4 ms·
Even if you believe Telegram was competent and well intentioned the SEC's argument here seems clear and reasonable: Grams are securities because the Initial Pu
by femto113 6y ago
Even if you believe Telegram was competent and well intentioned the SEC's argument here seems clear and reasonable:
Grams are securities because the Initial Purchasers and subsequent investors expect to profit from Telegram’s work ... Grams are not a currency because, among other things, there are not any products or services that can be purchased with Grams.
- thesz 6y ago"there are not any products or services that can be purchased with Grams" at the time of writing. And I believe omitting the time variable is the greatest omission in what you quoted.
- true_religion 6y agoNot really. Your security can bootstrap itself into being a currency, but until it does it’s still going to be treated like a security. You can of course negotiate with the SEC, but they would probably require guarantees, and a definite timeline of your plans... not just the promise of success at some indefinite future date.
- djrogers 6y agoThere is no time variable in play here, it’s either a currency at the time that it’s sold, or it’s not. If it’s not a currency at the time that it’s being sold, then it is being sold speculatively – which makes it a security.
- thesz 6y agoIs it possible for something to be sold "speculatively" and not being a security? Also, can profit be measured not only in money? If so, can something that does not exist be bought to be brought to existence and be profitable and not in money? For me, TON is an alternative to something like Libra, as I said elsewhere. It is basically same PBFT as Libra (thus - close to realtime operation) but it does not have many Libra flaws. And I think that is the point the judge missed.
- wmf 6y agoA big difference is that Libra is supposed to have stable value while TON Grams were explicitly designed to appreciate (3x IIRC). Of course, no one is interested in pre-buying a stablecoin years before launch so you can't fund development that way.
- Gudin 6y agoBut how is that different than any other Initial Coin Offering?
- wmf 6y agoAll the other ICOs are also scams.
- vvpan 6y agoThat is a nonsensical statement. ICOs are a way to raise money. There is nothing that inherently deceitful about them. I want to be able to invest into early-stage companies and an ICO is a way.
- dannyw 6y agoIs ethereum a scam? How about MakerDAO?
- juped 6y ago- Yes - Yes
- Polylactic_acid 6y agoEssentially. All of these coins have no real world use and everyone knows it, they just think they will the ones profiting on other idiots who buy it at the end.
- ccktlmazeltov 6y agoActually, I'm really wondering how all these cryptocurrencies are legal. Algorand also started by selling its initial coins, how is that legal?
- wmf 6y agoAlmost no token sales are done legally. Ethereum's token sale wouldn't be legal if it was done today but Ethereum is so large that regulators effectively grandfathered it under the "sufficiently decentralized" doctrine.