That CEO must have a lot on his hands operating three companies, with all a shitty core business, shitty bookkeeping, and shitty cashflow, he is looking to boost everything (and more so himself) by initiating an ICO. It has a very bad smell to it, and I actually like the SEC stepping in. I however wish the SEC did that too on other non-crypto related occasions. In most cases the SEC is too late when it comes to preventing scams and ponzi schemes from harming innocent investors, which has resulted in them to lose a lot credibility. If they actually put an equal amount of effort into busting non-crypto schemes, they will then finally do what they are supposed to do.
Exactly, I think what the article fails to highlight properly (probably deliberately or we don't have a sensational news piece) is that they are being suspended not because of their crypto affiliation but simply because they're just terribly run businesses. It's evidence that if all the ICOs we've seen "gracing" our hallowed forum halls were to go through even a sampling of the due diligence normal IPOs need, I'm sure the vast majority wouldn't survive those rigours.
I'm all for regulations, to be honest, because the solid projects need not worry. I'd very much like to see a lot of these half-assed money-raking ventures slapping on crypto and blockchain labels go to jail. But you're right, if they applied the same suspicion to non-crypto companies, they'd net a lot more criminals.
