Maybe Ripple's Loss can be HIVE's gain
HIVE didn't have an ICO, perhaps we should be screaming that from the roof tops
In case you haven't heard by now, the SEC has filed a lawsuit against Ripple and its CEO alleging they took part in an unregistered securities offering dating back to and continuing since 2013.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/sec-unveils-1-3b-suit-against-ripple-over-xrp
Never-mind the fact the SEC allowed this to go on for 7 years before saying anything, but it sounds like they are finally showing their teeth.
Understandably, many other altcoins are extremely weak these past few days but what if we can use that to our advantage?
(Source: https://www.coinbureau.com/review/hive-blockchain/)
HIVE had no ICO, which is a big part of what makes a coin a security.
What's more, HIVE forked out Steemit,inc earlier this year which was really the only other possible way HIVE could have been labeled a security.
There isn't really one company or foundation calling the shots, it's community lead.
Therefore, not a security.
Ripple, and by extension XRP, are likely going to see billions flowing out of it overt the coming days.
Where are those billions going to go?
We have a chance here to make the case that some of those billions should come to HIVE.
I'm no rocket scientist but this seems like a great opportunity for HIVE to pick up some free press and hopefully capitalize on the outflows from XRP.
Something like this sounds nice:
"There's no risk of HIVE being sued by the SEC as it is decentralized and community driven and never had an ICO! Invest accordingly."
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Well said. Yeah I agree with you
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
An IPO (Initial Public Offering) refers to the moment that an equity is offered to the public for purchase. An IPO does not have to be a grand event. It does not even have to take place on an exchange.
The SEC could declare the HIVE Hardfork to be an ICO because that was the moment that HIVE was available to start trading online.
The very fact that STEEM and HIVE are available to trade means that they started traded at some point.
The SEC suit describes RIPPLE as a "unregistered, ongoing digital asset securities offering." The manner in which RIPPLE hit the market does not appear to be the primary focus of the SEC's case. The SEC's ire is raised by the fact that the equity is traded publicly.
The case for HIVE is hinging on the idea that HIVE is a utility token running on an independent blockchain.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
This is not even remotely close to accurate. It has to do with the fact that Ripple pre-mined all their coins and owned them, becoming a centralized entity that distributes coins that people buy. If Ripple were to sell all their coins to other parties, they would no longer be violating securities laws. Are you familiar with the Howey Test?
Who would they even serve a lawsuit to in regards to HIVE? There is no central authority running it. It's not even close to be considered a security at this point.