Article Details

Sam Bankman-Fried Insists FTX Was Solvent — Says Lawyers Forced a “Bogus” Bankruptcy

TL;DR

• Sam Bankman-Fried states that FTX had enough assets and was not insolvent when the bankruptcy was filed.
• He argues that lawyers pushed the process to secure large fees and ignored internal data from FTX.US.
• The former CEO cites sworn testimony and technical reviews that, in his view, showed a path to repay customers without closing the exchange.
  

  ---

Sam Bankman-Fried returned to public discussion and repeated that FTX Was Solvent at the time the company entered court protection. The founder said he never approved the filing and that the decision was taken by external attorneys who assumed control of the platform. His comments revived arguments about whether the collapse reflected real financial damage or a rushed legal strategy.

In a message shared on social media, Bankman-Fried explained that internal teams reviewed wallets and balances before the filing. He maintained that FTX.US operated with separate accounts and held sufficient cash to continue business. According to his version, the exchange could have been sold to new investors and used to compensate clients over time.

The former executive pointed to a sworn statement from January 2023 that described talks with attorney Mr. Miller. Bankman-Fried said he asked to keep FTX.US outside the process because engineers had confirmed no customer deficit. He believed the technology and user base still had value even after the turbulence of 2022.

Was FTX Was Solvent According To Records

The central dispute involves the inclusion of FTX.US in the petition. Bankman-Fried alleged that the law firm Sullivan & Cromwell demanded that step to secure payment of a retainer. He mentioned more than $200 million held by LedgerX that could have covered legal costs without shutting operations. Traders who follow the case argue that the decision removed options for an orderly recovery.

Bitcoin trader Alex Wice described the trial as unbalanced and said important evidence about solvency was kept away from jurors. He added that the defense based on reliance on lawyers might have changed the outcome. Bankman-Fried answered that he agreed with most of those observations and thanked supporters who defend open financial networks.

Pressure And Disputed Evidence

Another thread from the former CEO accused prosecutors of hiding material helpful to the defense. He claimed officials threatened former executive Ryan Salame with additional charges to obtain testimony. Those allegations increased doubts among investors who believe the digital asset sector needs fair treatment from authorities.

Bankman-Fried is serving a 25-year sentence after a jury found him guilty on seven fraud counts linked to losses near $8 billion.