ASIC起诉ASX涉嫌误导CHESS项目声明

币界网2024-08-14 tarihinde yayınlandı2024-08-14 tarihinde güncellendi

币界网报道:

澳大利亚证券和投资委员会(ASIC)已在联邦法院对澳大利亚最大的市场运营商ASX有限公司提起法律诉讼。该案的核心指控是,澳交所对其清算所做出了误导性陈述。清算所被定义为买卖双方之间的中介,有助于促进从交易开始到结算的整个过程。清算所简化了支付、证券或衍生品交易的交换。清算所位于两家清算公司之间,这两家清算公司也有助于降低任何一家成员公司未能履行各自贸易结算义务的风险。买方和卖方签订具有法律约束力的协议。清算所被定义为买方和卖方之间的中介,有助于促进从交易开始到结算的整个过程。清算所简化了支付、证券或衍生品交易的交换。清算所位于两家清算公司之间,这两家清算公司也有助于降低任何一家成员公司未能履行各自贸易结算义务的风险。买方和卖方就e-Read本期电子子注册系统(CHESS)更换项目签订具有法律约束力的协议。

ASIC挑战ASX的说法

ASIC声称,澳大利亚证券交易所于2022年2月10日发布的公告具有误导性,该公告声称CHESS替代项目将于2023年4月“上线”,并且“进展顺利”。

ASIC表示,这些声明表明该项目符合澳交所宣布的计划,预计将达到未来的里程碑,包括2023年4月的计划上线日期。

澳大利亚证券和投资委员会(ASIC)是澳大利亚企业、市场、金融服务和消费信贷的主要监管机构。根据金融服务法,它有权促进、监管和执行澳大利亚金融法。澳大利亚委员会根据2001年《澳大利亚证券和投资委员会法》成立并管理。ASIC最初是根据1989年ASC法案成立的澳大利亚证券委员会。最初,澳大利亚证券和投资委员会(ASIC)是澳大利亚企业、市场、金融服务和消费信贷的主要监管机构。根据金融服务法,它有权促进、监管和执行澳大利亚金融法。澳大利亚委员会根据2001年《澳大利亚证券和投资委员会法》成立并管理。ASIC最初是根据1989年ASC法案成立的澳大利亚证券委员会。最初,“阅读本条款”辩称,这些陈述具有欺骗性,因为在公告时,该项目没有按计划进行,澳交所没有合理的依据暗示它将达到预期的里程碑。

ASX问责制受到审查

ASIC主席Joe Longo强调了指控的严重性,并表示市场的完整性取决于ASX声明的准确性。“ASX的声明触及了人们对我们市场诚信的信任,”Longo说。他将这种情况描述为当时澳交所董事会和高级管理人员的“集体失败”。

Longo进一步解释说,公司和市场参与者依靠ASX的沟通来做出明智的决策和投资。他指出,CHESS替代项目是一项重大的技术举措,对澳大利亚经济的运行至关重要。

Longo补充道:“这一点至关重要,因为澳大利亚证券交易所需要确保向澳大利亚公众告知该项目如何跟踪以及是否会按时完成的真相。”。

ASIC声称,截至2022年2月10日的真实情况是该项目“进展不顺利”,这与ASX的公开声明相矛盾。该项目最终面临延误,并于2022年11月暂停,导致澳大利亚证券交易所和依赖早期保证的市场参与者承担了巨大的成本。

澳大利亚证券和投资委员会起诉澳大利亚证券交易所罚款

ASIC尚未确定对澳交所涉嫌违规行为的处罚。然而,据Finance Magnates报道,ASIC最近采取了一系列行动,包括2024年3月对澳大利亚证券交易所因不遵守市场诚信规则而处以1050000美元的罚款,以及对其他市场参与者的执法行动。

2022年3月28日,在有争议的声明发布约六周后,澳大利亚证券交易所宣布,2023年4月的上线日期可能会进一步推迟。随后,澳大利亚证券交易所聘请埃森哲对该项目进行审查。埃森哲报告强调了解决方案设计及其满足ASX要求的能力所面临的重大挑战,导致ASX暂停了该项目并减记了2.5亿美元的成本。

ASIC的法律行动突显了其对保持对澳大利亚市场完整性的信心的承诺,特别是考虑到ASX在公司治理和关键国家基础设施管理方面的作用。

İlgili Okumalar

EF's Epic Reorganization: 20% Layoffs, Budget Halved, Is Ethereum Gearing Up for a Leaner Future?

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) has announced a major organizational restructuring, involving a 20% staff reduction (approx. 54 employees) and a division into functional clusters like Protocol, Access, User, Community, and Institutional layers. Co-founder Vitalik Buterin further revealed plans to cut the EF's budget by around 40% over the coming years, aiming to reduce its annual spending rate from about 15% to roughly 5% by 2030, transitioning to an endowment-driven model. This overhaul is seen as a long-overdue correction to the EF's ambiguous role. As Ethereum grew, the foundation faced persistent criticism over ETH sales, perceived lack of execution, and unclear strategy, often becoming a focal point for community frustration amid ETH's price stagnation. The reform aims to redefine the EF's boundaries, narrowing its focus to core protocol research, public goods funding, and ecosystem coordination, while offloading more applied development work to the broader market. Concurrently, ecosystem forces like the newly formed Ethlabs (founded by ex-EF researchers) and other independent groups are stepping in to fill the space, signaling a shift from a centralized model to a more distributed, collaborative ecosystem structure. The move was notably praised by Solana co-founder toly, who viewed a "leaner" EF as potentially more decisive and agile.

Odaily星球日报29 dk önce

EF's Epic Reorganization: 20% Layoffs, Budget Halved, Is Ethereum Gearing Up for a Leaner Future?

Odaily星球日报29 dk önce

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

Dragonfly partner Haseeb explores the distorted economics of AI model pricing, drawing parallels to tax policy. He notes that startups and small teams (under 150 users) enjoy heavily subsidized, fixed-price AI subscriptions (like Claude Code), where the marginal cost of an additional token is effectively zero. This creates a powerful incentive for them to maximize token usage ("token-maxxing") and innovate aggressively with AI automation. In contrast, large enterprises (over 150 users) are forced onto "Enterprise" plans, paying per-token API fees with high (~75%) markups. This acts like a steep "tax" on AI-powered labor, disincentivizing marginal automation and experimental use, and encouraging them to retain more human workers. Haseeb argues this pricing creates a "150-person cliff," a regulatory notch similar to labor laws in France that discourage firms from growing past 50 employees. He predicts the fastest-growing future companies may deliberately cap their headcount at 149 to avoid the punitive enterprise pricing. This would foster an "AI-first" management philosophy obsessed with automation and outsourcing to stay lean. While not intentionally designed, this bifurcated pricing could become one of the most influential de facto tax policies, shaping how AI replaces labor—not through mass layoffs at big firms, but through agile, AI-native startups outcompeting them.

marsbit41 dk önce

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

marsbit41 dk önce

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

xBubble: Addressing the Structural Gap in the VC-Backed OPC Economy The concept of OPC (One Person Company) is evolving from a buzzword to a significant AI-driven market. While AI coding tools like Replit and Lovable have validated demand from non-technical users wanting to build applications, a key gap remains: the leap from creating a demo to running a stable, evolving business. These tools still require users to manage the development process, including technical judgments for integrations, modifications, and deployments—a major hurdle for OPCs. xBubble, by DAPPOS, tackles this by shifting from "Prompt-to-Code" to "SOP-to-Business." Instead of generating code from instructions, its core is a system of pre-organized SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) that translate business goals—like "sell World Cup merchandise"—into complete, executable workflows. This includes generating cohesive assets, pages, payment systems, and backend logic. The platform is augmented by a network of third-party service providers who handle infrastructure (hosting, domains, payment setup), acting like "on-site service engineers." Users can pay for these services directly with xBubble credits, simplifying onboarding. This ecosystem aims to deliver not just an app, but a complete, modifiable business launch path. xBubble targets a clear OPC segment: small commercial nodes (e.g., creators, merchants) with existing products, customers, or channels, but for whom a full tech team is unjustifiable. Its potential lies in SOPs accumulating expertise from real cases, improving reliability and reducing delivery costs over time. Additionally, its native support for crypto payments caters to global or digital-native OPCs. In summary, as AI democratizes software creation, xBubble's opportunity is to prove that "SOP-to-Business" provides more immediate value for launching a real, operational business than a powerful but unstructured AI coding tool.

链捕手43 dk önce

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

链捕手43 dk önce

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

**"Invest Only When Certain": A Nine-Year Retrospective from a VC Across Four Cycles** IOSG founder Jocy shares hard-earned lessons from nine years and over a hundred investments in Web3. The core challenge isn't identifying successful founders, but understanding why talented founders with solid ideas still fail. Through building a "failed founder database," IOSG identified six recurring failure patterns. **Founder Trait Red Flags:** 1. **Emotionally Unstable:** Founders who react defensively to criticism or publicly lash out under pressure (e.g., 80% drawdowns) often fail. Resilience is key. 2. **Lacking Hunger / Having a Fallback:** Founders with significant safety nets (family wealth, cushy fallback jobs) may lack the "do-or-die" commitment needed to survive crypto's brutal cycles. 3. **Unchecked Ego:** Includes "polished execution machines" who excel in known frameworks but struggle when paradigms shift, and "professor-types" who are technically brilliant but resistant to commercial feedback or coaching. **Project Structure Red Flags:** 4. **Token-First, Not Product-First:** Treating the token solely as a fundraising tool with no real utility or connection to product value is a major warning sign. The project should have value even if the token goes to zero. 5. **No Day-1 Exit Thesis:** Founders must have a clear, staged capital strategy from the start, understanding what each funding round needs to prove to unlock the next. "Exit before entry" is crucial. 6. **No Full-Cycle Experience:** Founders who haven't lived through a complete crypto bull/bear cycle (e.g., 2018, 2022) often underestimate their vulnerability. IOSG limits initial checks for such teams to $250k, sizing for risk. **The Positive Flipside: Desirable Founder Traits** The ideal candidate exhibits: obsessive problem-depth, being a second-time founder with a non-consensus vision, strong communication skills with *controlled* ego, relentless perseverance, and a global perspective with agency and taste (increasingly vital in the AI era). **Three Survival Tips for Founders:** 1. **Cash Flow Over Narrative:** Real revenue is what sustains projects, not vanity metrics. 2. **Tokens Are a Liability:** Avoid issuing a token unless absolutely necessary. The hidden costs (market making, liquidity, compliance) are immense, often a multi-million-dollar burden. 3. **Respect Liquidity:** Sell during peaks to build treasury, buy back to support the protocol during troughs. Be realistic about valuations and your ability to deliver for the next round. The final principle is simple yet paramount: **"If it's a borderline 'yes' or 'no,' don't invest."** In an industry that reinvents itself every few years, the discipline to consistently say "no" is the ultimate secret to longevity.

Foresight News1 saat önce

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

Foresight News1 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片