“But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

Re:“But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments... by jcranmer on Monday June 12, 2023 @08:48PM (#36303596)

And the owners of that accounting software can make the case that they should be allowed to be used in the country. Lots of companies do that, and some are even successful!

So you have to ask yourself... why isn't Coinbase making that argument?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments... by everfree on Monday June 12, 2023 @09:01PM (#36303729)

> So you have to ask yourself... why isn't Coinbase making that argument?

Coinbase has (obviously) always been a strong advocate of distributed ledger technology, is constantly warning of the ramifications of this software being de-facto banned in the US, and has publicly stated that they have contingencies in place for moving offshore if it's economically unviable to be headquartered in and/or serve the US market.

They've been making that argument since 2012.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments... by JumpCrisscross on Tuesday June 13, 2023 @12:49AM (#36305487)

> has publicly stated that they have contingencies in place for moving offshore if it's economically unviable to be headquartered in and/or serve the US market

They should go. Crypto has a niche outside major economies and developed countries with the rule of law.

If you go back to the 1930s, bankers said the same (as they did again in the late 90s). Turns out freewheeling fraud isn’t a determinant for financial centrality. Worst case we can revisit if London or Singapore find a way to make this work, given they’re rapidly approaching being the only major economies who will stomach this nonsense.

[ Parent | on HN ]