Debtors of FTX are in discussions with financial services company Perella Weinberg Partners for a number of sales or reorganization attempts. However, the bankruptcy court must first approve the hiring of PWP.
A strategic review of their global assets was started as part of the recent bankruptcy filing by the defunct cryptocurrency exchange FTX and 101 of the 130 affiliated companies. Aiming to maximize recoverable value for stakeholders, the review.
On November 11, FTX, which was then headed by CEO Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after being discovered stealing from customers. The intention of the bankruptcy filing was to mitigate the losses suffered by FTX debtors—parties with stakes in FTX and associated businesses.
Debtors of FTX are in discussions with financial services company Perella Weinberg Partners about a number of sale or reorganization initiatives. The engagement of PWP, however, “is subject to court approval,” FTX warned.
CEO John J. Ray III, SBF’s replacement, attested that FTX affiliates have solvent balance sheets and could be sold or restructured to reduce losses. He also added: “While emphasizing that some subsidiaries, like cryptocurrency exchange LedgerX, are exempt as debtors in the bankruptcy filing.”
The exploration of sales, recapitalizations, or other strategic transactions with regard to these subsidiaries and others that we identify as our work progresses will be a priority for us in the coming weeks, regardless of the outcome.
Moreover, FTX debtors have parallelly filed motions seeking interim relief from the bankruptcy court, which is slated to be heard on Nov. 22, 2022. While no deadline for sale or restructuring has been set, Ray requested all stakeholders “to be patient.”
On November 19, the legal team assisting FTX and SBF during bankruptcy withdrew from the case, citing conflicts of interest.
Martin Flumenbaum, an attorney for Paul, Weiss:
After the FTX bankruptcy was filed, “We informed Mr. Bankman-Fried several days ago that conflicts had arisen that prevented us from representing him.”
Flumenbaum thought that Sam Bankman-Fried’s “incessant and disruptive tweeting” had hampered the lawyers’ attempts at reorganization.