I want to extend my highest praise to Paul Atkins, Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, for the wise decision — perhaps a better characterization being the brilliant decision — he announced today on behalf of the SEC about Stock Tokens.   The SEC granted a five year period of experimentation on this topic in U.S. markets. In doing so, the SEC laid out some inviolate and unequivocally annumerated conditions:   The SEC highlighted that “Investor Protection Is Not Optional.” The SEC clearly laid out that even as it puts forward an “Innovation Exemption,” the SEC has an implicit right to govern on this issue. This means that at least within the U.S., there is an underpinning that appropriate regulatory bodies can regulate  as they think is needed. I believe that over the last full century, investors have best been protected when U.S. regulatory bodies have been involved and U.S. securities laws have been applicable. Thank you, SEC.   The SEC also  emphasized  that there can be “No Synthetics.” Any such Stock Tokens must carry full voting and dividend rights. No synthetics is such a vital and basic concept. Thank you, SEC.   Also of crucial importance, the SEC mandated that “Issuers Can Object.” It said that issuers of stock must have the opportunity to object and prevent their security from being trading on a Tokenized Securities Venue if companies so choose. This puts companies in charge of their own securities and capital structures, not brokerage houses. Thank you, SEC.   I applaud what the SEC did today. Bravo!   And @vladtenev and @dangallagher I note that at Robinhood you accepted and supported the SEC’s ruling today. I call on you now to adhere to the exact same standards internationally. How hypocritical would it be if Robinhood’s stock tokens abroad were to differ materially from stock tokens in the U.S. on these hyper-important matters of investor protections, synthetics and issuer objections.    Adam Aron Chairman and CEO AMC Entertainment

Hey there @dangallagher, in the past week you and @vladtenev CEO of Robinhood have made public comments defending your use of and “standing behind” your relatively new Stock Token concept. I think this practice is abhorrent. It defeats the very ethos of share ownership. Public financial markets were created so that companies could raise capital, and so that investors could share in the wealth created as a result. Not to turn investing instead merely into some gamified business-oriented casino. If by your own admission you can’t offer or sell Stock Tokens to “U.S. persons” why does your U.S. web site talk about them so much and so favorably? Vlad: How can a U.S. brokerage firm be proud of creating an offshore Channel Island operation in far off Jersey specifically with the intent to operate outside U.S. securities laws? Is there potential confusion that Stock Token purchasers are getting less than all the rights accorded to real shareholders, and if so do you care? If those tokens are theoretically backed 1:1 by real shares, but hypothetically some of those underlying real shares are in turn lent out to short sellers, are the Tokens really backed 1:1 in fact? Dan: I think U.S. securities laws have protected the public very well over the past century. You spent much of your career at the SEC. Deep down, in your heart of hearts, how can you really think a world without the precautions imposed by U.S. securities laws creates a better, safer environment for investors? Choose whatever descriptors you think best make sense under the circumstances: Non-regulated, derivative, synthetic, sham, debt-backed securities trying to simulate actual real stock, or pick your own words if these don’t fit. Stock Tokens may make you an innovator in your own eyes. In my eyes, they bring your firm dishonor.

On this 25th anniversary of 9/11 comes this staggering aerial drone recreation of the World Trade Center twin towers. Some 2,977 drones over the lower Manhattan sky, the same number of fatalities that immediately resulted from that fateful attack. With reverence, we remember.