3 ms·

> I think it is something more in between. Yes. One which addresses the unique aspects of the technology, adds consumer and investor protections, and acknowled

> I think it is something more in between. Yes. One which addresses the unique aspects of the technology, adds consumer and investor protections, and acknowledges the liquidity benefits of an inevitable secondary market which no gatekeeper can prevent. > One financial sandbox alternative is to enable capped ICOs to offer securities for real startups. And not this.

wslh 9y ago
> And not this. Why not?
- ringaroundthetx 9y ago
  securities for real startups most likely means equities in real startups, which comes with the illiquidity burden that people just don't want. a totally roundabout way of using tokenized assets at all
  - charlesdm 9y ago
    Not if they are tradable and (semi) liquid? Isn't that the whole point, to raise capital through an ICO + eventually make said tokens (representing equity) tradable from the start, so you have liquidity?
    - omarchowdhury 9y ago
      Yeah, I don't understand why he's contradicting himself.
      - ringaroundthetx 9y ago
        Do you two understand securities laws? So properly registered startup securities cannot be traded on properly registered securities exchanges. If they are not properly registered and only sold to accredited investors, then they can only trade OTC to accredited investors. The costs of registering to trade on properly registered securities exchanges are too high for startups. The ongoing costs of transparency for publicly traded securities are too high for startups. Registered broker-dealers that are able to trade properly registered tokenized assets do not currently exist, even if a tokenized offering were to properly register as a publicly tradable security. Currently, people are avoiding all of this and get tradable assets with near-zero compliance costs. The rebuttal isn't "just register", it is "just register at a very high cost and lose all the benefits you already enjoyed at a lower cost and lose every possible service provider for the foreseeable future"
        omarchowdhury 9y ago
        Yes, I understand securities law. There will be proper avenues to trade tokenized securities within the next 12 to 24 months. There is atleast one high profile crypto exchange in the U.S. working on this that I've learned from an inside source. Your argument is essentially that the infrastructure hasn't caught up yet. It would be naive to think that it won't, especially if tokenized securities are going to be a massive market.
        ringaroundthetx 9y ago
        Right, that is a possibility. Overstock is also working on it. But even going that perspective is going to coincide with scalability and UI improvements which make decentralized exchanges better. These structures will have no entity to register as a broker-dealer and are incapable of distinguishing between any smart-contract's legal status

wslh 9y ago

> And not this. Why not?

ringaroundthetx 9y ago
securities for real startups most likely means equities in real startups, which comes with the illiquidity burden that people just don't want. a totally roundabout way of using tokenized assets at all
- charlesdm 9y ago
  Not if they are tradable and (semi) liquid? Isn't that the whole point, to raise capital through an ICO + eventually make said tokens (representing equity) tradable from the start, so you have liquidity?
  - omarchowdhury 9y ago
    Yeah, I don't understand why he's contradicting himself.
    - ringaroundthetx 9y ago
      Do you two understand securities laws? So properly registered startup securities cannot be traded on properly registered securities exchanges. If they are not properly registered and only sold to accredited investors, then they can only trade OTC to accredited investors. The costs of registering to trade on properly registered securities exchanges are too high for startups. The ongoing costs of transparency for publicly traded securities are too high for startups. Registered broker-dealers that are able to trade properly registered tokenized assets do not currently exist, even if a tokenized offering were to properly register as a publicly tradable security. Currently, people are avoiding all of this and get tradable assets with near-zero compliance costs. The rebuttal isn't "just register", it is "just register at a very high cost and lose all the benefits you already enjoyed at a lower cost and lose every possible service provider for the foreseeable future"
      - omarchowdhury 9y ago
        Yes, I understand securities law. There will be proper avenues to trade tokenized securities within the next 12 to 24 months. There is atleast one high profile crypto exchange in the U.S. working on this that I've learned from an inside source. Your argument is essentially that the infrastructure hasn't caught up yet. It would be naive to think that it won't, especially if tokenized securities are going to be a massive market.
        ringaroundthetx 9y ago
        Right, that is a possibility. Overstock is also working on it. But even going that perspective is going to coincide with scalability and UI improvements which make decentralized exchanges better. These structures will have no entity to register as a broker-dealer and are incapable of distinguishing between any smart-contract's legal status