Some nuances of the SEC ICO statement

[Emadm]

As a hedge fund manger and recent token architect I wrote up some of my thoughts on the SEC statement that the DAO was likely a security here:

https://medium.com/ananas-blog/sec-on-icos-securities-are-securities-but-928d9862389f

The coinbase white paper on the topic includes an excellent spreadsheet to help construct tokens, but as a general rule anything that promises a profit is a scam, a share of profits is probably a security.

[Whoisthelorax]

As a hedge fund manger and recent token architect I wrote up some of my thoughts on the SEC statement that the DAO was likely a security here:

https://medium.com/ananas-blog/sec-on-icos-securities-are-securities-but-928d9862389f

The coinbase white paper on the topic includes an excellent spreadsheet to help construct tokens, but as a general rule anything that promises a profit is a scam, a share of profits is probably a security.

So do you see this as bearish or bullish?

Overall, feels bearish, but the no penalty for previous wrong doing feels bullish. It puts a damper on runaway ICOs, which was an unsolvable problem for ETH...

[Emadm]

Bullish. Scam ICOs and pseudo securities were never going to drive Ethereum.

What drives Ethereum is current demand and Future expected value. Recognising it as a viable token platform and initiatives like coinlist will accelerate acceptance and legitimacy, much as the EEA has done.

Tokens will fall into four main groups

Scams - promise you profits
Securities - promise you profit share, centralised
API keys
Scarce digital assets e.g. Rarepepes

Mines coins will be a separate commodity

[ccoinca]

this looks bearish

ico craze stopped