Bitcoin Forum

The most notably pro-bitcoin SEC commissioner, Hester Peirce, appeared on the ‘What Bitcoin Did’ podcast at the weekend. Whilst unwilling to describe a future Bitcoin ETF as inevitable, she did confirm it was definitely possible.
Peirce first won the hearts of the crypto-community with her ‘statement of dissent’, following yet another denied Winklevoss ETF application.
https://bitcoinist.com/sec-peirce-bitcoin-etf-possible/

It has kind of happened already in Switzerland so it's just a matter of time before in happens in the U.S and other countries. It's a shame that this dump happened now as the stability at $6500 was looking really good for helping to get that elusive ETF

It doesn't say much. Last time she was for it and the rest of the commissioners against it. That's 3 against 1, if I remember correctly, so unless she managed to persuade at least 1 member there won't be any ETFs coming. She's saying that it's possible and we know that. Van Eck spokesperson also said that it's very likely they will get an approval and we're getting postponed ever since.

The ETF that was approved in Switzerland is a horrible financial instrument. Rule nr 1; don't ever mix up Bitcoin with other shitcoins, which is what Coinbase did as well, and it failed hard with its institutional focused index fund. Their current fund allows you to get rid of coins you don't want, and the entry amount is peanuts, which is a step in the right direction.

We already knew her standpoint in the whole ETF situation, and it didn't help at all, nor will it help in the future.

You know what the real problem here is? People's continuous focus on events, where an ETF is somewhat of the highest possible achievement for an asset. After people sold the news, sold the rally that may or may not follow afterwards, what's left to focus on? Use is what matters, not these silly events that have an expiry date in terms of market impact.

Technically though, its called ETP (Exchange Traded Product), meaning its derived from different investment instruments not only Bitcoin.

I also have the same theory. The price is going on smooth like in the $6000-$6500 range making it stable, as one of things that SEC wanted to get ETF approval is the volatility and market manipulation. Anyways, looks like its ruin because of the sudden dump. So people might eventually get tired waiting for something that will not happen. If institution wanted to really pour their cash, there's no need to wait for this ETF, in my opinion.

There could be a need for that though. If in an institution the decision makers were split down the middle on the issue of investing, the SEC's recognition could play a decisive role. I bet for some people who are against the idea of investing in BTC the SEC's bad attitude towards cryptocurrencies is their basic argument. If the SEC changed their attitude those people would definitely change their mind as well. What the SEC is doing is acting as a break on human progress. (It's not that they can stop it completely though).

Yeah, the sudden destabilising (but really, guys, they should have expected the Bitcoin rollercoaster was just about to enter another spiral) almost immediately forced even Bakkt futures to January (as if that's also something the market will wait for). If volatility is truly the aspect of Bitcoin that the SEC decision hinges on, then realistically no one should hold their breath. Plenty of life yet and that 2020 halving to come.

Anyone who's wanted to go in would have already or are well into other routes. This entry point ain't gonna last forever.

It is still not considered a good news until the SEC approve the ETF and resulted to make bitcoin hype. As adult as we are, we are result oriented base so the result is more important than giving a false hope if eventually ETF will not be approve. We can't make any conclusions for now for the news about ETF though many are waiting for the ETF discussions results.

it may look like that, but consider where the biggest trading volumes are: bitmex (seychelles), bitfinex (british virgin islands), okex (belize), binance (malta). these aren't jurisdictions known for heavy-handed regulation. they're registered where they are to avoid compliance with jurisdictions like the USA and to avoid burdensome regulations in general.

as long as volumes are concentrated on exchanges like this, i don't see the SEC approving any ETF.

Yeah, that makes me also think that these manipulaters might have received these signals earlier so they have dump bitcoin as much as they could. If only bitcoin is still  stable at 6,5k then we might see it  reaching between 15k - 18k once one of those ETFs got approval.

of course it is possible that one day approve some bitcoin ETF, even if pass 10 years. one day will approve some bitcoin ETF. this response from her is something anyone can say, the point now is: are there any conditions now that the ETF will be approved? because we need institutional investors and an ETF would bring a good image for bitcoin and maybe many banks and many governments would accept bitcoin

All that she is saying is that such ETF is possible.

I still find it hard to believe that it would be approved any time soon, to be honest. And it's obviously not up to her alone to decide whether or not a bitcoin ETF is able to be released into the market.

Personally, I couldn't care less about an ETF approval, because honestly it won't affect any actual bitcoin users in a positive way. It's going to be targeting institutional investors who have large sums of money that they want to trade with, potentially even leading to manipulation. But as to on-chain activity, there won't be any effects resulting from ETFs, even if they were approved.