Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If you don't have significant liabilities you can't really go bankrupt.

(I didn't look to see if that was the case, just making the point in general)



They just posted a quarterly loss of $430 million.


Okay, but that isn't a liability in an accounting sense, it is a cash flow.

Edit: looking at the 10K, other than customer assets (where they have a net holding), they have like $6 billion in cash and equivalents against less than $5 billion of debts and other obligations).

So if they shut it all down, there would be funds left over.


> they have like $6 billion in cash and equivalents against less than $5 billion of debts and other obligations...if they shut it all down, there would be funds left over

Every company that ever went bankrupt had more assets than obligations before they went bankrupt.

Coinbase's quick ratio [1] adjusted for custodial assets, as of 31 March 2022, was 6.6 [2][a]. That's good. Don't adjust for custodial funds, and it's 0.15. Virtually bankrupt. With $6.2bn cash on the balance sheet and $830mm cash burned by operations in Q1, they have over 2 years of runway assuming Q1's terribleness continues. That's good. But were they to suffer a hack, that margin of safety could rapidly collapse. And in that case, customers could be left behind secured lenders. (Where USDC holders would wind up is a mystery.)

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/q/quickratio.asp

[2] https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001679788/89c60d8... page 5

[a] (6,116,388, cash and cash equivalents + 346,048, accounts receivable + 1,333,333, crypto assets held) / (10,921,823, current liabilities - 9,742,961, custodial funds due to customers)


Right, I compared cash to liabilities, not assets.


Could you explain how you got 0.15? (6,116,388, cash and cash equivalents + 346,048, accounts receivable + 1,333,333, crypto assets held) / (10,921,823, current liabilities) = 0.71


What this means in layman's terms if they don't dip into custodial funds they can't cover their current liabilities?


On paper, you have and can report a lot of assets. However, many companies go bankrupt with current ratios greater than one with either overinflated or overvalued assets or undervalued or understated debts or some combination. Financial reports a la 10-Ks and 10-Qs are 'boring,' difficult for most people to read, contain specialized jargon, and contain significant lag time where a going concern is, well, a concern. Audits are almost always annual and not quarterly. Disclosures may be required, but they can be broad or nonspecific enough as to delay broader acknowledgement of bankruptcy level problems. I'd take information from financial reports with a bit of salt, even if they are often our best, or only, source of information.


If "cash and cash equivalents" is wrong, that's fraud, not something I should have taken with a grain of salt.


Cash and cash equivalents can be very wrong, even when audited by firms such as Ernst and Young, one of the big four accounting firms. Wirecard is a good example. https://www.ft.com/content/bcadbdcb-5cd7-487e-afdd-1e926831e...

Grant Thornton audits Coinbase last I checked. Hopefully they do a better job than EY. I doubt a "stablecoin" holding would count as cash equivalents, but not all cash equivalents are equal and the definition has changed over the years. Commercial paper, 1-3 month maturing Treasury notes, certificates of deposit, money market accounts, and savings account funds can all be counted as cash equivalents. For example, if you hold a two month commercial paper of another cryptocurrency company as Coinbase, this might qualify as a cash equivalent. Cash equivalents are not all equally liquid or risky. Even if all of the cash and cash equivalents are there and solvent, the definition of a cryptocurrency in a bankruptcy might not be settled in a court of law in such a way that it favors account holders of Coinbase held cryptocurrency over stockholders or bondholders.


All had been set up by Wirecard executives to dupe the auditors and help disguise what Munich prosecutors now call “a fraud in the billions”.

Yeah, that's what I said, fraud.

Do you have an example where it was wrong without fraud?


Would that be 5 billion in customer assets and associated liabilities, leaving about 1 billion of equity for Coinbase? At a burn rate of 430 million per quarter that only leaves a runway about 7-8 months.


No, I left custodial holdings out of those numbers.

The dead reply to my comment at the top of the thread makes a good point that loss of the custodial holdings in a hack would bankrupt them.


Wouldn't a hack of the custodial holdings just mean their customers lose their money but the business is otherwise a going concern (for that few moments until everybody stops paying them)?


They get a lot/most of their money from fees with ongoing transactions. If you look at the ‘5 minutes ahead’ picture if there is a hack that either 1) steals all customer assets, or 2) requires them to freeze all activity for a serious length of time, it’s a ‘no longer going concern’ type situation.

No transactions? No income. No trust/willingness for people to continue doing transactions? No future income.


According to Coinbase 98% of their crypto is stored in offline wallets. So hacking won’t work. You’ll have to break into wherever they have the coins stored and hope the key isn’t destroyed when you unplug the device.


There are 14 billion tether in circulation, don’t they need enough to back it?


Every single user account is a liability.


Every single user account is an IOU.

There is - as some people seem likely to discover - a difference.


The vast majority of bankruptcy courts place customer accounts ahead of creditors.


Nonsense. They can get hacked or introduce a bug into their stack and go bust in under an hour. That's extremely unlikely, but not impossible.


Just like it was for all the other crypto brokers that went down, exactly like that ;-)

I might tone it down just a bit to "Somewhat unlikely to happen. Today."


I would say that's extremely likely. Make a list of your favorite tech companies from 1990 or 2000, and see how many still have technology teams qualified to tie their own shoelaces today, exist, and haven't turned into sleazeware companies.

You can calculate your annualized failure rate. That's a best-case on the odds your funds will continue to exist next year. Move fast / break things / fail fast / developer sprints / etc. speeds this process up even further. Crypto companies also have a giant target painted on their backs for hackers (including rogue state-level actors, some of whom just had large sums confiscated by Western institutions).

Tulips, anyone?


That actually does sound kinda impossible, 98% of their crypto is in secured cold storage, and it’s spread across distinct coins and different wallets.

I’m not saying it’s risk free, but what exchange or broker is? Does anyone else match Coinbase for security? Gemini seems at best equivalent.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: