2 ms·

That seems to reinforce the grandparents characterization of this as an evasion of the Howey test, not refute it. You really think the technical distinction of

by ajross 3y ago

That seems to reinforce the grandparents characterization of this as an evasion of the Howey test, not refute it. You really think the technical distinction of a unique number defeats the idea of "common enterprise"? Doesn't the fact that all the initial profit goes to one enterprise clearly make it "common"? Conversely, aren't traded shares of common stocks on NYSE merely "speculative flipping" unless they're specifically paying dividends? Meh. I mean, fine, you can make that argument but I don't think this is nearly as clear as you think it is. From my perspective: I mean, duh. Of course these are securities. "Give us money for this thing and you'll get more money later" isn't a hard idea to understand as the spirit behind securities regulation.

Dylan16807 3y ago
> Doesn't the fact that all the initial profit goes to one enterprise clearly make it "common"? Maybe, but you're not tied to the enterprise after the initial purchase. > Conversely, aren't traded shares of common stocks on NYSE merely "speculative flipping" unless they're specifically paying dividends? The value is tied to the company and can be extracted in a multitude of ways, and the company has a duty to the shareholders. The expectation of profit in a stock goes well beyond just dividends. > I mean, duh. Of course these are securities. "Give us money for this thing and you'll get more money later" That depends on where the money comes from. The people selling gold say the exact same thing, and gold is not a security.
- ajross 3y ago
  There absolutely are gold-based securities, though, and most of the "invest in gold" scams are likely subject to securities law. It's true that gold objects themselves haven't been traditionally considered securities, but that's not a blanket statement. Which is to say, again, that it's complicated and there aren't any free hacks to evade regulation if you're trying to scam people with an obviously fraudulent security

by ajross 3y ago

Dylan16807 3y ago

> Doesn't the fact that all the initial profit goes to one enterprise clearly make it "common"? Maybe, but you're not tied to the enterprise after the initial purchase. > Conversely, aren't traded shares of common stocks on NYSE merely "speculative flipping" unless they're specifically paying dividends? The value is tied to the company and can be extracted in a multitude of ways, and the company has a duty to the shareholders. The expectation of profit in a stock goes well beyond just dividends. > I mean, duh. Of course these are securities. "Give us money for this thing and you'll get more money later" That depends on where the money comes from. The people selling gold say the exact same thing, and gold is not a security.

ajross 3y ago
There absolutely are gold-based securities, though, and most of the "invest in gold" scams are likely subject to securities law. It's true that gold objects themselves haven't been traditionally considered securities, but that's not a blanket statement. Which is to say, again, that it's complicated and there aren't any free hacks to evade regulation if you're trying to scam people with an obviously fraudulent security