While reading the following article, The following jumped out at me;
“A depository receipt is a transferable security, usually in the form of equity that is issued by a foreign publicly listed company and traded on a local stock exchange.
But these aren’t available locally as yet.”
Source: FSC to develop crowdfunding rules
Why did the FSC mention this line? Is there going to be a forced link with the Jamaica Stock Exchange (JSE)?
What if equity stake provides a Virtual Share, Virtual Stock, or Virtual Bond or Virtual Hyrbid of all three? Meaning it is not a depository receipt, much like Bitcion is not real money.
Also the said statement would imply that the FSC will seek to force crowdfunding sites to list with the JSE. That would be nonsense, as new models will seek to compete with legacy players and less paper work and less gate keepers.
Listing does not prevent fraud. Just asked all those investors who invested in start ups or companies and still cannot see ROI on their investments for years.
How will the FSC handle listings on the JSE when some of these trades is alleged to have made 2 to 3 change of hands prior to listing thus already making those who were in on it first more money that the last set of buyers?
After all this is not the norm in the USA.
Innovation does not join forces with legacy players. Innovators, true innovation make new rules and new industries and do not seek to be chained to any system that only seeks to protect the status quo under the false pretense of protecting the rights of investors. In another post I will elaborate on this further.
I will be following these developments keenly.
The FSC in the article said it could not disclose the firms or individuals that have approached them. Well I can.
From late 2011 I have approached them with the concept and in 2012 revealed to them the model and that it is known as IPO2.0 While providing numerous data to educate them on the industry.
I am however very concerned on their approach towards the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). As in my view they may seek to protect legacy players in pretense of protecting the investor.
Where were they when Wall Street and global traders in exotic securities caused billions of dollars to vanish in thin air, while not creating any new jobs or technology in the process?
Now have read this particular post, there is much room for concern for the crowdfunding and crowdfinance sector against the legacy players using valid reasons from past actions from failed investment schemes hurting innovation and job creation at the highest order.
The article “FSC Gets Wider Policing Powers”
“Anyone who fails to comply with a summons, or commits an offence, will be liable to criminal sanctions,” the attorney said.”
This I certainly hope does not affect the threat crowdfunding poses against the legacy Money Changers industry in Jamaica.
Nothing would be more disgusting than to see these Money Changers creep into the crowdfunding sector under the disguise as good fellas.