Cointime

Download App
iOS & Android

DCG Shareholder Letter: DCG Currently Owes Genesis Capital $525M

Validated Venture

DCG Shareholder Letter from Barry Silbert, Founder & CEO

Published 2:00pm EST, Tuesday January 10, 2023

Dear Shareholders,Happy New Year.  I’ve been reflecting quite a bit recently about the past year, the state of the industry, and where things go from here. 

First, I’m incredibly proud of the role that DCG and I have played as pioneers and builders over the past 10 years.  Since our founding, we have invested in more than 200 companies that have developed and shaped the industry, and we have helped build the first publicly-quoted BTC fund, the largest asset manager in the space, the most influential crypto media platform, the #1 bitcoin mining pool in the world, the leading crypto prime broker, and a dominant crypto wallet/exchange in the emerging markets.  DCG has also backed a tremendous group of emerging fund managers, crypto protocols, and cutting-edge blockchain projects.

I have fond memories of the early days of our industry, working hard to help educate and fighting in the trenches with fellow entrepreneurs and investors to gain legitimacy.  Speaking at conferences to rooms with three people, getting snickered at on CNBC, and being dismissed by most legitimate investors was, I found, empowering and motivating.

In contrast, this past year has been the most difficult of my life – both personally and professionally.  Bad actors and repeated blow-ups have wreaked havoc on our industry, with ripple effects extending far and wide.  Although DCG, our subsidiaries, and many of our portfolio companies are not immune to the effects of the present turmoil, it has been challenging to have my integrity and good intentions questioned after spending a decade pouring everything into this company and the space with an unrelenting focus on doing things the right way.  

I shared this sentiment in my previous shareholder letter this past November: DCG is committed to remaining at the forefront as we strive to build a better financial system.  As this new year unfolds, we are hunkering down with our “lean and mean” mindset, and we are making meaningful changes to position the firm for long-term success.  We’ve been aggressively cutting costs over the last few months in reaction to the current state of the market, which has included cutting operating expenses, and regrettably, reducing the DCG workforce.  We also made the difficult decision to wind down HQ, the wealth management subsidiary that DCG incubated in 2020.  While we still believe in the HQ concept and its outstanding leadership team, the current downturn is not conducive for the near-term sustainability of that business.

Looking ahead to 2023 and beyond, the industry has a lot of hard work to do to re-establish its credibility and reputation, which have been all but destroyed by a wave of unprecedented fraud and criminal behavior unlike anything I’ve seen in my career.  This is going to be a challenging year for all of us, but I remain optimistic.  I hope this letter and the accompanying Q&A that explains other developments and addresses some of the speculation about DCG – some of which is reasonable and some that is completely baseless and false – help to clarify our position.

To my peers in the trenches, now is a time to collaborate, cheer each other’s successes, and collectively take our industry to the next level.  Let’s all grow together, treat others with respect, and get back to having fun and making a dent in the universe.  I can assure you that DCG is certainly committed to doing so.  I also have no doubt that DCG will emerge from this year a stronger company than ever before.

Barry

Q&A

1. What is DCG’s business model structure?Founded in 2015, DCG is a holding company that builds, buys, and invests in businesses in the digital asset space.  Some of these businesses are wholly owned, and in most we own small minority stakes.  Today DCG has a portfolio of 200+ companies in over 35 countries and has invested in over 50 crypto funds and numerous digital asset tokens and blockchain projects.

2. How does DCG interact with its wholly-owned subsidiaries?Since DCG was founded, our subsidiaries have launched and operated as independent companies with their own management teams, financial and risk management protocols, and legal and compliance oversight.  Each subsidiary has its own culture, operational structure, and incentive mechanisms.  Every aspect of each subsidiary’s day-to-day business is directed by the respective subsidiary’s leadership team.  

DCG has a team of approximately 50 individuals that makes investments, supports our portfolio companies, and provides strategic guidance and general oversight to our subsidiaries.  To be abundantly clear, DCG does not direct any trades, loans, or borrows for Genesis’ business.

3. Do DCG and any of its wholly-owned subsidiaries commingle cash?No.  Each of DCG’s wholly-owned subsidiaries has its own bank accounts, securities accounts, and crypto accounts, and maintains separate books and records.

4. How does DCG interact with the rest of its portfolio companies?Our team maintains close relationships with our portfolio, providing business leaders with direct strategic and operational advice and access to a wide range of resources, programs, and value-add partners.  In this way, DCG has fostered one of the most collaborative and vibrant communities of businesses in the blockchain and crypto space.

5. Where is DCG headquartered?DCG is a U.S.-based company with headquarters in Stamford, CT.

6. How much debt capital has DCG raised from its non-affiliates and when?DCG raised $350M of external senior secured term debt in November 2021 from a syndicate of lenders led by Eldridge.

7. How much does DCG currently owe Genesis Capital?Like hundreds of other institutional investors, DCG borrowed capital from Genesis Capital, the lending arm of Genesis.  These loans were always structured on an arm’s length basis and were priced at prevailing market interest rates.  In addition to the promissory note discussed in question 14 below, DCG currently owes Genesis Capital (i) $447.5M* in USD and (ii) 4,550 BTC (~$78M), which matures in May 2023.

DCG borrowed $500M in USD between January and May 2022 at interest rates of 10%-12%.

DCG’s investment entity borrowed BTC during 2021 and 2022 at a weighted average interest rate of 3.85%, which include amounts previously borrowed that have since been repaid to Genesis Capital, leaving the current 4,550 BTC loan balance.  

To put these loans to DCG into context, at the time they were issued in early 2022, DCG’s equity was valued at $10.0B, DCG’s trailing twelve-month EBITDA was in excess of $1.0B, and Genesis Capital’s aggregate loan book size ranged from $12.0-$15.0B.  BTC prices ranged from $30.0K-$47.0K during this period.

In addition to the BTC loans, DCG’s investment entity borrowed 14,048 BCH tokens (approximately ~$1.5M) in late 2020 and is currently paying 9% interest.

DCG has not borrowed from Genesis Capital since May 2022, has never missed an interest payment, and is current on all loans outstanding. 

*The figure represents the amount that has been subject to a setoff.

8. How did DCG use the proceeds of the USD loans borrowed from Genesis Capital?The amounts borrowed by DCG were initially held as cash in Treasury to be used as opportunities arose.  The key opportunities ultimately identified were the repurchase of DCG stock from one of our earliest venture investors and investments in liquid tokens and public equities.

9. How did DCG’s investment entity use the BTC borrowed from Genesis Capital?DCG’s investment entity used the BTC borrowed from Genesis Capital to hedge GBTC long positions to remain market neutral on such positions.  DCG’s open market purchases of GBTC were made when GBTC traded at a meaningful discount to NAV and, like all other investments, these decisions were based on an assessment of the likely returns weighted against the risks.  Our purchases of GBTC on the open market have been in compliance with Rule 10b-18 under the Securities Exchange Act and transparently disclosed in filings and press releases.

10. What is DCG’s relationship with FTX?DCG made a small equity investment of $250,000 in FTX’s Series B in July 2021.  This was part of our ongoing strategy to invest in exchanges all over the world – we’ve invested in close to two dozen.  DCG held a trading account with FTX with less than 1% of all our trading volume transacted on that platform.Barry has no personal or professional relationship with Sam Bankman-Fried.  Aside from a conversation in the Summer of 2022 and a few emails at the time, Barry does not recall ever meeting, speaking with, or otherwise privately communicating with him.

11. What was DCG’s relationship with Alameda?DCG has never had a relationship with Alameda.  Genesis had a trading and lending relationship with Alameda.

12. Has Sam Bankman-Fried ever been on the board of directors of Genesis?No.

13. What was DCG’s relationship with Three Arrows Capital?DCG has never had a relationship with Three Arrows Capital.  Barry does not recall ever meeting, speaking with, or otherwise privately communicating with the Three Arrows Capital principals, aside from an introductory call with one of the co-founders in 2020.  DCG has never coordinated purchases or sales of GBTC or any other investments with Three Arrows Capital.

Genesis had a trading and lending relationship with Three Arrows Capital, and Three Arrows Capital defaulted on its loans from Genesis.  Separately, Three Arrows Capital was an investor in various Grayscale products.

14. Why did DCG take over the bankruptcy claim against Three Arrows Capital and what did DCG get in return from Genesis Capital for the $1.1B promissory note?Until the summer of 2022, Genesis Capital was the premier crypto lending firm in the world.  When Three Arrows Capital defaulted on its loans from Genesis Capital and numerous other lenders in June 2022, there was palpable fear in the market of contagion spreading through and devastating the entire industry.  That was one consideration in DCG moving to assist Genesis Capital.

In addition, DCG firmly believed that substantial demand for institutional prime brokerage services would continue once the crypto market stabilized.  Genesis had unrivaled expertise and the best institutional client base in the world, having built the first institutional crypto trading desk in 2013 before eventually launching Genesis Capital in 2018.  Thus, DCG believed that Genesis – both the trading division and the lending desk – were worth protecting.

DCG and its board determined that it was in the best interest of Genesis, its lenders, and DCG to try to help support Genesis.  The mechanism that was recommended by our financial and legal advisors, with input from our accountants, was for DCG to assume the Three Arrows Capital claim and replace it with the promissory note due to Genesis.

The $1.1B promissory note, which matures in 2032, represents DCG’s assumption of liabilities owing to Genesis from Three Arrows Capital in connection with their default in June 2022.  DCG agreed to assign and exchange Genesis’s $1.1B unsecured loan receivable from Three Arrows Capital, the recovery on which was highly uncertain, with the promissory note from DCG.  DCG did not receive any cash, cryptocurrency, or other form of payment for the promissory note.  DCG effectively assumed Genesis’s risk of loss on the Three Arrows Capital loan with no obligation to do so.

Importantly, the $1.1B promissory note is not callable and does not contain any other similar features of a callable bond.  Additionally, Genesis assigned to DCG its claims against Three Arrows Capital and as part of the transaction agreed that any recovery received by DCG in respect of the Three Arrows Capital liquidation will go directly to paying down the $1.1B promissory note.

Of note, during the period following Three Arrows Capital’s default, DCG contributed approximately ~$340M of new equity across Genesis entities to provide it with additional capital.

15. What role is DCG playing in the Genesis Capital restructuring process?As a separate and distinct operating subsidiary, Genesis has its own Board of Directors and management team.  The Genesis board formed a special committee, comprising two independent directors with decades of financial, legal, and restructuring expertise, to oversee the Genesis Capital restructuring process and any other matters involving related parties.  Genesis Capital also retained independent outside advisors to lead the restructuring process, including Cleary Gottlieb, Moelis, and Alvarez & Marsal.

DCG and its independent outside advisors, including Goodwin Procter, Weil Gotshal, and Ducera Partners, have productively engaged with Genesis, its advisors, and an ad hoc group of certain Genesis creditors and its advisors with respect to the restructuring.

Because of the outstanding loans and the promissory note that DCG owes to Genesis Capital, DCG executives, including those on the Genesis board, have no decision-making authority related to any restructuring of Genesis Capital.

16. Is DCG the subject of an Eastern District of New York investigation regarding intercompany loans?DCG has no knowledge of or reason to believe that there is an EDNY investigation into DCG.

DCG is in regular communication with regulators as part of our day-to-day business operations.  If contacted by any regulators or investigators, as always, we will openly engage, answer questions, and provide any information needed.

17. Did DCG have any involvement with Terra Luna?DCG did not buy, sell, short, or otherwise trade the Terra stablecoin and had no relationship with the issuer of those tokens.

DCG purchased ~60,000 Luna tokens in late 2021/early 2022 to assist Foundry, a wholly-owned subsidiary, with creating a staking node.  DCG did not buy, sell, short, or trade the Luna token as part of its investment strategy.

18. What was DCG’s involvement with Celsius?DCG did not buy, sell, short, or otherwise trade the Celsius token.  DCG had no relationship of any kind with Celsius.

19. Does DCG issue its own tokens? 

DCG has never issued its own tokens.

https://dcgupdate.com/

DCG
Comments

All Comments

Recommended for you

  • Bitget CEO Reveals $80,000 Loss from Impersonation Scam Linked to Lazarus Group

    On September 26, Crypto Briefing reported that Bitget CEO Gracy Chen disclosed a loss of approximately $80,000 from her personal wallet due to a social engineering attack disguised as a journalist interview. The attack involved hackers stealing the X account of a well-known crypto media outlet and impersonating a journalist to contact her under the guise of scheduling an interview. Chen stated that her personal losses are not covered by Bitget's user protection fund, which only covers users and not the CEO's personal wallet. Previously, Bitget's cold and hot wallets were hacked, resulting in an estimated loss of about $387.5 million (revised from an initial estimate of $351.6 million). The attackers did not utilize private keys but instead forged transaction data to redirect funds; the user protection fund has a scale of over $464 million. Chen attributed both incidents to the North Korean Lazarus Group, noting that the modus operandi and operational characteristics are consistent with the group's past actions, and mentioned that her personal wallet had previously been targeted, with tactics related to those used against other exchanges.

  • Bitget Confirms Being Deceived into 'Self-Approving' $388 Million Transfer, Losses Revised

    On September 26, Unchained reported that Bitget stated attackers transferred approximately $387.5 million from its exchange on Thursday, revising the initially estimated loss of $351.6 million after accounting for transfers on the Zcash and TRON chains. The attackers did not require private keys: CEO Gracy Chen mentioned that the attackers compromised key backend systems of its wallet infrastructure, forged transaction data, and triggered the authorization process, which was signed by Bitget's own system. The related vulnerability has been identified and fixed, and the withdrawal status, which has been suspended since Thursday, will be announced before midnight Eastern Time. Mandiant and SlowMist are assisting with the investigation. Chen noted that based on IP behavior patterns and on-chain signatures, this attack is consistent with methods used by North Korean-linked hacker organizations and resembles the previous $1.5 billion theft case from Bybit. Nansen tracking shows that 40,000 ETH were evenly distributed to four new addresses; as of Friday, 6:34 PM Eastern Time, eight attacker addresses held a total of approximately 68,300 ETH (about $18.4 million), with no further transactions initiated. Bitget stated that some of the funds have been frozen and is offering a 5% bounty on the recovered amounts to those who facilitate the freezing; the $464 million protection fund fully covers the losses.

  • Vitalik: Significant Progress in Mobile Offline Local Knowledge Applications, but Problem-Solving Ability Still Weaker than Notebook-Level Models

    On September 26, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin posted on X that he is testing a mobile offline local knowledge application recently developed by the community (with a related bounty link attached). He noted that these applications are significantly better than the product he attempted to build himself two months ago, but they still perform slower and less effectively than models that can run on a notebook when handling complex problems. Vitalik pointed out that the weakest aspect of these applications is professional travel-related queries, citing the test case 'Tell me the best vegetarian restaurant in my current city,' but none of the tested applications performed well. He expressed hope for continued improvements in such products and wishes to reach a level where users can comfortably query any facts of interest without needing an internet connection.

  • This Week, U.S. Bitcoin Spot ETFs See Net Inflows of Approximately $2.386 Billion, Led by IBIT

    On September 26, according to data from Farside Investors, U.S. Bitcoin spot ETFs experienced a total net inflow of $2.3858 billion this week. In terms of individual products, BlackRock's IBIT led with a net inflow of $1.1576 billion, followed by Fidelity's FBTC with $701.6 million, ARK 21Shares' ARKB with $294.7 million, Morgan Stanley's MSBT with $203.3 million, and Bitwise's BITB with $13.9 million. BTCW recorded a net outflow of $3.2 million, while BTCO and BRRR remained flat at zero.

  • Ethena: USDe-Related Token Incentives to Reach Zero, Down Approximately 85% Since 2024

    On September 26, Ethena announced that since the first airdrop in 2024, token incentives related to the growth of USDe have decreased by approximately 85% from 2024 to this year. The official statement indicated that by the end of this month, token incentives and additional issuance related to USDe will reach zero, and there will be no further incentive arrangements thereafter. Ethena also expressed gratitude to all users who have participated and supported the development of the product to date.

  • Analyst: Bitcoin Enters Bull Market Phase as MVRV Ratio Surpasses 1.0 Baseline

    On September 26, crypto analyst Axel Adler Jr. stated that Bitcoin has transitioned from an early bull market to a bull market phase. The adjusted MVRV 30-day/365-day moving average ratio he tracks broke above the 1.0 baseline on September 20 (with the short-term average surpassing the annual average), at which point BTC was priced at $80,691. Previously, this ratio had crossed above the 365-day moving average on August 20, marking the entry into the early bull market when BTC was priced at $71,255; this phase lasted for 31 days, during which Bitcoin rose by 13%. The current ratio stands at 1.018, with BTC priced at $84,156. As long as it remains above 1.0, the structure will maintain a bullish outlook. This marks the sixth such transition since 2012, and in four of the previous five instances, the bull market ended with prices above the entry price, with the only exception being August 2015, when the bull market lasted only 16 days.

  • CFTC Sues Cash FX Over $950 Million Crypto-Related Forex Scam, Investors Lose at Least $406 Million

    On September 26, Cointelegraph reported that the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has filed a lawsuit against Cash FX Group and three individuals, involving $950 million and elements of cryptocurrency. The defendants include Cash FX and its CEO Huascar Jose Lopez Castillo (Brazil), The Conversion Pros and its CEO Ronald Pope (Oregon), as well as Justin Halladay (Florida). The CFTC stated that the complaint was submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida on Friday. The agency accuses the defendants of operating a multi-level marketing Ponzi scheme, raising over $950 million under the guise of trading retail forex contracts in a commodity pool, falsely claiming that funds were managed by expert traders, proprietary algorithms, and artificial intelligence, with promises of returns as high as 15% per week. The CFTC pointed out that Cash FX engaged in very little actual forex trading, misappropriating most participants' funds to pay fictitious trading profits with new investments, while funneling millions of dollars to the defendants and providing false accounting statements. Participants have suffered losses of at least $406 million.

  • China and the U.S. Reach Consensus on Eight Key Outcomes

    On September 26, according to CCTV, Chinese President Xi Jinping made a state visit to the United States from September 23 to 25. During this period, the two heads of state engaged in in-depth discussions on building a constructive strategic stable relationship between China and the U.S. and addressing major international and regional issues, reaching a consensus on eight key outcomes, including: 1. Both sides agreed to establish a 'constructive strategic stable relationship based on respect, fairness, and equality.' 2. Both sides agreed to support each other in successfully hosting the informal meeting of APEC leaders and the G20 leaders' summit, with both heads of state intending to attend each other's hosted meetings. 3. The two heads of state agreed that Iran should fulfill its commitment not to develop nuclear weapons, and that no country or organization should impose tolls on international waterways. 4. The two heads of state recalled that China and the U.S. were allies in World War II, fighting side by side to achieve victory. 5. The two heads of state recognized the positive role of the China-U.S. economic and trade consultation mechanism and the outcomes of consultations by both economic and trade teams, including the establishment and promotion of mechanisms such as the Trade Council, reaching a '30 billion USD' reciprocal tariff reduction arrangement, and postponing the results of the Kuala Lumpur economic and trade consultations, and instructed for their implementation. 6. The cooperation between the drug enforcement agencies of China and the U.S. has yielded visible results. Recently, both sides closely collaborated to jointly crack multiple cases involving new psychoactive substances and precursor chemicals, resulting in the arrest of dozens of related criminal suspects in both countries. 7. Both sides agreed to establish a China-U.S. dialogue on artificial intelligence to discuss the associated risks and benefits. The next dialogue will be held in November this year, and both sides agreed to establish a communication channel for AI-related incidents. 8. The U.S. welcomed the loan of a pair of giant pandas from China to the Atlanta Zoo. In addition, the military of both countries agreed to sign a memorandum of understanding to strengthen crisis communication and prevention as soon as possible and to continue cooperating in the search for the remains of U.S. military personnel missing in China.

  • New SEC Guidelines: Staked ETH Receipt Tokens Do Not Constitute Securities, Provided They Are Purely 'Receipts'

    On September 26, according to BeInCrypto, the U.S. SEC's Division of Corporation Finance released new guidelines clarifying that tokens received from staking Ethereum do not constitute securities, provided their function is purely as 'receipts'. The document states that when tokens are backed by 'digital commodities', staked receipt tokens are considered 'digital tools'; the SEC and CFTC listed 16 types of digital commodities in a clarification document on March 17, including Ethereum (ETH). The guidelines set conditions: tokens must not alter the rights associated with the staked ETH or provide additional rewards, and service providers must not lend, stake, or reuse the deposited tokens; this contrasts with Kraken's $30 million fine in 2023 for promoting yield and shutting down its staking services in the U.S. The document also covers buybacks: announcing a buyback when the network is operational does not constitute a commitment that would turn the tokens into securities; however, it may still constitute one if the network is not yet complete.

  • US Lawmakers Propose Bill to Ban Chinese Optical Transceivers in National Security Systems

    On September 26, a bipartisan group in the U.S. Senate proposed a bill on September 25 aimed at prohibiting the federal government from installing Chinese-made components used for data transmission in artificial intelligence data centers within sensitive systems. The bill was jointly initiated by Republican Senators John Cornyn and Mike McCaul, along with Democratic Senators Jon Tester and Alex Padilla, and primarily targets optical transceiver modules produced by Chinese companies such as New H3C Technologies. Currently, Chinese optical transceiver manufacturers dominate this core component market in AI data centers.