Jump to content

Biden SEC nominee Gary Gensler set for March 2 confirmation hearing


Jack21
 Share

Recommended Posts

All I hear is investor protection, all I see, is an agency that has done the exact opposite in this case... they had years of meetings, exchanges knocking on their door asking for guidance etc and then somebody pulls this out of their ass, then the temp SEC chair changes the rules to suit themselves. This has got to be seen for what it is, utter BS. GG looks like he has no intention of paving a clear path for the USA, just more long-drawn-out FUD.

The rest of the world will move on digitally at least, whilst the USA stagnates in its own red tape nightmare, God help you, I'm glad I don't live in the USA, talk about shooting yourselves in the foot. GG wake up, or you may end up, screwing up your whole countries digital payment future and for what, just so you can show people in the USA who's boss!

There is a digital crypto Tsunami coming, the SEC will not change how future generations perceive and exchange value with each other or the tokens used to do so, so any perceived rules and red tape laid out today, will eventually be seen as antiquated notions by a bunch of old farts who just didn't get it.

Rant over, Pablo you might be right, but time is a ticking and the rest of the world won't wait for the USA to catch up.

 

Edited by HAL1000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Pablo said:

I'll take a stab at these because they are important questions - I've numbered them to simplify things:

  1. Yes - I can see a scenario where only the sales of XRP by Ripple, Brad and Chris are treated as the investment contracts while the token "XRP" is free from securities laws.
  2. That will leave XRP to be traded on the secondary market without restriction so it's entirely feasible that ODL remains a legitimate use-case in the US.
  3. Gensler did make reference to crypto exchanges potentially having to comply with securities regulations so that will be interesting to watch because it affects every token, not just XRP. What happens in that scenario? Assuming Gensler follows through, this actually makes XRP much more attractive as all lingering doubts are removed regarding the use and trade of XRP in the US. It also levels the playing field by forcing other crypto projects (Ethereum, DeFi etc) to get their house in order before operating in the US.
  4. I don't envisage any scenario where XRP or ODL ceases to be used in the US. It might affect how Ripple and Founders sell XRP and run their business (due to reduced revenue and/or increased costs of selling XRP). It will likely have a bigger impact on founders (which is fine by me - neither Brad, Chris, Jed or Arthur Britto are key employees any longer and shouldn't be permitted to sell XRP without tight controls).

Gensler did emphasise in the confirmation hearing that the SEC needs to apply "technology neutral" regulatory solutions which suggests that what happens to one project needs to apply to other projects too. I'm curious to see if he squeezes the Ethereum Foundation and DeFi teams, most of which allocated themselves huge bundles of pre-mined tokens and are key drivers behind their respective projects.

Thank you, Pablo. This makes me feel so much better about this situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, VanGogh said:

"Technology neutral"

This means:
1: he will treat all digital assets the same: As securities.
or
2: He will treat all securities the same, regardless of underlying technology

 

8 hours ago, Cambridge said:

Can it still be used to create ODL?

Can it still be bought and sold on the secondary market? 

What new framework will allow XRP to survive and innovate even though it is a "digital asset security"? If this happens. 

If the answer is - it can not be used for ODL and it can not be sold to retail, then congratulations SEC - the remaining bag holders are seriously f$%&* and innovation will be hampered. All for what? That's my last question.

What's become obvious to me is that it depends on the nature of the transaction. Obviously XRP transactions on open market between me and you aren't securities transactions.

 

6 hours ago, Pablo said:

I'm curious to see if he squeezes the Ethereum Foundation and DeFi teams, most of which allocated themselves huge bundles of pre-mined tokens and are key drivers behind their respective projects.

Watching some of his MIT lectures it's clear Gensler thinks Ethereum foundation did a securities offering back in the day. If eth's not safe (in essence) then none of the DeFi projects are.

4 hours ago, RobertHarpool said:

From my vantage point, he lacks education, context and vision. He'll make a great bureaucrat. 

You are aware Gensler is a professor at MIT, teaching a course called ''Blockchain and Money''?  He is the most knowledgeable commissioner on the board.

Edited by Gepster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A confirmation hearing is like a job interview. I expected nothing other than vague politically correct answers. 

Fact is that Gensler is friendly with Peirce & Roisman, and has a deep knowledge regarding digital assets. This man at the helm of the SEC is definitely **not** the worst outcome for XRP holders.

Edited by Gepster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gepster said:

A confirmation hearing is like a job interview. I expected nothing other than vague politically correct answers. 

Fact is that Gensler is friendy with Peirce & Roisman, and has a deep knowledge regarding digital assets. This man at the helm of the SEC is definitely the worst outcome for XRP holders.

The worst outcome for XRP holders, really?? Do you mean 'not' the worst :)?

How do you know he's pals with P&R? are you part of the illuminati lizard king's inner circle?

Edited by Xrpdude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The confirmation went well. He's not going to kill the space; indeed, he loves technology and wants to see it out for the good of the unbanked and efficiencies it brings to the markets of the world. It's positive also that the fate of Ripple in the U.S. is the fate of nearly every other crypto. XRP may be deemed a security but it will still trade on the open market and work as intended. This will not kill it. It would be silly to have thought that the regulators were not going to regulate. A primary reason I invested in XRP is because they intended to be regulated from the beginning. Otherwise, I would be all in on Monero. 

Edited by VanGogh
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately, the space is in desperate need of regulation. We're a decade in, and it's still just a casino. The last thing I want is over regulation, but I will be happy when we can begin to filter out some of the really useless scam coins that do exist and do take up a lot of the attention which attracts investors and typically does not end well. 

I trust that XRP's utility will eventually support it's place among the top crypto project, and I have that same trust for other coins seeking utility solutions with their projects. 

The fact of the matter, and I think anyone denying it is lying to themselves, is that Ripple and its executives absolutely treated XRP like a security. Since it was not registered as such, that should be punishable as the laws state. 

Ripple put their neck on the line. They knew this was all coming because they knew it wasn't exactly legal. Hence they were prepared for it. Like I said, I trust that XRP will make it out of this even if the people being sued do not. And I trust that this case will teach many other future crypto leaders and companies how NOT to use their tokens. And ideally give a framework for how this entire ecosystem should be approached by innovators, investors, regulators, partners, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what would happen if Ripple and named Founders burned all their holdings? Can we then just carry on? Could Ripple survive or are they dependent on free XRP? Can they still operate if they have to buy it on-market like everyone else? If they come out of this lawsuit badly, can they still flee to a foreign jurisdiction? If so, how does their ongoing use of XRP work when transactions come across US jurisdictions?

So many complex questions here. It's a total and complete mess. Let's hope the rest of the world stop giving two sh*ts about the USA and Ripple can find a way out of this – fast. Otherwise even Flare might not save us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, thinlyspread said:

I wonder what would happen if Ripple and named Founders burned all their holdings? Can we then just carry on? Could Ripple survive or are they dependent on free XRP? Can they still operate if they have to buy it on-market like everyone else? If they come out of this lawsuit badly, can they still flee to a foreign jurisdiction? If so, how does their ongoing use of XRP work when transactions come across US jurisdictions?

So many complex questions here. It's a total and complete mess. Let's hope the rest of the world stop giving two sh*ts about the USA and Ripple can find a way out of this – fast. Otherwise even Flare might not save us. 

Quant is building an operating system that works overtop of all DLT technology. The idea being that this operating system will make onboarding enterprises a million times easier than Ripple onboarding them. Because they will be able to continue working on their legacy systems but connect to Ripple/Corda/Ethereum/Hyperledger as and when needed. Via API connection. 

Ideally, this type of development will be a tailwind for companies like Ripple because the long, expensive process of onboarding slow-moving enterprises to a brand new technology will not be a requirement. But if the headwinds of this SEC case and the hurdles of operating in USA causes Ripple to lose too much focus this year, it will be a massive opportunity lost because they will be surpasses. All the work they put into laying those rails could be for naught. 

Ripple and Quant do seem to know each other though, not strictly as competitors but as leaders in bringing blockchain utility to enterprises. Fingers effing crossed hard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Archbob said:

Did anyone really think that Gensler would magically just remove the case against Ripple?

Not at all, I just wanted to see where he stood in regards to the cyrpto space entirely and It's clear the powers that be have a hard on for Bitcoin but anyone else including Ethereum will have to be in a wait and see scenario because outside of BTC which he mentioned as a commodity a  lot was left to be desired, which I think right now he is being PC to get the confirmation, so we will just have  wait and see what direction things take once he is in as I know for myself I really can't call it based on this hearing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RikkiTikki_is_Back said:

Not at all, I just wanted to see where he stood in regards to the cyrpto space entirely and It's clear the powers that be have a hard on for Bitcoin but anyone else including Ethereum will have to be in a wait and see scenario because outside of BTC which he mentioned as a commodity a  lot was left to be desired, which I think right now he is being PC to get the confirmation, so we will just have  wait and see what direction things take once he is in as I know for myself I really can't call it based on this hearing.

Yes, it was definitely interesting that he did not mention ETH with bitcoin at that moment. At least I don't think he did. Bitcoin is now too big to fail though in their eyes, too much money tied up in it. 

But little do they know they don't really dictate whether it fails or not. Elon Musk could say it's worth nothing tomorrow and start a mass selloff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SEC - don't break the rules - crypto give us some rules then - silence for years - crypto I guess they don't really have a problem then, Ripple / exchanges / individuals / companies etc - so what are the rules - SILENCE - Dec 2020 - you all broke the rules???????????

What a f'ing joke the SEC is:-

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/why-didnt-the-sec-catch-madoff-it-might-have-been-policy-not-to-86356/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.