Read on Twitter
1/ I shared some thoughts with @nikhileshde on XRP delisting.
I believe XRP is a security & that Ripple's years of dumping on brainwashed retail investors is way overdue to be stopped. But the SEC's approach is pain-maximizing to XRP holders, who are exchange *customers*.... https://twitter.com/CoinDesk/status/1342131366490759170
I believe XRP is a security & that Ripple's years of dumping on brainwashed retail investors is way overdue to be stopped. But the SEC's approach is pain-maximizing to XRP holders, who are exchange *customers*.... https://twitter.com/CoinDesk/status/1342131366490759170
2/ The best customer experience would have been to listen to more conservative securities lawyers (& technologists who flagged XRP is trash) and never list XRP in the first place. We shouldn't easily forgive that mistake, to be clear.
3/ Second best to that though, you want to understand what's happening and not decide rashly. Unlike some previous settlements, the SEC's complaint does not seek to make Ripple comply with the Exchange Act re: XRP (i.e., it does not seek to make Ripple become an SEC-reporting co)
4/ Instead, it seeks to have Ripple & its principals "disgorge all ill-gotten gains" and be enjoined from "delivering XRP to any persons..."
5/ B/c XRP is indeed centralized, this would doom XRP from a value perspective. B/c there is no cryptonative validation incentive, it seems unlikely the chain itself would continue for long if Ripple was no longer able to support it by e.g. distributing XRP to commercial partners
6/ A legitimate question--assuming XRP is held to be a security, will a federal court approve such a 'nuclear option' for XRP, thus destroying all accumulated value, or will it instead order the more natural remedy, that Ripple become an SEC-reporting company?
7/ We don't know. And the SEC's caginess on exactly what theories it is asserting--is XRP a security today, all the time, or only when Ripple sells it?--doesn't help exchanges make informed decisions.
8/ If there is a path forward for XRP to not be utterly destroyed and its investors wrecked, well if you're Coinbase you don't want to be the one that wrecks your customers (and maybe yourself) prematurely by delisting XRP based on allegations that could take years to play out.
9/ The SEC is also known for coming out guns blazing then essentially settling for precedential value with a slap on the wrist (see Kik/KIN). Coinbase could look pretty silly for delisting if, a year from now, the SEC wins, but their victory is similarly (inexplicably) Pyrrhic.
10/ There is plenty of blame to go around:
*greeedy lawyers in 2015-2017 with absurd securities law theories
*greedy exchanges listing shit assets for sale to the public
*Ripple & other snakeoil centralized token issuers profiting from idiots
*SEC being gun-shy & cagey for YEARS
*greeedy lawyers in 2015-2017 with absurd securities law theories
*greedy exchanges listing shit assets for sale to the public
*Ripple & other snakeoil centralized token issuers profiting from idiots
*SEC being gun-shy & cagey for YEARS
11/
as @collins_belton was quick to point out, people have been pointing to XRP's Coinbase listing as proof that XRP is not a security
no, enforcement can take YEARS--hire your own lawyer and make your own *independent* assessment; the "crypto rating council" is a joke
as @collins_belton was quick to point out, people have been pointing to XRP's Coinbase listing as proof that XRP is not a security
no, enforcement can take YEARS--hire your own lawyer and make your own *independent* assessment; the "crypto rating council" is a joke
12/ the newest iteration of that is "oh a16z invests in that company, that company did x, y or z, a16z has an army of lawyers and D.C. connections, so it must be legal"
ummm, no. stahp. just stahp. listen to your lawyer and don't assume a16z has it all wired
ummm, no. stahp. just stahp. listen to your lawyer and don't assume a16z has it all wired
