Bitcoin Forum

Standard government activity of late. Since it hasn't gone to trial, the SEC isn't required to give Coinbase discovery. But why wouldn't they? They will have to if they want to continue with a trial. Simply a bunch of bank-pushing BS against crypto.


Coinbase CEO Says SEC Told It To Delist Everything But Bitcoin: Report (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/347719-2023-08-01-coinbase-ceo-says-sec-told-it-to-delist-everything-but.htm)

---

https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/coinbase-ceo-says-sec-told-it-delist-everything-bitcoin-report
In a July 31 interview with the Financial Times, Armstrong revealed that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission wanted the exchange to delist the nearly 250 tokens on its platform prior to it filing a lawsuit against the exchange.

At the time, the SEC reportedly said it believes "every asset other than Bitcoin is a security," said Armstrong.

"We said, well how are you coming to that conclusion? Because that's not our interpretation of the law," Armstrong added.

He recounted that the regulator said, "we're not going to explain it to you; you need to delist every asset other than Bitcoin."

It's a similar view held by SEC Chair Gary Gensler, who claimed in a February New York Magazine interview that "everything other than Bitcoin" is a security under the agency's remit.

Armstrong said that agreeing to the SEC's request could've set a precedent and "would have essentially meant the end of the crypto industry" in the United States.

"It kind of made it an easy choice [...] Let's go to court and find out what the court says."

The SEC sued Coinbase in early June, alleging it operated as an unregistered exchange and named 13 cryptocurrencies it said Coinbase offered as unregistered securities. Days earlier, the regulator filed a similar complaint against Binance.

The SEC told the Financial Times its enforcement division does not make formal requests for "companies to delist crypto assets" but that its staff may share its view on what actions could violate securities laws.
... (https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/coinbase-ceo-says-sec-told-it-delist-everything-bitcoin-report)

---

8)

I don’t see a problem here. We all know bitcoin is the only crypto that matters in the long run. Even eth and the others will die off in the future but btc will keep going. The SEC is actually giving a wise advice to Coinbase and the baldy CEO of Coinbase should listen to it.

I am pretty sure Coinbase used to be a btc/usd only exchange and if they could do it in the past, they can do it now. The regulators will be happy, the bitcoiners will be  happy, the baldy will get to keep his business… win win win for everyone (everyone but shitcoiners)

The other cryptos are always in babysteps compared to Bitcoin, so i dont see it bad at all.

And also most of them are not reliable neither in price stability and also in changes made it by his owners or users.

Also to the traditional market its more reliable to show a good thing and solid like BTC and after that it was setled start to analize and offer other kind of crypto, by always with ton of cares.

This are the kinds of regulations to face with centralized institutions when you're also centralized, before now they have been attacking bitcoin to be a source of financial crime haven for all manners of fraudulent acts, some even called bitcoin a scam cryptocurrency, but  then, i will wonder what they would have called other cryptocurrencies if bitcoin is really a scam, gradually and step by little the truth is getting unfolded of, we shall know were this will land if after delisting other cryptocurrencies will enable the government trust bitcoin and adopt it as a legal tender or not.

I don't know how much of the coinbase profit comes from altcoins but it must be huge as well as they refuse to do it.  They are going to go bankrupt in no time if they do. And then there are users staking in Coinbase as well.

Bitcoin is the only supported coin by the SEC while in the beginning, they prosecute BTC. Since the IRS is about to tax the staking of altcoins, they are demanding users report to IRS their stakes when this happens I guess they will also start liking shitcoins.

Not all altcoins are shitcoins, though. We can't make such a bold statement when there are so many altcoins that have proven their worth and have a purpose in the cryptocurrency world. I don't disagree that there's an abundance of them that have absolutely no reason to exist, with hundreds popping up every single day, but we can't put them all in one basket. On top of that, if we suppose that all coins except Bitcoin are banned from exchanges, that would cause mayhem in the market and would definitely affect Bitcoin tremendously too. That would also eradicate any competition between different cryptocurrencies, turning investors away from them.

Blackrock & other huge corps, institutions etc have listed Coinbase as their desired custodian & exchange in their Spot ETF filings. I wonder if this has something to do with that. Maybe the SEC wants to clean crypto up to legitimise bitcoin as an investment asset.

Brian Armstrong definitely woulnd't be happy as altcoins make almost half of the Coinbase volume meaning he would lose shit load of profit if all people could trade there is bitcoin.

I mean, the fact that he decided to ignore SEC request and go to the court instead says how much it means to him/Coinbase.

Yesterday, I came across news stating that the SEC asking relo e all the trading pair except Bitcoin, rather they might consider requesting the shutdown of Coinbase. As Coinbase generates its revenue from various trading activities, a potential reduction to just one trading pair could lead to a loss of users. Even if Coinbase continues to operate, such actions could significantly impact its share price in the stock market. This situation poses a potential threat to the crypto industry, and some perceive it as part of the recent drama surrounding US regulatory actions, where certain businesses are hindered from starting operations if they don't align with government preferences.

I thought I saw that he actually denied the government said this and instead claimed it was a rumor. I guess I will have to take a look at his twitter account and clarify that for myself. I did also see that he said Coinbase was going to implement the Lightning Network. Considering how he seemingly always felt it was garbage, I could see that his company being faced with possibly only have Bitcoin trading could result in him extending an olive branch to the Bitcoin community.

Inasmuch as we don't see anything bad in these steps that SEC wants to take on Coinbase, let's not forget there are a good number of altcoins in the crypto space. Delisting all altcoins on the Coinbass exchange will send the wrong signal of what the crypto market is supposed to look like as a competitive market you won't get to find only bitcoin but other altcoins wanting to survive and give rise to a new price in the crypto space.

If SEC should succeed in this move on Coinbase, let it not come as a surprise when they will want more every other exchange to do the same, making them to have a monopoly over what goes on in all crypto exchanges. They will now dictate the amount of Bitcoin, exchange should begin to have or not

I am not a Bitcoin maximalist but I think that other cryptocurrencies are considered by SEC as security and being a security they need to comply with some of the regulations the government imposes.  And many of these altcoins are not complying reason why the SEC wanted to halt the transactions of these altcoins that they think are securities.  This means, those suspected as "security" must prove that they are not or comply with the requirement before they can proceed to normal activities.


IF SEC succeeds I can say that the Bitcoin market will surge while the other altcoin market will somehow collapse.

The SEC trying to get coinbase to change its name to bitcoinbase pretty much lol. Crazy year for regulating crypto, but honestly if they ended up delisting everything but BTC wouldn't that honestly be a good thing?

i am sorry but i have different opinion with other members above, in my opinion not all altcoins are bad. I just feel that, ETH, BNB, TRX and other similar coin has good future, I think these altcoin only become competitors for bitcoin. these altcoin has their own target market, Bitcoin always be the number one so I think we should not worry about these altcoins. So I think if SEC still want it, then it will be better if coinbase delist bad altcoins only.

BitcoinBase and USA BDC exchange is their most favorite name.

SEC did these attacks on behalf of the United States of American government including their central bank Federal Reserve. It is not easy for SEC to succeed because not all people in the Congress want to force all cryptocurrency companies, exchanges move their offices and operations out of USA.

They and USA citizens will fight back, Coinbase will fight back and SEC will fail. If they succeed, it won't last more than 4 years because each President election can make big changes in politics, economics and regulations.

Perhaps the first reason why Armstrong didn't heed the SEC was that it was all just told to him. It didn't seem like an official order. Can it be legitimate that way? If I were Armstrong myself, I would just dismiss it right away, even if it were relayed in the form of a veiled threat. If it were an official communication from the SEC, then perhaps the CEO of Coinbase could have dignified it a bit.

Other than this, of course, Coinbase can afford lawyers. They can wait for official steps by the SEC and challenge them in court if need be.

Delisting all altcoin will cause a mayhem for Coinbase and the crypto market because coinbase makes more money from altcoin and the platform will be short of liquidity. This is another way of telling coinbase to shut down it's operation if it doesn't accept what SEC says. Going to court might help in this situation to see if there will be another solution for coinbase to operate without delisting all altcoin. Some investors have invested more on altcoins due to the fast pump. Come to think of it Bitcoin is the superior of all cryptocurrency and I see that SEC understands this and don't want their citizens to fall into the scam project of shitcoins. Though not all altcoins are shitcoins but majority of them and nobody knows what is the future for these few ones that has survived for a while now.

How is an old coin like Litecoin considered a security? From what I understand it had no premine and it’s purely POW. Sure there is some speculation that the dev instamined a few blocks when it launched or used a early gpu miner while everyone was cpu mining. However it’s definitely not like xrp or ETH.

The sec really needs to switch their team around. Very unprofessional way to handle these issues. Especially since they let coinbase go public a few years back.

Coinbase or anyone would be ill-informed if they were surprised by this. Despite the claims of thousands of crypto (be they blockchains, currencies, tokens, apps like exchanges) to be decentralised, few, if any, truly are. In fact, the more they lay claim to being "decentralised", the less likely they are.

Funny enough, Bitcoin itself -- at least by early proponents and developers -- hardly mentions decentralisation. Proof in the action, rather than the saying, you know.

The SEC already acknowledged Bitcoin years ago, but could never truly believe anything else to be "decentralised" -- as recently as April they even warned so-called DEXes that they will be regarded as typical exchanges (and in the case of token-issuers like Uniswap, even issuers of securities).

So the encounter continues and this time it is Coinbase. Lol! US government is killing it's own business that they initially allowed to grow and get listed in the stock market. It's hilarious and disheartening at the same time.

Cryptocurrency must not be classified as a security. If SEC is so serious about this classification, they should allow all ETFs and all other bloody-bla requests to add Bitcoin in the stock market.

Coinbase - it's high time to move to Singapore!

Now you should start asking the most important question.... How invested are the decision makers and the government in Bitcoin, if they single it out like that? Surely all Crypto currencies are the same... it is only the token and some of the "parameters" that are different, but it is mostly driven on the same principle.  ::)

They are either invested in Bitcoin or they have plans for Bitcoin in the future.... just mark my words. The SEC is just the tool.... there are higher powers behind them, controlling them like a puppet.  ::)

While I would like that what yiou are saying is true and decisions makers actually hold bitcoin, somehow I doubt that's the case and reason why they are so negative towards other cryptocurrencies.


I beg to disagree that all currencies are more or less the same. Some are heavily premined and sold in ICOs and their whole purpose is to make their creators rich and then we have bitcoin that really stands out.

It is a fair assessment as any project that raised money in the form of initial coin offering should be considered as a security, exchanges wont be happy as they will be loosing out on billions worth of trading volume and their profits will take a huge hit. Either way majority of these alts will go down eventually and it is fair to follow this precedent and will wipe out the scam projects.

This means that the people that are behind them are the ones that are more heavily invested in Bitcoin. I think I like that because a smallholder like me is hoping to see them ride that wave that they're creating. And we're noticing on how they're moving like crazy when they're chasing an exchange, a project, and deciding whether it's a security or not. But in summing up this statement they've said, everyone is gonna agree that it's best to just have Bitcoin on them but Coinbase as a business, they will not let it slip the opportunity of making a profit from other coins/tokens by just listing it.

Even if it was an order Coinbase has all the rights to refuse and have their day at court, I mean delisting hundreds of coins so suddenly was bound to affect its operations and its customers, most likely causing it to fail at some point in the future, Coinbase as a business cannot accept this so they are going to fight with everything they have for their right to list all the altcoins they want, will Coinbase succeed? I doubt it, as the majority of the altcoins out there do seem like securities to me.

This brings up a great point. If it is an order, where is the authority behind the order that anybody has to obey it? They should ask for this authority, so that they know where they stand.

For example. If a cop gives you an order, where is his authority, especially if you ask for it? If he says it wasn't an order, then you don't have to do what he says. He just told you.

If the cop says it WAS an order, well, he gets paid for following the orders his sergeant gives him. So, you should get paid, too. Invoice him. Make the invoice big, because you didn't agree on an amount ahead of time. Take him to court over it, and stand your ground.

Same with Coinbase.

8)

They can't legally do it, because all those coins and their creators weren't indited in court.
Innocent until proven guilty, am I correct?

The procedure is well known and we had a glimpse of it in the XRP case. Don't get me wrong here, I feel like XRP is a security, but it wasn't proven yet, so even XRP that has an ongoing case should not be delisted yet. Other coins that have no cases against them are untouchable for now.

That said, many of them are total scams like that shitcoin HEX, but the SEC has yet to win against them one by one.

Yeah, no joke, of course! You're arguing that the big whales, er, Bitcoin developers, are the ones with the biggest stakes? I've got it now. And you're looking for a good wave to surf on, like? That is the attitude!

They certainly move quickly, dont they? Its such a roller-coaster chasing an exchange, a project, and wondering if its a security or not. The real sting, though, is that while its nice to have Bitcoin, Coinbase is a company, right? Man, they want profits. By listing additional coins, they wont forfeit the possibility to make money from those coins. I think they did well.

So, to sum up, Coinbase is opportunistic, Bitcoin is excellent, and smallholders like us are just trying to ride the wave, right?

I don't really see how you could call that a win-win: the SEC is clearly abusing its power, they not making clear rules and they are not giving straight answers on purpose, if you are a bitcoiner there is no way you could support the SEC and its behavior because that would mean that one day they can just ban bitcoin without giving any explanation. They simply can't do what they are doing.

The skeptical me would agree and it might be good to speculate on what cryptocoin these higher powers want to invest in next heheehe. I am quite certain we will also witness Blackrock, Fidelity and the other institutional investors do something similar to what Barry's Grayscale is doing where they will also have different altcoins included in their investment products hehe. I reckon if a spot ETF for Bitcoin is approved, next is a spot ETF for Ethereum.

That seems to be it. We're all riding what's currently with the waves now but as soon as we've figured out that Bitcoin is the future and it will definitely shine, we want to hold on to it. While with these companies, puppets, people, and behind them. We don't care about them, we only care with what they do and what's going to be the actions they make to the market because that's where we're going to capitalize and decide our actions based on what they do.

SEC should come out plain with their reasons as to why they want those coins delisted.
There are lots of coins that has potentials like the ethereum, litecoin and lots of them.
Because I don't understand what the regulators mean by saying "we're not going to explain it to you, you need to delist every asset other than Bitcoin".
I think the the court should just take a decided stance on this matter, because this is very delicate, as it involves lots of people's investments.

The advice isn't wise. It's putting an end to the ability for anyone to innovate and create something of high value. There are a lot of great creations surrounding Bitcoin. There's no reason why they should be stifled just because one agency says so. I'd say the motives behind telling Coinbase to do it were not with good intent either

It's a little naive to call everyone involved in things outside of Bitcoin, shitcoiners. Eth and layer2s are not shitcoins. New solutions with potential to serve additional purposes alongside Bitcoin, are not shitcoins.


Once blockchain and cryptocurrency are recognized as a legitimate, regulated form of finance in both the US and globally, then this might not be the case. There are technologies which provide a similar level of value in comparison to Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is the center pillar of freedom, liberty, privacy and ever feature that gold and cash represent. As long as it lives, it breathes life into the possibility of transparent digital finance. Each creation contributes both to Bitcoin and to those who govern the creation.


Neither is Bitcoin. Yes, these projects are more volatile because they are creations who are still finding their true value. No, owners can not just 'make changes' if it is a true, non-scam altcoin/token. If this is the case, then it's not something that is recognized as a token/altcoin. That would be a scam - which coinbase do not list.


Bitcoin is more mature, and yes you need more care to explore further than Bitcoin. Though that doesn't mean that everything other than Bitcoin should be labelled as a security.

If anybody wants to get out from under the SEC, all they have to do is use wallets and programming that has Private Member Association (PMA) written into the transactions pages. This makes every transaction to be a PMA, with the hash as the identifying configuration. Government has no authority over a PMA as long as it isn't harming the members or damaging their property.

BTW, the members = the sender and the receiver.

8)