Is this, finally, the death of the catchphrase "Not Financial Advice"?
According to Australian and US digital asset lawyers, simply saying "not financial advice" might not do anything for you. Well other than probably annoy your viewers. As I assume they like me instantly think, "if it is not advice, wtf are you going on about then telling me how good it is?".
An ironic twist
If the crypto influencers would have abided by the most used catchphrase in crypto "do your own research". One that is equally hated by me I might add. They most likely would have realized that the "not financial advice" catchphrase, or whatever you want to call it. Actually do not save you from facing legal action. Despite what, I assume, many think.
According to both Australian and American lawyers, the phrase is pretty much useless in the eyes of the law. Hopefully, if the awareness of this spreads it will lead to way fewer tiktokers and whatnotters promoting sh*tcoins simply because they waved a wad of cash in front of them. Personally, I think it is the pinnacle of parasitic behavior. One person using their own fans to get rich off of them. While most of the time the fans loos everything. Because they have invested in some rug pull pump and dump scam project, believing that the person they look up to would never in a million years mislead them.
In Australia, they have actually taken this one step further, in the right direction. There they require influencers to have a license in order to give out financial advice. How the application or test for this is done tho I can only imagine. Is it able to show three profitable investments? Or might there be a test that I imagine could go a little like this:
"Sir, yes, yes. Put your name there on the dotted line where it says 'name'... Ok, well an X will do. We know who you are, so it is all good. Now let's move on to the first question."
"Sir, I have the privilege of informing you that you now officially can make financial advice to plants and some select invertebrates like snails. Here is your license."
And while I will gladly joke about it. I do think something needs to be done that these societal parasites are held responsible for their actions. If that is having a regulatory body issuing a license, or simply having an annual Thunderdome. Sadly I do not have the answer to it. But the parasite influencer Thunderdome event is starting to sound pretty good to me.
The lawyers do however iterate that while legally the "not financial advice" might not have any meaning. It is still a good practice to inform the audience, as we tend to forget things from time to time.
What is your thought on the fact that the "not financial advice" actually is useless? Personally, it was very good to hear I thought. As I think it is one of the most annoying things in crypto. I mean if this is not financial advice what is it then, entertainment well if that is the case in 99/100 cases the content sucks then. Well, I would love to hear what you make of all of this. The comment section if yours.
If you would like to support me and the content I make, please consider following me, reading my other posts, or why not do both instead.
See you on the interwebs!
Picture provided by: https://pixabay.com/
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I always look forward to your posts. I think something needs to be done to when it comes to big names pushing crap coins out to their followers. Some have been charged. Kim Kardashian was charged for promoting a crap coin and was charged $1.26 million. How much did she make off of promoting that coin though? Also why did she not get charged with some type of crime? If I or someone like me did that then we would have had the hammer come down and we would have gotten jail time, probation, and a bunch of community service or fines. I guess money talks. I agree something needs to be done and there need to be stricter rules when it comes to big-name celebs promoting coins just for profit.
Thank you and yes. I totally agree with you. The main problem I see with this, as with most fines. When you are rich, fines just become a business expense. It is simply something you take into account and pass on the cost to your customers.
Floyd Mayweather is another example of the system not working. I think he was both fined and slapped with a ban on promoting his scames for a year. And on the day the ban was lifted he was back doing it.
I will have to look up the Mayweather story. I did not know he did something like this. Hopefully, as time goes on we will see more happen but I am thinking if you have money then you will be able to get out of trouble no matter what happens.
That does do appear to be the case.
Not financial advice, DYOR... is what it says on basically every article people find when trying to do their own research! Feels a bit like Paragraph 22.
Exactly, and that is my main problem with it. To me, it sounds like they are protecting themself because they know they did a bad job researching/covering it. Or they want to protect themself from any future changes. Also, it is basically only in crypto we see this.
We don't see a game reviewer covering a game adding with "But do your own research". Like wtf?
Finally! I've noticed for a long time that these phrases don't work for me, they just take up my reading time. 😅 !LOLZ I think some other phrases will just show up in the future. That's how this market and making money from subscribers works....
lolztoken.com
He just needed a little space.
Credit: reddit
@daje10, I sent you an $LOLZ on behalf of @stdd
Use the !LOL or !LOLZ command to share a joke and an $LOLZ
(4/6)
Yes finally indeed. I just find it extremely annoying. If I watch a game review and I hear the reviewer go "but do your own research" I would just go bananas I think.
!LUV !LOLZ
I don't know who said it originally but to me the key phrase relating to anything on the internet is, "Buyer beware!" I think we each need to take responsible for our selves.
I agree and dont agree with you there. While I agree that walking around being completely clueless is pretty bad. I don't agree with the sentiment that we as customers should be responsible. Like how should Celsius customers know the company was a fraud? I think we still should hold criminals accountable for tricking people. And sure to some degree I agree that it is one own fault. But I can't really say where the line is.
Anyone with common sense should know that they need to take responsibility for their choices. I wouldn't listen to anyone I don't know trying to tell me what I should do with my time and money.
But that's me.
!ALIVE
!CTP
@daje10! You Are Alive so I just staked 0.1 $ALIVE to your account on behalf of @lisamgentile1961. (8/10)
The tip has been paid for by the We Are Alive Tribe through the earnings on @alive.chat, feel free to swing by our daily chat any time you want.
Good Morning and Thank you, @youarealive! Enjoy your day.😀
Sure I agree with you and see your point. But, when does it constitute fraud? And if your shilling scam crypto you can't just point the fingers at others and go "but I said the magic word, not my fault the project was a scam".
I think it is a two way street.
There absolutely is a need for accountability for those people who are promoting scam cryptos, @daje10. The hard part seems to be how to determine where that line is and when it's been crossed. It shouldn't be that difficult though.
Those disclaimers should not just be a blanket protection.
Unfortunately, that makes some arguments for regulation and licensing.
I have been scammed in the past for other things so now I am just super wary of them.
I won't take investment cues from some celebrity influencer.
Many of them don't know their butts from a hole in the ground anyway.😂
Appreciate the conversation. Have a great day! 😀
!ALIVE
!CTP
Likewise, always interesting to be able to change thoughts with people. Especially when it doesn't turn into a shouting fight and namecalling. =)
!LUV
That is always the hope, @daje10
Enjoy your day!😀