Youre citing a rolling stones article and big fraud allegations. This is a teenie tiny no-named crypto company with a sketchy past. The allegations asserted in the Rolling Stones article show incentive for the SEC to be shady (kickbacks, cover-ups, etc). What does the SEC stand to gain by shutting down one of the smallest least legitimate players in crypto? Why wouldn't they go straight for Bitcoin, Coinbase, Ripple, or something that legitimately threatens the government? BITCF has no credible product. With bitcoin or other top crpytos there is at least some credible backing. BITCF has nothing. The TESLACOIL Coin has legitimately zero instrinic value and ADTV is again less than BITCF. So I ask you, again, what is the incentive for the SEC to take down a no name company, with no legitimate product, technology, or backing?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
