All eyes are on Sam Bankman-Fried. In the trial in New York, the jury found the former head of the collapsed FTX cryptocurrency exchange guilty on all seven counts of fraud and conspiracy. The sentencing is scheduled for March, and a lengthy prison term appears imminent. The public's anger and derision are substantial. Approximately $8 billion, which FTX customers had deposited, were not immediately traceable. However, regardless of the final verdict, this is not just about the actions of an allegedly fraudulent corporate leader and former billionaire. The failure runs deeper

The casual manner in which Bankman-Fried apparently shuffled significant sums of money highlights a fundamental failure of the company. FTX and its associated hedge fund, Alameda Research, were intertwined corporate entities. The young magnate surrounded himself with like-minded individuals, with little to no oversight. The company lacked established financial departments, risk management, or a compliance division. Clean accounting practices were virtually nonexistent. The bankruptcy trustee wrote, "I have never experienced such a complete failure of corporate controls and the absence of reliable financial information in my career." Once again, the value of division of labor, oversight, and transparency in the corporate world is evident.

Bankman-Fried and his associates displayed a grotesque perception of risk. Customer withdrawals are a glaring risk for a cryptocurrency exchange. Even banks, with liquidity cushions and deposit insurance, are not always immune to bank runs. For a cryptocurrency exchange where traders deposit money for risky trading, this risk is even more pronounced. FTX should have taken measures to mitigate this risk. However, without sound corporate governance, focus on the essential aspects is lost.

The cryptocurrency industry must acknowledge the actual danger of its activities in the largely unregulated space. Numerous hacking attacks with at times outrageously high loot serve as evidence. FTX was no exception in this regard. Cryptoassets have their place, but their habitat should be within a regulated financial system. It's paradoxical: Bankman-Fried, as an entrepreneur, advocated for a legal framework for cryptocurrency exchanges in the United States. However, he seemingly exploited the lack of control within his own company to his advantage. The FTX bankruptcy should also serve as a warning to philanthropists. Bankman-Fried was committed to utilitarianism, openly declaring his intent to donate his wealth to achieve the greatest good or prevent harm, a mathematical project of sorts in the eyes of the MIT physics graduate. He saw himself as part of the "effective altruism" movement and was devoted to addressing existential risks to humanity. However, he appeared to have no moral qualms about handling customer funds. Furthermore, indiscriminate distribution of money, including to various politicians, was not "effective" either. Donations also require an organizational framework and oversight. Above all, they should not be sourced from other people's money.

However, the debate on corporate governance, crypto regulation, and philanthropy has already faded into the background. What's more tempting is the story of the character Sam Bankman-Fried: a rapid rise, hubris, criminal intent, audacious ventures, and ultimately a deep fall. Bankman-Fried will likely be frequently mentioned in the same breath as figures like Jan Marsalek, Bernie Madoff, and "The Wolf of Wall Street" Jordan Belfort. The material is movie-worthy: a mathematically gifted outsider, a chaotic nerd who suddenly became a billionaire. A complicated love affair with Alameda's young CEO, Caroline Ellison, who, like other former associates Gary Wang and Nishad Singh, testified against Bankman-Fried in court. A drama indeed! But there is much more that needs to be said about the FTX bankruptcy.