BitMEX Co-Founder Forecasts $750K to $1 Million Bitcoin Price by 2026

Singapore’s Regulator Imposes 9-Year Ban on 3AC FoundersSingapore’s central bank and financial regulator, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), has handed down a nine-year prohibition order to Kyle Davies and Su Zhu, co-founders of the failed crypto hedge fund Three Arrows Capital (3AC).Photo by Swapnil Bapat on UnsplashSevere restrictionsThe penalty relates to alleged violations of the city-state’s securities laws. The prohibition order came into effect on Wednesday, carrying severe restrictions for Davies and Zhu.During this nine-year period, Davies and Zhu are prohibited from engaging in any regulated activities in Singapore. They are also barred from managing, serving as directors, or holding substantial shares in any capital market services business within the territory of Singapore.Loo Siew Yee, the Assistant Managing Director of Policy, Payments, and Financial Crime at MAS, emphasized the seriousness of the violations in a statement released by the central bank on Thursday. Yee stated:“MAS takes a serious view of Mr. Zhu’s and Mr. Davies’ flagrant disregard of MAS’ regulatory requirements and dereliction of their directors’ duties.” She further asserted that MAS would take action against senior managers who engage in such misconduct.Securities law violationsMAS’s decision to impose these sanctions on the 3AC co-founders was based on its findings of further securities law violations during investigations into 3AC and its founders. The regulatory authority accused Davies and Zhu of failing to inform MAS when 3AC hired a new business representative, providing false information to the regulator, and neglecting to establish an appropriate risk management framework.3AC’s troubles stemmed from the crypto market crash that occurred last year, triggered by the Terra ecosystem’s collapse. The hedge fund’s leveraged crypto positions exposed it to billions in loan defaults, resulting in significant financial losses. Its lack of risk management had a cascading effect in crypto. Lenders like Celsius and BlockFi had exposure to 3AC, leading to further collapses later in 2022 as a consequence.3AC’s creditors claim that the firm owes as much as $3.5 billion, and liquidators are now seeking to recover approximately $1.3 billion from Zhu and Davies, who allegedly incurred the debt when the firm was already insolvent.Regulatory reprimandsThis action by MAS follows last June’s reprimand of 3AC, which occurred just before the hedge fund filed for bankruptcy amid widely reported insolvency issues. At that time, MAS had criticized 3AC for providing false information, failing to report directorship changes involving Zhu and Davies, and exceeding the legal assets under management threshold.It’s just the latest reprimand the duo have received from a regulator this year, though. Zhu and Davies have been busy in trying to get another start-up off the ground. Earlier this year, they launched OPNX, a crypto bankruptcy claims trading platform. The venture is based out of Dubai, and the firm reported in April that it had gotten significant VC backing.Many of those that the company claimed were backing the venture disassociated themselves from those claims. The following month, the Dubai regulator, the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA), reprimanded the OPNX founders, having issued an investor alert relative to the firm a few weeks prior to that. VARA's complaint was that the business had been operating without having acquired the appropriate licensing.

GDAC Joins Hands with Bitgo to Fortify Crypto Wallet SecurityCryptocurrency trading platform GDAC, which is operated by South Korean blockchain fintech company Peertec, revealed on October 19 (local time) a partnership with crypto wallet provider Bitgo. This collaboration aims to bolster the security measures for the exchange’s wallets.Bitgo, headquartered in Palo Alto, California, and backed by investment bank Goldman Sachs, is renowned for its secure wallet solutions. As a qualified custodian for digital assets across various jurisdictions such as the United States, Switzerland, and Germany, Bitgo has been serving more than 1,500 institutional clients in over 50 countries since 2013. The company also touts that it processes about 20% of all on-chain Bitcoin transactions by value.Photo by Shubham’s Web3 on UnsplashBitgo’s growing presence in KoreaBitgo’s latest partnership with GDAC isn’t its first venture in the Korean market. Just last month, the company entered into a strategic partnership with Hana Bank, one of Korea’s leading banking institutions. This collaboration aims to drive the development of security solutions, foster technical cooperation, and even explore a potential joint venture in the future.With this collaborative initiative, GDAC is now a partner of two major digital asset custodians: Bitgo and Fireblocks. Through this cooperative network, the Korean exchange seeks to take a leading role in enhancing security as a virtual asset service provider (VASP). In May, GDAC launched a mobile application where users can seamlessly enjoy all of its crypto services, including exchange, custody, and staking.Han Seung-hwan, CEO of GDAC, said that the company places the utmost priority on bolstering its security technology and ensuring the secure storage of customer assets. He added that having solidified its position as an exchange dedicated to institutional clients, GDAC will focus on delivering customer-centric, high-quality services.

Calls for Regulation of Crypto Investment Management Firms Amidst Growing ConcernsThere have been recent calls in South Korea for crypto investment management companies to be subject to the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act amidst concerns about potential regulatory blind spots negatively impacting crypto investors.Photo by Conny Schneider on UnsplashPushing for regulatory oversightKang Seong-hoo, chairman of the Korea Digital Asset Business Association (KDA) went into detail regarding the issue during a forum held by the association on Thursday to discuss the efficient use of technology and safety management in the era of the digital economy.He emphasized that dealings related to virtual asset management such as deposits, lending, and staking must be regulated by authorities under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act. This is due to the fact that crypto investment management companies are not within the purview of the Act On Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information or the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, the latter of which is set to take effect next year.The Act On Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information defines financial companies as those that provide services for selling, buying, exchanging, transferring, keeping, or managing virtual assets; or act as a broker, intermediary, or agent for these services. However, there is no mention of crypto management companies.Echoes of past crypto platform controversiesThese concerns are driven by the looming possibility of another debacle like the class-action lawsuits against crypto platforms like Haru Invest or Delio arising again as a result of regulatory gray areas. Two months ago, investors had filed a legal complaint after the two lenders unexpectedly suspended customer deposits and withdrawals, claiming that they suffered around KRW 50 billion (approximately $39 million at the time of the incident) in damages as a result.Furthermore, the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), a division under the Korean Financial Services Commission (FSC), recently stated in a report that virtual asset deposits, lending, and DeFi services do not fall under the obligations of the Act On Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information.“Given the context of the ongoing crypto winter since last year, the business model of virtual asset management companies, which is heavily reliant on arbitrage between exchanges, poses a high risk of incidents similar to the Haru Invest and Delio cases,” said Chairman Kang.“In order to ensure virtual asset user protection and market safety, authorities should promptly explore regulatory measures under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act for virtual asset management such as deposits, lending, staking, and the like.”