"At this point it looks like the issue is more than not being able to obtain a relationship with a ATS or Broker /Dealer, rather it appears to be a regulatory issue. We can not know for sure because the CEO doesn't address this issue directly in any of the infomercials or even in the filings. Simply states what is linked below."
--
They are not mutually exclusive, obviously...
I imagine the ATS would ask immediately, "Is this cleared/ approved by SEC Trading division?"
I agree with some of this post, as I would like more specifics in regards to what these discussions with ATS entail as well as any feedback from SEC on what the process of approval is.
In any case, the first stage (and what makes the most logical sense), would be to get the Corporate Governance, Auditing, and Funding components of the platform into the hands of companies. It reduces risk on many levels for both the ATS and BEGI in terms of compliance and regulations. Keeps bad actors away.
In addition, I am more-so interested in getting the parts of the platform that do not need approval to the market, in order to get some revenue and out of the toxic note financing. Corporate Governance, Auditing, Funding are three revenue streams that are distinct from the Trading aspect of BDTP.
If you have the first three: It should make the last (trading) much more seamless. If I were the SEC, I would require they have the first three integrated before trading - so that the SEC has full access to not only the trades but their corporate structure and financing.
From this post, you are beginning to see why the SEC should want to move forward with a platform/service such as this. It's all about increasing their power/reach.
Bullish
