By now, most of you will have heard that the WSJ has broken the exclusive on the fact that the SEC has subpoenaed 'scores' of ICOs. My sources tell me that there are over 75 to have been subpoenaed and that these are not just the little obvious scam ones but some pretty big whale tokens as well.
Of course, we also warned you here on the pages of Steemit that the word was already on the street that these subpoenas were coming and that the lawyers 'advising' these ICOs would also be in the cross hairs. We had heard from some prominent lawyers down at Satoshi Roundtable that the first wave of subpoenas would target those tokens which were offering pre-sales. Many seem to have not realised that each pre-sale represented another offering to the main offering that was the ICOs public launch - thus they had not just one securities offering, but two or three or four, depending on the number of discounted pre-sale rounds they did.
Jay Clayton, chairman of the SEC appointed by Trump, was quite clear for the past few months that these subpoenas would be coming. His beat is Wall Street and unlike the CFTC chairman, he's less inclined to be favorable to a financing model which displaces Wall St banks.
The question now, is what impact will this have?
It's worth watching our interview with top cryptocurrency lawyer, Marco Santori. We interviewed him in January in Miami and the word on the street (which I have not confirmed at all) was that his firm had been contacted by the SEC for information about ICO clients. He's since left the firm to join Blockchain.info, but in light of ongoing SEC issues, it's interesting to re-watch this discussion about ICOs (from 12.30):
Good to hear that Apple is being back so much cash!! Hopefully the economy does well for a few more years. I don’t think good things will happen to the crypto market if something happens to the stock market any time soon! Thanks for the post!!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The best thing that can happen to the stock market is for the manipulators like goldman and Jamie Dimon to go to jail if Crypto can help disrupt their bottom line then I would be happy to see a flash crash in the stock market.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Nice!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Can't wait to see how this pans out.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I hate to say it but regulation in ICO s is the only way forward if we want big money making its way into crypto.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yeah, I hear ya. Whilst I had to see the feds poking their noses in, well, anything, this is required for cryptos to get to the next level. FOMO-minded noobs are going to throw money at anything, lose it, then dissapear from cryptoland if the space becomes completely overwhelmed with scamcoins and bullshit projects. Let the regs, clear out the obvious scams and hopefully that will scare off many of the scamsters, creating a healthier environment. Plus, of course, these more legitimized environment will permit the institutional to enter which, well, $$$$.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think the SEC will be coming down hard on most crypto's and tbh i am concerned about Steem the most...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Crackdowns to be expected... can't let them shake you!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
SEC only wants to regulate decentralized blockchains, because as Goldman admitted, the technology, which requires no trusted intermediaries, makes banks and other entities which offer financial services and financial institutions, including the SEC, which gets power from regulating them, obsolete. There is a clear conflict of interest, between the SEC and the technologists.
A credit card machine costs at least 700$ in fees, average, plus percentage of the transaction; a blockchain address costs small flat fees, and nothing up front.
Never imagine the SEC wants to actually reduce the number of scams; it wants to protect its vested interests, scare off the silicon valley programmers from eating the wall street pie.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit