ASC

dropdx

I found a list of all this persons scam sites: [Olek Bon \[Registrant Company\] - Sorted by Create Date \[ASC\] (bigdomaindata.com)](https://www.bigdomaindata.com/reverse-whois/?database=current&registrant_company=Olek+Bon&sort_by=create_date)

kombuchawow

Yup. We're using ASC1's with IPFS to give us smart contract access / access revokation to files only for nominated recipients. It's performing really well, and cheap as.

ChumbosChili

This is absolutely huge and very few people realize it. Companies are hamstrung by the limitations of US GAAP but as ASU 2023-08 lays out there is a provision coming to the ASC that will prescribe the accounting treatment. From there companies will be more willing to accept crypto as a payment method or just overall be willing to do business in crypto. This would be a MAJOR milestone towards widespread adoption.

Random_Person_246810

From their latest 10-Q: “The Company accounts for its digital assets, which are comprised solely of bitcoin, as indefinite-lived intangible assets in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 350, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other. The Company’s digital assets are initially recorded at cost. Subsequently, they are measured at cost, net of any impairment losses incurred since acquisition. Impairment losses are recognized as “Digital asset impairment losses” in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations in the period in which the impairment occurs. Gains (if any) are not recorded until realized upon sale, at which point they are presented net of any impairment losses in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations. In determining the gain to be recognized upon sale, the Company calculates the difference between the sales price and carrying value of the specific bitcoins sold immediately prior to sale.”

rednoids

Companies will now have to disclose their various cryptocurrencies by type on their quarterly and yearly financial statements, but at valuations that better represent true book value. Both public and private that hold digital assets on their balance sheet, will now include crypto gains and losses via their net income instead of only taking an impairment expense when fair value drops below the established carrying amount. While the FASB expects to issue the standard by the end of 2023, the rule is not set to go into effect until 2025 for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2024, however, companies can adopt the changes early. Additionally, companies will have to adhere and include the required reporting disclosures per accounting rule ASC 820, which explains how the company calculated their fair-value measurement.

Educational_Speech58

Try to buy that many ASC cards at one time there, not enough in the suply chains to deliver

NumberOneButta

No, it isn't. Read it in full. This is an "equity" method and not a full GAAP auditing which would be acceptable in real financial industries. From the report: *Both the Company and Coinbase have a 50.0% membership interest in Centre. The Company performed an analysis and determined that this investment would be accounted for as an* ***equity method*** *investment under ASC 323 – Investments –* ***Equity Method and Joint Ventures****. There was no operating activity within Centre in 2019 aside from the initial investments by its members.* ***The Company recorded a loss*** *on equity method investments related to Centre of $0.8 million during 2020 which is included in other income, net on the Consolidated Statement of Operations*." It's right there, centre reports a loss of income while having only a few million in actual cash and no revenue to back its holdings? Then they admit they're only using equity method of accounting, which means they are ***only reporting profit/loss as a joint venture*** for coinbase and eschewing a more full audit of their internal workings. This is absolutely ***not an "audit" of USDC.*** Prima facie, taking this at face value, as of 2019 it appears few million of actual cash segregated to pay out USDC holders. Yet, they have almost 50 billion in outstanding tokens today? This is laughable. Of course they also fail to list the actual financial instruments which account for the other liquidity they claim available. This isn't an "audit" that would be acceptable in any other financial industry. Fidelity regularly "audits" it's reserves for the SPAXX token, their version of a "stablecoin" yet coinbase fails to follow basic industry standards.

smellemenopy

How they are accounting for it on the balance sheet makes all the difference. " Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour. https://www.ft.com/content/364734d1-80df-49d3-bc2f-c813c93062ab We will account for digital assets as indefinite-lived intangible assets in accordance with ASC 350, Intangibles — Goodwill and Other. The digital assets are initially recorded at cost and are subsequently remeasured on the consolidated balance sheet at cost, net of any impairment losses incurred since acquisition.  Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour. https://www.ft.com/content/364734d1-80df-49d3-bc2f-c813c93062ab We will perform an analysis each quarter to identify impairment. If the carrying value of the digital asset exceeds the fair value based on the lowest price quoted in the active exchanges during the period, we will recognise an impairment loss equal to the difference in the consolidated statement of operations. The cost basis of the digital assets will not be adjusted upward for any subsequent increases in their quoted prices on the active exchanges. Gains (if any) will not be recorded until realised upon sale."

prokeep15

Are you referencing two top 10 coins that literally only held that spot for less than 2yrs? Because that in-unto itself should speak volumes as to why this is no surprise. I think what’s more interesting is the parabolic rise of those young projects. Why did that happen should be the real question. I didn’t read Luna’s white papers because I figured it was a shitcoin. Anyone claiming they have the solve for an algorithmic stable coin (ASC) with that fast of a rise is a giant red flag in my book. $xhv has been trying for years and they even admit it’s a tough problem to solve and shy away from hyping themselves up….and they’re built on monero, which is a pretty battle hardened algo to game. I can’t stress this enough to people. If you’re in crypto as a speculative asset, and don’t plan to trade. You need to read the projects white papers and understand the dev. teams background. If you’re not 100% sold there, then what are you actually doing? Few of these coins have extrinsic value yet. Sure they’re traded in massive volumes, but few transactions are more than just executing trades. That’s speculation. Not use-value. El Salvador might be the only place where crypto is finally being used to fiscal transactions. Tenure and functionality will be the end game for a lot of projects. The longer you stand, the more confidence people will have. The better the functionality, the faster the adaptation in the end.

Naki111

[https://developer.algorand.org/articles/algorand-smart-contract-layer1-asc1-and-oracles/](https://developer.algorand.org/articles/algorand-smart-contract-layer1-asc1-and-oracles/) ​ ​ the important parts ​ After a user writes an ASC1 and compiles it, the address where the smart contract lives is created, but neither the code nor the address are stored on the blockchain until a transaction interacts with the ASC1. For the rest of the users, the contract is just an address, indistinguishable from any other account address. ​ ​ We are witnessing a completely new concept compared to the rest of the public blockchains. While other networks store the smart contract in the blockchain before interacting with it, on Algorand, users can create an escrow ASC1, seed it with funds, and give the logic only to the beneficiary ​ ​ ​ Algorand’s smart contracts (ASC1s) remove these barriers as a trusted, seamless solution that is not only high performing by being faster, scalable, and cost-effective, but also functionally advanced to enable sophisticated application. ​ ​ Scalable, Fast, and Secure execution not currently possible in legacy platforms. ASC1s operate at over 1,000TPS and are final in under 5 seconds on a platform that is verified not to fork ​ ​ notice its tps is same as tx tps unlike solana or ethereum because of how the contracts are run and at 46k tps algorand smart contracts will still be 46k tps