Yes, because they're company funds, not yours. By definition, a bankrupt company has less assets than liabilities, so the liquidation process is about splitting them up equitably.
That makes sense. What I was thinking though is that the company turned off withdrawals. Are they required to do that? What’s the threshold? Because couldn’t an employee just flip the switch back on and withdraw like any other customer? (That clearly didn’t happen here though.)
It’s a curiosity to me about how these things all go down in a broader sense. Because clearly something went way wrong at FTX. But are authorities swooping in, as in literally and physically, at this point? It seems all sorts of shenanigans could be happening in the offices, which to my understanding is also where they live or close to it (at least some of the offices).
It’s like authorities know a figurative bloodbath is going on, but for these financial crimes, the response is a bit slower than a literal bloodbath.
You could flip all kind of switches as employee. This are not technical constraints, but legal ones.
Going by the twitter accounts of some (ex)FTX employees, they have not yet realized what might be coming their way. I.e it doesn't matter if authorities are busting down your door right now, whatever you say or do now can have implications.
> Going by the twitter accounts of some (ex)FTX employees, they have not yet realized what might be coming their way. I.e it doesn't matter if authorities are busting down your door right now, whatever you say or do now can have implications.
Certainly anyone in their situation should have personally lawyered up days ago, no matter what level of employee. Even if I was a low-level employee with absolutely no proper knowledge of this stuff, I would lawyer up because the people at the top will look for any scapegoat.
There’s a nagging curiosity, that likely everyone shares, about having a play by play of what actually happened during this week (after the downfall) and what should have happened.
