Author

Topic: Some nuances of the SEC ICO statement (Read 327 times)

member
Activity: 118
Merit: 10
July 25, 2017, 10:14:27 PM
#4
this looks bearish

ico craze stopped
member
Activity: 83
Merit: 10
July 25, 2017, 09:38:49 PM
#3
Bullish. Scam ICOs and pseudo securities were never going to drive Ethereum.

What drives Ethereum is current demand and Future expected value. Recognising it as a viable token platform and initiatives like coinlist will accelerate acceptance and legitimacy, much as the EEA has done.

Tokens will fall into four main groups

Scams - promise you profits
Securities - promise you profit share, centralised
API keys
Scarce digital assets e.g. Rarepepes

Mines coins will be a separate commodity
sr. member
Activity: 370
Merit: 251
July 25, 2017, 09:11:20 PM
#2
As a hedge fund manger and recent token architect I wrote up some of my thoughts on the SEC statement that the DAO was likely a security here:

https://medium.com/ananas-blog/sec-on-icos-securities-are-securities-but-928d9862389f

The coinbase white paper on the topic includes an excellent spreadsheet to help construct tokens, but as a general rule anything that promises a profit is a scam, a share of profits is probably a security.

So do you see this as bearish or bullish?

Overall, feels bearish, but the no penalty for previous wrong doing feels bullish. It puts a damper on runaway ICOs, which was an unsolvable problem for ETH...
member
Activity: 83
Merit: 10
July 25, 2017, 06:00:30 PM
#1
As a hedge fund manger and recent token architect I wrote up some of my thoughts on the SEC statement that the DAO was likely a security here:

https://medium.com/ananas-blog/sec-on-icos-securities-are-securities-but-928d9862389f

The coinbase white paper on the topic includes an excellent spreadsheet to help construct tokens, but as a general rule anything that promises a profit is a scam, a share of profits is probably a security.
Jump to: