The highly anticipated OKXICE TSV will launch on November 23rd. Previously, over 60 companies opposed the tokenization of their stocks on OKXICE TSV. Given that these are also tokenizing US stocks, why are these companies opposing OKXICE, but not Binance bStocks, xStocks, Ondo, or other similar systems? The core differences lie in the issuance mechanism and applicable regulatory rules: 1/ OKXICE: Issuing and trading tokenized stocks under the new framework of the US SEC OKX partners with ICE, the parent company of the NYSE, to offer on-chain stock trading via TSVs to qualified US users. These on-chain stocks enjoy the same rights as common stockholders, directly holding shares in the corresponding companies (actual shareholders), including economic rights, dividends, voting rights, and merger/split synchronization. Under the SEC's innovation exemption order, third parties can tokenize publicly traded company stocks, but must notify the listed company in advance and give it a 30-day objection window. Once the listed company formally objects, the platform cannot trade unauthorized third-party tokenized stocks under this exemption framework. Therefore, listed companies have a clear veto right. 2/ bStocks: Tokenized products backed by stocks issued by third parties. bStocks have underlying stocks held or custodied by a third party, which are then offered to investors (mainly users outside the US). Issuing corresponding on-chain tokens Investors gain economic rights equivalent to stock prices, but are not directly granted shareholder status in the listed company, such as voting rights. Therefore, the original listed company's participation or authorization is not required, and there is no universally applicable 30-day issuer veto procedure like that of OKXICE TSV. 3/ Why would listed companies oppose this? The reason may not be opposition to blockchain itself, but rather a reluctance to have their shares enter an immature and uncontrolled parallel trading market. Very few are truly willing to be the first to try this. Their concerns vary, for example: 24/7 trading may amplify price volatility outside of US stock trading hours; On-chain liquidity is disconnected from the traditional stock market, potentially leading to price discrepancies and price discovery issues; Investors may confuse true stock ownership with third-party token rights; Listed companies will need to address new investor relations, compliance, and potential litigation risks. Moreover, for listed companies, the cost of opposition is currently low, but the uncertainty following tacit approval is high. **4/ The Battle for Control of Stock Tokenization One route is third-party tokenization like bStocks, xStocks, and Ondo: financial institutions hold the underlying assets and then issue on-chain tokens with only economic exposure. Another route is the US-compliant route like OKXICE TSV: on-chain tokens must carry the same shareholder rights as ordinary shares. Listed companies can choose to participate in tokenization themselves or veto third-party tokenization. The former is easier to quickly expand stock coverage, similar to the "offshore model" of exchanges, mainly targeting non-US markets; the latter operates under the regulatory framework of the US SEC, and has a greater opportunity to achieve deep integration of equity, dividends, voting rights, and settlement systems, with higher entry barriers and greater early friction. The opposition from these listed companies does not mean the failure of stock tokenization, but rather a necessary process for new things in their early stages. The real competition in the future will not be about which platforms can provide more tokenized stocks, but about who can truly connect listed companies, equity registration, custody, trading, and regulation. Appendix - OKX Official Announcement https://(x.com)/okx/status/2120502060428792047