--- author: Bloomberg Podcasts date: '2026-02-12' guest: '' layout: post.njk source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_Q9jv088Sw speaker: Bloomberg Podcasts tags: - prediction-market-regulation - commodity-definition - insider-trading - regulatory-coordination - market-integrity title: CFTC新任主席Michael Selig谈预测市场监管 summary: 本期Odd Lots播客采访了美国商品期货交易委员会（CFTC）新任主席**Michael Selig**，深入探讨了预测市场和加密货币的监管挑战。Selig主席阐述了CFTC基于原则的监管体系，以及如何将预测市场定义为商品，并处理内幕交易、赌博与衍生品交易的区别。他还强调了CFTC与SEC之间协调的重要性，以及在快速发展的数字资产领域制定清晰规则的必要性。对话还触及了对市场广告的担忧和监管机构资源分配的问题。 insight: '' draft: true series: '' category: investment-assets area: finance-wealth project: [] people: [] companies_orgs: - CFTC - SEC - Kalshi - Polymarket - Truth Social products_models: [] media_books: [] status: evergreen --- ### 预测市场与监管挑战 **Joe Weisenthal**: 你对**Cardi B**是否在**超级碗**上表演了有什么看法？这很有趣，但也有些相关，因为我看到有人就**Kalshi**的决定向委员会提出了投诉。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Do you have an opinion on whether Cardi B performed at the Super Bowl? I mean, it's funny, but it's also kind of relevant because I saw someone has actually filed a complaint to the commission about **Kalshi**'s decision specifically.
**Mike Selig**: 当然，我们正在投入大量资源调查**Cardi B**是否表演了，但我们真正的重点是市场。我们监管市场的方式独特而又出色，交易所本身，类似于证券方面，是**自律组织**。因此，每个交易所都有自己经机构批准的规则手册，并对交易所上认证的合约有自己的要求。所以，**Cardi B**合约当然经过了自认证过程，然后它们根据交易所规则进行结算。它们也通过清算所。所以，每个交易所都有这些规则手册和关于合约如何解决和结算的某些要求。当然，我们现在看到**Kalshi**的规则手册和**PolyMarket**的规则手册之间存在一些差异。但这就是我们市场的伟大之处，能够建立一个业务，开发一个交易所，并在机构监督下拥有一些灵活的护栏。但我们不精确规定规则手册中必须包含什么。我们有一个**基于原则的监管系统**。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, of course, we're spending a lot of resources investigating whether **Cardi B** performed. Really our focus here is on the market. So the unique thing, the great thing about the way that we regulate the markets is that the exchanges themselves, similar to on the security side, are **self-regulatory organizations**. So each exchange has its own rulebook that's been approved by the agency. It has its own requirements for contracts that are certified on the exchange. So of course, the **Cardi B** contracts went through a self-certification process and then they're settled in accordance with exchange rules. They go through a clearinghouse as well. So the exchanges each have these rulebooks and certain requirements around how the contracts are resolved and settled. And of course, now we're seeing some differences amongst **Kalshi**'s rulebook and **PolyMarket**'s rulebook. But that's the great thing about our markets and having the ability to build a business, to develop an exchange with some flexible guardrails on top that the agency oversees. But we don't prescribe exactly what has to be in the rulebook. We have a **principles based system of regulation**.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 大家好，欢迎收听《Odd Lots》播客的又一集。我是**Joe Weisenthal**。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Lots podcast. I'm **Joe Weisenthal**.
**Tracy Alloway**: 我是**Tracy Alloway**。**Tracy**，你看了**超级碗**吗？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: And I'm **Tracy Alloway**. **Tracy**, did you watch the **Superbowl**?
**Joe Weisenthal**: 我正要问这个，我其实知道，我正要以同样的方式开始。我看了**超级碗**。所以我觉得有权问你一个非常有争议的问题。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: You know, I was going to ask that and I knew it actually, I was going to start exactly the same way. I did watch the **Super Bowl**. And so I feel empowered to ask you a very controversial.
**Tracy Alloway**: 哦，是的，不是你看了哪个中场秀，而是**Cardi B**在**超级碗**上表演了吗？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Oh yeah, not which halftime show you watched, but did **Cardi B** perform at the **Super Bowl**?
**Joe Weisenthal**: 哦。对，因为这是一件大事。我忘了有这个。我听说过各种关于预测市场和人们下注的问题。那么，这个问题是如何解决的？基本问题又是什么？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Oh. Right, because this was a big thing. I forgot that there was. I'm aware of various sort of questions about prediction markets and things that people place bets on. Well, how did that resolve? What was the basic issue here again?
**Tracy Alloway**: 我想它仍在以各种方式解决。但是，**Cardi B**在**Bad Bunny**的盛大表演期间在现场，她有点像随着音乐跳舞和唱歌，至少是跟着**Pedro Pascal**和**Jessica Alba**等人一起对口型。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: So I think it's still being resolved in various ways. But, **Cardi B**, she was on set during **Bad Bunny**'s extravaganza and she was kind of like dancing and singing along, like mouthing words, at least along with other people like **Pedro Pascal** and **Jessica Alba**.
**Joe Weisenthal**: **Lady Gaga**。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Yeah, **Lady Gaga**.
**Tracy Alloway**: **Lady Gaga**。他们好像一起唱歌。对，对，对。这之所以重要，完全是因为**预测市场**。所以有一个赌注：**Cardi B**会表演吗？现在的问题是，站在舞台上，摇摆着头，对口型算不算表演？**PolyMarket**说算，**Kalshi**说不算。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: **Lady Gaga**. It was like singing together. Right, right, right. The only reason this matters at all is because of **prediction markets**. So there was a bet. Will **Cardi B** perform? And now the question is, does standing on stage and kind of bobbing your head and mouthing words count as a performance? **PolyMarket** says it does, **Kalshi** says it doesn't.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 哦，有意思。看吧。**Kalshi**和**PolyMarket**在**Cardi B**是否表演的问题上存在分歧。这很棒。这种张力我喜欢。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Oh, interesting. Yeah. There you go. **Kalshi** and **PolyMarket** split over whether **Cardi B** performed. That's great. That's a great tension. I like that.
**Tracy Alloway**: 是的。这让我很震惊，抛开我似乎错过了这个具体事件不谈，**预测市场**现在在多大程度上已经成为消费体验的一部分。你看看人们谈论的所有这些不同的事情，比如**Lady Gaga**是否会出现，有人在它公开之前就下了赌注。而且，就像每次得分一样，你会查看赔率线，比如这在多大程度上改变了对**海鹰队**领先的预期。**预测市场**正在真正成为流行文化以及我们与流行文化互动的一部分。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: It is. It was striking to me, setting aside that I actually somehow seem to have missed the specific thing, how much **prediction markets** are now just part of the consumption experience. You look at all these different things that people are talking about, there was, is **Lady Gaga** going to show up somehow? Someone made a bet on it before it went public. But also, just like with each score, you check the line, how much did this move the expectations of whether the **Seahawks** are leading? **Prediction markets** are truly becoming part of pop culture and how we interact with pop culture.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 还有一些奇怪的赌注，比如教练身上要倒的**佳得乐**的颜色。国歌演唱的时长。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: There were some weird bets around like color of **Gatorade** that was going to get dumped on the coach. Yeah, length of like the national anthem being sung.
**Tracy Alloway**: 是的。你看到了吗？我有点想尝试其中一些，但我忍住了。我仍然没有使用**PolyMarket**或**Kalshi**。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Yeah. Did you see that? Like, I was tempted by some of those, but I stayed away. I'm still, I haven't used **PolyMarket** or **Kalshi** probably.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 有趣的是，情绪波动有多大。因为几年前，比如2022年、2023年，我们做了一集节目，那时候几乎什么都没有，而这些市场的监管180度大转弯，自由化程度相当显著。甚至回到一年半前，只有**PolyMarket**，而且是离岸版本，你必须用**稳定币**来资助。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: The interesting thing too is how much the mood has swung, right? Because a few years ago, like, I don't know, 2022, 2023, I think we did an episode. And that time, there was almost nothing. And the sort of regulatory 180, the degree to the liberalization of these markets has been pretty remarkable. Even, going back to a year and a half ago, there was just **PolyMarket** and it was just the offshore version that you had to fund with **Stablecoins**.
**Tracy Alloway**: 是的。现在它爆发了，当时**Kalshi**非常有限，他们没有美国访问权限，或者美国访问权限非常受限。总之，他们现在在这里，每个人都在努力弄清楚这一切将走向何方。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Yeah. And now it's exploded. At the time, **Kalshi** was very limited. They didn't have U.S. access, etc., or very curtailed U.S. access. Anyway, they're here and everyone's trying to wrap their heads around where this is all going and stuff.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 是的，感觉它们现在比以前更受认可了。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Yeah, it feels like they're much more sanctioned, I guess, than they used.
**Tracy Alloway**: 是的。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Yeah.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 但话虽如此，仍然有一些问题人们正在努力解决。你有模糊的结果，比如**Cardi B**真的表演了吗？你对**内幕交易**有担忧，虽然不是严格意义上的内幕交易，因为我们谈论的不是证券合约，但也许是拥有内部信息的人无意中披露了一些重要信息。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: But that said, there are still some issues that people are trying to work out. You have ambiguous outcomes like did **Cardi B** actually perform? You have concerns around **insider trading**, although not insider trading per se, because we're not talking about securities contracts, but maybe people with insider info who inadvertently disclose something material.
**Tracy Alloway**: 我当时确实在想这个，你也可以押注哪些公司会在**超级碗**上投放广告。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: I was thinking about this actually, so you can also bet on which companies are going to run **Super Bowl ads**.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 哦，是的。很多人一定知道一家公司是否会投放那样的广告。你有像代理机构的参与者，每个人，你可能会争辩说那可能是**重要非公开信息**，对吗？你投放**超级碗**广告，你会得到很多关注，如果你是上市公司，你的股价可能会上涨。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Oh yeah. And a lot of people must know if a company is going to run an ad like that. You have like the agency actors, like everyone, and you could argue maybe that that's **material, non-public information**, right? You run a **Super Bowl** ad, you get a bunch of attention, maybe your share price goes up if you're publicly listed.
**Tracy Alloway**: 是的，我不知道。反正有很多事情，与其一直谈论它们，因为我们可以谈一个小时。我们确实有完美的嘉宾。我们将与**Mike Selig**交谈。他是**CFTC**（美国商品期货交易委员会）的新任主席，是预测市场的主要监管机构。他刚刚在12月宣誓就职。我们将讨论所有这些，也许还有一些加密货币。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Yeah, I don't know. There are so many things anyway, rather than just keep talking about them because we can talk for an hour. We really do have the perfect guest. We're going to be speaking with **Mike Selig**. He is the new chairman of the **CFTC**, the main regulator for prediction markets. He's just sworn in in December. We're going to talk all about this, maybe some crypto as well.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 那么，**Mike**，非常感谢你来到《Odd Lots》播客，来到演播室。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: So, **Mike**, thank you so much for coming on Odd Lots, coming into the studio.
**Mike Selig**: 很高兴来到这里。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Glad to be here.
### CFTC的监管目标与新市场 **Joe Weisenthal**: 你能大致介绍一下你担任这个新职位后的目标吗？**CFTC**正处于一个关键时刻。你提到了**预测市场**、**加密货币**、**人工智能**以及各种影响我们市场的新技术和产品。**CFTC**在金融危机之前是一个鲜为人知的监管机构，主要监管期货市场。它的管辖权已扩展到掉期市场、场外衍生品市场。现在，我们看到这个领域有如此多的创新，比如**预测市场**和**加密货币**，立法有望摆在总统的办公桌上。因此，该机构正处于一个独特的时刻，有机会塑造这些新兴市场的未来。这是一个非常激动人心的时刻。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: What do you tell us a little bit about just broadly coming into this new role? What are your goals here with the **CFTC**? We're really at a pivotal moment. You mentioned **prediction markets**, **crypto**, **AI**, all manner of new technologies and products that are impacting our markets. And the **CFTC** was really this kind of a little known regulator before the financial crisis, regulated in the futures markets. It has expanded jurisdiction over the swaps markets, the over-the-counter derivatives markets. And now we see so much innovation in that space with things like **prediction markets** and **crypto**, with legislation on the verge of hopefully being on the president's desk. And so the agency is really at this unique moment where it has the opportunity to shape the future of these new and emerging markets. And it's really exciting time to be in the seat.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 你对**Cardi B**是否在**超级碗**上表演了有什么看法？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Do you have an opinion on whether **Cardi B** performed at the **Super Bowl**?
**Mike Selig**: 这很有趣，但也有点相关，因为我看到有人就**Kalshi**的决定向委员会提出了投诉。当然，我们正在投入大量资源调查**Cardi B**是否表演了。我们真正的重点是市场。我们监管市场的方式独特而又出色，交易所本身，类似于证券方面，是**自律组织**。所以每个交易所都有自己经机构批准的规则手册。它对交易所上认证的合约有自己的要求。所以，**Cardi B**合约当然经过了自认证过程，然后它们根据交易所规则进行结算。它们也通过清算所。所以，每个交易所都有这些规则手册和关于合约如何解决和结算的某些要求。当然，我们现在看到**Kalshi**的规则手册和**PolyMarket**的规则手册之间存在一些差异。但这就是我们市场的伟大之处，能够建立一个业务，开发一个交易所，并在机构监督下拥有一些灵活的护栏。但我们不精确规定规则手册中必须包含什么。我们有一个**基于原则的监管系统**。
Original English **Mike Selig**: I mean, it's funny, but it's also kind of relevant because I saw someone has actually filed a complaint to the commission about **Kalshi**'s decision specifically. Well, of course, we're spending a lot of resources investigating whether **Cardi B** performed. Really our focus here is on the market. So the unique thing, the great thing about the way that we regulate the markets is that the exchanges themselves, similar to on the security side, are **self-regulatory organizations**. So each exchange has its own rulebook that's been approved by the agency. It has its own requirements for contracts that are certified on the exchange. So of course, the **Cardi B** contracts went through a self-certification process and then they're settled in accordance with exchange rules. They go through a clearinghouse as well. So the exchanges each have these rulebooks and certain requirements around how the contracts are resolved and settled. And of course, now we're seeing some differences amongst **Kalshi**'s rulebook and **PolyMarket**'s rulebook. But that's the great thing about our markets and having the ability to build a business, to develop an exchange with some flexible guardrails on top that the agency oversees. But we don't prescribe exactly what has to be in the rulebook. We have a **principles based system of regulation**.
### 商品定义与监管范围 **Tracy Alloway**: 像**Cardi B**是否会在**超级碗**中场秀表演这样的事情，它被归类为由**CFTC**监管的真正金融工具的依据是什么？因为对我来说，这感觉确实有问题。谁有经济风险？他们需要对**Cardi B**的表演进行对冲。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: What is the basis for something like Is **Cardi B** going to perform at the **Super Bowl** halftime show? What is the basis for this being categorized as a true financial instrument regulated by the **CFTC**? Because it certainly just feels like problematic to me. Who has economic exposure? They need to hedge to **Cardi B** performing.
**Mike Selig**: 关于**商品**的定义以及我们今天监管的市场，有一个非常有趣的历史故事。追溯到20世纪30年代，当《**商品交易法**》首次批准时，它最初侧重于谷物，随着时间的推移，我们有了像工作台这样的东西，走了很长一段路。
Original English **Mike Selig**: There's a really interesting historical story around the definition of **commodity** and the markets that we regulate today. Starting back in the thirties, when the **Commodity Exchange Act** was first ratified, it was originally focused on grain and over time we've had things like workbench come a long way.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 确实，走了很长一段路。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Exactly. It's come a very long way.
**Mike Selig**: 当然，随着金融危机，我们获得了各种新产品的监管权限。但**商品**的定义非常广泛。它几乎包括所有东西，除了少数被明确排除的，比如洋葱和电影票房收入。这是一个非常重要的点，它们被明确排除在外。所以今天我们商业中的大多数事物，甚至证券，在我们的法律下技术上都被视为商品，我们有权监管它们。在证券的情况下，我们与**SEC**协调并拥有一些共同权限。但对于所有其他类型的产品、服务、房地产投资信托、指数，人们会对冲这种风险。他们会进入市场对这些产品进行投机。所以我们不进行**实质性监管**。我们不告诉人们应该签订什么合约。我们围绕这些市场制定规则和法规，以确保它们具有**完整性**、**弹性**、**活力**，并拥有**护栏**和**投资者保护**。这就是为什么回到交易所规则手册和其他控制措施，**自认证**是一个重要的过程，以确保这些市场安全可靠。但我们不告诉人们是交易猪肚还是**Cardi B**合约或其他任何东西。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Of course, with the financial crisis, we got all manner of new products within our authority. But the definition of **commodities** is extraordinarily broad. It includes virtually everything except a few things have been carved out, onions and motion picture box office receipts. And that's a really important point to note that they were expressly carved out. So most things in our commerce today, even securities are technically considered commodities under our act, and we have authority to regulate them. In the case of securities, we coordinate with the **SEC** and have some joint authority. But for all other types of products, services, REITs, indices, people are going to hedge that risk. They're going to be in the market to speculate on those products. And so we don't **merit regulate**. We don't tell people what they should be entering into contracts on. We create rules and regulations around those markets to make sure that they have **integrity**, that they're **resilient**, that they're **vibrant** and they have **guardrails** and **investor protections**. And so that's why going back to the exchange rulebooks and other controls, **self-certification** being an important process or making sure those markets are safe and secure. But we're not telling people whether to trade pork bellies or **Cardi B** contracts or anything else.
### 内幕交易与市场监控 **Joe Weisenthal**: 那么，我们来谈谈**内幕交易**问题，因为这是很多人最关心的问题。从技术上讲，这不是内幕交易，但看起来有些人确实有时拥有内部知识，当他们在第二天就会发生的事情上下大注时。据我所知，**CFTC**在这个问题上没有给出太多指导，你对此有何看法？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: So let's go to the **insider trading** question, because this is sort of top of mind for a lot of people. Technically, it's not insider trading, but it does look like some people have inside knowledge sometimes when they put on big bets on something that just happens to happen the next day. The **CFTC** hasn't, as far as I know, given a lot of guidance on this issue, how are you actually thinking about it?
**Mike Selig**: 从法律角度来看，我认为人们对**CFTC**的**内幕交易**原则存在一些误解。该机构的权限与**SEC**在我们的反欺诈反操纵规则下的权限非常相似。我们确实有权在商品市场中**打击内幕交易**。现在，内幕交易的执行方式通常与公司相关的信息不对称情况不同。但确实存在与市场相关的信息不对称情况，例如在客户之前进行交易，甚至现在在**预测市场**中也是如此。这是我们正在思考的问题，并且肯定在关注和探索。所以我们**监控市场**，我们收集数据，我们有关于例如，我们的参与者是否参与这些市场，是否有人与体育联盟等相关的信息。因此，在这方面，我们是市场上的警察。所以，这些原则并非完全不同，但我们确实意识到一些细微之处，并确保我们正在进行监管。
Original English **Mike Selig**: From a legal standpoint, I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding about the **insider trading** doctrine at the **CFTC**. So the authority at the agency is very similar to the authority at the **SEC** under our anti-fraud, anti-manipulation rule. We do have authority to **police insider trading** in the commodities markets. Now the way that insider trading is carried out is oftentimes different from a situation where you have information asymmetries relevant to a company. But there are situations where you have informational asymmetries related to the markets placing a trade ahead of a customer, for example, or even in this situation now with **prediction markets**. And that's something we are thinking about and certainly on the beat and exploring. So we **surveil the markets**, we collect data, we have information about, for example, our players participating in these markets, are people associated with the sports leagues, etc. And so we are a cop on the beat in that regard. So the doctrines not entirely different, but there are some nuances that we are aware of and making sure that we're policing for.
**Tracy Alloway**: 在你看来，**PolyMarket**或**Kalshi**是否被允许直播一个巨大的轮盘赌视频并创建期货交易？让人们交易轮盘赌落在红色或黑色的期货？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Would **PolyMarket** or **Kalshi**, in your view, be allowed to live stream a video of a giant roulette wheel and create futures trade? Let people trade futures on when it lands on right or black.
**Mike Selig**: 这些类型的博弈中，有些确实是**机会游戏**而非**技能游戏**，这肯定是有区别的。我认为当我们审视什么是**商品**时，你有可能构建某种合约，一种深奥的衍生品，但**机会游戏**和**技能游戏**的底层逻辑非常不同。例如，在**超级碗**中，存在明确的经济风险。这是一个很好的例子。与此相关的经济活动非常多。有酒店收入，有供应商，有城市内的活动，旅游业，所有这些。因此，有充分的理由对冲这种风险。而对于**机会游戏**，很难说它能吸引什么，但它不太可能是一个真正的底层资产。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Some of these types of gaming where it's really a **game of chance** and not a **game of skill**. There's definitely a difference. And I think when we look at what's a **commodity**, it's possible that you could construct some sort of contract, an esoteric derivative, but really the underlying and a **game of skill** is very different. There's a clear economic risk associated, for example, at the **Super Bowl**. It's a good example. There's a ton of economic activity associated with that. There's hotel revenue that comes from it. There's vendors, there's activity within the city, tourism, all of that. And so there's a real reason to hedge that risk with a **game of chance**. It's harder to say it's possible you can attract something by it, but it's less likely that that's a real underlying.
**Tracy Alloway**: 那么区别是什么呢？比如，**Bad Bunny**在**超级碗**上的第一首歌会是什么？这和轮盘赌之类的东西相比，似乎并没有更多的经济意义，区别在哪里？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Well, what is like the difference? Because, let's say it's what is **Bad Bunny**'s first song going to be at the **Super Bowl**? What is the difference between that? Which doesn't really seem any more economic than a roulette wheel and whatever it is?
**Mike Selig**: 明确地说，法案中并没有要求合约必须产生某种基于价值的结果。我确实认为，许多信息市场，即**预测市场**，它们预测未来的潜在结果，会产生大量有用的信息。我们看到新闻编辑室正在整合**预测市场**。我们看到体育直播正在整合**预测市场**。我们看到信息的使用尤其如此。一个很好的例子是2024年的选举，总统获得了压倒性胜利，这在许多民意调查中并未必然预测到。但**预测市场**却预测对了。所以，我认为这对社会是有价值的。关于对其进行监管的问题是另一个问题。我认为这是一个重要的问题。我们当然正在承担这项任务，并确保我们不会让这些市场停滞不前，或者我们不会将它们推向海外，而是制定正确的规则和法规来发展**投资者保护**，并确保这些市场在美国蓬勃发展。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, to be clear, there's no requirement in the act that there has to necessarily be some merit based result from it, from a contract. I do think with a lot of these information markets, these **prediction markets** where they're forecasting a potential outcome in the future, they produce a lot of useful information. We are seeing newsrooms incorporate **prediction markets**. We're seeing sports live broadcasts, incorporate **prediction markets**. We're seeing the information use in particular. A great example is the election in 2024 where the president had a very large victory and that was not necessarily forecast in many of the polls. But of course, the **prediction markets** got that right. So it's something that I think is valuable to society. The question of having regulation around, that's a separate question. I think that's an important one. We are certainly taking on that task and making sure that we don't let these markets languish or we don't push them offshore, but we develop the right rules and regulations to develop **investor protections** and make sure that the markets are flourishing here in the United States.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 既然我们通过**超级碗**这个媒介来讨论**预测市场**，你还提到了关注球员行为。如果一个球员在比赛中对某个特定的打法下注，然后他们自己执行了这个打法，也就是他们有掌控权的事情，你会调查或关注吗？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Since we're discussing **prediction markets** through the prism through the medium of the **Super Bowl**. And you mentioned players as well looking at player behavior. If a player were to place a bet on, I don't know, a specific play during the game and then they did it themselves like something that they actually have agency over. Would that be something that you would investigate or look into?
**Mike Selig**: 我认为这完全取决于具体情况。所以我们会评估潜在的，如果市场中有内部人士参与，我们会获取这些数据。我们实际上正在与许多体育联盟交谈。我们正在与市场参与者交谈，以确保我们掌握情况，了解谁能够参与这些市场，谁不能。在交易所层面，交易所确实是第一道防线，它们正在**监控市场**。它们对客户进行**KYC**（了解你的客户）。所以这当然是我们正在关注的事情，我们会根据具体情况进行考虑和评估。
Original English **Mike Selig**: I think it's all facts and circumstances. So we'd evaluate potentially to the extent that there's insiders that are involved in the markets, we get that data. We're actually talking to a lot of the sports leagues. We're talking to participants in the markets to make sure that we are on top of things, have information about who is able to be participate in these markets, who's not. We do have at the exchange level, the exchanges are really the first line of defense, and they are **surveilling the markets**. They're doing **KYC** on their customers. And so that's certainly something we're on top of and we'd consider and evaluate on a case by case basis.
### 衍生品与赌博的区别 **Tracy Alloway**: 为什么体育衍生品交易不是**赌博**或下注？或者它更好？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Why isn't trading sports derivatives gambling or betting, or is it better?
**Mike Selig**: 这里确实有一个有趣的历史。如果你回到20世纪30年代，全国性的谷物下注是一种流行的消遣。所以，只要有衍生品市场，我们就有这些所谓的“**桶店**”（bucket shops），它们是场外市场，人们只是与庄家对赌商品的未来价格。另一方面，你有**有组织的交易所**。所以**芝加哥期货交易所**（Chicago Board of Trade），后来的**CME**（芝加哥商品交易所）及其他机构都有具有市场完整性的有组织市场。它们有衍生工具，合约，你实际上是与另一个人签订合约。现在在我们的市场中，我们有一个清算所进行创新，并站在这些合约的中间。但对于每一个卖方，你都有一个买方，而**庄家模式**则不是这样，或者说是与庄家对赌。当你与庄家对赌时，有很多不同的规则，你没有能力抵消你的头寸或出售你的大部分头寸的流动性。你有点被困住，只能接受庄家给你的任何东西，而且有些赔率非常不同。所以你实际上是基于庄家的赔率，而不是像这里，合约的价值根据实际市场活动而上下波动。随着时间的推移，**最高法院**实际上通过声明你不能从有组织的交易所获取报价并在**桶店**中使用，从而阻止了这种**桶店**活动。但多年来，许多这些**桶店**现在已经转向博彩和其他事物。我们看到同样的现象，赌场和其他运营机构在州法律和法规下合法运营，但它们没有相同的控制措施。我们监管着一个近500万亿美元名义价值的掉期市场。我们对交易所拥有非常严格的要求和控制，这些合约反映了这一点。它们经过非常严格的**自认证**过程。它们不能轻易受到**操纵**。我们**监控**这些市场，我们**打击内幕交易**。因此，这是一个更加健全的市场体系，要求更高，更严格。所以我确实认为，我们看到了20世纪30年代和40年代与今天之间的许多相似之处。但请放心，我们正在密切关注这些市场，它们拥有与你在证券市场和我们的期货市场中期望的相同类型的**投资者保护**。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, there really is an interesting history here. So if you go back to the Thirties National, grain betting was a thing right then that was considered a national pastime. And so for as long as we've had derivatives markets, we've had these so-called **bucket drops** which were, these off exchange markets where people were just placing bets against the house on the future price of a commodity. On the other hand, you had organized exchanges. So the **Chicago Board of Trade**, later **CME** and others had organized markets with market integrity. They had derivative instruments, contracts where you actually were in a contract with another person. And then now in our markets, we have a clearinghouse innovating and standing in the middle of those contracts. But you have a buyer for every seller with the with the kind of **bookie model** that's not the case or betting against the house. And there's a lot of different rules when you're betting in the house, you don't have the liquidity of being able to offset your position or sell a lot of your position. You're kind of stuck taking whatever the bookies giving you, and some of the odds are very different. So you're actually based on the odds of the bookie as opposed to here where the contracts go up and down in value based on actual market activity. And so over time, the **Supreme Court** actually blocked some of this **bucket shop** activity by saying you can't take the price quotations from the organized exchanges and use them in a bucket shop. But a lot of these **bucket drops** over the years have now moved into gaming and other things. We're seeing really the same phenomenon where we have casinos and other operations that are operating lawfully under state requirements and regulations, but they don't have the same sorts of controls. We regulate a nearly **500 trillion notional market** with the swaps market. We have very stringent requirements and controls around our exchanges, and these contracts reflect that. They go through a very stringent process of **self-certification**. They can't be readily susceptible to **manipulation**. We **surveil those markets**, we **police things like insider trading**. And so it's a much more robust scheme on top of these markets, much higher stringent requirements. And so I do think. We're seeing a lot of parallels between the thirties and forties and today. But rest assured that we're on top of these markets and these have the same sorts of **investor protections** that you would expect in the securities markets and in our futures markets.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 嗯。出于好奇，你现在有多少时间分配给新事物，比如**预测市场**、**加密货币**，以及旧的、无聊的传统交易所？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Hmm. Out of curiosity, how much of your time is split now between the new stuff, **prediction markets**, **crypto** versus the I guess the old boring older exchanges?
**Mike Selig**: 是的，非常好。我们日常工作主要是**传统市场**。当我们谈论这些新市场时，许多现有公司也正在进入这个领域。我们看到越来越多的这些产品在我们的传统DC ATM上提供。但所有这些都属于相同的注册类别，对吗？它们的设置有一些细微差别。历史上，一些平台获得了一些新的**不采取行动函**（no action relief）。但这并不是我们日常工作的主要部分。话虽如此，鉴于它是新的，而且变化如此之大，我们在这个领域还有很多**规则制定**和**政策工作**要做。所以，我认为这是一个重要的部分。但就这些市场的实际规模而言，与我之前提到的500万亿美元名义掉期市场、40万亿美元名义期货市场相比，它是一个较小的部分，但它正在增长。我认为**区块链**将特别改变一些现有交易所的运作方式，它们如何结算交易等等。所以，这是一个非常激动人心的时刻。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Yeah, all very well. Our day to day is really the **traditional markets**. And when we talk about these new markets, many of the incumbents are getting into the space as well. We're seeing more and more of these products offered on our traditional DC ATMs. But all of these are the same registration category, right? There are some nuances in how they're set up. There's some new **no action relief** that's been given to some of these platforms historically. But this is not, it's not, our day to day bulk of work. That said, given that it's new and given that there's so much that is changing, we have a lot of more a lot more **rulemaking** and **policy work** to do in this space. So I do think it's a big piece because of that. But in terms of the actual size of these markets compared to are, as I said, that **$500 trillion notional swaps market**, **$40 trillion notional futures markets**, it's a smaller piece, but it's growing. And I think **blockchain** is going to really change in particular how some of these existing exchanges operate, how they settle transactions and so forth. And so it's a really exciting time to be in the seat.
### 监管年龄与社会责任 **Tracy Alloway**: 我理解体育期货交易所与传统赔率等之间存在一些市场结构差异。但从用户或下注者的角度来看，我想大多数人会说它们在经济上非常相似，而且越来越相似，因为我们知道像**Kalshi**和**PolyMarket**这样的公司正在尝试如何进行**连赢投注**（parlays）等。所以它们越来越接近。人们对**体育赌博**及其对年轻人的影响有很多担忧，以及这些的全国性合法化。它实际上降低了许多州的年龄限制，因为在许多州，合法赌博年龄是21岁，而交易期货的合法年龄我相信是18岁。你认为我们实际上降低了体育下注的年龄是好事吗？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: So I get that there are some market structure differences between a futures exchange on sports versus the traditional horse sense, the odds and so forth. But from the perspective of the user or the person who's putting money on the line, I think most people would say like economically they're very similar and they're getting more similar because we know that say like the **Kalshi** and **PolyMarket** they're trying to get into, figure out how to do **parlays** and stuff. So it's getting closer and closer and people have a lot of concerns about **sports gambling** and the effect that that has on young people and so forth legalizing, national legalization of these. It de facto lowers the age in a lot of states because in a lot of states, the legal age to gamble is 21, and the legal age to treat a futures like 18, I believe is this is this is do you think that's good that we've de facto lowered the age to bet on sports or again we're not married regulators.
**Mike Selig**: 我们不是**实质性监管机构**。我们不对证券市场和衍生品市场中的年龄要求做出判断。我们在这些市场中有一些既定的标准。人们可以对任何数量的资产下注。但绝大多数是体育。我认为，话虽如此，你有能力进行投资和交易期权以及各种证券和商品。所以规则不会因为是体育或其他什么而不同。我认为“**下注**”这个词在我们的证券市场和衍生品市场中也被使用和提及。所以我认为它不一定意味着任何特定的东西。但其概念是，你可以在18岁时在我们的市场中做出决定，我们州与州之间都支持这一点。有些州的标准甚至更高。这不是我个人有特定意见的事情。我认为这就是当你说“州与州之间”是什么意思时，一些州在饮酒或赌博方面有灵活性。他们认为这是**金融市场活动**。这些不是赌注。你不是与庄家对赌。我们从监管角度对这些市场有重要的监督。所以我们不会对特定的市场选择或体育进行把关，并制定不同的标准。这不是我们通常的做法。所以我们不打算在这个特定市场中这样做。
Original English **Mike Selig**: We don't **merit regulate**. We don't pass judgment on kind of the age requirements in our securities markets and our derivatives markets. We have certain standards that have been upheld in these markets. People are betting on, any number of assets. But that's overwhelmingly sports. I mean, I think that said, you have the ability to make investments and trade options and all manner of security is all manner of commodities. And so the rules are not different based on doing sports or this or that. I think this term **betting** has been used and thrown about in our securities markets and our derivatives markets as well. So I don't think it necessarily means anything in particular. But the notion is that you're able to make decisions at 18 in our markets and we uphold that state by state. Some of the standards are set even higher. And that is not something that, I have a particular opinion on. I think that's just the way when you say what do you mean in state by, say, some of the standards or some some of the states have flexibility in what they set up for drinking or for, gambling. And they're like, this is **financial market activity**. These are not wagers. You're not betting against the house. We have significant overlay from a regulatory standpoint over these markets. And so we're not gatekeeping particular categories of market selections or sports and having different standards. That's not how we've typically done things. And so we don't intend to do that in this particular market.
### 资源限制与机构重组 **Joe Weisenthal**: 所以你不是一个**实质性监管机构**，但你是一个**技术性监管机构**。正如我们一直在讨论的，有很多事情正在发生，有很多规则制定工作要做，有很多潜在的执法行动。今天《**巴伦周刊**》有一篇报道，说**CFTC**的芝加哥办公室似乎没有执法人员了。你以前有20人，但似乎所有人都辞职了。你如何平衡这些快速增长的新市场带来的棘手问题与更有限的资源？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: So you're not a **merit based regulator**, but you are a **technical regulator**. And as we've been discussing, there's a lot going on, lots of rulemaking to do, lots of potential enforcement actions. There's a **Barron's** story out today talking about how the **CFTC** apparently has no enforcement officers left in its Chicago office. And you used to have 20, but everyone resigned, it seems. How are you balancing all these new markets, which are growing really, really fast and pose some very thorny questions that we've been discussing with more limited resources?
**Mike Selig**: 很多离开的人是在我任期之前。当然，我不是在责怪你。他们不是在我加入后立即离开的。但这是一个严肃的问题。我们必须确保我们有足够的员工来**监管市场**。我们在全国各地都有大量的员工。关于我们的芝加哥办公室，当然，我们办公室里有员工是很重要的。但我们没有德克萨斯州办公室。我们没有佛罗里达州办公室。我们没有在每个州都设立办公室。我们只有少数几个办公室。我们在华盛顿特区有大量员工，纽约也有一些员工。这些是我们最大的两个办公室。我们继续补充这些办公室的人员，我们希望在芝加哥有更多的人。对于那些想加入我们的人，大门永远敞开。我们继续在那里扩充队伍。但我们有足够的资源。我们每个办公室都有大量的员工，我们实际上正在利用许多新技术，比如**人工智能**，来确保我们**监控市场**，审查**内幕交易**等问题，并在有意义的情况下提起诉讼。我们还在非常迅速地处理申请。我们刚刚在创纪录的200天内处理了最近的一个交易所申请。所以我们人员配备非常充足，但我们正在继续扩充，并确保我们有能干的优秀人才，能够保护我们的市场。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, look, a lot of the folks that left that was before my tenure and certainly, I'm not blaming you. It's not, they didn't leave right after I joined it. But no, I think it's a serious question. We've got to make sure that we have adequate staff to **police the markets**. And we do have a ton of staff throughout the country. And, to the point of our Chicago office, of course, it's important that we have folks within that office. But we don't have a Texas office. We don't have a Florida office. We don't have offices in every state. We have a handful of offices. We've got a critical mass in D.C. and a number of folks in New York as well. And those are. Two largest offices. We continue to fill those out and we would love to have more people in Chicago. And, the door is always open for folks that want to come in and work for us. And we continue to build out the ranks there. But we have adequate resources. We have a ton of folks within each of our offices, and we're actually leveraging a lot of the new technologies like **A.I.** to make sure that we're **surveilling the markets** and that we're reviewing things like **insider trading** and bringing cases where it makes sense. We're also processing applications very quickly. We just processed, I think, in a record time of 200 days, one of the more recent exchange applications. So we're really well-staffed, but we're continuing to build that out and make sure that we have good people in the building who are competent and able to make sure that we protect our markets.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 那么你们有资金增加人手吗？你们正在努力增加人手吗？你们需要更多资金吗？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: So you have the funding to you have the funding to add headcount. And are you pursuing like building out the headcount? Do you need more funding?
**Mike Selig**: 绝对。所以我们实际上正在增加人手。100%正在扩充。我们有足够的资源这样做。但我想明确一点，我们有一个人员配备非常充足的机构，我们非常了解情况，关于不执法和不监管的问题，我认为那有点像**假新闻**。我们也许应该把它放到一个**预测市场**上去。但我确实认为我们掌握着情况。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Absolutely. So. So we are actually staffing up. Okay. So 100%, we're building that out. We have adequate resources to do so. But I want to be clear that we have a very well staffed building and we are very much on top of things with and, these questions around not enforcing and surveilling. I think there's a little bit of **fake news** there. We probably should put it up to a **prediction market**. But I do think that we're on top of things.
**Tracy Alloway**: 我知道**特朗普**政府的一个特点是，他们似乎非常喜欢削减成本、削减开支，并在某些方面精简联邦政府，有时甚至完全裁撤机构。这在市场结构领域一直是一个长期存在的问题。但我们为什么不把**CFTC**和**SEC**合并呢？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: So one thing I know about the **Trump administration**, they are big fan seemingly of cutting costs, cutting spending, streamlining the federal government in some ways and, sometimes cutting agencies altogether. This has been a really long running question in market structure world. But why don't we just combine the **CFTC**?
**Mike Selig**: 哦，是的，那很容易。这是每个人最喜欢的问题。**CFTC**和**SEC**是非常不同的监管机构。**SEC**是一个**资本市场监管机构**。他们关注的是有人想为好主意筹集资金。其他人想把资金投到某个地方。这需要一些监管。大萧条之后，市场一片混乱，该机构确实很好地解决了这个问题。并建立了一个很好的制度来监管所有这些。**CFTC**实际上是在不同的时期发展起来的。最初的法案是在20世纪30年代，但**CFTC**是在20世纪70年代成立的。但**CFTC**的目的是**监管风险缓解**、**风险管理**，这是非常不同的领域。所以有些公司，无论是农民、牧场主、能源生产商，现在我们有数据中心在空中领域，但所有类型的企业都面临着与其业务投入和持续运营相关的大量风险，他们需要对冲这种风险。还有其他参与者希望向这些市场提供流动性，做市或投机，而**CFTC**监管这些。所以监管机构的目的非常不同。我们没有**SEC**那样的**披露制度**。所以有两个独立的监管机构是有道理的。但没有道理的是，**Adkins主席**和我一直非常清楚的是，机构之间缺乏协调。所以是**协调**，而不是**合并**。我们需要协调这两个制度，以确保没有不一致和不兼容的规则，也没有空白。**Adkins主席**曾将这两个机构之间的“**无人区**”比作所有这些死去的、否则本可以存在的**产品和服务**的尸体，如果这两个机构能够弄清楚如何协调的话。证券期货就是一个很好的例子。我们有共同管辖权，但我们确实未能很好地合作来启动它。所以我认为现在这两个机构都迎来了新的一天，我们打算在这方面密切合作。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Oh, yeah, that's easy. It's everybody's favorite question. Yeah, look, the **CFTC** and **SEC** are very different regulators. So the **SEC** is a **capital markets regulator**. They are focused on somebody wants to go raise capital for a great idea. Other people want to place that capital somewhere. There needs to be some regulation over that. After the Great Depression, there was a lot of chaos in the markets and the agency really was a great answer to that issue. And as as put a great regime in place to regulate all of that. The **CFTC** grew up actually at a different time. The original act was in the thirties, but later on the **CFTC** was established in the seventies. But the purpose of the **CFTC** is to **regulate risk mitigation**, **risk management**, very different areas. So there are firms that whether farmers, ranchers, energy producers, now we have data centers in the air space, but all manner of businesses have a bunch of risk related to the inputs for their business and ongoing operations, and they need to hedge that risk. And there are other participants that want to supply liquidity into those markets, make markets or speculate, and the **CFTC** regulates that. So very different purpose for the regulator. There's not the same sort of **disclosure regime** that we have at the **SEC**. And so it makes sense to have two separate regulators. But what doesn't make sense and what **Chairman Adkins** and I have been very clear on is the lack of coordination between the agencies. So it's **coordination**, not **consolidation**. We need to harmonize the two regimes to make sure that there's not inconsistent and incompatible rules and that there's not gaps. So **Chairman Adkins** has referred to this **no man's land** between the two agencies where you've got the bodies of all these dead **products and services** that otherwise could have been, if the agencies could just figure out how to coordinate security features is a great example. We have shared jurisdiction there, but we've really failed to work well together to get that off the ground. And so I think it's really a new day at both agencies where we're intending to work closely together on that.
### 机构间协调与加密货币 **Joe Weisenthal**: 是的，这正是我要问的。自金融危机以来，我一直听到人们谈论**SEC**和**CFTC**之间加强合作和协调。但它并没有真正发生，或者没有达到一些人希望看到的程度。你对实际问题有什么诊断？我很想深入了解，比如这两个机构之间的协调是什么样的？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Yeah, this is exactly what I wanted to ask. So I've heard people talk about increased cooperation and coordination between the **S.E.C.** and the **CFTC**, basically ever since the financial crisis. And it hasn't really happened or it hasn't happened to the degree that some people would like to see. What's your diagnosis of the actual problem there? And I would love to get into the weeds here and, like, what does coordination look like between the two agencies?
**Mike Selig**: 我处于一个有利的位置，因为我曾经为**Adkins主席**工作过。所以，我认为我们从一开始就建立了良好的关系。但我们承诺很快会签署一份**谅解备忘录**（MOU），我们正在寻求尽快执行。这将真正为员工之间的协调设定所有基本规则。所以，我认为没有这个备忘录确实阻碍了这两个机构，因为**信息共享**非常重要。你需要一个共享信息的框架。每个机构都会产生大量**非公开材料**。所以，制定共享这些信息的规则很重要。员工之间定期举行会议，协调和共享与注册人相关的市场数据非常重要。所以，如果我们有两个注册机构，我们收集各自的信息，并确保它们各自遵守这两个独立的规则和法规堡垒，我们怎么知道谁在做什么，以及需要改变什么？所以，拥有信息非常重要。这是第一步。然后员工需要齐心协力，找出如何创建**替代合规**。所以有些规则在双方都是不兼容的。我们需要消除这些规则，或者至少有一个默认选择。一个机构与另一个机构。如果你是一个经纪自营商，并且你进行的商品衍生品活动非常少，也许你应该有一个主要监管机构在**SEC**，并有一些**CFTC**的监督，以确保没有空白。所以这是一个重要的部分。我认为许多与**加密货币**相关的问题确实需要机构之间进行联合规则制定和联合工作，因为我们看到**NVIDIA**代币在链上，不一定在美国境内，但我认为现在有了**DTC**，我们将开始看到更多的**公开股权代币化**。然后我们还看到**比特币**、**以太坊**等在我们管辖范围内在屏幕上交易，这些世界将会碰撞，而且它们今天实际上正在碰撞。所以，机构之间有共同点，弄清楚基本规则是什么，并确保我们对**去中心化金融**和**数字钱包**有相似的标准，所有这些都非常重要，因为如果我们设定不兼容的标准，那么这将对市场造成真正的损害，并会损害所有美国人。
Original English **Mike Selig**: I'm in a good position in that I used to work for **Chairman Adkins**. So I think we have a great relationship just getting off for the start. But a **memorandum of understanding** is something that we've committed to execute and we're looking to execute very soon. And that really set all the ground rules for coordination between the staffs. And so not having that in place I think is really hampered the two agencies because **sharing information** is really important. You need a framework for sharing that information. There's a lot of **nonpublic material** that is generated in each building. And so having rules for the sharing of that information is important. Having regular meetings between the staffs and coordination and sharing of market data related to registrants is really important. So if we've got dual registrars and we're collecting our own sets of information and we're ensuring that they're each complying with these two kind of separate fortresses of rules and regulations, how do we know what, what, who's doing what and what needs to be changed? And. So having the information is really important. That's the first step. And then the staffs need to come together and figure out how to create **substitute compliance**. So certain rules are incompatible on both sides. We need to knock those out or at least have a kind of default choice. One agency versus the other. If you're a broker dealer and you're doing a very minimal amount of commodity derivatives activity, perhaps you should have a primary regulator at the **SEC** with some **CFTC** overlay to make sure that there's no gaps. So that's an important piece. I think a lot of the general like **crypto** related issues are really calling for joint rulemaking, joint work between the agencies because we're seeing **NVIDIA** tokens on chain, not necessarily within the U.S., but I think now with the **DTC**, we're going to start seeing a lot more of the **tokenization of public equities**. And then we're also seeing **Bitcoin**, **Ether**, things that are with the within our territory trading on screen and those worlds are going to collide and then they are in fact colliding today. And so having common ground between the agencies, figuring out what the ground rules are and making sure that we have similar standards for **decentralized finance** and for **digital wallets**. And all of that is really important because if we set incompatible standards, then it's going to be a real disservice to the market and that's going to harm all Americans.
### 广告与消费者保护 **Tracy Alloway**: **Kalshi**最近有一个广告说：“第一人称视角：我是个女孩，我快付不起房租了，但我通过**Kalshi**的预测获得了两年的房租。”这太棒了。这甚至比传统的**体育博彩**更具侵略性。而且有各种各样的**体育博彩**广告，然后他们会有一个提示，如果你是问题赌徒，请拨打这个号码。这些**预测市场**的广告宣传是否应该有任何限制因素？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: **Kalshi** had an ad recently. It said, P.O.V. is a girl and it's a pure V. I was about I was about to be unable to pay my rent, but I got two years of rent through **Kalshi**'s predictions. It's amazing. This is seems more aggressive even than, the traditional **sports betting**. And there's all kinds of **sports betting** ads. And then they have a thing where if you're a problem gambler, call this number. Should there be any limiting factor on how aggressively sports these **prediction markets** should be advertised or that?
**Mike Selig**: 这是一个值得深入探讨的问题，因为在我们的市场中，期货委员会的经纪人有标准。其中一些标准本质上是法律和法规发展方式的遗留物，即客户与清算所和交易所之间存在中介。通常在我们的市场中是这样。现在，这些始于2000年左右的**不采取行动函**，当时和现在都给予了一些**预测市场**。其他市场则取消了**FCA**（金融行为监管局）和经纪人。所以你直接与清算所、直接与交易所打交道。这种模式没有所有相同的规则和法规。所以我们正在思考的一个问题是，我们如何确保两者之间有**一致的标准**。现在我认为，关于营销和广告应该采取何种形式的问题，我们肯定会考虑。
Original English **Mike Selig**: That's one point that I think is worth double clicking on in the sense that there are standards for a futures Commission emergence for brokers within our markets. And some of those standards are a relic essentially of the way that the act and the regulation is developed where you have a intermediation between the customer and the clearinghouse and the exchange. Typically in our markets. Now these **no action ladders** that started around 2000 that were given to some of the **prediction markets** back then as well as now. Other markets cut out the **FCA** and cut out the broker. And so you had direct to the clearinghouse, direct to the exchange. And that model doesn't have all the same rules and regulations. And so something that we're thinking about is how do we make sure that we have **consistent standards** across both. Now I think this question of what sort of marketing and advertising either should be able to engage in is one that we're certainly going to think about.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 那么，明确地说，对于期货经纪人如何营销，现在有一些现行规则。但是当这些新的**不采取行动函**被制定出来，允许期货实体直接提供服务时，它们没有这些规则。这些规则是什么？像这样的广告，比如如果一个期货经纪人，比如**MF Global**之类的，说“哦，我付不起房租，但现在我再也不用工作了，因为我交易了小麦期货”，这听起来有点奇怪，我从来没见过这样的广告，对吗？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: So just to be clear, there are current rules on, say, a futures broker and how they can market. But when these new **no action letters** were established that allowed the sort of the futures entity itself to offer directly, they didn't have the rules. What are the rules? And would an ad like these like if if if a futures broker like, I don't know, forget **MF Global** or something that like, oh, I couldn't pay my rent. But then now I'm, now I'll never have to work again because I traded wheat futures. That seems a little weird and I've never seen an ad like that, right.
**Mike Selig**: 确实，这正是这些**不采取行动函**多年前下发的结果，以及我们现在拥有的这种制度。我对很多这些事情的看法是，我们需要**清晰的道路规则**。我们需要通过**通知和评论规则制定**来做事，并真正全面地思考我们的市场，而不是专注于这些零散的**不采取行动函**，不幸的是，这多年来一直是惯例。所以这绝对是我们正在思考的问题。我们希望制定**清晰的标准**。我们希望利益相关者参与进来，弄清楚这些制度应该是什么样子。我不是一个必须说营销应该是什么样子的人。我们希望听取参与者的意见，了解他们认为什么样的营销适合这些市场。但我们肯定正在思考这个问题，而且存在不同的标准。这确实是过去监管机构以**临时方式**为市场中的某些事物设立例外情况的结果。
Original English **Mike Selig**: I mean it really is this result of the way that these **no action letters** were handed down, as I said many, many years ago. And this kind of regime that we have, that really my view on a lot of this stuff is that we need **clear rules of the road**. We need to do things through **notice and comment rulemaking** and actually think holistically about our markets and not focus on these little patchwork, **no action letters**, which unfortunately has been the rule over many years. And so that's definitely something we're thinking about. We want to set **clear standards**. We want stakeholders at the table to figure out what these regimes should look like. And I'm not one necessarily to say what the marketing should look like. We want to hear from participants as to what what sort of marketing they think is appropriate for these markets. But what we're certainly thinking about that and there are different standards. It really is just a result of that kind of **ad hoc way** that regulators in the past have gone about establishing exceptions for certain things in the markets.
### 新的分类与市场结构 **Tracy Alloway**: 那么，关于这一点，你们是否需要新的分类？因为看起来所有这些不同的世界正在融合，你可能有一个**加密货币**交易平台，现在提供衍生品和其他东西，然后你有一个老牌交易所，基本上提供对你的数字上涨或下跌的赌注。目前，我认为你的注册类别相当标准化，你有三个，对吗？比如期货交易所、掉期执行之类的。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Well, on this note, do you maybe need new classifications? Because it seems like all these different worlds are kind of melding together where you might have a **crypto** trading platform that's now offering derivatives and other things, and then you have like an old school exchange that is offering essentially bets on your number, go up, number go down. At the moment, I think your registration categories are pretty like standardized and you have three of them, is that right? Like futures exchange, swap, execution, stuff like that.
**Mike Selig**: 不，我们有太多了。我们有很多。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Now, we've got too many. We've got many.
**Tracy Alloway**: 好的。不止这些。那么你们能否创建更多类别来涵盖我们正在看到的行业变化？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Okay. On anymore. All right. More than that. So could you create even more to sort of encompass the industry changes that we're seeing?
**Mike Selig**: 我们当然需要全面思考我们对不同参与者的要求。所以这些**非中介化交易所**，我们也看到很多**垂直整合**，一个单一业务拥有清算所、经纪人和交易所，我们看到不同的模式，如我所说，我们根本没有足够的**CRM**，然后介于两者之间的一切。所以我们需要思考这个问题。我们需要确保有**一致的标准**。我们不希望出现**监管套利**，因为你没有经纪人，所以你可以做更多的事情。现在，这些在**不采取行动函**下建立的方式，它们不允许任何保证金。所以它们是完全抵押的。所以如果你作为客户直接去清算所，你是在提供抵押品。这也是我们正在看到更多机构对这些市场感兴趣的原因。他们更愿意能够提供保证金并通过经纪人，或者采用一种没有经纪人但可以使用保证金的模式。所以我们正在思考所有这些事情。这是一个非常有趣的时刻，正如我所说，思考市场结构，这些事情本来应该在多年前就完成。但由于某种原因，人们依赖这些**不采取行动函**。当时这更像是一个小麻烦，没有得到一个完整的制度。但我们正在思考所有这些。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, we certainly need to think holistically about what requirements we have on different participants. So these **non-answer mediated exchanges** and we're also seeing a lot of **vertical integration** with a single business owning a clearinghouse. And and the broker and the exchange are seeing different models where where there's that non intermediated as I said, we don't have enough CRM at all and then you have everything in between. And so we need to think about that. We need to make sure there's **consistent standards**. We don't want a **regulatory arbitrage** where because you don't have the broker, you're able to do more. Now the way that these have been set up under **no action letters** today, they do not allow for any margin. So they're they're not they're fully collateralized. And so if you go directly to the clearinghouse as a customer, you're putting up for collateral. And so that's something as well, or we're seeing more institutional interest in these markets. They would prefer to be able to put up margin and go through a broker or have a model where you don't have the broker at all, but you're able to use margin. So we're thinking about all these things. It's a really interesting time, as I said, to be thinking about market structure for things that really just probably should have been done many years ago. And for whatever reason, people relied on these **no action letters**. And really, I guess it was more of a an ankle biter at the time and didn't get a full regime. But we're thinking about all of that.
### 政治影响与市场信任 **Tracy Alloway**: **小唐纳德·特朗普**是**Kalshi**的顾问，他是**PolyMarket**的董事会成员，而且看起来主要由**特朗普总统**拥有的**Truth Social**也将推出一个名为**Truth Predict**的产品。鉴于白宫或总统及其家人在这个行业中拥有非常明显的利益，公众应该如何相信这些是受良好监管的市场？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: **Donald Trump Jr.** is an adviser to **Kalshi**. He's on the board of **PolyMarket** and it looks like **Truth Social**, which is largely owned by **President Trump**, is also going to launch something called **Truth Predict**. How should the public feel comfortable that these are well regulated markets given the very obvious sort of like stake that the that that the White House has found or that the president and his family has in this industry.
**Mike Selig**: 这些都是指定合约市场，与其他市场一样。我们已经监管这些市场很多年，几十年了。它们有一些最严格的监管要求。正如我提到的，我们监管着近500万亿美元名义价值的市场。我们非常认真地对待它。我们打击这些市场中的欺诈和操纵。所以我认为每个人都可以放心，我们正在保护市场。我们认为市场有广泛的兴趣是件好事。
Original English **Mike Selig**: These are designated contract markets like any other. We have regulated these markets for for many, many years, for decades. They have some of the most stringent regulatory requirements. As I mentioned, these are nearly **$500 trillion notional markets** that we regulate. We take it very seriously. We put these fraud and manipulation in these markets. So I think everybody can rest assured that we are on top of of protecting the markets. And we think it's great that there's a broad swath of interest in the markets.
**Tracy Alloway**: 但是，例如，当你确定广告的适当水平时，回到**Kalshi**的那些广告，你正在思考，好的，你怎么知道？你谈论与市场参与者交谈，那都是谁？当政府在这个行业中拥有非常明确的经济利益，并希望行业发展时，人们应该如何相信你会找到正确的界限？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: But like so, for example, when you're figuring out like what is the appropriate level of advertising going back to those **Kalshi** ads and you're thinking like, okay, like how do you know? And you're talking about talking to market participants, like who is that? And like, how should people feel comfortable that you're going to find that right line again when the administration has a very clear economic stake in this industry and having the industry grow?
**Mike Selig**: 我们遵守法律。我的意思是，《**商品交易法**》是我们的授权法规。我们根据《**商品交易法**》行事，并符合非常严格的道德和政府要求，我认为本届政府中的每个人都是如此。所以我们非常认真地对待所有这些。
Original English **Mike Selig**: We adhere to the law. I mean, the **Commodity Exchange Act** is our authorizing statute. We act in accordance with the **Commodity Exchange Act** and meet very strict ethics and, government requirements, and as does, I think, everyone in this administration. So we take all of that very seriously.
### 加密货币与永续期货 **Joe Weisenthal**: 谈到**特朗普**，我们应该多谈谈**加密货币**，因为它这个月过得相当糟糕。我认为这个行业的一大希望，《**清晰法案**》（Clarity Act），似乎在国会受阻了。如果它没有通过会发生什么？因为你似乎在很多方面都致力于成为一个对**加密数字资产**友好的政府或监管机构。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: So speaking of **Trump**, we should talk a little bit more about **crypto** because it's been having a pretty bad month so far. And I think one of the big hopes of the industry, the **Clarity Act**, seems to be stalled in Congress. What happens if that doesn't go through? Because you've sort of I feel like you've committed yourself to being, a **crypto** digital asset friendly administration or regulator in many ways.
**Mike Selig**: 感谢总统的领导，我确实认为我们正处于一个关键时刻，我们现在有了法律法规，我的执法工作已经完成。我们有《**清晰法案**》正处于关键时刻。我认为有一些问题正在解决中。我知道今天有一个会议，我们希望它能完成。我认为这将为美国的**加密货币**设定一个真正**面向未来的框架**。我们不能让欧洲国家和其他国家在这个领域领先，而没有美国的参与和领导。所以我们致力于完成这项工作。我认为我们有一个非常好的法案，它几乎已经到了终点线。如果它没有完成，我认为机构有很多权力，但重要的是，随着**Loper braids**和一些判例法，它将机构在法规细微之处的自由裁量权收回，并将其交还给国会和法院。我认为在法规中包含更多内容而非更少内容非常重要。所以我们希望能够制定一项法规。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, thanks to the President's leadership, I really do think we're at a critical moment where we've got genius now as law regulation, my enforcements done. We've got the **Clarity Act** that's really on the precipice. I think there's a few issues that are being ironed out actually, as we speak. I know there's a meeting today and we're hopeful that that's going to get done. I think that's going to set a really **futureproof framework for crypto** here in the U.S. We can't allow European countries and others to lead in this area without U.S. involvement and leadership. And so we're committed to getting that done. And I think we've got a really great bill that's that's almost at the finish line if it doesn't get done. Look, I think there's a lot of authority that the agencies have, but it's important with **Loper braids** and some of the case law that takes a little bit of the agency's discretion over nuances in the statute and puts that back to the Congress and the courts, I think it's really important to have more baked into the statute than not. And so we're hopeful that we'll get a statute in place.
**Joe Weisenthal**: **加密货币**似乎一直走在前沿的一个领域是**永续期货**。它非常受欢迎。你看到，在某些平台上，你可以获得101倍杠杆交易期货。你认为**永续期货**在传统金融中会有更多用途吗？我们将来某个时候会有**永续石油期货**吗？你能想象吗？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: One of the areas that **crypto** seems to have been at the forefront of is **perpetual futures**. And, it's very popular. You see, you can get 101 leverage trading if futures on some platforms. Do you see the more use of **perpetual perps** in sort of traditional finance, Could we have **perpetual oil futures** at some point? Like could you envision that?
**Mike Selig**: 目前我们正在**加密货币**领域思考这个问题。我希望在链上交易，就像所有期货一样。你的意思是，**加密货币**提供了基础设施，但你为什么不在链上交易**永续石油期货**呢？
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, right now we're thinking about it in **crypto**, I think, there. I would like, trade it on on chain, like all futures, like you're going for like, okay, **crypto** provides the infrastructure, but could you like, why not trade? an **oil perp** on Unchained.
**Mike Selig**: 如果对这些产品有需求，那绝对是我们会考虑和关注的事情。目前，绝大多数需求都在**加密货币**领域。我们看到贵金属，黄金、白银也有一些需求。我们必须考虑每份合约被**操纵**的可能性。因此，对于没有实物交割日期的合约，例如猪肚或其他东西，可能会有独特的考虑因素，这可能会在期货合约的**供应和流动性**方面产生问题。所以这是我们正在思考的问题。我们对所有这些创新感到非常兴奋。这已经太久了。这些东西只在海外发展，我们真的希望通过**清晰的道路规则**将其带回美国。所以美国领导并设定其他国家将遵循的标准非常重要，而不是仅仅让这些东西在海外蓬勃发展，而监管可能较少。正如你们所知，当你向不同国家提供服务时，直接进入或招揽都有不同的规则。所以我们当然意识到了这一点。我们正在思考这个问题。我们希望为美国市场设定真正清晰和一流的标准。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Look, if there's demand for these products, it's definitely something that we're all consider and look at right now. The overwhelming demand has been in the **crypto** space. We've seen some demand in precious metals, gold, silver. We have to consider their susceptibility of each contract to **manipulation**. So there might be unique considerations around a contract that doesn't have a physical delivery date with, for example, pork bellies or other things, and that can create issues within the **supply and liquidity** for the futures contracts. So it's something we're thinking about. We're definitely excited about all this innovation. It's been too long. This stuff is only developed offshore and we really want to bring it back with **clear rules of the road**. So it's really important that the U.S. leads and that we set the standard that other countries are going to follow rather than just allow this stuff to flourish offshore with potentially less regulation. As you all know, when you offer into various countries, there's different rules around offering directly in or solicitation or solicitation, all of that. So we're certainly aware of that. We're thinking about it. We want to set really clear and kind of **best in class standards** for U.S. markets.
### 监管界限与社会考量 **Tracy Alloway**: 回到**预测市场**，我知道你一直强调你不是一个**实质性监管机构**，对吗？所以你不会决定人们应该下注什么或可以下注什么。但是否存在某个界限，你不想看到私营公司跨越？比如如果有人创建一个关于某人将死于暴力死亡的合约，那看起来就有问题了。或者一个合约，这在我们和**芝加哥**的**Dan Wilson**谈话时提到过，关于人们是否会在**WNBA**比赛中向球场投掷性玩具的合约，当然，合约的存在可能会促使人们这样做，改变他们的行为。这也有些危险，比如，界限在哪里？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: And just going back to **prediction markets**, I know you keep emphasizing that you're not a **merit based regulator**, right? So you're not making decisions on what people should be betting on or what they can bet on. But is there like is there a line at some point that you wouldn't want to see private companies actually cross? Like if someone creates a contract for like someone's going to die, right, a violent death or something, that that would seem problematic or a contract. And this came up when we talked to **Dan Wilson** do Chicago, the contract for whether people would throw sex toys onto the court during a **WNBA** game, which of course the existence of the contract might elicit people to do it changed their behavior. Also kind of dangerous, like, what is where do you where is the line?
**Mike Selig**: 后者似乎极易受到**操纵**，我们确实有权拒绝。我认为对于其他类别，如**暗杀**等，我们的法规中有禁止的权力。所以我们会行使这项权力。当然，在某些领域，我们肯定不希望提供合约，但对于其他领域，正如我所说，我们不是一个监管机构。我们不会说你不能在体育或政治领域有合约。但**细节很重要**，我们正在评估这一点。
Original English **Mike Selig**: The ladder seems highly at risk of, being susceptible to **manipulation**, which we do have authority to reject. I think with other categories, **assassination** and the like, there is authority within our statutes to prohibit. So we would exercise that authority. You know, there are certain areas where we certainly would not want contracts being offered, but with others, look, we're not, as I said, a regulator. We're not going to go and say you can't have a contract in sports, You can't have a contract in politics. But the **details matter** and we are evaluating that.
**Tracy Alloway**: 回到基本问题。许多州的**总检察长**，你知道，有很多关于这个问题的法庭斗争。他们和许多人一样看待这个问题，他们说，看，这是下注，这是**赌博**。这看起来确实像**体育赌博**。**Kalshi**自己曾发布广告说“**体育博彩**现在在你的州合法了”，我想他们后来撤回了这些广告。但从公众的角度来看，通过将**体育博彩**纳入这个框架，这似乎削弱了各州制定谁可以下注什么的规则的能力。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Just going back to, the sort of basic question. A lot of states, attorneys generals are are attorneys general. Did I say that I plural attorneys for a lot of states, attorneys general? You know, there's a lot of court fights about this. And they look at this and like many people would and they say, look, this is this is **betting**, this is this is **gambling**. This certainly looks like **sports gambling**. **Kalshi** itself ran ads that said **sports betting** is now legal in your state. And I think they've pulled those back, etc.. But from the perspective of the public, it certainly looks like by calling, by putting **sports betting** into this framework that a lot of like that it's undermined the ability of states to set the rules about who can bet on what.
**Mike Selig**: **Hayes教授**有一篇很棒的法律期刊文章，他是一位证券法教授。这篇文章一定是在2000年代初写的，但那是在金融危机之前，比较了**衍生品**、**期货合约**、**证券**、**保险产品**和**赌博**。这些都是你可以采取相似经济头寸的产品，但它们有不同的法律处理方式。这是因为产品的结构方式不同。所以**保险合约**的结构可能与**信用违约掉期**非常相似，但你没有可保利益。所以**细节确实很重要**，我们正在关注这一点。所以我们并不是进入赌场说你正在提供合法的场外掉期。但如果产品被构造成掉期，那么我们就有管辖权。所以许多平台提供的产品可能具有一些相似的经济属性，但**细节确实很重要**。正如我提到的，你必须通过清算所。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, there's a great law Journal article by **Professor Hayes** and he's a securities law professor. This must have been written in the early 2000, but it was before the financial crisis comparing **derivatives**, **futures contracts**, **securities**, **insurance products**, **gambling**. These are all products that you can take similar economic positions in, but they have different legal treatment. And it's because the products are structured in different ways. So an **insurance contract** could be structured very similarly to a **credit default swap**, but you haven't insurable interest. So the **details do matter** and we are looking at that. So it's not the case that we're going into the casinos and saying you're offering legal off exchange swaps. But if the products are structured as swaps, then we have authority there. And so many of these platforms that are offering products that may have some similar economic attributes, but the **details do matter**. Right. As I as I mentioned, you can you have to go through a clearinghouse.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 是的。产品可以抵消。你可以进出你的头寸。它们是不同的。它们很重要。我完全理解。但是从一个沉迷于**体育博彩**的19岁年轻人的角度来看，它们重要吗？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Yeah. The products can be offset. You can get in and out of your position. There are different. They matter. I totally get that. But do they matter from the perspective of like a 19 year old who's addicted to **betting on sports**?
**Mike Selig**: 我认为这是一个全社会甚至国会的问题。我的意思是，在某种程度上，我们也不希望一个19岁的年轻人交易**NVIDIA**股票期权。那是你可以和国会讨论的事情。但现实是，今天我们在金融市场中允许18岁以上的人参与，这伴随着责任。在许多情况下，他们必须通过经纪人。存在这种**非中介模式**的细微差别，但也有筛选机制才能进入这些市场。所以我们确实有标准，我们确实有规则。一切都按照交易所规则手册进行，我们执行这些规则，我们正在**监管这些市场**。但我认为这种更**家长式**的问题，即参与市场的年龄应该是多少，这些人可以被征召入伍，上战场。所以，他们是否可以交易**超级碗**结果的期权，我认为这不是监管机构应该决定的。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, I think that's a question for society as a whole and even for Congress, right? I mean, to the extent we don't want a 19 year old trading in **NVIDIA** stock options either, you know, that's that's something that you can talk to Congress about. But the reality is that today we allow 18 plus in our financial markets and there's a responsibility associated with that. They have to go through a broker in many cases. There is this nuance of the **non intermediated model**, but there is screening as well to be able to access those markets. And so we do have standards, we do have rules. Everything's done in accordance with an exchange rulebook and we enforce that and we are **policing those markets**. But I think this this more **paternalistic** question of what age should be the age to be able to participate in the markets and these people can be drafted, go off to war. And so a question of whether they can trade options on the outcome of the **Super Bowl**, I think that's not really for the regulator to decide.
### 人员招聘与政府机构竞争 **Joe Weisenthal**: 你说你正在增加人手，以帮助监管所有这些新的、快速增长的市场。目前招聘流程或招聘体验是怎样的？因为，回想去年或2025年，政府就业的所有头条新闻都是裁员、大规模解雇、精简。你现在的情况如何？招人容易吗？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: You said you were ramping up staffing to help regulate all these new markets, new and fast growing markets. What's the hiring process or the hiring experience actually like at the moment? Because, you know, thinking back to last year or 2025, all the headlines when it came to government employment were, layoffs, mass firings, streamlining. What's what's that like for you now? Is it easy to get people in the door?
**Mike Selig**: 在我们需要额外员工的领域，我们正在根据能力和最高质量进行评估。我们不希望仅仅为了增加人数而增加人数。我们正在确保我们为这些职位招聘到合适的人。在许多情况下，我们人员配备非常充足。我认为我们正在努力填补一些需求。但同样，这与在私营公司招聘非常相似，我们希望招聘最优秀、最聪明的人才，他们真正希望帮助振兴机构，满足机构的需求。正如我之前提到的，我们也大量依赖技术，因为多年前很多事情必须手动完成，现在可以通过新技术非常迅速地完成。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, look, there are there are to the extent there are areas where we need additional staff. We are evaluating based on competence and the highest quality. We do not want to to just bring on bodies, to bring on bodies. We're making sure that we're bringing on the right people for the roles. And in many cases we are very well staffed. I think there are some needs that we're looking to fill out. But but again, it's it's very much akin to hiring at a private company or looking to bring on the best and the brightest who really want to help revitalize the agency fill out needs for the agency. And we are, as I mentioned earlier, relying a lot on technology as well, because there's just so much that many years ago it really had to be done manually. That can be done very quickly through new technologies.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 这是一个长期存在的问题，即政府机构如何与私营部门竞争以获得优秀人才。考虑到你现在的情况，你是如何做到的？我的意思是，我想你有一些预算限制，而且我想你的预算可能不如**CMS**之类的机构那么大。你到底是如何竞争的？
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Well, this has been a perennial question, which is how government agencies actually compete with the private sector to get good people. How are you doing that at the moment, given that? I mean, I imagine you have some form of budget constraint and I would imagine that it's probably your budget is not as big as like, I don't know, **CMS** or something like that. How how do you actually compete?
**Mike Selig**: 我认为部分原因在于**使命**。我们真正感兴趣的是确保这些市场在美国蓬勃发展。这是一个激动人心的时刻。许多人有兴趣为这项努力做出贡献，正如我之前所说，我们正在为这种资产类别以及基于**区块链**的市场设定新的市场结构，以及**多德-弗兰克法案**之后需要修复但坦率地说从未修复的许多事情。所以我认为部分原因在于使命，部分原因在于愿意服务并加入的人，也许他们没有得到私营部门的薪水，但这不一定是坏事。他们在为政府工作中获得了很大的价值。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Well, look, I think part of that's the **mission**. We are really interested in making sure that these markets flourish here in the United States. It's an exciting time. Many people are interested in being able to contribute to that effort where really, as I said earlier, setting new market structure for this asset class as well as for for **blockchain** based Marquez and a lot of the things that needed to be fixed in the wake of **Dodd-Frank** that frankly were never fixed. So I think it's in part mission and part people that are willing to serve and come in and maybe they don't get the salary that they get in the private sector, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. They get a lot of value out of being it working for the government.
**Tracy Alloway**: 回到营销问题，以及赌博营销，总有一些关于沉迷者的问题。你希望国会介入并制定规则吗？国会应该就**预测市场**广告制定规则吗？
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Do you think going back to the question of like marketing and again, gambling marketing, there's always like some line or whatever about people who get addicted. Would you like Congress to come in and create rules? Should Congress come up with a rule about **prediction market** advertising?
**Mike Selig**: 我们有很大的权力来监管我们的参与者。我认为有时国会确实有必要，正如你们所提到的，如果你真的想制定某种更**家长式**的角色，比如你必须年满18或21岁才能参与市场，诸如此类的事情。当然，你可以和国会讨论。至于我们如何监管市场的更细微的部分，那是我们处理的事情。它通常不会写入法规。我们通过我们的**通知和评论程序**，并从公众那里获得关于这些事情的意见。所以我认为你不必把所有细节都交给国会。但这当然可能是许多国家，对不起，许多州认为“21岁以下我们不希望那样”的事情。
Original English **Mike Selig**: We have got a lot of authority to regulate our participants. I think there's sometimes a real need for Congress to the extent, as you all mentioned, if you really want to set some sort of more **paternalistic** role around, you have to be 18 or 21 to participate in the markets, that sort of thing. Sure, you can talk to Congress about with respect to the more nuanced pieces of how we regulate the markets, that's stuff that we handle. It's not typically baked into statute. We go through our **notice and comment process** and get input from the public on those sorts of things. So I don't necessarily think you need to kick everything the Congress within the details. But but but it certainly could be something that people in a lot of countries, you know, we're sorry, a lot of states regard like, okay, under 21 like we don't want that Right.
**Tracy Alloway**: 这听起来你认为这是一种**家长式**的行为，我知道很多人都有这种看法。但是，**CFTC**，人们有不同的看法，而且**CFTC**似乎正在削弱一个州可能对赌博持有的价值观。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: And it sounds like you regard that as **paternalism** in action, which, I understand a lot of people share that view. But, it also seems like the **CFTC**, people have different views and it sounds like the **CFTC** is sort of undermining a value that a state might have about gambling.
**Mike Selig**: 我不这么看。我确实认为我们的衍生品市场在政府和法律中是一个独立的领域，与州赌博和管理州赌场的规则和要求非常不同。它们可以做很多与受监管的期货交易所不同的事情。所以我确实认为有一些取舍，肯定有一些年龄限制。但是，你可以在赌场提供酒精，并允许人们对体育下注。你不能在数字交易所这样做。也许有人旁边喝着啤酒。但我确实认为有很多不同的限制和人们交易的不同环境。所以这不完全是苹果对苹果。
Original English **Mike Selig**: I don't view it that way. I do think our derivatives markets are a separate area within government and within the law as opposed to the state gambling and the. The rules and requirements that govern a state casino are very different. They can do a lot different things than what a regulated futures exchange can do. And so I do think there's some give and take, some for sure limitation on the age piece. But look, you can serve alcohol in a casino and allow people to bet on sports. You can't do that necessarily at a digital exchange. Maybe somebody has got a beer on the side. But I do think there's a lot of different restrictions and a different environment in which people are trading. So it's not quite apples to apples.
**Joe Weisenthal**: **Mike Selig**，非常感谢你来到《Odd Lots》。你是在完美时机出现的完美嘉宾。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: **Mike Selig**, thank you so much for coming on Odd Lots. a perfect guest at the perfect time.
**Mike Selig**: 谢谢邀请。
Original English **Mike Selig**: Thanks for having me.
### 对预测市场监管的思考 **Tracy Alloway**: 我也很享受这次对话。然而，监管**预测市场**存在许多困难，我正试图找出我认为可能是主要的一个。首先，**CFTC**的存在是为了**监管风险管理**，对吗？这就是**Mike**所说的。在我看来，有人需要管理他们对**Cardi B**在**超级碗**舞台上表演的风险敞口，这非常值得怀疑。所以，对我来说，这甚至不完全清楚这是否是**CFTC**应该监管的行业。话虽如此。那是一个很大的题外话。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: I enjoyed that conversation too. However, there are a number of difficulties with regulating **prediction markets** and I'm kind of trying to like zoom in on what I think might be the primary one. So, number one, the **CFTC** exists to **regulate risk management**, right? Which is what **Mike** said. It is very doubtful to me that someone needs to manage their exposure to **Cardi B** performing on stage at the **Super Bowl**. So it's not even entirely clear to me that, like, this is an industry that the **CFTC** should be regulating now. That said. So that's that's a big tangent.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 是的，对。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Yeah, right.
**Tracy Alloway**: 此外，你当然可以争辩说，通过使**预测市场**合法化并帮助它们发展，你实际上是在系统中引入了新的风险，因为每个人都会开始赌掉他们的大学基金或其他什么。**Mike**在对话快结束时提出了一个有趣的观察，他说不同的市场结构需要不同类型的监管处理。我认为这很有道理。然而，关于这次对话，特别是与**体育博彩**相关的部分，有趣的是，我们听到各州在许多情况下要么没有**体育博彩**，要么对谁可以参与**体育博彩**有非常严格的规定，这与金融风险无关，而与关于谁可以参与**体育博彩**的**道德选择**有关。所以，一方面，有传统的**体育博彩公司**。他们有一个设定赔率的庄家。**预测市场公司**确实有不同的市场结构，但从社会为什么想要限制**体育博彩**的作用的角度来看，这并不是因为任何金融不稳定风险。这是因为我们不希望某些人，比如可能还在上高中的18岁年轻人，能够接触到**体育博彩**。当**CFTC**说，这是一种新型金融工具，应该像金融工具一样受到监管时，它似乎削弱了州所做的这种选择。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: And then just beyond that, you could certainly argue that by legitimizing **prediction markets** and helping them to grow, you are in fact introducing a new risk into the system because everyone's going to start gambling away. I don't know, they're college funds or whatever. **Mike** made an interesting observation and sort of near the end of the conversation that like and until it was like different market structures warrant different types of regulatory treatment. Right. So and I think that makes sense. I think what's interesting, though, about this conversation, particularly as it relates to **sports betting**, is that part of the reason that we hear that states have sort of in many cases, either no **sports betting** or very stringent rules about who can engage in **sports betting** has nothing to do with financial risk and everything to do with the sort of like **moral choice** about who gets to **sports bet**. And so, on one hand it's like, okay, there's like traditional **sports books**. They have a house that sets the odds. It's definitely true that **prediction market** companies have like a different market structure, but from a sort of like, why do society want to constrain the role of **sports betting**? It's not because of like any sort of like financial instability risk. It's because we don't want certain people like 18 year old people who might still be in high school having access to **sports betting**. And when the **CFTC** says, like, this is this is a new type of financial instrument that should be regulated like a financial instrument, it sort of undercuts that sort of choice that the state has made.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 是的，没错。你认为**体育博彩**是新的**单一文化**吗？我的意思是，它真是令人难以置信。它真是令人难以置信地无处不在。令人难以置信，但它也真是令人难以置信地无处不在，对一切事物的下注。而且，我应该说，我是一个**预测市场**数据的热情消费者。正如我一开始所说，我现在对各种事情，包括美联储的决定，都感兴趣。我认为说，你看像美联储基金掉期之类的某些衡量标准，这很有用。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Yeah, exactly. Do you think **sports betting** is like the new **monoculture**? I mean, it's just really incredible. I mean, it is really incredible how pervasive it is. An incredible but also it's just incredible, truly how pervasive betting on everything is. And, I should say, like I I'm an enthusiastic consumer of the **prediction markets** data. As I said in the very beginning, like I now on all kinds of things, including fed decisions, you know, like I think it's very useful to say like you look at like certain measures of like I don't know, the Fed funds swaps or whatever. It's like you just look at worth.
**Tracy Alloway**: 不，我喜欢，我也喜欢工作，但是像我们现在在**彭博社**上看到的**PolyMarket**，今年会有三次降息吗？那也是一个有用的工具。但是**预测市场**有很多东西，而且，我喜欢很多。我喜欢看选举赔率。我喜欢看一些公司的赔率会怎样。我认为它们有很多有用的信号。但平台目前也主要是**体育博彩**。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: No, I like I like I love work, too, but like a simple we have it on the **Bloomberg** now **PolyMarket**. Will there be three rate cuts this year? That is also a useful instrument to have. But there are a lot of things the **prediction markets** have and again that a are that. But I, I like a lot of them I like looking at election odds. I like looking at whether the odds of like some company what they're going to like. I think there's a lot of useful signal from them. It's also true that the platforms are largely **sports betting** at this point.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 对。你到底需要多少关于**超级碗**的信号？我确信有些人真的很喜欢它。但从金融监管的角度来看，这是一个不同的问题。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Right. Right. How much signal do you actually need about I don't know, the **Super Bowl**? I'm sure some people are really into it. But from a yeah, trading from a sort of from a **financial regulation** standpoint, it's a different question.
**Tracy Alloway**: 是的。好吧。我们就到这里吧？而且，顺便说一句，**特朗普家族**在这个领域投入了大量资金，这理所当然地应该引发一些关于政策如何制定以及这个行业如何发展的问题。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Yeah. Anyway, all right. Shall we leave it there? And it's also true, by the way, that the **Trump family** is very invested, quite literally into this space. And I think that quite reasonably should, raise some questions about like how policy is being made about the growth of this industry.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 激励。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Incentives.
**Tracy Alloway**: 是的，当然。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Yeah, for sure.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 好的。我们现在就到这里吧。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Okay. Shall we now leave it there.
**Tracy Alloway**: 就到这里吧。
Original English **Tracy Alloway**: Let's leave it there.
**Joe Weisenthal**: 好的。这是《Odd Lots》播客的又一集。我是**Tracy Alloway**。你可以关注我的推特@TracyAlloway。我是**Joe Weisenthal**。你可以关注我的推特@thestalwart。关注我们的嘉宾**Michael Selig**，他的推特是@MichaelSelig。关注我们的制作人**Carmen Rodriguez**，@CarmenArmen，**Dashiell Bennett**，@dashbot，和**Cale Brooks**，@CaleBrooks。如果你喜欢《Odd Lots》并想要更多内容，请访问Bloomberg.com/oddlots。你可以在那里找到我们的每日通讯和一些其他文章，你还可以24/7与听众在discord.gg/oddlots上讨论这个话题。如果你喜欢这次对话，请留下评论或点赞视频，或者更好的是，订阅。感谢观看。
Original English **Joe Weisenthal**: Okay. This has been another episode of the Off Thoughts podcast. I'm **Tracy Alloway**. You can follow me @TracyAlloway and I'm **Joe Weisenthal**. You can follow me @thestalwart. Follow our guest, **Michael Selig**. He's @MichaelSelig. Follow our producers, **Carmen Rodriguez**, @CarmenArmen **Dashiell Bennett**, @dashbot and **Cale Brooks** @CaleBrooks. And if you enjoy Odd Lots and you want more Odd Lots content, then go to Bloomberg.com/oddlots You can find our daily newsletter and some of our other writings, and you can chat with fellow listeners. 24-7 about this topic discord.gg/oddlots And if you enjoyed this conversation, then please leave a comment or like the video or better yet, subscribe. Thanks for watching.