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

Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 215 posts

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#71

Post by [deleted] »

phkahler wrote: post #62
alistproducer2 wrote: post #55

I was involved with one of the bigger ICO right at the beginning of the ICO craze. I had pretty regular conversations with the project founder and was in talks to become the dev evangelist. The project had raised ~$5 million in ETH (this is when ETH was trading around $80). Despite the fact that this project had raised a crazy amount of money the whole project was being conceptualized and coded by a single 23 old guy…

If you're launching one of these, you don't really need investment. You just make sure you own the first batch of currency and get rich if it takes off. If you need investment then you don't really believe in your own stuff do you? Ponzi Ponzi Ponzi.

[deleted]

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#72

Post by TACIXAT »

vanattab wrote: post #3

I am thinking a short position in bitcoin is in my near future. I am not saying bitcoin is doomed to fail but I am pretty confident this shit coin crazy is going to hit the fan sooner or later and it's going to drag the "legitimate" crypto currencies down.

Heads up. Bitcoin is likely to be forever deflationary until it fails. There are no capital controls to increase the supply which means as people lose their wallets it becomes more and more constrained. I agree that it's a trash fire that will never be adopted as a regular currency, but its value could go up for a very long time like any collectible.

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#73

Post by adjkant »

dsacco wrote: post #24
onewaystreet wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just in the past three months bitcoin has gone from $1500 to $3000 to $2500 to $1800 to $2900 to $2500 to $3400. You'd make more with a lot less risk just waiting for a dip and buying.

That volatility is perfect for a mean reversion strategy.

I've been testing this out over the past 6 days with $500 to see how it would actually work while keeping my current amount in. I've been working a bit more on the micro level, but it still is pretty consistent in its volatility (lol).

So far I have a 4.6% total return on trying to capitalize on the volatility. That's much less than if I had just held at the original buy. I'm going to keep doing it though to see how it works in long term flat and drop periods. When you hold yourself to rules, it also decreases maximum losses too. I see the strategy as a great way to make safe money relative to crypto.

Right now if the volatility and my returns hold for even just two years, it could be going from $500 to over 100K. It makes it really tempting not to increase the amount I'm playing with even slightly, but I have yet to see how the strategy fares on long term drops. I do have confidence it will perform well on long term flat periods though.

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#74

Post by richardknop »

alistproducer2 wrote: post #55

I was involved with one of the bigger ICO right at the beginning of the ICO craze. I had pretty regular conversations with the project founder and was in talks to become the dev evangelist. The project had raised ~$5 million in ETH (this is when ETH was trading around $80). Despite the fact that this project had raised a crazy amount of money the whole project was being conceptualized and coded by a single 23 old guy…

And what you described is one of the more "legitimate" ICOs. Many of them are outright scams. This one at least tries to do some token work while pocketing the massive amount of raised money.

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#75

Post by ringaroundthetx »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #59
ringaroundthetx wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody and their brother with a soundboard has stated an opinion about ICOs and the SEC guidance. Literally anyone influential has said something and if they haven't, expect them to say it tomorrow. The gradient of opinions is just as abstract as the weeks before. It would be a mistake to take that as canonical just because you respect that particular entrepreneur's non sequitur criticism of existing token sales.…

> The SEC will never ever ever use the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as currently written to ensure a fair market of all cryptographic token issuances If the SEC categories an asset as a security, it has rule making powers over the trading of those assets provided an American buys or sells the asset, inadvertently or not. Many respected lawyers and lawmakers, as well as the SEC, say m…

> Many respected lawyers and lawmakers, as well as the SEC, say many ICOs look like securities.

Yes, this is the crux of everything I've said, primarily that "many" has nothing to do with whats possible. Whether a future token sale chooses to register as a security or is completely exempt from securities frameworks because it is a product.

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#76

Post by the_stc »

The SEC guidance galvanized us on not offering tokens. Instead, we are going to offer shares directly in the company, even if they are mostly issued via an ERC20 contract. If we are going to get heat from the SEC, might as well go all out and issue proper shares.

Plus tokens don't even make sense most of the time. You can't buy a Tesla car with TSLA and you do not get dividends/trading with a car. And no one outside kids at Chuck E Cheese want to use venue-specific currency.

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#77

Post by ringaroundthetx »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58
ringaroundthetx wrote: post #21

Even the SEC realizes that not all token sales are securities. Some people in the industry simply aren't getting it, they are creating a straw man which the agency isn't even arguing for. > The agency said that it would focus on coins that should be categorized as securities. So there are all these people on the periphery just HOPING for their prophecy of a heavy handed government breaking the cryptocurrency rush. Th…

> This is an article about everyone getting smarter and restructuring their offering where necessary, and continuing to move forward The article specifically states "only three projects have said they are canceling or postponing the sale of coins because of the warning." It's not a doom and gloom article. It's just saying the vast majority of ICOs are (a) probably noncompliant and (b) doing nothing about it. > the SE…

If you read the Securities Act of 1933 there are TONS of ways to get around SEC rules. And as such I think your intrastate offering idea is a red herring, but I'll entertain you:

Did you know that anything that is super obviously a security can be completely exempt if it matures or expires in less than 270 days? Its written right there. Turns out there is a huge market called "commercial paper" that takes advantage of this specifically. I personally had no idea about it until I read the law itself.

And there are lots of exemptions. Most of them are completely impractical for most of us.

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#78

Post by duxup »

phkahler wrote: post #62
alistproducer2 wrote: post #55

I was involved with one of the bigger ICO right at the beginning of the ICO craze. I had pretty regular conversations with the project founder and was in talks to become the dev evangelist. The project had raised ~$5 million in ETH (this is when ETH was trading around $80). Despite the fact that this project had raised a crazy amount of money the whole project was being conceptualized and coded by a single 23 old guy…

If you're launching one of these, you don't really need investment. You just make sure you own the first batch of currency and get rich if it takes off. If you need investment then you don't really believe in your own stuff do you? Ponzi Ponzi Ponzi.

That guy on TV keeps telling me how awesome owning gold is... it is so awesome he wants to sell me his...

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#79

Post by [deleted] »

alistproducer2 wrote: post #55

I was involved with one of the bigger ICO right at the beginning of the ICO craze. I had pretty regular conversations with the project founder and was in talks to become the dev evangelist. The project had raised ~$5 million in ETH (this is when ETH was trading around $80). Despite the fact that this project had raised a crazy amount of money the whole project was being conceptualized and coded by a single 23 old guy…

[deleted]

Re: Despite S.E.C. Warning, Wave of Initial Coin Offerings Grows

#80

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ringaroundthetx wrote: post #75
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The SEC will never ever ever use the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as currently written to ensure a fair market of all cryptographic token issuances If the SEC categories an asset as a security, it has rule making powers over the trading of those assets provided an American buys or sells the asset, inadvertently or not. Many respected lawyers and lawmakers, as well as the SEC, say m…

> Many respected lawyers and lawmakers, as well as the SEC, say many ICOs look like securities. Yes, this is the crux of everything I've said, primarily that "many" has nothing to do with whats possible. Whether a future token sale chooses to register as a security or is completely exempt from securities frameworks because it is a product.

> Whether a future token sale chooses to register as a security or is completely exempt from securities frameworks because it is a product

The "many" I refer to are the people get to decide, legally, whether it's a security or a product. The polite thing for the SEC to do would be to announce a new rule. The less polite route, though still completely legal, would be to prosecute under the Acts in an SEC court [1].

[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/sec-fights-challenges-to-its-in...

Post reply on HN