RE: SEC Going After Binance And It's BNB Shitcoin

avatar

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

Lol, when Binance? When Moon? Am I right?

Haha, ah the good old days.

:)

Anyway...

While BNB is obviously a security, Binance will get a slap on the wrist, pay a fine that has zero bearing on their business and continue as if nothing happened.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta



0
0
0.000
6 comments
avatar

I wish it would be more than that, I am so sick of CZ and his bullshit, his just another Justin Sun with deeper pockets

0
0
0.000
avatar

I don't quite see why "BNB is obviously a security" ? It's been issued as a pure utility token: you buy it with fiat and you use it to pay tx fees and your tx fees will be lower - basically like a "gift card" where you "front load" your tx fees - binance gets cash upfront, you get lower tx fees. Are prepaid, gift cards "securities" ? Where's the "investment peddled with a an implicit promise of appreciation" ? I mean, what part of the Howey test does it pass cause I don't see

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yes and with the advent of BSC the utility went through the damn roof. They've also been around so long (much like XRP) without minting new tokens (in fact they do burns instead) that it's very hard for the SEC to make their case. Like, it's not even a US-based company.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

0
0
0.000
avatar

https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/howey-test

In a common enterprise… The term "common enterprise" was never explicitly defined by the Supreme Courts. However, it remains an important prong of this test.

There are generally three ways to understand "common enterprise." The first, known as the horizontal approach, focuses on the idea that all the investors are putting their money toward the same enterprise. The second, called a vertical approach, is understood to be an investment where the success of the investors is linked to the success of the party that is being invested in. The last, known as the broad vertical approach, defines a common enterprise as an investment that hinges on a promoter or a third party's expertise.

Already we can see a massive amount of holes in the concept that "You're a fucking idiot if you don't understand how this obviously passes the Howey Test." First of all, nothing is obvious when it comes to legal matters. Strike one just for the tone of the message. An investment where the success is linked to Binance corporation? That's not true because there are a ton of random devs working on BSC worldwide. That completely destroys both the vertical approach and the broad vertical approach. The horizontal approach also fails because obviously all the money is not going to the same enterprise, as there are clearly multiple enterprises.

The expectation of profit also completely fails for the reason you stated: utility.
Not only does BNB have utility on the exchange side with reduced fees,
but also BSC opens the doors for infinite utility to be built (again maybe not even by Binance)...

0
0
0.000
avatar

Let's take that point you raise, how does token burning differ from a company buying back their stock?

0
0
0.000
avatar

There are similarities between an airplane and a bird yet that doesn't make a bird an airplane nor the opposite ...

Imagine an issuer of gift cards who has issued 50000 gift cards but only managed to sell 10000 and it says "ok, I didn't manage to sell all the cards I issued, I'll destroy a part of those I printed but didn't manage to sell".

0
0
0.000