Other than SBF, Gary Wang or Caroline Ellison.
Resolves to YES if criminal charges are brought in the US against anyone for their involvement with FTX or Alameda in relation to the current collapse and fraud case.
Feb 22, 7:50pm: Will there be at least one other indictment in the FTX/Alameda debacle before the end of February? → Will there be at least one other indictment/charges filed in the FTX/Alameda debacle before the end of February?
Feb 22, 10:12pm: Will there be at least one other indictment/charges filed in the FTX/Alameda debacle before the end of February? → Will there be at least one other indictment in the FTX/Alameda debacle before the end of February?
PLEASE READ: Feb 28, 1:34pm: This and related markets are about INDICTMENTS (i.e. by a grand jury), not plea deals with prosecutors.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ248 | |
| 2 | Ṁ152 | |
| 3 | Ṁ58 | |
| 4 | Ṁ28 | |
| 5 | Ṁ26 |
@PatMyron Happy to reimburse you if you feel misled. The description has said ‘charges brought’ since the beginning, implying a guilty plea with prosecutors would be enough. But I agree it could have been better phrased.
@NicoDelon I also suppose many bet YES assuming the broader sense (not US specific) of indictment. Again, happy to reimburse anyone who feels misled.
@PatMyron Which one do you prefer? You sell all your positions, tell me how much you lost, and I pay you back? Or I liquidate mine and send you my profits?
@PatMyron Alright, I’ve thought about this more, and since no one has bought any share since the clarification, I’ve reverted to the original title. I will only resolve YES if there is a formal indictment.
@NicoDelon This is unfortunate. I did buy on the "charges brought" language.
The relevance is that in pre-arranged guilty plea situations in the federal system, defendants will often consent to being charged by an information (which is otherwise constitutionally impermissible for a felony charge in federal court) rather than indictment. I think that could happen with Singh any day.
@NicoDelon In my view, if a description reads "Resolves to YES if . . ." the specific resolution criteria should control. I think if someone chooses to buy without reading the narrative description, that's on them and not on the people who read it.
@Jason If the title is not specific enough I agree. In that case I mistakenly used a more specific term in the title than I intended. I can’t blame people for reading the title correctly. I saw you sold your YES positions. If you’d like me to send you the marginal profit you didn’t make let me know.