Another more serious question: is it possible that a big

Question

Another more serious question: is it possible that a big

reason for AMPERA's existence is that the FLEXA model can't happen at scale until reugulations clarify staking pools? There are so many versions of staking for many reasons and the mere existence of a staking pool raises the SEC "security" question in another legal format --- to me the pools makes sense as risk managment devices but only once regulations are clear - no retailer will push big money through a pool if it can get shut down by the Feds and then all parties dragged into a legal quagmire.

To date transactions are so small, I think all parties can say - this is a proof of concept.

#amp #cryptocurrency #english

0

07.09.2023

4 ответов

25 просмотров

Steve Optimist Автор вопроса

HalfAGlass
Flexa Capacity staking isn't what the SEC is conce...

"Between the lines: The SEC's complaint specifically takes issue with pooled staking, rather than staking at large. Zoom in: In order to offer staking services, an exchange like Kraken would pool customer assets transferred by them and stake them on their behalf, the SEC's complaint reads.Feb 9, 2023" Yes, hopefully that is the distinguishing characteristic and legislators can get this all straight so there isn't any legal ambiguity for the big public companies using AMP to process payments - I know the Team's legal people and lobbyist are all over all of these issues ...

0

07.09.2023

HalfAGlass

Steve Optimist
"Between the lines: The SEC's complaint specifical...

Another nuance if there are still people worried about the SEC. In the SEC vs. LBRY case the SEC admitted they really didn't have a problem with secondary market usage and especially how the LBC token was used within the LBRY ecosystem when John Deaton was allowed to make an amicus argument on behalf of LBC token holders. It was the initial sales that were and always have been and will always be the issue. That is what got Ripple into trouble and not secondary market sales. Flexa did it right and Filed a Form D for their early sales to accredited investors. They have been careful not to "promote" the token. There is much lower-hanging fruit for the SEC and it is unfortunate that they were drawn into the conversation solely due to the Wahi brothers trading a relatively small amount of AMP.

0

07.09.2023

Steve Optimist Автор вопроса

HalfAGlass
Another nuance if there are still people worried a...

I appreciate the information - I agree, AMP doesn't have a problem now but IF they convinced their partners to "flip the switch" I think they would all have problems, because they will then be a big target - justly or unjustly.

0

08.09.2023

HalfAGlass · Accepted Answer

HalfAGlass

Flexa Capacity staking isn't what the SEC is concerned with. That is using a utility token for its intended purpose. What is a gray area is when someone "stakes" with a third party and they take a cut and there may not be transparency with who actually is the custodian of the token and what it is being used for. Direct staking of a utility token for its intended purpose is okay.

0

07.09.2023

209 похожих чатов

Another more serious question: is it possible that a big

4 ответов

Похожие вопросы