It is not necessary that I agree, but probably that the Telegram offering is not a security. Sure, "all they had to do was file" but that is a pretty onerous requirement if you think you're not a security, and hugely restricts your market.

The Telegram token may increase in price but there's no profit sharing directly from Telegram. It's as if you funded a kickstarter for a limited edition trading card and the company was going to soon start printing more.

Nobody is actually commenting on this argument. It just seems like there's a team of people following me around downvoting me.

>but that is a pretty onerous requirement if you think you're not a security

But the SEC does, so tough luck?

>The Telegram token may increase in price but there's no profit sharing directly from Telegram

Sounds like a weasely attempt to skirt the rules. Look up the Howey test

>The leading case on the definition of an investment contract is the U.S. Supreme Court case, SEC v. W.J. Howey Co. Under the Howey test, an investment contract is “a contract, transaction or scheme whereby a person invests his money in a common enterprise[1] and is led to expect profits solely from the efforts of the promoter or a third party.”