Nine giants object to OKX-ICE tokenized stocks because "not without my shares, you don't" 🚫

Nine publicly listed companies have told OKX and Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) they do not want their equities offered in tokenized form on the proposed platform the two firms are backing, according to a Thursday notice filed by OKX and ICE. The objecting firms are Cerebras Systems, AppLovin, Applied Digital, Rocket Lab, CoreWeave, Verizon Communications, Applied Optoelectronics, Broadcom and UnitedHealth Group. The notice did not disclose the reasons behind the objections.

The pushback comes under the Securities and Exchange Commission's Sept. 17 innovation exemption, which requires tokenized venues to give issuers written notice and an opportunity to object before listing third-party tokenized stocks. Cointelegraph has reached out to OKX for comment on the ramifications of the objection and had not received a response by publication time.

Industry participants said the companies are not rejecting tokenization broadly, but are questioning execution and consent. "Issuers aren't on the blockchain. They're objecting to not knowing what happens to their price once it trades there," Robin Nordnes, CEO of trading validation platform Raiku, told Cointelegraph. "On a public chain, the validator building the block sets the order. Until desks can measure their distance to that point, best execution is a promise, not a number."

Misha Putiatin, co-founder of collateral markets platform Symbiotic, told Cointelegraph companies want more operational data before signing off. "Issuers need to see the upside and a track record of efficient pricing," he said, adding that more "real-world data would help everyone assess the benefits and risks." He pointed to institutional initiatives such as the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation's (DTCC) tokenization services as a way to build confidence.

CoinShares senior research associate Luke Nolan told Cointelegraph the objections are venue-specific rather than a blanket rejection. "This veto also seems to be venue-specific, as in companies being able to say: no, I don't want them offered on this venue, but I could permit/launch it somewhere else," Nolan said. He added that the concerns are valid, noting that market participants have previously used specific market mechanics to drive "squeezes" or "short-term swings" in the underlying asset's price.

According to a breakdown of onchain capital flows, more than $754 million moved onchain during the past 30 days, pushing the combined total across stablecoins and tokenized assets to $320 billion. The dispute is set to test whether crypto venues can list blockchain-based versions of public-company shares without issuer cooperation.