Today, UNI's price suffered a heavy blow, mainly because it received the Wells Notice issued by the SEC, also known as the Wells Notice. This actually hinted at the SEC's intention to sue UNI, causing the UNI price to plummet by nearly 20%.
But it is worth noting that the Wells Notice is actually an informal notice before the SEC initiates civil prosecution. This means that UNI still has the opportunity to negotiate and communicate with the SEC before the formal prosecution.
If the two sides can reach a consensus, UNI may be able to avoid being sued, but it will undoubtedly come at a price. In the eyes of industry veterans, this is just another "extortion" by the SEC.
![](https://public.bnbstatic.com/image/pgc/202404/6d7452beeb9508a2c1c3065674c15f09.png)
The SEC has made similar moves in the past, whether it was suing $XRP, taking action against EOS, or even participating in Binance’s huge fine, and obstructing the launch of a Bitcoin ETF. Its routine has long been well known to everyone: find a well-funded target, initiate a lawsuit on the grounds of non-compliance, and ultimately end up with huge fines.
Of course, this is also an opportunity for us. Every time a major event occurs in the market, it is an opportunity that cannot be missed. I will make arrangements in my small circle and wait for the opportunity to come.
But this time, I think the SEC’s old tricks may not work so well. The founder of UNI responded quickly, saying that he would actively respond, and his words were quite fierce.
![](https://public.bnbstatic.com/image/pgc/202404/a52769969f8b5f33360c90b3094f3633.png)
The reason why I think the SEC may not succeed this time is the key to UNI's compliance architecture. UNI's architecture consists of three parts: DAO, Foundation, and Labs. This architecture does a very good job in compliance.
![](https://public.bnbstatic.com/image/pgc/202404/77b0520239dfda3ac5a9b6ac9fe6d523.png)
DAO, as an autonomous organization of coin holders, is responsible for the governance of UNI; Foundation is responsible for specific operational decisions; and Labs focuses on the operation and update of the project. This division of labor makes UNI almost free of loopholes in compliance.
Therefore, the SEC can only send the notice to Uniswap Labs in the end, because Labs seems to be an easier target than the other two parts. But even so, considering UNI's compliance structure, it is not easy for the SEC to successfully sue.
I am confident in UNI's position in the DeFi space, so I plan to buy $UNI on dips after the SEC may bring more bad news to UNI. After all, I am more optimistic about the long-term value of UNI than the SEC's possible blackmail scheme.
So, do you think the SEC will be able to successfully extort UNI in the end? Welcome to leave a comment in the comment section
Because compared to the SEC's blackmail scheme, I am more optimistic about UNI's position in the DeFi field.
#热门话题