Adam Aron, CEO of AMC Entertainment, published a post on X publicly distancing himself from Robinhood’s so-called “Stock Tokens,” products that replicate stock prices in tokenized form. Aron stated that AMC has no connection to the initiative and never authorized Robinhood to issue tokenized instruments based on its ticker.

The group is now reportedly appointing external legal counsel to examine the matter, while also threatening to approach the SEC directly over an alleged violation of U.S. securities law. Vlad Tenev, Robinhood’s CEO, responded to Aron’s outburst by asking, in his exact words: “What’s the concern?”

The issue is becoming a textbook case of the complex relationship between tokenized securities, which technically represent debt securities issued by an offshore entity, and the underlying stocks that they are supposed to replicate from the TradFi world.

AMC vs. Robinhood: What Is Happening?

The CEO of AMC, a company that operates one of the world’s largest cinema chains, used extremely harsh language to describe the practice through which Robinhood is reportedly issuing tokenized stocks, calling the entire matter “disgusting, shameful and unjustifiable.”

The dispute began because Robinhood allegedly added the $AMC coin to its stock-token catalog, even though the company had never consented to the use of its ticker on such a product. Adam Aron also accused the well-known trading platform—now a major player with record figures in DeFi—of failing to comply with the registration requirements for the aforementioned tokenized securities under U.S. securities laws.

Robinhood apparently is behind an effort related to “tokenized real-world assets including Stock Tokens” for AMC Entertainment (and supposedly 190+ other companies). They are not registered under U.S. securities laws !!!!!!

I find this practice to be contemptible, outrageous,…

— Adam Aron (@CEOAdam) September 3, 2026

Robinhood apparently is behind an effort related to “tokenized real-world assets including Stock Tokens” for AMC Entertainment (and supposedly 190+ other companies). They are not registered under U.S. securities laws !!!!!!

I find this practice to be contemptible, outrageous,…

Robinhood’s Response

The response from Robinhood’s CEO was not long in coming. With apparent nonchalance, Vlad Tenev replied to Adam Aron’s angry post with a question that was as brief as it was provocative: “What’s the concern?”

The AMC executive suggested that Robinhood could not sell or offer such products to customers residing in the United States, nor could it do so in other jurisdictions subject to restrictions, including Canada, the United Kingdom and Switzerland. In reality, however, the tokenized stocks managed by the broker are offered under the MiFID II framework, under the supervision of the Liechtenstein Financial Market Authority.

Technically, Robinhood operates within the European regulatory framework and is not violating any laws.

What’s the concern?

— Vlad Tenev (@vladtenev) September 4, 2026

What’s the concern?

The Real Core of the Issue

The discussion continued with a series of responses from AMC’s CEO, also involving a number of prominent figures in the tokenization and traditional financial markets sectors.

The real critical issue is not so much the regulatory framework within which Robinhood’s Stock Tokens operate, but rather the model under which the company issuing these securities—Robinhood Assets Limited, an offshore entity based in Jersey—should guarantee their collateral value and provide rights to their respective holders.

Furthermore, these tokenized products could create distortions in the control that a publicly traded company should retain over its capital-raising strategy. As AMC’s CEO reported:

Our past equity issuance to strengthen our balance sheet was vital to our success. Your creation of some kind of fictitious synthetic equity market disconnects ownership of stock tokens from a company’s ability to control its capital-raising efforts.

Our past equity issuance to strengthen our balance sheet was vital to our success. Your creation of some kind of fictitious synthetic equity market disconnects ownership of stock tokens from a company’s ability to control its capital-raising efforts.

Put simply, stock tokens do not provide holders with voting power and are designed exclusively as speculative instruments. The fact that someone can purchase these assets on synthetic secondary markets generates distrust in institutions and leaves a publicly traded company unable to maintain control over its capital-raising strategy.

AMC asked Robinhood to stop trading tokenized stocks related to its equity, also threatening to involve the SEC.

Armani Ferrante Joins the Discussion

Armani Ferrante, CEO of Backpack, also joined the discussion. His company is likewise involved in the tokenization of real-world assets, but takes a substantially different approach from Robinhood’s, involving a regulated broker that purchases the securities before the user makes an on-chain request.

Ferrante partly agreed with AMC’s CEO, arguing that there is some truth to his accusations, particularly because of the effect that a structure based on the issuance of debt securities could have on the market.

Tokenization is the most important change coming to financial markets in our lifetime.

I am a tokenization maximalist.

However.

There’s real substance behind @CEOAdam‘s criticism to learn from.

It boils down to one thing 👇 https://t.co/V5EuYtCbHL

— Armani Ferrante (@armaniferrante) September 4, 2026

Tokenization is the most important change coming to financial markets in our lifetime.

I am a tokenization maximalist.

However.

There’s real substance behind @CEOAdam‘s criticism to learn from.

It boils down to one thing 👇 https://t.co/V5EuYtCbHL

The concept is as follows: Robinhood’s Stock Tokens are not stocks, but represent a claim on a basket of collateral assets consisting only partly of real stocks, with the remainder made up of cash and a series of unspecified “eligible financial instruments.” This means that when someone buys a tokenized stock on Robinhood, the buying pressure does not automatically translate into equivalent demand for the actual equity listed on Wall Street.

Stock Tokens are not minted against an on-chain purchase; rather, they are issued from an existing inventory or against hedging transactions. Consequently, if tokenized-stock trading were to grow in the future and account for a substantial portion of a stock’s supply, it could trigger a price-distortion mechanism, with the “official” market becoming increasingly less representative of investor interest.

A Situation Likely to Remain Controversial for a Long Time

At present, the concerns raised by Aron and Ferrante have little to do with Robinhood’s current tokenized-asset market. Today, the total AUM of all these products amounts to just over $58 million, although it involves more than 800,000 holders and $3 billion in cumulative DEX volume since its July debut, thanks to the recent marriage between Robinhood and Uniswap.

In terms of AUM, Robinhood’s tokenized stocks are still worth very little compared with what is found in traditional markets, so this is not currently a case in which to fear possible distortions or inefficiencies. Nevertheless, Robinhood’s Vlad Tenev has repeatedly explained his intention to bring tokenization into the mainstream and put every publicly traded company on the blockchain.

It therefore cannot be ruled out that other companies tokenized by Robinhood could challenge the broker’s practices in the future, and at the very least, new SEC rules can be expected concerning the various mechanisms for issuing debt securities.