Doug Polk promoted Coinflex stablecoin might be going donkdown

Coinflex USD, a stablecoin heavily promoted by Doug Polk, is now trading at $0.82 and had had withdrawals paused. Not good. It isn't clear if Doug bought in, or simply received promotional coin to plug them.

The situation is not his fault, but obviously not the best look at the moment.

Doug does not appear to be in a management position with the coin. It was a stablecoin where you "earn interest every 8 hours", which of course was a bit suspect regarding long term viability.

https://gizmodo.com/coinflex-voyager...1849101954/amp

https://twitter.com/dougpolkvids/sta...38826584186880

:what

My previous post has been [redacted]

Your serve Polk

I also think Doug really believed in the coin, or he wouldn't have put his (very valuable) rep on the line heavily promoting it.

I do believe he had no idea this was coming. At the same time, after the Luna debacle, he couldn't be that surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

My previous post has been [redacted]

Your serve Polk

---

I just want to be clear that I was not using [redacted] to reference the PFA episode. I was not taking a shot. That matter is still a tender sore. I do not want to revisit it.

I had typed something in haste about CoinFlex also being a Ponzi and decided to delete it. Members were in the thread and might have already read my post so I thought I would type something to acknowledge same.

I don’t hang on Doug’s every word but what little I have read I have found him to be be forthright and bright. He has earned the right to say his piece before I judge him.

Most crypto shills are just opportunists. They will suffer the consequences i hope.

that's hoyt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I also think Doug really believed in the coin, or he wouldn't have put his (very valuable) rep on the line heavily promoting it.

I do believe he had no idea this was coming. At the same time, after the Luna debacle, he couldn't be that surprised.

---

Evidently the geniuses at companies like Blockfi, Coinflex, Voyager were either giving the clients funds to a fund called Three Arrows Capital (who just put the money in Anchor on Luna and earned 19.5%) or had the money in Anchor, kept the difference between the 19.5% and whatever they were paying their customers.

When Luna died, it was because of Anchor and UST. UST took Three Arrows down with it, and all these other companies as well...

Evidently this bankrupted all these CeFi yield platforms. Anchor was the only way to earn higher returns than these platforms were promising. Most yields on "legit" defi dapps on stable coins are around 5%. The only way they could offer more is by using Anchor (which blew up) or just running a straight up ponzi.

Celcius was another one of these companies. It's not clear what happened with Celcius or Coinflex, but I'm guessing Luna/UST/Anchor/Three Arrows had something to do with it somehow.

All these companies experienced problems at almost the exact same time. Hardly an accident.

Thread expectedly devolved into a combination of trolling, old drama rehash, and off-topic discussion.

I moved the WSOP Seniors stuff here: https://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sh...rogress-for-me

I deleted the rest. I'm not interested in re-debating drama from almost a year ago.


Doug has made a statement basically saying that he'll make a statement on July 1:

https://twitter.com/DougPolkVids/sta...87034193231879


Someone noticed that Doug deleted his initial promotion of Coinflex, posted in December 2021:

https://twitter.com/papihodl/status/1540913567867830272


... however, Doug is still listed as a Coinflex ambassador on his Twitter profile.

I do not blame him for this, but again, he probably should have steered away from this "opportunity", given his valuable reputation.

It appears he is giving them a chance to make good on their "withdrawals allowed on June 30" promise before completely going hard on them.

Druff I don’t mind you deleting some trolls but it’s only going to make things worse if you are critical of other crypto issues with people like Polk but can’t take the heat yourself.

Might be better to just avoid crypto subjects.

On the radio I heard you suggest if it comes to it Polk should give the money he have made to potential victims, I totally disagree
Everybody should know that investing in crypto involves risk. In order for a crypto to have a shot at becoming the next bitcoin reputable people have to get behind it.
There's no way he could have caused foreseen or prevented the great crypto crash. If it goes belly up thank him for putting his rep on the line and giving everyone a good shot.
I think if the people in charge are honest and doing everything they can, that's all that should be expected. There's no way anyone should be expected to underwrite the losses of others.



I think it's wrong to suggest he pay back investors. That puts a lot of unfair pressure on him and potential false hope for those that lost.
Doug I think you should have the option to keep the money with no pressure or risk to your reputation.

If Druff was in your position, I can't imagine him voluntarily coughing up several hundred thousand profit just to be a good guy.

todge literally paid me thousands of dollars out of his own pocket when our jimmy johns franchise went out of business

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by simpdog

Druff I don’t mind you deleting some trolls but it’s only going to make things worse if you are critical of other crypto issues with people like Polk but can’t take the heat yourself.

Might be better to just avoid crypto subjects.

---

I understand your point, but I am not being critical of Polk here. I feel he made an error in judgment for his own personal brand. He has a lot more to lose than I do. He's making big money off of his name and reputation, while I am not. There's also a tremendous difference between letting someone create a thread about a coin and subsequently posting that I bought some, and being an official ambassador of a coin.

Unlike some others who are calling for Doug's head, I understand how this happened. Someone must have approached him and talked him into believing that Coinflex was legit, crash-proof, and rug-proof, and he believed them. In his defense, the crapping out of stablecoins is a relatively new phenomenon. Previous shitcoin ruggings were typically in the form of a speculative rise, then a tremendous crash once the early adopters took their profits and bolted. The Luna debacle changed everyone's perceptions of stablecoins.

So I fully believe that Doug really thought he was promoting something legit and highly unlikely to fail in the near future. I'm just saying that, given all the bad stories related to non-major coins, he should have stayed away, given the hit his reputation could take, which would be beyond his control.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Entropy

On the radio I heard you suggest if it comes to it Polk should give the money he have made to potential victims, I totally disagree
Everybody should know that investing in crypto involves risk. In order for a crypto to have a shot at becoming the next bitcoin reputable people have to get behind it.
There's no way he could have caused foreseen or prevented the great crypto crash. If it goes belly up thank him for putting his rep on the line and giving everyone a good shot.
I think if the people in charge are honest and doing everything they can, that's all that should be expected. There's no way anyone should be expected to underwrite the losses of others.



I think it's wrong to suggest he pay back investors. That puts a lot of unfair pressure on him and potential false hope for those that lost.
Doug I think you should have the option to keep the money with no pressure or risk to your reputation.

If Druff was in your position, I can't imagine him voluntarily coughing up several hundred thousand profit just to be a good guy.

---

If Doug was only paid in flexUSD, which might end up worthless, I agree he shouldn't pay anyone anything. I wouldn't expect Doug to reach into his pocket to compensate those who invested in crypto -- even one he promoted which went bad.

However, if he made actual real money on this, and his viewers lost real money, I would think it would be a nice gesture to set up a fund to give that money to them. I would actually do this if I earnestly promoted a coin I thought was good, made a lot of money from said promotion, and then it turned out to be a scam and/or mismanaged. I admit that, if I didn't come out ahead on the matter, I wouldn't reach into my life savings to pay people back. There's a big difference between profit distribution to victims and paying compensation for other people's crimes.

lol, a discussion about profits/loss/integrity/no regulations in the investment field. Jesus H.
Rinse and repeat and let's throw in the next school shooting for a twist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Entropy

On the radio I heard you suggest if it comes to it Polk should give the money he have made to potential victims, I totally disagree
Everybody should know that investing in crypto involves risk. In order for a crypto to have a shot at becoming the next bitcoin reputable people have to get behind it.
There's no way he could have caused foreseen or prevented the great crypto crash. If it goes belly up thank him for putting his rep on the line and giving everyone a good shot.
I think if the people in charge are honest and doing everything they can, that's all that should be expected. There's no way anyone should be expected to underwrite the losses of others.



I think it's wrong to suggest he pay back investors. That puts a lot of unfair pressure on him and potential false hope for those that lost.
Doug I think you should have the option to keep the money with no pressure or risk to your reputation.

If Druff was in your position, I can't imagine him voluntarily coughing up several hundred thousand profit just to be a good guy.

---

If Doug was only paid in flexUSD, which might end up worthless, I agree he shouldn't pay anyone anything. I wouldn't expect Doug to reach into his pocket to compensate those who invested in crypto -- even one he promoted which went bad.

However, if he made actual real money on this, and his viewers lost real money, I would think it would be a nice gesture to set up a fund to give that money to them. I would actually do this if I earnestly promoted a coin I thought was good, made a lot of money from said promotion, and then it turned out to be a scam and/or mismanaged. I admit that, if I didn't come out ahead on the matter, I wouldn't reach into my life savings to pay people back. There's a big difference between profit distribution to victims and paying compensation for other people's crimes.

---

i think he made real $$... he shilled them endlessly.

FLEXUSD
$0.401119

ouch. another 3 arrows capital victim.

Interesting twist to this saga.

Coinflex CEO Mark Lamb is now publicly naming Bitcoin Cash guy Roger Ver, and claiming that Ver owes them $47 million.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/29/cryp...lion-debt.html

https://twitter.com/MarkDavidLamb/st...31700275240964
https://twitter.com/MarkDavidLamb/st...31704633131009



Roger Ver denies it, and claims HE is owed money:

https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status...22377461415936



Coinflex has released a new token called rvUSD, attempting to earn the $47 million back. They're promising 20% APY interest for anyone buying rvUSD, paid daily. Yeah, right.

This coin is fucked.


Interestingly, Roger Ver is friends with Micon, who has deep admiration for him. It was Ver's private jet that Micon showed himself flying in between islands. Micon also seemed to have switched from Bitcoin to Bitcoin Cash in late 2017, due to Ver's involvement in BCH.

Is it possible Ver is busto, and fucked Coinflex here? Or did Coinflex fuck him and is now finding a scapegoat? Hard to tell.

flexUSD has fallen to $0.32.

I think Ver is 100% guilty, he's shady AF and a total prick.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCOjCEth6xI
They're going to have hell collecting imo

Doug has quit as ambassador, which isn't a surprise.

Here is his promised July 1 statement:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxEDxuLNI70

At least Doug is being transparent.

Where is your statement on the shit coin? In before this is deleted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by simpdog

At least Doug is being transparent.

Where is your statement on the shit coin? In before this is deleted.

---

When I heavily promote a coin on my show, or suggest anyone invest in a coin, or am named ambassador of a coin, I will make a statement about it when things go bad.

I don't want to re-discuss this entire matter, but there is no comparison between the two situations. If you wish for me to explain my position again, you can PM me and I'll be glad to. This thread is to discuss the Coinflex matter, which obviously is a fairly big one and has made mainstream news.

Anyway, I will be analyzing Doug's statement on radio, which won't be until July 8th unfortunately.

In the meantime, I'll say a few things here.

First off, he claims that he will have lost money on the entire deal if Coinflex never pays out (which they probably won't). While he didn't say it directly, this mostly confirms my suspicion that he was paid in flexUSD, and got fucked like everyone else. Given that's probably the case (and I believe him), I don't think he should be responsible to pay anyone who lost money here. I did think it would be a good gesture to use any profit or endorsement money to pay back victims of this thing, but since it appears he will have also lost money, that point is moot. (The losses seem to have been more of paper losses, given the "staff" he hired to help promote it, which I assume was minimal or people he already had working for him anyway. But I believe he will have made zero point zero if he can't withdraw.)

He did raise a few good points about why Coinflex is acting shady. Most notably, he points out that they should have $137 million worth of assets, so even of Roger Ver did fuck them out of $47 million, where is the other $90 million? They aren't making that clear, and he's bothered by that. He suggested that they just pivot to paying out a certain percentage to everyone based upon the $90 million that's supposedly left, but implies that perhaps that $90 million really isn't there either.

I think this is kind of a Full Tilt situation. If you remember, Full Tilt really did get fucked by the situation where they were taking phantom deposits while searching for a new payment processor (that is, crediting people for having deposited without charging them), and then didn't get an actual processor in place before Black Friday hit and ruined the whole thing. But that wasn't what sucked out most of the $350 million which disappeared. The $350 million mostly disappeared by being outright stolen for marketing and owner distribution purposes. The processor issue was just the final kick in the ass, to where the minimal money they DID plan upon keeping (for withdrawals) wasn't coming in anymore.

Or, simply put, it's like having to be at work at 9am, which is an hour away, leaving home at 8:55am, and then running into terrible traffic and arriving there at 10:30am. You can tell your boss honestly that traffic caused you a delay, but you would have been very late anyway through your own fault.

My belief at this point is that Coinflex stole or wasted the assets on deposit, and now are blaming Roger Ver's shenanigans on the whole coin crashing down.

Another good question is why they even had to pause withdrawals if they still had $90 million of the $137 million in question. That's plenty to cover withdrawals, and if they didn't make the Ver mess public, they could have recovered that $47 million, or at least threatened Ver to go public if he didn't start paying. Instead, they shut down withdrawals completely, as if they knew they couldn't cover them anymore.


Polk also said that the rvUSD coin released to raise money to save Coinflex doesn't make sense, and he doesn't trust it. I agree.

Overall a pretty good statement from Doug, and I predict he gets out of this without a major hit to his reputation, especially if nobody influential or semi-influential on poker Twitter invested in it.

I've thought more about Mark Lamb's claim that Roger Ver owed Coinflex $47 million and wouldn't pay, and Ver's response that they owe HIM money and won't pay.

It's possible that both are true. How?

Recall that Ver basically had his $47 million investment in Coinflex on credit. They knew he was so crypto rich that he didn't actually have to put up the funds to back it. Basically they gave him credit for being good for it, which he probably is. I'm guessing that was also the only way he was going to invest in this project, as otherwise he was opening himself up to get scammed for $47 million.

Recall that Coinflex investors earned interest "every 8 hours". Think of how much interest Ver must have been earning on his $47 million worth of flexUSD.

Well, Coinflex probably chunked off all or most of their assets, and likely could no longer cover withdrawals. At that point, they might have gone to Ver and said, "Hey bro, we need some of that $47 million to cover the withdrawals."

And Ver might have said back, "Fuck no, something is fishy here. In fact, it pisses me off that I can't withdraw the interest I made on my $47 million investment! So fuck off. Not only am I not sending over that $47 million, but I expect you to cash out my interest immediately!"

And there you have it. Both can truthfully claim that each "owes" the other.

Obviously this is all speculation, but I think it's a pretty good guess. They've never explained why they need Ver's $47 million right now if they're supposedly already holding $90 million from others. (They also won't comment on that $90 million, and if it exists anymore!)


Anyway, I think there's about zero point zero chance that Coinflex recovers from this.

People are being able to cashout 10% apparently. But the real good news is that 10% is enough to make Doug whole for all his work. JFC…You really can’t make this shit up. Polk rationalizes that he is in the right on everything.

https://twitter.com/DougPolkVids/sta...Th0bN_rwszw7ew

https://twitter.com/DougPolkVids/sta...Th0bN_rwszw7ew

Two things. In what world does this show their resolve to make things right? A small payment doesn’t mean you are going to get one penny more. This more likely is a move to buy time and keep people placated for crumbs. I also take issue with the word “mistake”. Doug stepped down so he should not in any way be assisting spin from Coinflex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffDime

People are being able to cashout 10% apparently. But the real good news is that 10% is enough to make Doug whole for all his work. JFC…You really can’t make this shit up. Polk rationalizes that he is in the right on everything.

https://twitter.com/DougPolkVids/sta...Th0bN_rwszw7ew

https://twitter.com/DougPolkVids/sta...Th0bN_rwszw7ew

Two things. In what world does this show their resolve to make things right? A small payment doesn’t mean you are going to get one penny more. This more likely is a move to buy time and keep people placated for crumbs. I also take issue with the word “mistake”. Doug stepped down so he should not in any way be assisting spin from Coinflex.

---

For the record Doug is getting destroyed on Reddit over his Twitter posting about the 10%. It ain’t pretty.

See Marc Klang posted, he was the guy they tried to rip the 500k from no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRANKRIZZO

See Marc Klang posted, he was the guy they tried to rip the 500k from no?

---

Yes, and he listens to PFA Radio now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I've thought more about Mark Lamb's claim that Roger Ver owed Coinflex $47 million and wouldn't pay, and Ver's response that they owe HIM money and won't pay.

It's possible that both are true. How?

Recall that Ver basically had his $47 million investment in Coinflex on credit. They knew he was so crypto rich that he didn't actually have to put up the funds to back it. Basically they gave him credit for being good for it, which he probably is. I'm guessing that was also the only way he was going to invest in this project, as otherwise he was opening himself up to get scammed for $47 million.

Recall that Coinflex investors earned interest "every 8 hours". Think of how much interest Ver must have been earning on his $47 million worth of flexUSD.

Well, Coinflex probably chunked off all or most of their assets, and likely could no longer cover withdrawals. At that point, they might have gone to Ver and said, "Hey bro, we need some of that $47 million to cover the withdrawals."

And Ver might have said back, "Fuck no, something is fishy here. In fact, it pisses me off that I can't withdraw the interest I made on my $47 million investment! So fuck off. Not only am I not sending over that $47 million, but I expect you to cash out my interest immediately!"

And there you have it. Both can truthfully claim that each "owes" the other.

Obviously this is all speculation, but I think it's a pretty good guess. They've never explained why they need Ver's $47 million right now if they're supposedly already holding $90 million from others. (They also won't comment on that $90 million, and if it exists anymore!)


Anyway, I think there's about zero point zero chance that Coinflex recovers from this.

---

I think your very close to what actually happened.