Bitcoin Forum

...

Blythe Masters, she of fame when at JP Morgan for inventing Credit Default Swaps (a type of derivative) AND speculating in "paper silver", is now hard at work taking over BTC companies.

Her firm has recently taken over two small BTC firms: HyperLedger (similar to factom) and Bits of Proof.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/wall-street-takeover-blythe-masters-gobbling-up-block-chain-companies-left-and-right/

Blythe Masters is not our friend.  "She looks out for Number One."

Whether this is good or bad for Bitcoin remains to be seen. I think we all have to expect that if this project is to be successful these types of participants are going to exist. People aren't going to ignore Bitcoin if it is to succeed, you know? What we can do is understand what new entrants are doing to gain their position and understand if it helps or hurts the overall purpose. Ultimately the masses will determine success or failure of any new firm that decides to make a play in Bitcoin.

I knew it is only a matter of time.  You can count on it, the more successful cryptos are, the more you will see big players entering the markets.  It doesn't have to be a bad thing, but lets face it, it will be a bad thing.  Look at regulations for stocks.  Why do you think you need an account of at least 25,000$ to day trade?  All of the rules are made by them and the deck is stacked against everyone else.  When they jump in here with both feet it will be the same.  Already they have done this in california, where it will soon be illegal to sell coins on LBC.  Then the big boys will step in and take over that part of the market.  Don't think for a second that it is a coincidence.  This is perhaps the end of the golden days, but on the bright side we will all benefit when that juicy wall street money pours in.  The market cap will shoot up, and so will the value of your coins.

If you don't have a MSB license you're most likely already breaking federal law...

Wasn't this a story on cryptocoinnews already a few months ago?  Otherwise I wouldn't know her name, but I definitely read about her wanting to get involved in Bitcoin before.
It is probably good news in the short term for the bitcoin market, I wouldn't bet on her staying in for the long haul though, she would happily drop BTC to make a profit too.

Found the link:
http://www.coindesk.com/former-jp-morgan-exec-blythe-masters-swaps-wall-street-for-bitcoin/ from March

Absolutely! If the top investment bank in Wall Street steps in bitcoin, it will attract a lot of attentions from the financial elites. But the problem is that how much they will commit to this market and what level they will manipulate its market! They are here just for profit, not for supporting the ecosystem.   

How is it bad that they come? they can only bring more money into the ecosystem. They can't change the fundamentals of how BTC works. Sure, they can manipulate the price, but tell me how could you avoid this an unregulated free market? If they have billions in cash they can have billions in BTC and start playing around with the price. What are you going to do about it?

Lets be very honest. Wall street is all about making money, its all about profit. They don't care about creating a culture, they domt care about an economic evolution, they think about money and how to double it. Their involvement with bitcoin cannot be approximated, their performance and commitment determines what happens next.

Who doesn't?    ;)



Link to CoinDesk's article from yesterday: http://www.coindesk.com/blythe-masters-blockchain-startups-hyperledger-bits-of-proof/

Yes, wall street is about making money. Maybe, just maybe, that itself can be a bright move for the bitcoin community? The more money they generate, the more eceonomy is pumped for bitcoin. More use of bitcoin, more money for bitcoin.

As far as I know Hyperledger has nothing to do with Bitcoin or any other cryptocoin.
Even on their website they write: "Unlike other decentralised ledger platforms, Hyperledger has no native cryptocurrency."
Beside that is a sign with Bitcoin crossed out.

Blythe Masters has no interest in using Bitcoin or Bitcoin's Blockchain. She is looking for a way to missuse or manipulate it in one way or the other like she did with silver and her CDS derivatives.

But there are also chances that the whole idea of economy gets disrupted as they will gain monopoly here too considering they invest all of their assets in bitcoin. It will change the market and make them really powerful which might be bad for people.

I think its good that bigger players are coming inside the game, it can change the game. The change can be negative or positive, but it will change the game. And right now I think the game could use a little change (:

Wall st can come in but the miners are the driving force behind btc !!
Hopefully the curiosity of wall st & other 'speculators' will help drive btc into the main stream & not where people in America can't mine or use bitcoin without getting a 'bit license'

Seriously whoever taken up the business with the Bitcoin digital currency it is good for them in now and future, this is nothing for us to become overwhelmed as she entered into the digital currency. They are going to make high level of profit while doing trading with Bitcoins.

Exactly, Blythe Masters has never given any reason why she opt for Bitcoin digital currency, but certainly their must some of her new smart move here to re invent some other things, Her own words in an interview "We’re not seeking to disintermediate and destroy the current financial system,” and “We’re seeking to make it stronger, better and safer.”

Yeah, it’s not direct investment in cryptos per se, but it is an investment in the underlying technology nonetheless, and the fact that they’re interested in the technology itself can only be a good sign since the vast majority will not be so keen on reinventing the wheel and most likely will directly invest in the best of existing cryptocurrencies.

It’s not a question of if, rather it is a question of when (and I believe it has already begun, albeit in trickle mode still).

In my opinion, there is huge investment potential in cryptocurrencies. To get an idea of what I’m talking about, take the over 10 trillion USD aggregate M2 money supply for the U.S. alone and use that as your comparative calculative base, and then, being conservative, give the top 50 cryptocurrencies an aggregate value of just half that: 5 trillion USD.

If we assign equal parts of that 5 trillion USD of equivalent value to each of the top 50 cryptocurrencies, each would have the equivalent market cap of 100 billion USD. That means that each BTC would be worth $4,761.91, each LTC $1,190.48, each WDC $376.77, each DGB $4.77, and each DOGE would be worth around 1 buck (with the removal of its original cap of 100,000,000,000, similar to the fiats, it should initially lose around 5% of that value yearly in the coming years due to its now inherent inflationary component).

Does this sound far fetched? Why should it? Why shouldn’t cryptocurrencies have a similar value to their fiat cousins? After all, wasn’t that the original intent behind cryptos to begin with?

What’s more, the combined USD equivalent money supply of the developed world easily exceeds 50 trillion USD, 5 times the U.S. and 10 times this imaginary cryptocurrency aggregate figure. Is it really that far fetched to imagine that the best cryptocurrencies could one day have an aggregate value equal to a very modest 1/10 that of the developed world's aggregate fiat money supply?

Considering that the appreciation potential is greater than 1000%, is there any wonder that big money is looking vivaciously at cryptos?