Coinbase's whole shtick is to be the law-abiding crypto exchange, so it's kind of alarming to see the sudden SEC action against them, when their entire value is based on the goal of working in good-faith with regulators to bring crypto into the mainstream economy.
> when their entire value is based on the goal of working in good-faith with regulators
Armstrong spends his day tweeting insults at the SEC. I know Gemini and Coinbase positioned themselves, to users and investors, as regulatory friendly and compliant. But they didn’t behave the way compliance-obsessed firms do.
> Armstrong spends his day tweeting insults at the SEC.
I don't follow Armstrong on Twitter. Can you cite some examples? I took a brief look through his Tweets mentioning "SEC" [0] and didn't see any Tweet that a reasonable person would consider an "insult."
Also, the rate of his Tweets containing "SEC" seems much lower than what you'd expect from someone who "spends his day" tweeting at the SEC - surely such a person would mention the SEC in their Tweets more than a few times per year.
The "really sketchy behavior" rant came to mind [1]. This isn't someone who's trying to build regulatory relationships. It's someone who wants to look like he has them. (Similar to SBF's political donations not resembling someone who wants to build political goodwill. Just someone who wants to appear as much.)
Note: I'm not arguing Armstrong had no points. But if you're going to air out your regulatory complaints ex ante and in public, you're not playing in the good-and-compliant lane.