Robin CEO Vlad Tenev said the trading platform’s so-called OpenAI and SpaceX token stocks are not technically stakes in the company and are not “completely related”.
This comes after Openai raised concerns about the product, which aims to expose EU users to a variety of U.S. stocks, including private companies, which have less liquidity than listed companies.
Openai warned last week Robinhood’s Stock Token Do not represent interests in the company and said in an article on X: “Any transfer of equity requires our approval – we do not approve any transfer.”
Robinhood said its OpenAI stock token “is realized through ownership equity in Robinhood in special-purpose tools.”
Tenev, who co-founded Robinhood with entrepreneur Baiju Bhatt in 2013, responded to Robinhood on Tuesday to CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe”, his initial response to Openai said: “It’s really not technically fair.”
Tenev said OpenAI’s complex corporate structure allows institutional investors to use “various tools, such as various tools that will be converted to for-profit later, such as fair tools, such as equity.”
Openai was originally formed as a non-profit organization. However, since then, it has evolved to include a nonprofit organization owned by a nonprofit organization.
“In itself, I don’t think it’s technically stakeholder tool at all meaningless,” he said, adding: “It’s important that retail customers have the opportunity to access this asset due to the disruptive nature of AI.”
On Monday, the Bank of Lithuania was the main authority of the EU, which was CNBC’s “waiting for clarification” of the company’s stock token structure after OpenAI issued a statement last week.
“We can only evaluate the legality and compliance of these specific tools after receiving and evaluating this information,” Lithuania Bank spokesman Giedriusšniukas told CNBC. “The information of investors must be provided in clear, fair and non-misleading language.”
Responding to comments from the Lithuanian regulator, Teneff said Robilins was “happy to continue answering questions from our regulators”.
“Since this is a new thing, regulators will want to study it, and we have built the program in a way we think we can withstand scrutiny – in this field we want to be censored as a large, innovative player.”
