Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
by vkou on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @01:31PM
(#18187090)
> a token that is a security and comply with securities laws
Because if you do that, there's no point having an ICO. Just do an IPO - the token is an expensive, pointless distraction from their mission to democratize the world's dogsitters, or whatever they want to do.
Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
by A2017U1 on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @07:03PM
(#18189716)
> Just do an IPO
A token is virtually frictionless and costs nothing to setup or trade globally, dividends can be paid out directly to token owners.
An IPO is an incredibly lengthy, arduous process requiring a small army of lawyers and accountants simply to offer shares to a restricted subset of sophisticated investors in one country.
Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
by hndamien on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @09:12PM
(#18190333)
You are referring to an STO and not an ICO.
Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
by CPLX on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @01:42PM
(#18187195)
Because the only reason for tokens is to create a little confusion that allows people to think they'll be allowed to violate securities laws.
Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
by thinkmassive on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @01:12PM
(#18186887)
They have, see https://coinlist.co/
I’m not sure why a company doesn’t just come out and do an ICO: a) with a token that’s not a security or b) a token that is a security and comply with securities laws.