A total ban on cryptocurrency derivatives from the UK Financial Conduct Authority last week was ignored by 97% of participants in the consultations, according to a statement from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

The 527 respondents included stock exchanges, crypto-asset and derivative companies, commercial organizations, competent national authorities, legal representatives and individuals.

97% of those who opposed the proposed ban from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) claimed that cryptocurrencies have intrinsic value, that retail investors can assess that value, and that other measures can achieve the desired results without applying a “disproportionate” ban.

In his blog “Attack of the 50-foot blockchain”, crypto-skeptic David Gerrard suggested that this was an example of how “cryptocurrency derivatives [think] about possible spamming in the process, and they were wrong.”

The answers, of course, came from a “stakeholder group” about the British crypto industry. However, it would be more than inappropriate if the consultations with cryptocurrency derivatives triggered serious setbacks from parties that were not interested in the result, as Gerrard seems to prefer.

An article on buyshares.co.uk accuses the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) of selecting its data.

Despite admitting that 60% of the results of crypto-ETN trading between June 2015 and April 2019 were profitable, the FCA report believes that this period is not suitable for studies, given that the listing in bitcoin at the end of 2017 was a record. high.

Instead, the report looks at the period from April 2018 to December 2019, where 57% of crypto-ETN clients lost money.

Buyshares.co.uk researcher Justinas Baltrusaitis notes that from April 2018 until today, several investors have lost money in the FTSE100 index, which has fallen in value by 20%, adding:

The question is whether the FCA’s decision to ban cryptocurrency derivatives was a politically motivated decision that would free the FCA from responsibility for cryptocurrencies. As opposed to developing a long-term strategy that protects investors in the UK and blockchain innovation in general. “

Source: CoinTelegraph