Amazon, Google, and crypto are on trial

Today on the flagship podcast of The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890: 01:43 - The Verge’s David Pierce chats with policy editor Adi Robertson and reporter Makena Kelly about US v. Google, and what we’ve learned so far. They also talk about the FTC’s lawsuit against Amazon, which could be the next big tech trial. US v. Google antitrust trial: updates Amazon reportedly used a secret algorithm to jack up prices Satya Nadella tells a court that Bing is worse than Google — and Apple could fix it Why the US is suing Amazon 28:46 - Later, senior correspondent Liz Lopatto joins the show to preview the trial of Sam Bankman-Fried, the former CEO of FTX. FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried is on trial for fraud and conspiracy 52:36 - Keep listening for this week’s Vergecast hotline question with Alex Cranz. Email us at [email protected] or call us at 866-VERGE11, we love hearing from you. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:02David Pierce?

  Welcome to The Vergecast, the flagship podcast of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. I'm your friend David Pierce and I am currently in the hallway outside of courtroom 10 at the E. Barrett-Pretzman United States Courthouse in Washington DC. Inside courtroom 10 is where USV Google, one of the most important tech trials in the last two decades and probably the biggest antitrust trial since the Microsoft trial in the late 90s, is currently going on. I'm here in the building today because Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft, is taking the stand to talk about search engines, Bing, AI, Apple, ChatGPT, and who knows what else? There's a lot to talk to that guy about. This trial has been weird and complex and important, and today should be more of the same.

• 0:45David Pierce?

  And that actually is a big part of what we're going to talk about on the show today. Yes, there are tons of gadgets coming out and lots of news to cover, and we're going to get to all of that, don't you worry. But we also have three very different lawsuits happening that could all change the way the tech industry works. So, we're going to talk about USV Google and what we've learned so far about the future of search. We're also going to talk about the FTC's lawsuit against Amazon, which could be the next big tech trial. And we're going to talk about the trial of Sam Bankman-Fried, the former CEO of FTX, and for a long time, the golden bully of the whole crypto world, and now he's on trial in New York. And in some ways, honestly, it feels like the whole crypto industry is on trial with him. So, there's a lot to dig into there as well. All that is coming in just a sec, but the proceedings here are just about to start.

• 1:29David Pierce?

  And if there's one thing I've learned about the US District Court these last few weeks, it's that they are sticklers for punctuality. That, and they never seem to be able to get the screens in the courtroom to work. But I digress. Got to run. This is The Vergecast. See you in a sec.

• 1:45Speaker 01

  This episode is brought to you by Michelob Ultra. Good times mean competitions between you and your friends, like seeing who can throw some pigskin the farthest or rush the field the fastest. Winner gets an ultra. Because it's not just a superior-like beer, it's also giving fans superior access to their favorite sporting events. Superior is worth playing for. Visit michelobultra.com/superioraccess to enter. Enjoy responsibly. Copyright 2026 Anheuser-Busch InBev Michelob Ultra Beer, St. Louis, Missouri.

• 2:13Speaker 02

  Flowing ad budget on metrics that look great till the CFO sees them? That's bull spend and marketers are calling it out in Dashboard Confessions.

• 2:23Speaker 03

  I remember telling my boss, "It'll be good for the brand," when leads were slow. Yeah, it wasn't.

• 2:30Speaker 02

  Cut the bull spend. LinkedIn lets you target by company, job title, and more. Advertise on LinkedIn. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a $250 credit. Go to LinkedIn.com/campaign. Terms and conditions apply.

• 2:45David Pierce?

  Welcome back. All right, I'm home. Satya Nadella's testimony is over. He said some really wild stuff about why Bing can't compete with Google and why it's kind of Apple's fault. It was a lot and I have a lot of thoughts. So actually, let's just start there today. Like I mentioned, we have two big antitrust trials in progress now. One at the very beginning of the process, which is the government's case against Amazon, and one very much in the middle, US versus Google. These two cases are very different in some ways, but I think they also have a lot in common. And the combination of them is going to tell us a lot about the future of the tech industry. So I called up The Verge's Addie Robertson and McKenna Kelly to help me dig into the differences and similarities and where we go from here. Addie, hello.

• 3:30Speaker 04

  Hi.

• 3:31David Pierce?

  McKenna, hello. Hi. So, okay, we have basically two big trials to talk about in like very different versions of the process. And I want to talk about the ways in which they are the same. But let's just sort of catch up on both of them first. And let's start with US v. Google because I've been in the courtroom a bunch and Addie and I have been talking about this nonstop for like two weeks. So it is like deep in my mind. Addie, where are we in this trial right now? Like, what's your sense? We've talked a bunch about kind of the stakes of the search engine and like what it means to be a default. We're now, what, three weeks in, almost four weeks in? Where do you feel like we are?

• 4:06Speaker 04

  So pragmatically, in the course of this trial, we're at the part where the Justice Department is getting close to having made its argument for why Google is an unlawful monopoly, which gives us kind of a skewed view of it, that right now we're hearing all of the bad stuff about Google. And after this, there's going to be some states attorney generals making their case for why its ad business is also a monopoly. And then we're going to get Google's rebuttal. And I think that's going to probably bring out some details that cast the current case in a new light.

• 4:39David Pierce?

  Right, yeah, I kind of don't care about the advertising part of this. Is that okay? Am I allowed to just not be interested in the advertising piece of this case? I get that it's relevant. I just cannot make myself care about it.

• 4:48Speaker 04

  I think, yeah, well, in one sense, this is all about ads because ads is how search makes money. And ads is also if you're going to treat this as there are consumers and they are harmed maybe through raised prices, this is where you get the prices. But it's a lot of it is, I think, less juicy.

• 5:04David Pierce?

  Yeah. And so to your point about the sort of side of it that we've seen so far, what's your sense of how much of a preview of Google's argument we've actually gotten? Because you're right that Google has spent most of its time responding to different allegations from the DOJ. And John Schmidt, line, Google's lead counsel, is like spectacularly good at his job and has done a very good job of like being mad at various people for lots of reasons. But Google's defense always seemed to be, you know, Google is very good and that's not illegal. And that's definitely been the case so far. Do you think there's going to be sort of a different turn once Google actually starts to take the stand here?

• 5:42Speaker 04

  It seems like what we're probably going to get is more people testifying in more detail about how Google is good. And the flip side of this is how Bing does the same things in Google's estimation as Google, but Bing is bad and therefore does not succeed.

• 5:58David Pierce?

  Yeah, Bing being bad is, like we've been saying, the crux of this entire case.

• 6:02Speaker 04

  It also seems like this is maybe when Google tries to poke holes in some of the more sort of embarrassing things that the Justice Department has brought up.

• 6:10David Pierce?

  What's your sense of how the DOJ's side of this is going? I was in court on Monday for Satya Nadella. And before they got to Satya, they spent a bunch of time on scheduling stuff. And it came up a couple of times that Google's stance on how the DOJ is doing is that the DOJ is taking a long time, not moving its case forward and just sort of mucking around without actually proving its point. Of course, Google is going to say that loudly and on the record as many times as it can. But what's your sense now, a few weeks in? Does it feel like the DOJ is doing a good job of making the case it's trying to make?

• 6:46Speaker 04

  Yeah, Google's case is sort of just that the DOJ is wasting a bunch of time throwing Google's dirty laundry out.

• 6:51David Pierce?

  Right.

• 6:52Speaker 04

  But it's also not necessarily clear to me that this case is not partly about Google's dirty laundry and that Judge Meta is not interested in potentially embarrassing things that Google executives have said. But it's also, I think, it's often pretty hard to tell how judges are going to rule and you should probably not read too much into them. And I also, I don't think that Meta has said a lot of incredibly pointed things. He's asked questions, but I think it's a little bit hard to tell. And there was a hot mic moment where he was talking about how frustrating this all is with another judge because it's so complicated and there's not like a, there's not DNA evidence.

• 7:32David Pierce?

  Oh, interesting. I didn't know that.

• 7:33Speaker 04

  That was not his words. That was the, the other judge, I believe. But it seems like he's a little bit frustrated with a lot of this case, but it's hard for me to tell how that translates into a ruling.

• 7:43David Pierce?

  Do you think that's because of the way the case is going or because of the actual sort of stakes of the case? Like, we've been talking from the beginning that it's not even necessarily super obvious what the boundaries of the fight are here. Everybody's kind of arguing these nebulous things that are good or bad, right?

• 8:01Speaker 04

  Yeah, you have to argue, okay, so if there's consumer harm, who are the consumers? What does harm mean? Is it enough to say that Google just isn't as good as it could be, even if it's the best thing on the market? Or is that unfair? And then there's been this, this whole sort of meta layer to the trial about how much can be fairly disclosed. And so there have been a lot of arguments about how much of any of this is vital to the DOJ's argument. And I think that has been its own source of frustration for a lot of people.

• 8:35David Pierce?

  Very much so. That got better. Hooray.

• 8:37Speaker 04

  That has gotten better.

• 8:38David Pierce?

  McKenna, my first question for you, if I'm remembering this correctly, we've been waiting for this case for what feels like hundreds of thousands of years. What actually made this case happen? Like, how did we finally get to the point where we have like words on paper about what the FTC is mad about at Amazon?

• 8:54Speaker 05

  Yeah, so the investigation into Amazon on antitrust grounds has actually been going on since the Trump administration. The former FTC Chair Joe Simons kicked it off. Of course, a lot happened in tech under the Trump administration as well. Cambridge Analytica, a bunch of other FTC stuff with that company. And so instead of pursuing the Amazon case, Simons kind of designated the FTC's very meager resources, they've gotten more in recent years, towards like Facebook and Meta. But of course, in 2021, President Biden nominated Lena Kahn to be the Chair of the FTC. Lena Kahn, of course, is famous for a somewhat viral legal paper on Amazon.

• 9:38David Pierce?

  The only one ever.

• 9:39Speaker 05

  Yeah, the only one ever, called "The Amazon Antitrust Paradox." And in it, she kind of talks about basically how common antitrust, American antitrust doctrine, the way that we've approached antitrust law for decades, doesn't really apply too well to big tech companies. So Kahn gets into office, she's confirmed, and then she designates, you know, more of the FTC's resources to that case. And so it's been, you know, probably about five years that the company has been under investigation for anti-competitive behavior.

• 10:08David Pierce?

  The thing that strikes me about this case, and I want you to kind of lay out the basics of what the FTC actually thinks that Amazon is doing wrong. But one of the things that it strikes me, big picture, is that, like you said, Lena Kahn knows better than most that it's very hard to bring an antitrust case against a company like Amazon, right? We talk a lot about, how do you prove consumer harm? We typically, these things are like monopoly plus raise prices equals bad, is like the legal framework for a lot of this stuff. And that's very hard to do when products get cheaper and when, in many cases, they're free, like Google Search. What it seems like they tried very, very, very hard to do in this case is make a case about how Amazon has raised prices. And part of me wonders if that case, which is very different from like the big sort

• 10:53David Pierce?

  of heady argument about Amazon being too powerful that Lina Khan was making a bunch of years ago, now we're in this place where she's like, I get the sense she tasked a bunch of people with saying, we have to make an argument about Amazon being bad for customers because things are getting more expensive. Is that a fair way to look at what's happening here?

• 11:09Speaker 05

  Yeah, I mean, that's how the US antitrust reforcers have long approached, you know, antitrust law is whether or not a company, the behavior that it's engaging in is driving up prices, lowering them. And I'm sure people on this podcast have heard, you know, for so many years, the consumer welfare standard. So she has been losing a lot. We've talked about the Microsoft Activision merger, not so hot there. The FTC didn't win. Of course, like Meta and the Within acquisition, they didn't really win there. And so with a case so monumental, like this Amazon case, the FTC really needs to show that it can take

• 11:52Speaker 05

  these companies on. Because for the first, you know, couple of years of her tenure, it hasn't quite been working out. And so trying to make those arguments, you know, about whether Amazon is raising prices is might just be the only winning argument that the FTC can find under current antitrust doctrine.

• 12:09David Pierce?

  Right. Yeah. So walk me through that case a little bit. Like, what are the sort of specific accusations that the government is making against Amazon?

• 12:16Speaker 05

  Sure. So I don't want to make it seem like the FTC isn't looking at structural parts of Amazon as well. Because really, the heart of the case is saying that Amazon, for as long as it's been around, has been making sizable investments in its company, creating Amazon Prime, Prime Video. It's basically a fashion designer, has logistics and fulfillment. Amazon is a behemoth. And by reinvesting all of this would be profit back into the company, it's been able to grow immensely and have a lot of control over individual sellers. And then also being very competitive against other big box stores like Walmart, Target and other companies like that.

• 13:00Speaker 05

  And so because of that structural power that Amazon has created over decades, the FTC is making the argument that it has a lot of control over requesting that some third-party sellers put their products on Amazon at a significantly lower price than they would on other platforms. Also requiring, basically requiring third-party sellers to buy ads on Amazon's search when you go into type of product in order for that product to even be seen, while Amazon is selling its own Amazon basics products, which are competitors. It has that control over the infrastructure in order to create a better system for its own products and services compared to those of its competitors.

• 13:43Speaker 05

  Which yeah, sounds a lot like the case Hadi is talking about in a little bit.

• 13:48David Pierce?

  Yeah, I mean, that's the thing, right? That we're in this weird place where just the overarching question is like, are these companies too powerful? And it feels like the Amazon version of that cycle, at least the way the government describes it, is kind of unusually tight and succinct where it's like you can actually explain the whole cycle of how things get more expensive because of Amazon. I don't know whether that's true. Amazon, obviously vociferously denies that it is responsible for prices going up all over the internet. But it's like, the government sort of lays out this case where it's like, okay, Amazon forces sellers to use the fulfilled by Amazon things. Those fees are super high. And also, Amazon prevents them from offering cheaper prices anywhere else because it has these mechanisms to figure out what you're pricing around the internet.

• 14:31David Pierce?

  And then they either bury you in search results or they get rid of the buy box. I've learned so much about how the Amazon website works through this case, which is really fascinating. But Amazon has all these little knobs it can turn to just wreck your business on Amazon if it feels like it. And so what you do is you raise all your other prices elsewhere in order to not run afoul of Amazon's increasingly expensive process. And that is like an actual case of consumer harm. Like, if that's true, that is the most straightforward, this is bad for consumers, anti-just argument against a tech company I feel like I've heard in a long time.

• 15:08Speaker 05

  Yeah, there were a lot of figures in the lawsuit that were redacted.

• 15:13David Pierce?

  So much.

• 15:14Speaker 05

  I would have loved to see, like, the percentage of, you know, how many people subscribe to Prime, um, how many people over other websites order stuff through Amazon because of Prime. I think those figures would really, really say a lot and help us to drive that point home if we had them. But of course, we don't.

• 15:36David Pierce?

  Yeah, that complaint was very redacted. Like, there was one thing that kept coming up, this thing called Project Nessie, which you can tell is this, like, very exciting internal program at Amazon that does something. And every time it's about to reveal anything, there's just, like, two full lines redacted. Uh, do we know anything about Project Nessie? What is the story here?

• 15:55Speaker 05

  It is just as elusive as the Loch Ness monster that it's named after. I have not been able to find too much information on it. And I bet, you know, I hope that when this case, if this case, right, because Amazon could still settle, if that will happen, not entirely sure, it's very hard to predict right now. But in a couple of years, you know, if this case actually goes to court, I'd be really excited to see what else, you know, comes out of that complaint, those, those pieces of data, more info on Nessie, you know, and all these things that we haven't really seen, but kind of vaguely know about, uh, because of, you know, the text.

• 16:30David Pierce?

  And I'm assuming, if I remember right, Addie, the first version of the Google case was super redacted, just like the Amazon case was, and then we got another version of it that was much less redacted, which is when we learned all the actual information about the case. Am I remembering that right?

• 16:44Speaker 04

  Yeah, I think that we've gotten, this is kind of typical in a lot of these cases, that you'll get very heavily redacted versions and then they slowly get exposed as the trial gets closer.

• 16:52David Pierce?

  Okay, so we might get Nessie information at some point here in the near future. I just want to know about Project Nessie. That's all I want to know in the whole world. I don't care about anything else. I just want to know what Project Nessie is. If you know, please email me, [email protected]. That's all I want to know. Addie, my, my question for you is, like, these two cases sort of rhyme to me in the sense that they are like, they're happening at roughly the same time, which is either really interesting or a total coincidence, and I'm curious. If you guys see it one way or the other. But it also feels like if you if you sort of boil it all the way down, the question of like, is it illegal to be wildly successful? Feels like the question of both of these things. And where does being wildly successful and protecting all of that success tip into monopolistic practices?

• 17:37David Pierce?

  Like, do you see similarities between these two cases, Addy? Or are they more different than I'm giving them credit for?

• 17:43Speaker 04

  It's definitely not a coincidence that this kind of aggressive enforcement is happening under the Biden administration, which has nominated people who are very strongly pro being antitrust watchdogs. So on that side, like, the big tech investigations have been going on for years. This is sort of just this finally coming to fruition. On the other hand, I actually think that there are some levels of difference in the case, at least the allegations, that Google's case so far, the trial has been all about, look, Google is legitimately good. There are downsides that we haven't gotten into the really the arguments for like privacy, but Google really, it knows what you want. It uses its data to produce a product that's actually genuinely good.

• 18:25Speaker 04

  The Amazon case, at least from the parts that we've seen, the allegations are basically, Amazon's terrible. Amazon forces prices up. It throws ads all over everything and forces sellers to buy them, which is part of the Google case too, but has not really come up as much yet. That there are all of these cases where their argument is, look, people don't even necessarily want to be signed up for Prime as part of a separate case. They they're just getting signed up accidentally. That it really feels like the argument in the FTC case is that Amazon sucks and there's no alternative. The DOJ case against Google, at least so far in court, has been, Google's really good, but it's bad that no one else can be that good.

• 19:09David Pierce?

  McKenna, is that your read too? Like, do you think the Amazon is bad case is part of this? I have gone back and forth on this because on the one hand, some of the things they're talking about, like it's super easy to buy stuff and you get things really fast is like, those are good things and those are things people like, right? Like lots of people did sign up for Prime on purpose and really fast shipping is one of the things that people really like about Amazon. I do think it's true that the Amazon shopping experience has been on a pretty fast decline for a pretty long time. And I wonder if now is the moment where it's like, the case is, Amazon used to be good and then got really big and has gotten worse for everyone involved and there's nothing you can do about it.

• 19:48Speaker 04

  I mean, to be clear, people make that case about Google too, all the time outside the court.

• 19:52David Pierce?

  Fair.

• 19:52Speaker 04

  Like, this isn't necessarily about the reality of the actual platforms right now, but it's sort of the cases that both sides are making.

• 19:59Speaker 05

  Yeah, I think that's totally fair. I think when it comes to similarities between the two, it really becomes, it really comes down to like the consumer experience and how that feels for the consumer. So when I buy cat food, right, I normally buy my cat food from Amazon. I have to wade through so many listings and often it's not the same seller that I'm buying the same cat food from and it's really confusing. It's a different price. Oftentimes it's like, it sucks, but like my cat needs food and I know it's going to be here in two days because I have Prime, right? So, you know, you weigh the cons, you know, the benefits and the cons over that. And then also, you know, similarly with Google, it's using that service, using that search bar and how the company controls that search bar that plays a really key role in the case.

• 20:43David Pierce?

  Yeah, I'm very curious to see, especially in the Amazon case. It doesn't seem like in the Google case, we're going to have the Google has gotten worse argument. It would be interesting if we did, but it just doesn't seem like we're going to get there. Google certainly is not going to argue that Google is a worse product than it once was. But it does seem like Amazon worked for a long time because it was good and now it's bad and there's nothing you can do about it. It's like, that's part of how you win this, everything is getting worse and more expensive case. Like if you're Lena Kahn, you kind of have to make that argument.

• 21:14Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 21:16Speaker 05

  I think that's really the argument that the case looks at the most. And I mean, when you look at also, like, it comes down to like, what does the FTC want as well? Now, Lina Khan has been very like tight lipped about the exact remedies that they're looking for. But in the press release, it says like, structural remedy. That is a breakup, right? What gets broken off? What goes where? Who buys what? I'm not entirely sure. But it'll be interesting to see, you know, how that pans out over the next, you know, months and years.

• 21:46David Pierce?

  Yeah, Addy, do you have a, do you have a theory? If you were going to break up Amazon, how would you? If you're Lina Khan and you're, you have to figure out how to split up that company, what would you do?

• 21:54Speaker 04

  Well, the really cheap answer is that you split up Amazon. The, it's not always called Amazon Basics now, but the equivalent of Amazon's white label products.

• 22:02David Pierce?

  Right. It's many, many, many, many in-house brands that you don't realize are Amazon brands in many cases.

• 22:07Speaker 04

  Especially because there are specific antitrust allegations around that. There's the argument that they use all of their consumer data to see what's selling well and then they clone it. I don't know if that's necessarily where the FTC thinks it would be most useful to split up Amazon. But that's just the obvious cleavage point.

• 22:24Speaker 05

  Yeah, personally, for me, I think the place where it'd be most beneficial for the case to break up Amazon would be the logistics and fulfillment side. Because that really is what adds that additional competitiveness. Like we're saying, that knowing that the product is going to come in two days, right? To you. So instead of like Amazon having, you know, its own fulfillment services, having to operate with like a UPS or FedEx more often than not, I think would really, if not, if that's not the only thing that gets broken up, I imagine that would be a really intimate focus of the FTC as well.

• 22:56David Pierce?

  Yeah, and that would obviously be a huge, huge, huge blow to Amazon. I think realistically, you could get rid of the in-house brands and like a bunch of people at Amazon would be like, oh, shucks. And they'd all move on. If you split off the logistics side of Amazon, you have like fundamentally changed that company.

• 23:10Speaker 05

  Right.

• 23:10David Pierce?

  Which I suppose is, if you're the FTC, the goal. So I, I, it'll be interesting to see how big that swing turns out to be. Last thing before I let you guys go, I have been trained over the years that if we're going to talk about tech antitrust, we have to argue about market size because all they argue about is market size. And I've been sitting in the courtroom at Google where everybody is arguing about what a general search engine is and no one seems to know and it's very complicated and there's vertical search engines, there's general search engines and TikTok is neither of those, but it's something else. And everybody just sort of spins out of control about whether Google just competes with Bing or competes with like every other site that exists on the internet. Amazon, I feel like is about to go through exactly the same thing, right? Amazon's case has been we compete with every store on planet Earth and we're actually

• 23:52David Pierce?

  like a pretty tiny minority of the resale market. The FTC is going to have to make a different and much harder case now, right?

• 24:00Speaker 05

  Yeah. So in the case of Amazon, the FTC basically defines the market as the online marketplace industry, which is a really interesting way to define it. And I think honestly, I don't think Amazon would really even like that because it wants you to think that it competes with the big box stores with Target and Walmart. And all the antitrust hearings and all this stuff that we paid attention to over the last couple of years, you always have the Amazon reps pointing to, you know, the way that it arranges products in search to the way that a Walmart or a Target arranges products on a shelf. So in order to define it as an online marketplace, I don't think Amazon would be really happy with that. And I imagine they're going to challenge that in court. Just looking at like the way that

• 24:44Speaker 05

  it's defined, it really has to do with like online storefronts. And I imagine that will get kind of shaken out a bit more as time goes on.

• 24:52Speaker 04

  It seems kind of even more complicated because stores like Walmart have gotten more like Amazon. If you go to walmart.com now, you can get a bunch of third-party storefronts, items.

• 25:01David Pierce?

  But even that, well, so this is, this is where it gets really heady for me, right? Because I think like if Amazon has its way, the competition is everyone who sells anything in any way, anywhere in the world, right? I would argue that is a reach. But also if the FTC has its way, it's like companies that allow other companies to set up storefronts inside of your storefront on the internet, which is a much, much smaller thing that Amazon and to like a lesser extent Walmart, because Walmart was a third-party stuff, but you can't really have a store on walmart.com in the same way that you can kind of have your own store on amazon.com. So it's like that teeny tiny thing is Probably too small because I don't know that like if you're a real person on the internet, you're not thinking like, oh, I'm gonna go to the storefront on amazon.com. You're just like shopping for things on Amazon.

• 25:45David Pierce?

  The answer seems to be, I mean, it's somewhere in the middle there, but it does feel like even where, like if you go sixty forty on one side or the other, that's gonna end up being really important in this case.

• 25:54Speaker 05

  Yeah, what are the competitors? Because the thing that I'm thinking of is Etsy, for example, very small company in comparison.

• 26:00David Pierce?

  Like Shopify, sort of, but it's it's a slightly different thing.

• 26:04Speaker 04

  Alibaba.

• 26:05David Pierce?

  Alibaba is a good one.

• 26:06Speaker 05

  Yeah, Instagram is setting up a bunch of like ways to buy products in like storefronts, which I guess are essentially people's accounts now. And then also like TikTok shop, maybe, but that's like really, really new. So, you know, other than like, to think about like competitors, it's mostly, you know, these kind of smaller companies compared to like, I guess, like Meta's stuff and like TikTok stuff, which is really still very nascent and not people. I'm not going to Instagram to buy things.

• 26:33Speaker 04

  And also then you add the whole distribution logistics chain that you mentioned too, that really none of these competitors have that, that it's fairly unique. None of the small like Meta and TikTok don't have that at this point.

• 26:47David Pierce?

  Right. The only company doing Amazon things is Amazon, which is, I suppose, a strength of the argument here, but also gonna make it a challenge to figure out like, who are we, who else are we arguing about here is gonna be weird in this case. Whereas like at least Google has one real honest to God, like apples to apples competitor, which is why the Google trial has become so much about Bing, because like, why isn't Bing good? Is like a central question, but in a way you can't quite ask the same question about Walmart and and get answers about Amazon. It's gonna be very, it's gonna be very strange to see how we talk about this, because there just isn't any company out there remotely like Amazon anymore.

• 27:26Speaker 04

  And we are also not even touching Amazon's media business. The fact that it runs Prime, which is its own very powerful player in its market.

• 27:34David Pierce?

  Yeah.

• 27:35Speaker 04

  Like Prime Movies.

• 27:36Speaker 05

  It has Lord of the Rings now, right?

• 27:38David Pierce?

  Yeah, there's like, although that show sucks, so I suspect that will not come up on anybody's side in this argument.

• 27:43Speaker 04

  Well, there's the MGM acquisition.

• 27:45David Pierce?

  Yeah, all these things to bolster prime, like in a lot of ways, it does seem like this goes back to like, is this raising prices things like, is the is the ongoing push and existence of prime good or bad for consumers? Is a big part of the question here and Amazon has spent a long time being like, it's cheap. We keep giving you reasons to make it better. And the FTC is going to be like, no, actually what it's doing is like building ever higher walled gardens through which it can screw both sellers and customers.

• 28:10Speaker 05

  A solution to a problem and creative essentially.

• 28:13David Pierce?

  Yeah, right, right. And has made more and more expensive to solve over time. What do we have any sense of the timeline on the Amazon trial? Like the Google thing took, what, almost three years to actually go to trial from that first complaint? Is is that a roughly good guide for the Amazon one, do we think?

• 28:31Speaker 05

  Yeah, I think that's probably fair. Justice moves very slowly in this country on all fronts. But I do imagine it's going to be quite a bit of time and while people interested, I think we just have to continue following it before we have like a gauge of when arguments could take place, when things start. Right now, it's just, it could be anyone's guess.

• 28:53Speaker 04

  We also don't really know what's going to end up going to trial, like even the Google case that went to trial is somewhat subtly different than the one that was filed.

• 29:01David Pierce?

  Yeah, that's very true. Well, listen, as long as Project Nessie doesn't go away in this process, I'll be okay.

• 29:07Speaker 04

  Okay, which is a cooler name, Project Nessie or Jedi Blue?

• 29:10David Pierce?

  They're both very good, but Project Nessie for something that is heavily redacted is perfect.

• 29:15Speaker 05

  Yeah.

• 29:16David Pierce?

  Like it's the Sasquatch, like they should just have secret names for everything and then just redact them all. Like, that's what I would do.

• 29:22Speaker 05

  They all have cryptid names.

• 29:25David Pierce?

  All right. Thank you both very much for being here. We got to take a break and then we're going to come back and talk about a very different trial, about a very different industry with very different stakes. It's crypto time, y'all. We'll be right back.

• 29:44Speaker 01

  This episode is brought to you by Michelob Ultra. Good times mean competitions between you and your friends, like seeing who can throw some pigskin the farthest or rush the field the fastest. Winner gets an Ultra. Because it's not just a superior light beer, it's also giving fans superior access to their favorite sporting events. Superior is worth playing for. Visit michelobultra.com/superioraccess to enter. Enjoy responsibly. Copyright 2026 Anheuser Busch InBev Michelob Ultra Beer, St. Louis, Missouri.

• 30:13Speaker 02

  Are your ad campaigns lighting up the dashboard? But not the pipeline? That's bullspend. And marketers are calling it out in dashboard confessions.

• 30:22Speaker 03

  My boss asked for results, so I opened my dashboard for the only positive sounding metric I had: impressions.

• 30:30Speaker 02

  Cut the bullspend. See revenue, not just reach. LinkedIn delivers the highest return on ad spend of major ad networks. Advertise on LinkedIn. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a $250 credit. Go to LinkedIn.com/campaign. Terms and conditions apply.

• 30:46David Pierce?

  Welcome back. As you're hearing this on Wednesday, it's day two of the trial against Sam Bankman-Fried, who's better known as SBF and is also known as the former founder and CTO of FTX, which was for a while one of the hottest companies in crypto. It was huge. Now, of course, crypto has taken a dive, and so have SBF's fortunes. And the two things have a lot to do with each other, actually. There are a lot of folks out there who think this trial, which is ostensibly just about SBF, is going to have huge ramifications for the whole crypto universe as new information comes out about how the industry actually works. It's a complicated trial and an important one. The Verge's Liz Lopatto is covering it for us, and I suspect right this second,

• 31:30David Pierce?

  she's probably in a courtroom. So we caught up a couple of days ago before things really got going. Hi, Liz.

• 31:36Speaker 06

  Hey, David. How's it going?

• 31:38David Pierce?

  OK, so I realized I was prepping for this, and you and I have both been following this pretty closely for a long time. You, mercifully, more closely than I. You have a higher tolerance for this nonsense than I do, I think. But I realized, after all of the chaos of the last, however many months it's been, I've sort of lost track of what Sam Bankman-Fried is actually on trial for. So in a weird way, let's just start at absolute ground level here. I think there are a lot of layers and a lot of things to talk about, but what is this man actually being accused of and on trial for?

• 32:11Speaker 06

  Well, conveniently, David, I brought something to the recording.

• 32:16David Pierce?

  Did you?

• 32:16Speaker 06

  And it is, it is a copy of the superseding indictment. So this is what he's on trial for.

• 32:21David Pierce?

  I love it.

• 32:22Speaker 06

  And there are seven counts in it.

• 32:23David Pierce?

  Okay.

• 32:24Speaker 06

  And they are wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud, mostly.

• 32:30David Pierce?

  Okay.

• 32:30Speaker 06

  So count one is wire fraud on the customers of FTX. Count two is conspiracy to commit wire fraud on the customers of FTX.

• 32:38David Pierce?

  Sure.

• 32:38Speaker 06

  This is pretty straightforward. And I just want to pause here and talk about how you prove this because this is part of what's exciting. Part of it for wire fraud, you have to show the bank transfer happened. That's boring. But then you have to prove that people were defrauded, that Sam Bankman Fried knew he was lying to the customers of FTX. And so this is something where we might hear testimony from actual customers, you know, who are talking about what he told them. It's where we might talk about what he was saying in front of Congress, is where we might talk about what he's, you know, what the Super Bowl ad said. Those kinds of things are where this all comes into play.

• 33:13David Pierce?

  Right. And this sort of base underlying thing is that he used customers' money, basically funneled it to this, his investment arm called Alameda. Was it Alameda Capital?

• 33:23Speaker 06

  Alameda Research.

• 33:24David Pierce?

  Alameda Research.

• 33:24Speaker 06

  But also used it to buy himself real estate and to make some investments. It's, it's a straightforward, the accusations are straightforward. It's embezzlement. It's very old fashioned.

• 33:34David Pierce?

  See, this is why this is useful because I feel like this is all, it all spins in so many directions about like the crypto industry and tax fraud and all this stuff. But ultimately it is just like, he used money that wasn't his to do things you're not allowed to do with money that isn't yours. It's like, it's pretty simple. Okay. All right. So that's the first two. What else we got?

• 33:51Speaker 06

  So we have count three, wire fraud on lenders to Alameda Research. So this is his crypto trading arm and they had borrowed money. And now the allegation is that he defrauded the people he borrowed money from. And then count four is conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Again, you see where this is going.

• 34:08David Pierce?

  You want to do it and then you do it. Yeah.

• 34:10Speaker 06

  Yeah. And then count five is conspiracy to commit securities fraud on investors of FTX. So that's different. And that's the one where we might see VC testimony. So the people Who were investing were given bad information. Sam Bankman Freed had reason to know it was bad information. That's the allegation, right? So you might see somebody step up on the stand and say, hey, this is what the documents that I got said. Here is what Sam said. And here's the due diligence we did. Here are our due diligence documents. And again, you have to prove that he knew what he was saying is wrong because like being an idiot isn't illegal.

• 34:45David Pierce?

  Right.

• 34:45Speaker 06

  So that's count five. And then we have count six, which is conspiracy to commit commodity fraud on customers of FTX.

• 34:54David Pierce?

  Seeing a trend here, Liz.

• 34:55Speaker 06

  Yeah, let's, well, we're going to get to the conspirators in a minute. And then count seven is conspiracy to commit money laundering.

• 35:02David Pierce?

  Okay.

• 35:03Speaker 06

  So that's what, that's what we're going to be hearing from. And part of the reason I wanted to go through those things specifically is that there's a bunch of other stuff that's going on around this. There are so many things going on. There's like an SEC lawsuit. There's a CFDC lawsuit. There's another trial, actually, that's going to be happening. It's scheduled for next March. For a number of counts, we aren't going to be hearing here. So I wanted to make sure we knew which counts we're dealing with because some of the allegations around like campaign finance stuff, for instance, while they might show up in this trial, they are not the charges that are being brought against him here.

• 35:37David Pierce?

  Yeah, and you've kind of alluded to this, but one of the things I think is important and sort of complicated to understand is what's different about what happened at FTX versus what has happened in some of these other crypto messes? We've talked about on this show over the years. And I think about like everything from, you know, the, the Luna debacle where a bunch of people lost a lot of money to like what happened with Axie Infinity, where a bunch of people lost a lot of money. It seems like there's one thing that is like crypto gone bad. And that seems to have all gone, it kind of gone one direction. And this has gone a slightly different direction. Like, how do you explain the difference between what all those things are where a lot of people lose a lot of money? And what this has become?

• 36:19Speaker 06

  Oh, boy. So Terra Luna was a project that I think was badly conceived from the jump. And there were a number of people who predicted that that death spiral would happen in exactly the way that it did. And now there are, you know, also some allegations that are being brought against Do Kwon about, you know, the last I saw was that he might have been falsifying some trading.

• 36:40David Pierce?

  Okay.

• 36:41Speaker 06

  But as far as I know, and I'm saying this now, we may, we may see something else in the future. As far as I know, Do Kwon did not tip his hand into the till and actually take money. Okay?

• 36:51David Pierce?

  Right.

• 36:52Speaker 06

  And when you talk about like the various crypto failures of things like Three Arrows Capital, again, like they had loans that went bad and they couldn't make good on them.

• 37:01David Pierce?

  Sure.

• 37:01Speaker 06

  There's a difference between making bad bets and actually taking people's money. So like, that's kind of what we're looking at. And there are people within the crypto industry, by the way, who are very happy to see Sam Bankman-Fried go down because they want, they want the fraudsters out of the industry. They really do think that this is something that's big and real and important. So clearing out all of the villains, if you will, is a positive for crypto. I think that they are a little confused about what the general public understands about crypto. Because I think, once you're in it, like there's a lot of stuff that, there are a lot of subtleties and nuances. It's kind of like an onion, right? Like, there's just always more down there.

• 37:39David Pierce?

  Yeah.

• 37:39Speaker 06

  But Sam Bankman-Fried was really, really successful at marketing, and really, really successful at promoting himself, and really, really successful at making himself synonymous with crypto in the United States.

• 37:50David Pierce?

  He was the good guy. Like, not only was he not the villain, he was like the disheveled good guy of crypto who like, wasn't trying to sell you a bunch of nonsense. He was the other one.

• 37:59Speaker 06

  Right. And so, that makes it a lot harder for anybody who says, hey, we want to be regulated, because you know who else said that was Sam Bankman-Fried?

• 38:06David Pierce?

  Right.

• 38:07Speaker 06

  Right? So, there's like, sort of a lot of a taint here, I think, for people who are not directly involved in crypto. And one of the sort of long-term goals of crypto is, I think, to get a lot of people involved. And I think, potentially, you know, this kind of trial, and the associations with Sam Bankman-Fried as a very public face of crypto, could be bad for the entire industry, as far as like, recruiting new customers goes.

• 38:30David Pierce?

  Yeah, I was thinking about this. I rewatched the The Big Short movie relatively recently. I love it very much. But there's this character in it, Michael Burry, who was like one of the first people to see that the housing crisis is coming and that the way we've propped up mortgage bonds is a disaster. And he is like the voice of reason. He's also like a maniac. And I had this moment of reading about Sam Bankman-Fried in the run up to this trial, thinking, he's both trying to be like the CEO of Goldman Sachs, setting up these systems that are a disaster, and the Michael Burry saying, this is all a mess and is all going to come crashing down. He like tried to do both of those things simultaneously and sort of play all sides, depending on who he's in a room talking to, and did it really

• 39:15David Pierce?

  well for a surprisingly long period of time. He was like, this is the future. Also, we need to be regulated. Also, it might be nothing, but it's possibly everything. And like, it worked until it didn't.

• 39:26Speaker 06

  Well, I have a, I have a couple of thoughts about this. And then there's, there's something that I've noticed when I explain crypto to people, which is, I'll explain it to them and they'll say, oh, is that it? Is that all? And it's like, yeah, that's all. That is it. You know, and they think it must be much more complicated than it actually is. And there, you know, there are like, a bunch of, there's a bunch of complicated math in there, you know, but conceptually, it's actually not that difficult to understand. And so as soon as you explain like an NFT to people, they're like, but I thought, I thought this was supposed to be sophisticated. And it's like, well, the math is sophisticated, the programming is sophisticated, but like the concept, pretty simple. And I think one of the things that people like Sam Bankman-Fried really benefit from is this assumption of

• 40:08Speaker 06

  technical complexity and that if you think it sounds, you know, half baked, maybe it's just that you don't understand it. Maybe you're just not smart enough to understand it. And Bankman-Fried's background, as somebody who went to MIT, worked on Jane Street, you know, math whiz, makes it easy to sell something like that. Part of what's really striking to me about all of this is actually running the casino is a pretty profitable business. And if he had just run FTX and like let Alameda fail. I think he would be fine. The problem here is that he wanted to prop up Alameda Research, which was the reason he founded FTX in the first place. Like, if you go back to that

• 40:50Speaker 06

  that profile from Sequoia Capital that they like deleted because it was so embarrassing.

• 40:54David Pierce?

  Oh, right.

• 40:54Speaker 06

  But don't worry, it's on the Internet Archive. You can go read it. He talks about, you know, other exchanges being rickety and Alameda having losses because the exchanges weren't good enough. And so he wanted to build an exchange that was good enough for what he wanted to do. And again, you know, there are moments in that profile where the the VCs were like, well, we assumed he wouldn't need money, but here he is. And it's like, that's an alarm bell for me right there. You know, there might be a good reason to go get VC money, even if you don't need it, just because it lets you expand faster, for instance, lets you do more things. But in retrospect, that does seem like a striking thing in the profile where they're like, oh, we assumed he was just minting money hand over fist, but here he is asking us for some. Hmm. And, you know, if you read

• 41:38Speaker 06

  the SEC complaint, they say FTX was a fraud from the jump, that like from the very beginning, you know, customer funds were being misallocated. And so I'm partially curious to know a sort of like the timeline of all of this, because the way that FTX was exposed was particularly chaotic.

• 41:55David Pierce?

  Yes.

• 41:56Speaker 06

  And we found out about the misappropriated customer funds after a different kind of chaos that is not on trial.

• 42:03David Pierce?

  Explain that really quickly. And then let's, again, there are many more tentacles of this story that are going to come out over time. But I do think that part is important because you're right, it's not on trial, but it is like central to what happened to FTX. So just explain that chaos real fast.

• 42:15Speaker 06

  Sure. So CoinDesk gets a hold of Alameda Research's balance sheet. And the balance sheet is weird. It's the easiest way to put it.

• 42:24David Pierce?

  Yep.

• 42:24Speaker 06

  There's an awful lot of this token, FTT, that's minted by FTX, that's propping up the balance sheet and backing up their loans. That's like if Sephora were to go out and get loans based on the beauty insider points, which they determine the value of. Okay?

• 42:42David Pierce?

  That's a good example. I like that. Yeah.

• 42:43Speaker 06

  And so there's, there's something like weird happening here. And Sam Bankman-Fried has a long running rivalry with the head of Binance, CZ. And CZ happens to have a lot of FTT tokens because CZ was an early investor in FTX. And Sam bought him out and gave him FTT tokens to do it. And so CZ essentially announced he's going to dump his tokens. And at that point, the market panics. And so people, there's, there's a run. People are trying to get their money out. They're, you know, dumping tokens left, right and center. FTX is like, ah, we're up for sale. Binance is like, oh, we'll buy you. And then Binance, like after a day is like, just kidding. We're not buying this. And then after that, there's bankruptcy.

• 43:25Speaker 06

  And it's in this period of time, post bankruptcy, that these details start to emerge that get weirder. You know, like the, the sort of like funky accounting of valuing yourself by a token that you get to assign the value of yourself. Like, that's not great in and of itself.

• 43:44David Pierce?

  Yeah.

• 43:44Speaker 06

  But the customer funds stuff that comes up afterwards, where it's like, there's this hideous balance sheet of terrors that the, the Financial Times gets a hold of, that like, it's still up there. Like, if you want to go look at that terrible spreadsheet, like, it gives me panic attacks. But like, go look. There's, you know, just like a hole. There's an eight billion dollar hole. Billion with a B. That's when everybody was sort of like, okay, well, where's the money? Where's the money, Lebowski?

• 44:10David Pierce?

  Well, and so this is where the FTX trial and this sort of relatively specific set of allegations against Sam Bankman-Fried becomes the trial about crypto. Right? And you, you wrote a sort of run up to the trial, getting at a lot of this, that there is a, there is a sense in the industry that actually what's about to happen is a lot of evidence is going to be introduced and a lot of testimony is going to be given, not just about Sam, but about the crypto world. And this is both a, it seems like both a prosecution tactic and a defense tactic, is to basically make the whole crypto world look really, really, really, really bad.

• 44:48Speaker 06

  Yeah, that's right. I think there is a lot of danger here. Without knowing the specifics of what's going to be said, we're going to find out during opening arguments. What we've got is an offshore exchange that is doing something that would be illegal in the United States. You can't run both your own trading firm and your own exchange. Like, that's an obvious conflict of interest.

• 45:08David Pierce?

  Right, we have laws about that, yeah.

• 45:10Speaker 06

  It turns out, yeah. So, and it's in the Bahamas, so. And, you know, as we ran through the charges, I think it's worth thinking about what kind of evidence it takes to prove each one of these charges. Like, there's the boring part where you show the wire transfer happened, like, that's gonna happen.

• 45:24David Pierce?

  Sure.

• 45:25Speaker 06

  There's like, some chain of custody stuff about like, text messages, also boring, but that has to go in the record. But then, it's like, you have to demonstrate what was actually said by Sam Bankman-Fried, and what Sam Bankman-Fried knew. And those might be two entirely different things. And so you think about, like, okay, what kinds of text messages were there? What was going on in Slack? What conversations were happening? We know that there are a couple of his co-conspirators who pled guilty and are cooperating will most likely testify, including his ex-girlfriend, Carolyn Ellison, who was one of the CEOs of Alameda Research, you know?

• 45:59David Pierce?

  Who was in a position to know everything about what happened here.

• 46:02Speaker 06

  Exactly. And there is a recording of her contemporaneously explaining what happened. Like, you can say, you can make an argument, maybe, to try to take her down, oh, well, you know, she's trying to pin it all on Sam because she wants an easier sentence. But like, if you have that contemporaneous evidence of her explaining what happened, that's a much harder thing to make. You can't make it stick if she said it before she thought she was gonna get caught, you know? So, there's a lot of stuff that is going on that I think we could potentially hear about. But one of the things that I want everybody to sort of remember, because there are so many moving parts in this case that it's easy to get lost, is that right before Sam Bankman-Fried was arrested in the Bahamas, he was going to testify before Congress.

• 46:45Speaker 06

  And we had his prepared testimony, which included a group chat of crypto exchanges, where he was being, you know, sort of scolded by CZ. And I I wonder, one, if we're going to see more of those exchanges, especially brought in by the defense. And two, what they will say, because you know, this is the sort of thing where like, I don't think it's unusual for crypto exchanges to have conversations with each other. I'm sure that happens all the time.

• 47:17David Pierce?

  Sure.

• 47:17Speaker 06

  If only because, you know, everybody's trying to be like, okay, so what's the SEC going to do next? But like, I am interested in, you know, what kinds of evidence might be brought forward potentially, either to try to get the not guilty verdict or to try to get Sam a lighter sentence. Because you have to keep in mind, the defense is doing about three things at once. First and foremost, they want him not guilty.

• 47:40David Pierce?

  Sure.

• 47:41Speaker 06

  But should that fail? They, second, want to make sure that sentencing is relatively light. And third, want grounds for appeals. So that means there's a bunch of evidence that they're going to be stuffing the record with that may not necessarily be directly relevant to the verdict itself, but might, for instance, be helpful for those other two goals.

• 47:59David Pierce?

  Okay. And it seems like if you're his defense, the only two moves I can think of are you either have to make the case that he didn't know what was going on. Like you said, that being an idiot is not illegal. And so they either have to make the, he's just sort of a dumb figurehead case, or make the, everybody in crypto is a con man, Sam's not worse than everybody else case. Is there a, is there a third version of the defense that you've heard about?

• 48:27Speaker 06

  Yeah. So one of the things that, that's sort of a joke in white collar crime is either you're too small to be responsible or you're too big to be responsible.

• 48:36David Pierce?

  Yeah, there you go. I like that.

• 48:37Speaker 06

  You're too far down the food chain to be responsible for the crime, or you're so high up the food chain, you had no idea it happened.

• 48:43David Pierce?

  Right. He's like, I'm hobnobbing with Democratic hopefuls. Who, how could I possibly have known what was going on?

• 48:48Speaker 06

  That's right.

• 48:49David Pierce?

  Yeah.

• 48:49Speaker 06

  So I expect that we're going to get the, he was, he was too far up the food chain to know the specifics of what happened. But I also think that based on the reporting I've seen, there's going to be an advice of counsel defense. He's basically going to say that his, he's going to throw his lawyers under the bus. He's going to say, the lawyers told me that this was the best way to do things, so I did it their way. I don't know how much water that's going to hold. I'm very curious about what kind of evidence you might present in order to make that defense, particularly because there seems to be a lot, just like a mountain of evidence here in terms of like chats and recordings and press, you know, moments in the press, all of these things. Just a, just a mountain of stuff that he said.

• 49:32Speaker 06

  So I'm very curious about what could possibly be brought forward in order to, to show that he was acting at the advice of counsel, that he was doing what his lawyers told him to do and it wasn't his fault.

• 49:43David Pierce?

  Just from a trial perspective itself, how do you think this is going to compare to say, the Elizabeth Holmes trial, which you also covered very closely? That one was just like a nonstop spectacle, right? There were people cosplaying as Elizabeth Holmes outside of the courthouse. Do you think this one's going to be sort of a show in the same way?

• 50:02Speaker 06

  I honestly have no idea. I think there are going to be a lot of people from the crypto industry who are going to pop by to watch. I've certainly spoken with people who've expressed an interest in doing so, just out of curiosity, in the same way that like, you know, I think a lot of us are very curious about this. Certainly I am curious, that's why I'm going. One of the things that I'm interested in is, you know, with a lot of the sort of like crypto bankruptcy proceedings, there are investors who show up. And so I'm curious if we're going to see people who are FTX customers, who are going to show up to see what happens. And, you know, the other thing that's like worth keeping in mind here is we've been talking about the sort of boring financial side of all of this, but there is this salacious human element that I am now going to talk about, because I think that's one of the things that people are really interested in.

• 50:46Speaker 06

  You know, questions about recreational drug use. A lot of the people within FTX were dating each other. I mean, Carolyn Ellison is Sam Bankman-Fried's ex-girlfriend, you know? And like, someone who is likely to testify and who has already pled guilty is his childhood friend from math camp. Like, there's some operatic stuff going on. So I think that there's like, I don't know if we're going to see necessarily people showing up dressed as Sam Bankman-Fried or in FTX gear, although we might, who knows? But I do think that there is a very, very high likelihood of Like real fireworks, because if you think about like, David, you've worked at a startup too. If you think about what people are like when they're, you're working at startups, like especially because you're working these long hours and everybody's in their twenties and like you don't know what you're doing.

• 51:30David Pierce?

  Yep.

• 51:30Speaker 06

  It's just, just the case. There are shenanigans and these are shenanigans that are now going to be in the courtroom. And so like, you can imagine in an attempt to discredit a witness, you might bring up some dumb stuff they did in the office.

• 51:42David Pierce?

  Yeah. Or in an effort to discredit the defendant, you might bring up a lot of their own personal shenanigans. And I do, I think you're right that there were a lot, there are a lot of shenanigans we know about because especially like since the man went on house arrest, he has, he had the most public house arrest of all time and just happily told anyone who asked about all the shenanigans going on, going on at FTX. And yeah, I have a feeling there is a lot more to come. How long is this trial supposed to be?

• 52:10Speaker 06

  It's scheduled for about five weeks. It may run a little longer, a little shorter, but I, I will be in New York City for all of October and the first couple of weeks in November. I'm actually turning 40 well in there.

• 52:19David Pierce?

  Ah, happy almost birthday. Very, it's, tell Sam that he hosts you.

• 52:24Speaker 06

  This is how I'm celebrating.

• 52:25David Pierce?

  Yeah, it's, it's, it feels very fitting for you as actually it's how to celebrate your birthday. This feels right.

• 52:31Speaker 06

  But yeah, I, you know, I think that there's, there's a lot to come and I, I really can't wait to find out what kind of evidence I'm going to see because, you know, there's a lot of stuff that as a reporter, I just love being in other people's business. I'm a huge gossip. Like that's just the truth of the matter. Like I was that before I was a reporter. I grew up in a small town. Gossip was a contact sport. Like this is like a game I love. And the government can get ahold of so much more juicy info than I can. Like I would love to see the due diligence that Sequoia did. Like I would love it. I never get to see that stuff. So this is the kind of thing that I'm really hyped for.

• 53:07David Pierce?

  It is a really underrated thing. I had this experience being in the courtroom for USV Google for a couple of the sort of bigger named people, the people who A, never meet with reporters most of the time. Sam Bankman-Fried is sort of unusual in that he loved talking to reporters, but most of the time these people either never tell the truth or never meet with reporters in general. But just watching them sit there and they're, it's like, oh, they have to tell the truth now and they have to say it out loud and I get to just sit here and listen to it. It's the best.

• 53:36Speaker 06

  It rules.

• 53:36David Pierce?

  Sometimes it's very boring and procedural and it takes a long time, but eventually they have to answer the question and it's kind of great.

• 53:44David Pierce?

  All right. Well, we're gonna check in a bunch over the course of this trial. Like you said, it's, it's long. I suspect if I had to guess, I would say it's gonna kind of ebb and flow. There's gonna be a lot of really wonky talk about how money moves around, but then we're gonna get a lot of shenanigans. And we're gonna check in on both of those things.

• 54:00Speaker 06

  I'll tell you what, David, because I, I don't know how many of our listeners are aware of like the sort of the reporting that goes on, but because there's a limited amount of people that just a limited physical number of bodies that can fit in that courtroom. I'm usually like for something like this, I'm gonna be standing outside at like an unholy hour in the morning. And so if there are shenanigans, I have some time where I'm doing nothing, standing on the streets of New York City. And so yes, I will be calling in. You'll get to hear the cell phone report.

• 54:27David Pierce?

  This is what I like to hear. All right. Thanks, Liz. We'll talk to you guys soon.

• 54:30Speaker 06

  All right. Bye, David.

• 54:32David Pierce?

  All right. We gotta take one more break and then we're gonna get to the Vergecast hotline. We'll be right back.

• 54:42Speaker 01

  This episode is brought to you by Michelob Ultra. Good times mean competitions between you and your friends, like seeing who can throw some pigskin the farthest or rush the field the fastest. Winner gets an ultra. Because it's not just a superior light beer, it's also giving fans superior access to their favorite sporting events. Superior is worth playing for. Visit michelobultra.com/superioraccess to enter. Enjoy responsibly. Copyright 2026 Anheuser Busch InBev Michelob Ultra Beer, St. Louis, Missouri.

• 55:10Speaker 02

  Blowing ad budget on metrics that look great till the CFO sees them? That's bull spend. And marketers are calling it out. In. Dashboard. Confessions.

• 55:20Speaker 03

  I remember telling my boss, it'll be good for the brand when leads were slow. Yeah, it, it wasn't.

• 55:27Speaker 02

  Cut the bull spend. LinkedIn lets you target by company, job title, and more. Advertise on LinkedIn. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a $250 credit. Go to linkedin.com/campaign. Terms and conditions apply.

• 55:46David Pierce?

  Welcome back. Let's answer a question from the Vergecast hotline, as we do on this show every week. As a reminder, the hotline number is 866-VERGE11. Call and ask us all of your best tech questions. No question too big, no question too weird. The weirder the better, if I'm being honest with you. We've gotten some amazing questions recently. Thank you for all of your most bonkers thoughts about all things technology. Oh, and if you don't want to call or can't, you can always email us, [email protected]. That works just as well. Today's question comes from Zach.

• 56:18Speaker 07

  Hi, this is Zach. I'm in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. My daughter is a voracious reader, very proud dad. That also means she just goes through tons of library books. Basically, anytime we go to a bookstore, she's picking up something. I kind of don't know where to go as far as a electronic reader. This feels like a really natural holiday gift, but do I just go for the iPad because it's got the most access to apps? Especially things like Hoopla, things that work with the local library system. I don't want to really get super locked into an ecosystem. But on the other hand, like if you go with the e-ink, it's not going to use for anything else. It's just going to be for reading, but then it doesn't have access to those library apps. And we're kind of back to square one, spending

• 57:02Speaker 07

  you know, $10 to $15 for every single book, especially books you will read once. I don't know what the correct answer is. So light up the CRAN signal and get me the best information you've got. Thanks. Bye.

• 57:16David Pierce?

  Ask and you shall receive. We lit up the CRAN signal. Alex Cranz is here. Hi, Alex.

• 57:20Alex Cranz?

  Hi. Oh, my God. This is a great question.

• 57:23David Pierce?

  Right? There are so many layers to this question in ways that I find so very interesting. So let me just try and like lay the land for you here and see if you think about this the way that I do.

• 57:34Alex Cranz?

  Okay.

• 57:34David Pierce?

  There's like a hardware and a software question here. I think we can immediately rule out buying a Kindle.

• 57:39Alex Cranz?

  Yes.

• 57:40David Pierce?

  Because we don't want to be tethered to one ecosystem, right? Fair?

• 57:44Alex Cranz?

  Yeah.

• 57:45David Pierce?

  Good on that. Okay. So I think we're basically in one of three places now. We can either tell our buddies Zach to buy an iPad. We can tell our friends Zach to buy A different e-ink ebook reader, which is I know you're gonna have several thoughts about certain brands that may or may not exist in America, but are possible to find. Or you can buy a different Android tablet. Those seem like the three categories. Am I missing anything?

• 58:08Alex Cranz?

  I think that's exactly right.

• 58:10David Pierce?

  Okay.

• 58:10Alex Cranz?

  Because the Kindle, Kindle can work with some libraries, but it only works with Libby and and Overdrive, and that's not like the only library ecosystem out there.

• 58:20David Pierce?

  And it's also kind of wacky and complicated. And yeah, they just haven't done a good job of that.

• 58:24Alex Cranz?

  For kids, like, it's very involved. And Kobo has kind of built itself as like, oh, you can use it for your library books and all these other kinds of reading. Like, I think it's got Pocket built in, or it used to. It's also not really great, because again, it's really limited to Overdrive. And otherwise, you're gonna be like, teaching your daughter how to sideload stuff. And that is a great skill she should have. Like, I highly encourage you doing that. I don't know if this is the time you want to do that.

• 58:52David Pierce?

  Yeah.

• 58:52Alex Cranz?

  So I don't want to get into your parenting, like.

• 58:54David Pierce?

  You teach your kids to sideload whenever feels right to you.

• 58:57Alex Cranz?

  Yeah, that's a very personal moment for you and your daughter. So yeah, it really is like, okay, do you want to go iPad? And, you know, it's more likely to, she can crack it and break it and make it more difficult to use, a lot easier than a lot of other devices. But it is very, very flexible, but also like, you could catch her playing Roblox on it, or watching YouTube. Like, there's a lot of things that could happen there. Or you can go with something like, probably the best brand, and I've mentioned it a bunch of times on the show, and David already knows what I'm gonna say, which is Books.

• 59:27David Pierce?

  B-O-O-X, we should say.

• 59:28Alex Cranz?

  Yeah, B-O-O-X. And they're probably the best at like Android e-ink tablets. I'm a little hesitant to say go that route, just because she is a child, and like, it can be a little complicated. And so you will probably still have to teach her the sideloading situation, but also a whole bunch of other. Things and like if you want your daughter to be really, really understanding of how technology works, the books is the best way to go. If you don't want to also be participating in that educational activity, the iPad or like an Android tablets, like a traditional Android tablet feels right.

• 1:00:04David Pierce?

  Yeah, my, my heart wants books to be the answer. Because in theory, that combination of it's almost exclusively a reading device, but I also need all the other apps because there are lots of places you read, not just in the one ebook system.

• 1:00:18Alex Cranz?

  Right.

• 1:00:19David Pierce?

  Like, yes, what an incredibly common use case that no one has fixed. I want books to be the answer, but I do agree. I think for most people, the books version of Android is just like somewhere between one and five ticks too complicated to really work.

• 1:00:36Alex Cranz?

  I'm using like the most recent color one and it's got the most recent software on it. Night and day difference.

• 1:00:42David Pierce?

  Really?

• 1:00:42Alex Cranz?

  Onboarding versus, yeah, like the Google Play Store is built in now. So you can just start using the Google Play Store. Whereas before you had, you would have had to teach your daughter about patience and, and waiting for 24 hours for Google to register the device after you register it. Now you can just start using it. So it has improved a lot and, and there's some pretty affordable ones. There, you know, there's, there's some, I think like the Poki 3 is like $150 maybe. It's, it's a little more affordable. I definitely would look into it and have a serious conversation with yourself on how much you are willing to troubleshoot things. Cause I think it's still going to require it. Even with a software update, there's still going to be more handholding than with an iPad.

• 1:01:26Alex Cranz?

  But it's probably going to get you closer to that experience you're looking for. So yeah, it just depends on like, how often do you want to have to answer tech questions for your daughter?

• 1:01:35David Pierce?

  Fair. Can I throw one wrench in here that I am not a hundred percent sure I think is a good idea, but I think might be a good idea, which is one of Amazon's tablets. My hesitation with all tablets, whether they run Android or iOS, is that they have all the apps, that's true. But buying stuff on those devices is a gigantic pain in the ass. Because of the way that Google and Apple run those platforms, you can't buy Kindle books in the Kindle app. You know where you can buy Kindle books in the Kindle app? And buy other things in other apps is on the Fire tablets. And those tablets aren't like amazing hardware, but like the Fire HD plus 8 inch has a decent screen. It's pretty rough and tumble. You're not really going to break it if you beat it up.

• 1:02:19David Pierce?

  They make a kids' version that's even more rugged. And it's $70. Like, I cannot explain enough how much more expensive every other tablet is. This one is not a great tablet. But if truly all you want is a reading device, this feels like it might be enough.

• 1:02:35Alex Cranz?

  It might be. I think you'd have to double check on what apps will work with it. Because it's still like Amazon's thing and they want you to buy their books. They don't want to, like, they might make it difficult. I don't know the state of like the Libby app on a Fire tablet or the Hoopla or whatever. So you probably would need to do just a touch of research there because I haven't used one in a little bit.

• 1:02:57David Pierce?

  It's definitely significantly more open than the Kindle, but significantly less open than like full Android. You're still getting Amazon spin on Android. That's definitely true.

• 1:03:05Alex Cranz?

  Yeah, but if it's got the apps, it's probably like the most affordable and like easiest to use of it. It just requires like quadruple checking that the app is available for it. Also, it's like 100 bucks and easy to return. So if you get it and it doesn't work, return it. Buy books, buy an iPad and you'll be happy.

• 1:03:25David Pierce?

  Yeah, I will say, I think we're probably aligned on this one that like, if money is no object and you're not worried about like breaking the thing, the iPad Mini is the correct answer, right? It is like objectively the best device of all these devices.

• 1:03:37Alex Cranz?

  Yeah, I try to switch between my e-reader and my iPad Mini a lot. And I oftentimes will find like my iPad Mini just does more stuff. So I use it more. But I love having my e-reader. I love being able to read it outside. I love it for just focus. And I think for a kid, it's probably that might actually be a good thing in some cases, right? Like, they got to focus on the reading and not just go off on a tear being like, I wonder. Like when you read a chapter in a book and you're like, oh, that's interesting. And you immediately go Google it on your iPad. That's easy on your, on your e-reader. You have to wait and do it later. And that's kind of nice because then you just keep reading.

• 1:04:13David Pierce?

  Right, yeah, it's either a feature or a bug, depending on how you look at it. And I think that has a lot to do with it. So I think we're aligned on that. I would say if you're feeling ambitious, Zach, buy a books device. See how it feels. My sense would be it will immediately be obvious to you if it's more and more work than you want. Right? Like you're going to take the thing out of the box, turn it on and immediately just be like, nope. Or you're going to be like, oh, this solves all my problems. Right? That's, that seems, it will not be unclear, I wouldn't think.

• 1:04:42Alex Cranz?

  Yeah, it will not be unclear. You're going to know really, really quickly. And generally speaking, the new, the new operating system, the new version they've rolled out has been really, really good. They're very good about like getting the latest version of Android on things. You just can't use 70% of Android because it's not meant for a black, like, e-caplet. So like you can watch YouTube, but it don't.

• 1:05:03David Pierce?

  If you, yeah, it's a specific kind of torture trying to watch YouTube on a device like that. So my other question for you is where do you buy your eBooks? I realized in prepping for this that I accidentally just became sort of Amazon exclusive. Like a million years ago, I loved the Kindle and had a bunch of Kindle books. And now that's where all my books are. So I have kept buying Kindle books and like, am I here to tell you that the Caliber app exists and does a really good job of stripping DRM from your Kindle books? So that you can use them on other devices? No, that's not what I'm here to tell you. It's true and the app is free and open source and it strips DRM from all your eBooks. So you can use them on other devices, but that's not the point. My question for you is where do you get your eBooks if not from Amazon?

• 1:05:43Alex Cranz?

  I originally started with Nook and then I found Caliber and, and made the switch to Amazon and took my whole Nook library with me, which is really, really nice. And then I was at Amazon for a while and then I was like, I feel weird being in this one ecosystem. So I switched back to Nook and brought all my books back via Caliber. And so now I'm usually like, I tend to go Nook, but I've got a couple of like, there's ebooks.com. There's a couple of other ones and I'll kind of look around because sometimes the stories, the selection is different. And honestly, Amazon has a ton of books. It's gotten so big with self-publishing that a lot of like self-published books, somebody will say, oh, you got to read this. It's really good. It's only available on Amazon, which is super frustrating. And also sometimes I'll just buy it directly from the publisher

• 1:06:28Alex Cranz?

  and the author gets more money that way. So that's if you really are supporting an author, buying it directly from their publisher, if available, best way to buy the books.

• 1:06:38David Pierce?

  Yeah. And you can usually, if you know what you want to buy, if you just Google the title and ebook, you can pretty quickly find that publisher website usually and get the book that way. That's a good trick. What I wish existed, like bookshop.org, which is this amazing website for buying physical books from like actual bookstores that are better citizens of the publishing world than your Amazons. I love that website and I wish something like it existed for ebooks. It feels like ebooks.com is like kind of that, but not quite.

• 1:07:06Alex Cranz?

  Ebooks.com is kind of doing that. Libro.fm does that, but it's almost exclusively audiobooks. I spend like $15 a month there and it gives me one book credit and that's nice. And I know I'm supporting an author and I'm supporting my local bookstore. Like, feels great. You can also find your local bookstores. A lot of them actually will have partnerships with booksellers online and be like, oh yeah, you can go here and buy any ebook from us at this. They often will have garbage websites, but if you want to support your local bookstore, that's the way to do it. It just unfortunately requires more work than logging into Amazon.

• 1:07:42David Pierce?

  The only thing I would add to your list of websites, which is, which is very good, and I just am going to go sign up for Libro.fm right now, is there's this website called BookBub, B-O-O-K-B-U-B.com. And its whole thing is just spectacular deals on ebooks from around the internet. And so it's like, not a place to go if you're like, I want to read this specific brand new book. But if you're just like, I like spy novels, let me know when I can get a spy novel for $1.99 as an ebook. They send emails and it has become my like most quickly clicked email every week because it's just non-stop ebook deals. And it's great. And I use it all the time. So highly recommend.

• 1:08:19Alex Cranz?

  I'm doing that as soon as we're done with this podcast.

• 1:08:22David Pierce?

  I think we've helped, right? This feels, Zach, let us know what you end up doing. I think your instincts are good. And if you buy a book and you love it, it will warm Alex's heart. So let us know.

• 1:08:32Alex Cranz?

  It will, it will.

• 1:08:33David Pierce?

  Alex, thank you. Appreciate it as always.

• 1:08:35Alex Cranz?

  Always.

• 1:08:40David Pierce?

  All right, that's it for The Vergecast today. Thanks to everybody who came on the show today and thank you as always for listening. As ever, there is lots more from everything we talked about at theverge.com. We're covering all of these trials pretty closely, so we'll put some links in the show notes, but also we're posting all over theverge.com as everything happens. So keep an eye on the website. Also, if you have thoughts, questions, feelings, or tips on how to improve my handwriting, because I'm not allowed to have electronics in the courtroom, you can always email us at [email protected] or keep calling the hotline 866-VERGE11. We love hearing from you. Send us all your thoughts and questions and ideas for what we should do on the show. We do at least one hotline question every week, so please keep them coming. This show is produced by Andrew Marino and Liam James. Brooke Minters is our editorial director of audio.

• 1:09:22David Pierce?

  Vergecast is Verge Production and part of the Vox Media Podcast Network. Neelai, Alex and I will be back on Friday to talk about the Pixel event, the Sphere in Vegas, the sad fate of the $17,000 Apple Watch, and all of the rest of this week's tech news. We'll see you then. Rock and roll.

• 1:09:48Speaker 09

  Your heart can tell you a lot about your health. Apple Watch Series 12 measures your heart rate every five seconds with the most accurate heart rate sensing in a wearable. So your vitals app, now with heart rate variability, can tell you when something is off. And your readiness score can let you know when to rest and when to push. Hear the story in every heartbeat with Apple Watch Series 12. The features described are for wellness purposes only and not for medical use. iPhone 11 or later required. Based on Apple conducted study of heart rate accuracy, August 2026. Visit apple.com slash apple watch series 12.

• 1:10:17Speaker 10

  Fall savings are happening now at The Home Depot. Save up to $500 on select appliances. Plus, enjoy free delivery when you spend $998 or more. From prepping to cooking to cleaning up, Frigidaire has you covered. The custom Flex Temp drawer switches from fridge to freezer. With more than 15 cooking modes, including stone baked pizza mode, you can enjoy restaurant quality pizza in as little as two minutes. Then clean up with the Frigidaire dishwasher, featuring the industry's fastest normal wash cycle. Shop fall savings now at The Home Depot. Off the valve through October 21st, US only. See store online for details.