ETN is a token. FULL STOP :)

There seems to be some confusion about this, so let’s clear it up for good—esp. as it doesn’t reflect well e.g. when people on social media are “shouting”, incorrectly(!), about ETN not being a token.

ETN, as a type of cryptoasset, is officially an ‘exchange token’.
Read about the three main types of cryptoassets here.
And see also this Glossary entry: Regulatory Status

Sorry about the confusion.

It all started on the following topic :
Website improvement

I have to disagree. Depending on who you are talking to.

When talking to people in the cryptosphere the word token implies that the crypto you are referring to is a token which does not have its own blockchain. Generally ERC20 tokens being the most common.

Since ETN has its very own native blockchain, it is not a token.

However! If you are talking to someone who is not involved in Cryptocurrency, or reading what regulatory bodies in the financial services industry then they don’t seem to have any recognition for any cryptocurrency, hence unless it’s FIAT of some kind they dont accept anything to be a “Coin” this includes Bitcoin.

So it depends on wether your talking to the crypto community or going by the legal definitions i guess. Since that website is geared towards the people already into crypto i’m going to say its wrong and anything with its own independant blockchain should be referred to as a “Coin”

If you are going to use the legal definitions then every single CC is a “token”


I appreciate the point that you are making and ETN is obviously not an ERC token… but the fact remains that it is incorrect to be going around saying ETN is not a token, when… it is: By Electroneum’s own T&Cs and by a pretty established and accepted framework used by policy makers, regulators and banks… I.e. players in the real world.

But you cant go using what current financial players say and expect people who are long term crypto enthusiasts and have them adapt to what banks or financial institutions call cryptoassets.

Frankly these people hate what CC’s are, have little understanding of them and they regard them as low in status as they do the money found in a game of monopoly.

I certainly wont change my definition of what makes a crypto coin, a “coin” and a token, a “token” based on those people.
But fully accept that by their definition nothing is a coin unless it is a FIAT currency. They have their own ideas, but that doesnt mean others need to go by what they say.

I just dont think you should be trying to change peoples assesment of coins and tokens when the people you are talking to are not in this space to appease banks etc.

We can agree to disagree on the matter, but ETN is as much of a coin as it can be in regards to crypto. But if you think it should be regarded as a token, you should go into the bitcoin forums and say the same to them. Prepare for a mighty fight though :grin:

1 Like

etn is a coin. full stop. :slight_smile:


You are missing my point. :slight_smile: It’s okay though, it’s just the limitation of having to communicate like this.

I’ve said nothing about ETN being a ‘coin’. By all means let’s continue to call it that (too), even if of course no coins whatsoever are ever involved in any cryptocurrency. (E.g. no ‘coins’ are ever stored in your ‘wallet’, right? Remember as it’s all distributed there is no particular “thing” that could be called a coin anywhere in the system. A “coin” is literally and figuratively an abstraction. :)) You also seem to be equating coins with FIAT money, which is of course a limited analogy as FIAT money also exists as notes and in fact in a digital form.

All I am saying is that it is simply incorrect to say that ETN isn’t a token, when Electroneum itself says (for very very good reasons) that it is. So, to repeat, ETN is a token: an exchange token.

Please note I am 100% sympathetic to the struggle against the established financial “order” (disorder, really) but the point being made is not on that level but the level of technicalities.

I am not missing your point. I am disagreeing with it and explaining why.

You are citing definitions from people that mean nothing to the people whom you are talking to.

If Electroneum were in talks (for whatever reason) with a financial regulator they may indeed refer to ETN as a token so that they are seen to be embracing regulation but dont expect the people to accept that by their own definition ETN is to be called a token.

I actually dont get why you would make this thread in the first place, the choir will not change their minds based on what banks or a current financial system calls something. If there was ever a cryptocurrency regulator that deemed everything tokens (even though this is highly ever unlikely) then maybe that would be a stepping stone to changing peoples minds. But not the current financial dissorder (your own words)


Good breakdown here of Coin vs Token

and Chrono breaking it down


break for a second, here some juices :tropical_drink::tropical_drink::tropical_drink:

1 Like

I’ve had those sites and others bookmarked for awhile since I’m not exactly a crypto expert, but try to learn here and there. I have to agree with ColinSTE, ETN is in fact an alt coin and I don’t plan on changing how I view it or describe it. Unless For some weird reason we were told by ETN not to use the terms coin, alt coin or crypto currency.

1 Like

Let’s say ETN is legally and financially recognized as an “Exchange Token” but in the real life, we all call it a coin. And a good one :wink:


While we encourage discussion we do not accept rudeness. Please be polite and civil when discussing topics with other users.

1 Like

I dont see anyone not being polite. To whom is this referring to @Rach?


It’s a gentle reminder for all of you.

I fully agree with Colin on this one. Let the financial institutions call it whatever they want for their internal purposes. If they want to call it a token, sure. They can go right ahead for whatever regulatory terminology they need to use to fit their needs. Now that ETN is a compliant crypto, they have to change their terminology to fit the financial regulations. That’s all fine. But it doesn’t change the crypto sphere’s terminology, which is the correct one within crypto itself.

This reminds me of my former job when I was working between a few different departments. Each department had their own terms. For instance, I was in IT. In IT, a “CPU” is the chip that does all the computing within a computer…which is the correct terminology. However, when we made purchase orders for entire computers, we had to refer to them as CPUs…which simply made no sense…but you get my point. This discussion is no different. It’s simply a terminology difference between two different groups.

I am also a little confused by your gentle reminder, @Rach. I see no rudeness on this post at all…nothing but a good discussion? Can you point out where the rudeness is being implied so people can determine what they are writing fits that description instead of simply hoping they don’t cross a line they don’t know is there by your definition? Throwing out warnings with no definition is a cause for confusion…and I’m personally confused now myself…


One definition I was pointing to is Electroneum’s own T&Cs. So let’s pause on your comment there for a mo… :wink:

Next, the people “I am talking to” are both people already involved with cryptoassets (with various degrees of understanding—and we are all on a learning-curve here) as well as people completely new to the field. Admittedly, I do think though that if the idea is mass adoption, anything said will have to be said especially with people new to all this in mind. Like it or not, people we need to get on board as the next wave of adopters will likely find reassurance and comfort in knowing a little bit about what HM Treasury, or the Bank of England or other financial institutions think about these matters and to see it evidenced that they do in fact take the technology and the field very seriously.

It’s not so much about being in talks with a regulator, but about the fact that regulation is coming, perhaps as early as this year (I’ve linked to official material making this clear). Again, we neither have to agree with it, or support that drive in contrast to the original vision of cryptocurrencies—it is however a fact. I am not asking anybody per say to change their definition… I am not interested in trying to convince people when the facts speak for themselves. The point I am making is that ETN is and will be recognised as an exchange token by key players and it’s not a good idea or helpful for people to go around social media having a go at other people (even publications on occasions) shouting that ETN is not a token. Especially when a perfectly serious and grounded argument can be made that it is—inc. that Electroneum’s own T&Cs says that.

I think if you read for example the above Cryptoassets Taskforce report you’ll see that your assertion is rather simplistic, if not (sorry! :grinning:) somewhat naive. Did you know that The Bank of England recognised the resilience benefits of DLT systems in one of its proofs of concept back in June 2016? (They were using Ethereum). Or that the Bank of England’s new RTGS service will be compatible with ‘DLT-based payment systems, supporting further innovation and use of DLT in financial services’?

In terms of not getting why I started this thread—and to make clear the spirit in which I’ve meant it—I trust you’ve noted the :slightly_smiling_face: in the title. I knew/know that people would have “issues” with the matter and the suggestion that ETN is a token!

In summary then, to reiterate the point: it is perfectly coherent and reasonable to refer to ETN as a token! It is, as according to both Electroneum’s T&Cs as well as the policy (and regulatory) framework key players of society are developing…

Finally, as a number of you, am also puzzled by Rachel’s interjection. :slightly_smiling_face: I don’t think anybody’s been at all rude…(?) and to say it’s ‘a gentle reminder’ comes across as potentially patronising, considering the level of in fact polite discourse when in disagreement unfolding here.


The point is it’s not for internal purposes! And the comparison with CPU terminology is great! :wink:

1 Like

Yes these are good and thank you for linking them here. But neither refute the point I am making that it is perfectly coherent (and more) to refer to ETN as a token. As long as we know why we do it and able to qualify it… hence the :slightly_smiling_face: in the title…! Thank you again! :pray:

Etn website

In September 2017, Electroneum made ETN exchange tokens available for sale in their Initial Coin Offering (ICO), also known as a token sale. The ETN token sale was a great success closing early after having achieved the maximum Bitcoin and Ethereum targets. The Electroneum ICO is still the record holder for the largest ICO ever to take place by participant numbers (115K+). The value of the Bitcoin and Ethereum that was used to purchase ETN was $40 million USD at the time the sale closed.

Website says token.

Terms and conditions…

1. These terms

1.1. What these terms cover . These are the terms and conditions on which we supply products or services to you, whether these are services or any form of digital content for the purposes of using ETN tokens.

1.2. What these terms do not cover . These terms and conditions do not cover:

1.2.1. ETN tokens themselves or their use other than in connection with the Services and Digital Content;

So there you have it … its a token

I still say its a coin.

End of the day

Its a cryptocurrency …