One thing that I am not going to let slide...
From Kroll's e-mail:
"DeFi yield generation strategies like lending, staking, and liquidity mining are inherently safer than traditional loans which carry counterparty risk and will allow yields to users of the platform of 5 – 8% per annum"
I just wanted to specifically note that Vauld's business model as reported to creditors was OVER-COLLATERALIZED LOANS. Even to this day - screenshot below - Vauld's website shows their model as loans with >150% collateral. This was a lie, and arguably criminal misrepresentation. The issue was not the loan model as reported to clients, the issue was that Darshan lied on multiple occasions to creditors regarding the business model/financial exposures, and continued to pay unsustainable interest rates on UNDER-COLLATERALIZED LOANS even while insolvent. Heck, even to this day our accounts are still posting interest payments.
So while I am willing to support Kroll's restructure proposal with supervision - and new management - versus alternatives that have been proposed, let's not conflate Vauld's criminal actions under direction of Darshan with failure of lending, in general. Platforms like Vauld and Celsius failed because of criminal misrepresentation to clients, not because of failure of an over-collateralized lending model.
