Re:SEC Shuts Down Munchee ICO
by tptacek on Tuesday December 12, 2017 @01:04PM
(#15907847)
Which is it? Is it that these tokens aren't really investments, but rather utility instruments people are buying to obtain restaurant reviews? Or is it that it's so unfair that the SEC requires these kinds of companies to register before selling to the public like everyone else? It looks to me like your argument is oscillating a bit.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Well, the exciting part might be that the line between investment and utility instrument is blurring. It seems to me that these two categories needn't be separated by a bright-line.
A particular instrument might blur the lines in terms of how it's packaged and promoted, but the underlying activities aren't blurry at all. People who acquire an asset in the hopes that its price will rise so they can resell it on a secondary market are speculating ("investing"), full stop.
Obviously, this isn't the first time we've had offerings ostensibly taking these forms. People used to buy comic books in the hopes of their appreciation. Ty sold Beanie Babies to people who were stockpiling them for eBay.
The reason Ty didn't get in trouble, but Munchee did, was that Ty was never stupid enough to record videos extolling the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity people had to 9x their investment in restaurant review coupons. Again: a very significant component of the SEC's concern is about marketing and promotion.
Are you arguing that beanie babies and comic books are securities? How about bars of gold?
They are certainly speculation. But I doubt the SEC would ever claim that literal bars of gold (not notes, physical bars of gold) are securities.