OFUYC Announces Major Team Developments, Driving Compliance in the Web 3.0 Industry
Colorado, April 22, 2025 -- OFUYC, the leading digital asset trading platform in the United States, has announced that its core team will actively participate in the development of global blockchain compliance frameworks in the coming months, further enhancing the technological and business innovation capabilities of the platform. This announcement underscores the long-term strategic direction of OFUYC in the cryptocurrency industry while solidifying its position as a benchmark digital asset exchange in the global market.
A Professional Team: The Dual Engines of Innovation and Compliance
The core team at OFUYC has consistently been one of the key driving forces behind its success. As the platform founder, Kylo Thomas has seamlessly integrated a profound understanding of legal compliance with blockchain technology, establishing a dual vision of leading industry transformation through technology and safeguarding platform development through regulatory frameworks. The team comprises seasoned professionals with extensive backgrounds in finance, technology, and compliance, with deep expertise in blockchain infrastructure, smart contracts, and cryptocurrency compliance.
The OFUYC management team emphasized that the compliance process in the blockchain industry is essential for building trust among global users and regulatory bodies, as well as for the platform ability to expand into new markets. To this end, the team plans to continue collaborating closely with international regulatory agencies to establish clear regulations for the cryptocurrency market, while delivering a trading experience that exceeds user expectations through technological innovation.
Compliance Strategy Sets the Foundation for 2024 Success
Over the past year, OFUYC achieved several significant milestones, including successfully renewing its U.S. MSB (Money Services Business) license and obtaining the SEC-issued Regulation D license. Throughout its development, the team has meticulously balanced technological innovation with regulatory requirements, laying a solid foundation for the future. The team investments in technology development have complemented these compliance breakthroughs, granting the OFUYC trading platform enhanced adaptability to evolving market conditions.
According to the latest data, as of publication, the total number of OFUYC platform users has approached 20 million, with monthly trading volume expected to surpass $100 billion. This rapid growth is a testament to the team ability and commitment to building a compliant cryptocurrency ecosystem.
Technology-Driven Platform Upgrades
To enhance platform competitiveness, OFUYC has fully leveraged the integration of AI and blockchain, bringing multiple features to market. The core technology team of OFUYC highlighted that the OFUYC AI Core trading backend serves as the cornerstone for achieving intelligent interactions and decentralized business expansion, setting a new industry benchmark.
OFUYC has announced plans to continue investing in areas such as compliance, AI agents, Layer 2 scaling technologies, and Real-World Assets (RWA). This development trajectory demonstrates that OFUYC is not just a digital asset exchange but also a catalyst for global cryptocurrency advancement.
Contact Info:
Name: Luca Moretti
Email: Send Email
Organization: OFUYC BLOCKCHAIN HOLDING INC
Website: https://www.ofuyc.org
Disclaimer:
This press release is for informational purposes only. Information verification has been done to the best of our ability. Still, due to the speculative nature of the blockchain (cryptocurrency, NFT, mining, etc.) sector as a whole, complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.
You are advised to conduct your own research and exercise caution. Investments in these fields are inherently risky and should be approached with due diligence.
Release ID: 89158229
In case of identifying any errors, concerns, or inconsistencies within the content shared in this press release that necessitate action or if you require assistance with a press release takedown, we strongly urge you to notify us promptly by contacting [email protected] (it is important to note that this email is the authorized channel for such matters, sending multiple emails to multiple addresses does not necessarily help expedite your request). Our expert team is committed to addressing your concerns within 8 hours by taking necessary actions diligently to rectify any identified issues or supporting you with the removal process. Delivering accurate and reliable information remains our top priority.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
Should We Standardize Non-GAAP Reporting?
There is a weak case at best for standardizing non-financial KPIs such as same store sales. Leave the rest of the existing regulation as is. Standardizing Regulators have long struggled with whether and how to standardize non-GAAP reporting. The SEC, via Regulation G and additional rules in 2016, put in common-sense rules on non-GAAP numbers requiring firms to reconcile the non-GAAP number to the GAAP number. In addition, the SEC requires that: (i) the firm cannot present misleading non-GAAP numbers, defined mostly as excluding normal, recurring, cash operating expenses necessary to operate a firm's business; (ii) the firm cannot present inconsistent non-GAAP measure across periods; (ii) the non-GAAP measure cannot exclude gains; and (iv) non-GAAP numbers should clearly label the adjustment. The policy question is whether we should go beyond this? The FASB has a proposal asking whether they need to do something about standardizing financial KPIs. One hypothesis would be that non-GAAP numbers are not all useless or fudged in that the exclusions and inclusions signal information (however costly). There is a fair amount of academic research supporting this perspective. Some complain that GAAP has become excessively restrictive, and we need to give firms leeway to communicate the idiosyncratic aspects of the business model via non-GAAP numbers. The opposing camp would argue that these adjustments to GAAP numbers are opportunistic, and the policy maker must protect the uninformed investors from such opportunism. So, what should the policy maker do? The reality, I suspect, lies somewhere in the middle. Some exclusions potentially make business sense. One-time items, say a litigation settlement, potentially mess with an analyst's projection of continuing performance. As long as that exclusion is disclosed, I can live with that exclusion. However, excluding depreciation, interest expense and taxes, which are normal business expenses, personally make little business sense to me. I often joke in class with my students, 'imagine a world where the student does not pay interest on student loans, does not pay NYC city, NY state and federal taxes, and pays no rent (loosely the capacity cost or DA in EBITDA). Of course, you are rich after these exclusions.' I suggest a mid-way compromise: (i) leave non-GAAP numbers as is, as long as the firm reconciles the non-GAAP number to the GAAP number and follows the SEC's earlier guidance on consistency; (ii) if there is no comparable GAAP number, such as same store sales or the number of subscribers and customers, there may be some value to standardizing what same store sales might look like, for instance, in the retail industry. Consider same store sales disclosure for Home Depot in the 10-K of 2024 and compare that to Lowes, its closest competitor. Home Depot reports something called, 'comparable sales,' defined as: 'Comparable Sales. Comparable sales is a measure that highlights the performance of our existing locations and websites by measuring the change in net sales for a period over the comparable prior period of equivalent length. Comparable sales includes sales at all locations, physical and online, open greater than 52 weeks (including remodels and relocations) and excludes closed stores. Retail stores become comparable on the Monday following their 52 week of operation. Acquisitions are typically included in comparable sales after they have been owned for more than 52 weeks. Our comparable sales results for fiscal 2024 exclude the 53rd week and compare weeks 1 through 52 in fiscal 2024 to the 52-week period reported for fiscal 2023. The method of calculating comparable sales varies across the retail industry. As a result, our method of calculating comparable sales may not be the same as similarly titled measures reported by other companies. Total comparable sales decreased 1.8% in fiscal 2024, reflecting a 1.0% decrease in comparable customer transactions and a 0.9% decrease in comparable average ticket compared to fiscal 2023.' Lowes reports, in its annual report for 2024, 'A comparable location is defined as a retail location that has been open longer than 13 months. A location that is identified for relocation is no longer considered comparable in the month of its relocation. The relocated location must then remain open longer than 13 months to be considered comparable. A location we have decided to close is no longer considered comparable as of the beginning of the month in which we announce its closing. Operating locations which are sold are included in comparable sales until the date of sale. Comparable sales include online sales, which positively impacted comparable sales in fiscal 2024, fiscal 2023, and fiscal 2022 by approximately 50 basis points, 25 basis points, and 45 basis points, respectively. The comparable sales calculation for fiscal 2022 was calculated using sales for a comparable 52-week period.' Even for two very similar, closely tracked peers such as Home Depot and Lowe's, there are subtle differences in comparability in the 'comparable' sales numbers: One of the challenges of standardizing non-financial KPIs is that these KPIs are likely to differ depending on the industries using them. Retail uses same store sales. Streaming services and cable companies report number of subscribers. Airlines use available seat miles. Does the rule maker want to get into the business of regulating KPIs by industry? Standardization can cause new problems Trevor Harris, emeritus professor at Columbia Business School, my colleague worries, 'standardization of non-GAAP numbers is going to cause more issues. I think part of the general problem is that people want everything in a summary statistic which cannot really work, and we assume all investors use the measures being reported. So, part of the answer is to put some of the responsibility back on investors instead of adding more regulation which will never cover everything. When I created economically consistent measures in Model Ware at Morgan Stanley, there were many cases where I had to arbitrate and provide consistency. No regulation can deal with all the idiosyncrasies in complex companies. Another dimension of this is why is comparability a holy grail? Lowes and Home Depot are more similar, but not homogenous. If people cannot adjust for 52 versus 53 weeks, why add more burden on the companies if they don't operate that way?' An ex-standard setter, who wished to stay anonymous, points out another important wrinkle - the constant pressure from industry to adopt income-increasing metrics or rules that make companies look good: 'If I was in charge of the FASB, I might think twice about taking on such a project. An example was earnings per share. It was the first GAAP metric and at one time was viewed as critical to investment decision making. Because many believed it was critical to investment decision making, the gaming of the standard became a popular sport. So much so, that the FASB was constantly trying to issue guidance to address the most recent scheme to boost EPS. The literature became voluminous and complex. A former FASB Chairman told me that he believed the EPS standard was one of the FASB's biggest mistakes and that in his view the FASB should not set standards for how to compute metrics used by investors.' In sum, there is a weak case at best for some kind of standardization of non-financial KPIs. On balance, I suggest we leave Regulation G and the SEC's 2016 rules as is. In my view, these rules strike a reasonable balance between giving firms discretion to tell their story without giving investors information to detect managerial opportunism.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Vanguard Files for ETF Share Class Approval
Vanguard, long above the dual share class fray, has officially joined it. On Wednesday night, it filed for exemptive relief to offer an ETF share class of its legacy active mutual funds. The move makes Vanguard — previously the only company allowed to provide dual share class ETFs — the latest to file. (Vanguard uses dual share classes for its passive index funds, but this would bring the structure to actively managed funds.) The move marks an important milestone in the push for dual share class approval more broadly, since Vanguard, up until this point, has adopted a 'wait-and-see' approach toward the possibility of broader SEC approval, said Jeff DeMaso, author of The Independent Vanguard Adviser newsletter. 'Vanguard was waiting to see positive signs from the SEC before going through the paperwork and application process,' DeMaso said. 'Now that they've seen those positive signs, they don't want to miss this boat.' Vanguard held an exclusive patent on ETF share classes of mutual funds until 2023, and the SEC allowed it to offer such classes only for index funds. READ ALSO: Schwab Keeps Industry's ETF Fee Cuts Rolling and Weight-Loss Drug ETFs Generate Skinnier Returns Than Expected Prior to Vanguard's patent expiring, only one fund company, VanEck, had filed for similar exemptive relief from the federal Investment Company Act of 1940 to offer such classes — a filing that was never addressed by the SEC. Now that roughly 60 fund companies have applied for the relief, however — with the Trump administration's SEC signaling support for their approval — the applications are widely expected to be waved through this summer. What Vanguard may find particularly appealing about the structure, DeMaso said, is that investors will have more control over the timing of realizing portfolio gains because capital gains distributions aren't required with trading activity like they are for mutual funds. Vanguard currently has more than 70 funds with $2 trillion in assets under management that make use of the ETF share classes. Vanguard also has $3.2 trillion in ETF assets, and seven actively managed fixed-income ETFs in the US, with the latest launched earlier this month. Death by a Thousand Cuts: As mutual funds see more and more outflows — and as ETFs continue to experience massive inflows — DeMaso holds that their future remains to be seen: 'Even if this is a step towards the grave for mutual funds, it's going to be a very slow walk.' This post first appeared on The Daily Upside. To receive exclusive news and analysis of the rapidly evolving ETF landscape, built for advisors and capital allocators, subscribe to our free ETF Upside newsletter.
Business Upturn
10 hours ago
- Business Upturn
Aetherium Acquisition Corp. Announces Change of Special Meeting Date
GREENWICH, Conn., June 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Aetherium Acquisition (the 'SPAC' or the 'Company'), a publicly-traded special purpose acquisition company, today announced that its Special Meeting ('Meeting'), previously scheduled at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time on June 13, 2025, has been postponed to 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time on June 27, 2025, and the redemption right deadline has been postponed to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 25, 2025. The record date for the Meeting remains May 9, 2025. No changes have been made to the proposals to be voted on by shareholders at the Meeting. Shareholders of the Company who have previously submitted their proxy and who do not want to change their vote do not need to take any action. On May 23, 2025, the Company filed a definitive proxy statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the 'SEC') and on June 3, 2025, the Company filed a revised definitive proxy statement with the SEC, each in connection with its solicitation of proxies for the Meeting. Before making any voting decision, investors and shareholders of the company are urged to read the definitive proxy statement (including any amendments or supplements thereto) and other documents the company files with the sec carefully in their entirety when they become available as they will contain important information. Investors and shareholders will be able to obtain free copies of the definitive proxy statement (including any amendments or supplements thereto) and other documents filed or that will be filed with the SEC through the web site maintained by the SEC at About Aetherium Acquisition Corp. Aetherium Acquisition Corp. is a blank check company formed to effect a merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition, stock purchase, reorganization, or similar business combination with one or more businesses. Efforts to identify a prospective target business will not be limited to a particular business, industry sector, or geographical region. However, it intends to focus on companies in Asia (excluding China). Forward-looking Statements This press release contains statements that may constitute 'forward-looking statements,' including with respect to Aetherium's pursuit of an alternative business combination. No assurance can be given that Aetherium will successfully seek and consummate such an alternative business combination. Forward-looking statements are subject to numerous conditions, many of which are beyond the control of Aetherium, including those set forth in the Risk Factors section of Aetherium's public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Copies are available on the SEC's website, Aetherium undertakes no obligation to update these statements for revisions or changes after the date of this release except as required by law. Participants in the Solicitation The Company and its directors, executive officers, other members of management and employees, under SEC rules, may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from the shareholders of the Company in connection with the Meeting. Investors and shareholders may obtain more detailed information regarding the names, affiliations and interests of the Company's directors and officers in the Proxy Statement, which may be obtained free of charge from the sources indicated above. No Offer or Solicitation This press release shall not constitute a solicitation of a proxy, consent or authorization with respect to any securities or in respect of the Meeting proposals. This communication shall also not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities, nor shall there be any sale of securities in any states or jurisdictions in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction. No offering of securities shall be made except by means of a prospectus meeting the requirements of Section 10 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or an exemption therefrom. Contact: For investors: Crocker Coulson, CEO, AUM Media+1 (646) 652-7185 [email protected]; [email protected]
