Top Analyst Predicts SEC’s Downfall in Ripple Battle; Here’s Why

Renowned blockchain specialist Mr. Huber has recently shared his forecast, painting a pessimistic picture of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) efforts against Ripple’s top executives, Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen.

According to Huber, the regulatory body’s legal cases are unlikely to succeed, offering a sobering perspective on the potential outcomes.

Unlikely Success for the SEC

Mr. Huber argues that the SEC will face great difficulty in demonstrating any “bad faith” on the part of the Ripple executives. In the most extreme scenario, Ripple might be fined for some pre-On-Demand Liquidity (ODL) securities offerings. However, the need for Ripple to register future sales appears improbable as the distinction between “investment” and “utility” liquidity remains indistinct. 

The complexity deepens when one considers secondary market transactions. Mr. Huber underlines the fact that these transactions cannot be unilaterally classified as securities transactions. Instead, each sale must undergo a meticulous assessment to determine its regulatory implications, further complicating the SEC’s case.

The chain of discussions surrounding Ripple’s business model commenced with a thought-provoking comment from crypto enthusiast Jay’V. Speculating on the lawsuit, Jay’V suggested that the presiding judge would meticulously review all aspects of Ripple’s business model, drawing parallels with the approach taken in the case of LBRY.

Marc Fagel Speaks Out: Does Huber Have a Point?

Adding his insights to the conversation, former SEC director Marc Fagel expressed agreement with Mr. Huber’s analysis. Fagel proposed the possibility that the presiding judge might circumvent the secondary market trading issue altogether, as it does not directly form a part of the ongoing lawsuit.

In response to Fagel’s perspective, Mr. Huber acknowledged that he often finds common ground with him, despite their differing views on the SEC. While Huber perceives the regulatory body differently, he recognizes the lawsuit’s valid motivations. In fact, Huber believes that the SEC’s legal actions would not have been initiated if they hadn’t previously established a precedent with Ethereum and ConsenSys.

Also Read: Ripple vs SEC Verdict Shall Be Crypto’s Make-or-Break Moment, Predicts Analyst

Plagued with Issues

He went on to express a view that the majority of the cryptocurrency industry is plagued by scams, fraud, and money laundering. He drew an analogy to purchasing website domains, stating it would be as if he had bought web addresses, only for the SEC to sue ICANN claiming ‘www’ websites as illegal securities, while ‘.eth’ websites were considered adequately decentralized and the only ones that could be freely purchased, used, and traded.