Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko: Companies that oppose trading tokenized shares should go private
On October 28, Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko said that U.S.-listed companies that oppose their shares being traded in tokenized form should choose to go private. The remark was aimed at the wave of issuer objections under the SEC's innovation exemption framework; as of late October, more than 30 companies had formally raised objections.
The SEC approved a five-year innovation exemption on September 17, allowing tokenized securities venues (TSVs) to provide trading in tokenized NMS stocks after notifying issuers, with a 30-day objection window for issuers. The OKXICE platform, a joint venture between OKX and Intercontinental Exchange, has already received multiple rounds of objections, including Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, Alphabet, McDonald's, JPMorgan Chase, Coca-Cola, and Dell, with some notices bringing the total number of objections to 33. The objections apply only to that venue and do not affect other channels; most notices did not disclose specific reasons. At the same time, trading volume in tokenized stocks has risen, with Robinhood Chain's September turnover reaching $11.31 billion, a sharp increase from $526 million in July. Tokenized stocks on Solana are said to be the fastest-growing category.
Yakovenko interpreted the objections as companies wanting to retain the liquidity and valuation convenience of the public market while refusing the evolution of trading methods. Opponents preserve control over third-party tokenization through the formal objection window, while supporters emphasize on-chain composability and network effects. Actual market trading demand and issuers' desire for control coexist, and exchanges and tokenized venues have become the focus of the dispute.
Source: Crypto Briefing (https://cryptobriefing.com/solana-yakovenko-tokenized-stock-opponents-go-private/）、Decrypt、SEC官网创新豁免文件、OKXICE公开通知。核验情况：Yakovenko表态由多家英文媒体一致报道，日期与内容交叉吻合；SEC豁免与异议窗口有官方文件支持；OKXICE异议数量与公司名单经Decrypt、Unchained等交叉确认。原始推文未直接定位，属二次报道。
ABAB AI Insight
Historically, public markets have long allowed trading venues and clearing methods to evolve, with issuers obtaining capital and liquidity through listing while accepting that trading rules are shaped jointly by the market and regulators. The current objection mechanism returns the question of whether third-party tokenization is allowed to issuers, creating a departure from the traditional public-market path.
In terms of the capital path, the objections are concentrated among large financial and technology companies, showing that existing control holders are trying to limit spillover into trading venues. If tokenized venues reduce the number of listed assets because of objections, liquidity may be diverted to unopposed assets or to issuers' own tokenization paths; infrastructure providers on-chain such as Solana view this as a test window for composability and network effects.
In horizontal comparison, similar disputes over control have appeared in dark pools, over-the-counter trading, and cross-border listing rule adjustments. What is different this time is that the technology path is initiated by a third party and the regulator is using a temporary exemption to test it, rather than the design being led by an exchange or issuer.
Judgment: issuer objections reflect a contest over control of the trading venue, rather than an absolute rejection of tokenization itself. If the core of public-market status is liquidity and price discovery, then the statement that opposition should mean going private ties the obligations of public listing to the evolution of trading forms, and the practical pressure will fall on how regulators balance issuer control and market accessibility.
Cognition law
Public-market status is not a permanent freeze on trading forms, but a choice that continues to accept iterative changes in pricing and settlement paths.
The issuer objection window shifts the power to decide the trading venue from the market default back to the issuer, creating a rollback of control.
Rising tokenized trading volume alongside objections from large companies shows that demand for liquidity and the desire for control can expand at the same time, rather than being mutually exclusive.
Source: Public information