Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 343 posts

Re: SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

#21

Post by bilbo0s »

flunhat wrote: post #16

So what happens to Kik now? Funding-wise, I mean. The press release says that: "the company’s management predicted internally that it would run out of money in 2017. In early 2017, the company sought to pivot to a new type of business, which it financed through the sale of one trillion digital tokens." I'm guessing that they spent a decent amount of the money they raised through the ICO. If they have to give it back,…

>If they have to give it back, will they have to take on even more funding from a VC at even worse terms? ...

I think they are far more worried about being referred at this point. Who cares if you have try to pay back ICO investors? As long as you can stay out of prison, any terms are good terms. I suspect a good many people at Kik will be losing property they own, because this will definitely pierce the veil so to speak. But at times like this, only losing personal cash and property is a win in my book.

Re: SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

#23

Post by jki275 »

tadfisher wrote: post #14
seibelj wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet Bitcoin and Ethereum are not considered securities by the SEC. So clearly the same sort of asset is considered a security sometimes but not other times , essentially whenever the SEC decides.

Because Bitcoin and Ethereum are not stand-ins for shares in a particular entity.

Eth and BTc are quite different and Eth is absolutely a security.

Eth meets the Howey test. BTc arguably does not due to its manner of distribution and initiation.

Re: SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

#24

Post by mindcandy »

Note that Kik has expressly stated that they have really wanted this case to go to court for some time now. They strongly believe that the SEC guidance so far has been vague and non-committal to the point of becoming damaging. They believe they have a case that Kin is not a security and that the Howey Test is being mis-applied to many cryptos. By going through with the suit they hope to fast-forward more concrete guidance from the SEC.

https://unchainedpodcast.com/kin-sets-up-5-million-defendcry...

Re: SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

#25

Post by r00fus »

mindcandy wrote: post #24

Note that Kik has expressly stated that they have really wanted this case to go to court for some time now. They strongly believe that the SEC guidance so far has been vague and non-committal to the point of becoming damaging. They believe they have a case that Kin is not a security and that the Howey Test is being mis-applied to many cryptos. By going through with the suit they hope to fast-forward more concrete gui…

Is their intention to set a precedent with a sympathetic court?

I know a lot of other actions around the country are pushing the limits, hoping to get a favorable ruling and establish precedent (see: case vs. ACA being unconstitutional).

Re: SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

#26

Post by pxndxx »

fastball wrote: post #13
sieabahlpark wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is those are the outliers and the majority are scams.

Ethereum is an outlier in the cryptocurrency world? Ethereum is the reason there have been so many ICOs in the past 3 years.

Yes, Ethereum is an outlier in the sense its ICO wasn't a complete scam.

Re: SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

#27

Post by rolltiide »

sieabahlpark wrote: post #8
seibelj wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ethereum also had an ICO (paid in Bitcoin) and it delivered. Cosmos held an ICO and delivered. Not all ICOs are scams.

I think the point is those are the outliers and the majority are scams.

thats not distinct from funding models that you respect, don't you find that at least weird?

Re: SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

#28

Post by ChrisArchitect »

joshstrange wrote: post #22

Are there legitimate uses for Kik past NSFW uses? I only ask because that is the only context in which I've ever seen Kik used. I didn't know if it was popular in other places (not the USA) for SFW purposes.

only ever remember it being big with young kids/teens as a sort of alternative/escape from mainstream messenging apps before they jumped to other things like IG etc

Re: SEC Charges Kik With Conducting $100M Unregistered ICO

#30

Post by CPLX »

flunhat wrote: post #16

So what happens to Kik now? Funding-wise, I mean. The press release says that: "the company’s management predicted internally that it would run out of money in 2017. In early 2017, the company sought to pivot to a new type of business, which it financed through the sale of one trillion digital tokens." I'm guessing that they spent a decent amount of the money they raised through the ICO. If they have to give it back,…

> If they have to give it back, will they have to take on even more funding from a VC

That seems remarkably optimistic. The two likely options here seem to be dissolution with heavy fines for all involved, or something even more serious than that.

Post reply on HN