]

It appears I was quite mistaken in my speculation on CZ might reject the DOJ's settlement offer. However, is CZ's surrender enough for the American government to stop the crackdown on Binance or will it bite the dust? CZ's agreement on the settlement might be a decision created to save the exchange.

In the news they're not disclosing all conditions of the agreement. CZ steps down, it's pretty clear. He has to pay some fine: according to different sources $50-$200 million. And finally, Binance has to pay ~$4-4.3 billion in fines. Additionally, Binance has already reportedly lost ~$200 million when the news on the deal were published. But anyhow, Binance still seems solid as a rock and I don't think we should be worried.   

[bbc.reporter]

@serveria.com. Binance's revenues is certainly very good. I reckon it was more than $20 billion on 2021 and $12 billion on 2022. Also consider that 2022 was a bear market. They will have no difficulties on paying the $4 billion settlement and CZ might unreportedly be one of richest men in the world. $200 million and going to prison for 2 years will be a slap on the wrist.

It appears Binance has avoided biting the dust?

[o_e_l_e_o]

I reckon it was more than $20 billion on 2021 and $12 billion on 2022.

Revenue is not the same as profits nor reserves.

They claim to have 100% reserves for all their customer deposits. I have previously cast doubt on that number, but even assuming that this number is true, that money belongs to their customers and Binance should not be using it to pay off their fines. How much they have in their own reserves is anyone's guess. And remember when CZ evaded the question about whether Binance could cover a $2.1 billion fine? https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/15/binance-ceo-changpeng-cz-zhao-brushes-off-2-billion-ftx-clawback-concerns-fraud.html. This fine is more than double that.

Still, nothing stopping them printing a few million of some made up token and dumping it on their users to cover their insolvency, eh?

[bbc.reporter]

@o_e_l_e_o. Agreed that revenues are not profits and also cannot be comparable to reserves. However, if an exchange can still generate revenues that large and can generate them in a bull market, I reckon Binance does not have problems in inflows of liquidity and cashflow. They can pay the $4 billion settlement with the Department of justice quite easily. I reckon CZ would not have accepted this proposal if it would cause Binance to be bankrupt.

Also, the article from CNBC is headshaking. The answer is yes to their question. They were creating another fud storyline.

What made up token were they printing?

[o_e_l_e_o]

However, if an exchange can still generate revenues that large and can generate them in a bull market, I reckon Binance does not have problems in inflows of liquidity and cashflow. They can pay the $4 billion settlement with the Department of justice quite easily. I reckon CZ would not have accepted this proposal if it would cause Binance to be bankrupt.

This is the exact same reasoning that people were using prior to Celsius going bankrupt, or BlockFi going bankrupt, or FTX going bankrupt, and so on. The fact remains the exchange will always say that everything is fine, that they can easily cover the fines/losses/whatever, that they are complying with all investigations, and so on, because as soon as they don't they trigger a bank run and then they are definitely going bankrupt. Don't trust anything that is being said right now. Get your coins off of Binance.

What made up token were they printing?

I don't keep up with just how many centralized tokens Binance can print at will, but off the top of my head BNB, BSC, and BUSD. And don't forget all their fake tokens on top of these centralized chains, like their fake wrapped bitcoin tokens that they trick newbies in to buying instead of real bitcoin. And don't they have a bunch of fake leveraged tokens as well, like BTCUP and BTCDOWN? All of these are 100% centralized and under Binance's control. There are plenty of ways they can fudge the numbers and dump on their customers to magic up a few billion dollars if they need to.

[bbc.reporter]

@o_e_l_e_o. They cannot print more BNB. This token has a deflation mechanisms created through buy and burn every quarter until 100 million tokens are left. There is no BSC token, only BNB. Binance has already stopped their stablecoin BUSD after Paxos was adviced by the New York Department of Financial Services.

In any case, we should wait after Binance's $4 billion payment to the American government to confirm our speculations. However, I reckon it will not occur similar to FTX or Celsius. It will be something similar to Bittrex.

[o_e_l_e_o]

They cannot print more BNB.

Why not? Who is going to stop them? They have complete control over the entire BNB network and can do literally anything they like with it, from printing a billion out of thin air to simply shutting the whole thing down with zero warning.

This token has a deflation mechanisms created through buy and burn every quarter until 100 million tokens are left.

Only as long as Binance keep their promise to keep doing this.

[Darker45]

They cannot print more BNB.

Why not? Who is going to stop them? They have complete control over the entire BNB network and can do literally anything they like with it, from printing a billion out of thin air to simply shutting the whole thing down with zero warning.

LOL! As if the Binance network is decentralized. Not only can Binance mint more BNB, CZ himself can order it. CZ is Binance. Forget about those handful of Binance validator nodes; they're all under CZ's command. CZ is the central power over Binance.

As a matter of fact, if I'm not mistaken, Binance minted BNB to be airdropped to the victims of the Morocco earthquake a couple of months ago. If I'm wrong on this, I'm sure that the Binance network was once paused. This is proof enough of Binance's centralization. And if they can pause the entire network, they can also tinker with anything on it including the supply of BNB.

[bullrun2024bro]

Now they're going after Cristiano Ronaldo for promoting Binance and his NFT collection on Binance in the past. IMHO, that was only a matter of time.



Source: https://twitter.com/WatcherGuru/status/1729758677647724947

Pro-soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo has been hit with a proposed class-action lawsuit from plaintiffs claiming they suffered losses from his promotion of the now-legally embroiled crypto exchange Binance.

A Nov. 27 filing to a United States district court in Florida claimed Ronaldo “promoted, assisted in, and/or actively participated in the offer and sale of unregistered securities in coordination with Binance.”

Binance entered a multiyear partnership with Ronaldo in mid-2022 to promote a series of his own nonfungible tokens (NFTs), with at least three of the soccer star’s collections tied to Binance.

Looks like promoting worthless NFTs on Binance wasn't CR7s smartest idea.

More information here: Cristiano Ronaldo sued for promoting Binance, unregistered securities