I suppose if there were some actually relevant news, like Lykke had received ANY license to trade other than a "Vanuatu brokerage license" the LKK price would react. But while I believe Lykke's US rep went so far as to anticipate imminent US regulation in the months ahead during the online AGM (from his laptop at the airport), I view this as unsubstantiated, unprofessional and misleading. He doesn't know IF AND WHEN US regulators will give him approval. What if they do not? What is Lykke's business case then?

This is how a lot of regulators I know work: You apply for a license. They examine your application, and if they're favourable or unfavourable they'll give preliminary written feedback, which of course is market sensitive information and will be immediately released by the company in question. Then later the regulator usually - not always - follows up with a final determination granting or not granting, as the case may be.

Lykke has "got people on it". How we get from that to publically stating likely timeframes within periods of months I don't know - or rather I do: that's what the person promising speedy regulatory approval hopes for. What you hope for isn't likely, and shouldn't be presented to investors as such. I think Lykke's hopes of licensing is an example of this. But let's look at another example, the Winklevoss brothers ETF application. It was rejected. Then a whole lot of "news" outlets in the crypto space started reporting the "news" that the SEC will "review" its decision. This isn't "news", it's a statutory obligation the SEC must offer to ALL applicants whose applications are not frivolous.

I do not like Coindesk, Cointelegraph or whatever manipulating the true nature the situation (eg. the SEC rejection of Winklevoss' ETF) to paint a picture not really aligned to reality. I like even less Lykke which claims to want to be a major financial exchange doing it. To me it's just like manipulation at every level - on the LKK price which users can't control, and then on the roadmap.