Print Page - SEC delays decision on ETF again, Vaneck, SolidX withdraw proposal

Mark that date because this is the final extension. As mentioned in the article, on February 27, 2019 the SEC will need to make a decision if they approve or reject VanEck's proposal. What a terrible time to put bitcoin in a period of uncertainty.

What are your predictions, will the ETF be approved or rejected? I know my answer, but I reckon you would not like it. If the SEC really wanted to approve it, it would have been approved already.

https://www.newsghana.com.gh/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Kim-Jong-nam.jpg
Tom Lee waiting for the SEC's decision

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) extended a rule change proposal allowing the nation’s first bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF), pushing the decision deadline to next year.

In a notice posted online, the securities regulator said it was extending the review period for the ETF to Feb. 27, 2019. The proposal was first submitted by money manager VanEck and blockchain startup SolidX, who partnered with the Cboe exchange earlier this year.

Under SEC rules, a decision on the proposal cannot be delayed any further, meaning the next notice must either approve or reject the ETF.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/sec-again-delays-decision-on-vaneck-solidx-bitcoin-etf

I don't get why the market is reacting to this news like they are reacting right now. It was suppose to be decided on 29th of December if I am not wrong and and postponed about 2 months later from that date. This is not some year long huge deal, its just 2 months and it will be really early of 2019 when this happens.

Whats going to happen the price will go back up in a month to redo all of this again? What did people think they can hold their coins right now and sell after it gets accepted but decided 2 months is a long enough time to sell and rebuy to wait again? Why not keep it and not sell it for another 2 months before the price goes back up ?

I really don't understand people and their overreactions, market is going down for no reason and people are idiots to think this has too much difference in bitcoins life span.

Quote from: el kaka22 on December 07, 2018, 08:58:04 AM

i don't think the market is selling because of the ETF anymore.

when bitcoin trends, it trends strong. there's been an exodus from the market and investors are continuing to sell every bounce. we've seen this before. it's just like the end of the 2014 bear market---really painful and despair-inducing.

Quote from: talkbitcoin on December 07, 2018, 10:15:11 AM

is there anybody left who is actually waiting for SEC's decision about ETFs? i seriously doubt that. people have been burnt by SEC enough times that they already know that the approval is not going to happen or at least the chances of it are so minuscule that they don't matter at all.
not to mention that ETF is not going to do anything for bitcoin really!

It' all psychological i think. People probably believe an approval will save the market and pull the value up. What they don't realize is what you said. There' a chance that etf will be denied and those that anticipated to be saved would likely end up panic selling with huge losses.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on December 07, 2018, 01:39:45 AM

What are your predictions, will the ETF be approved or rejected? I know my answer, but I reckon you would not like it. If the SEC really wanted to approve it, it would have been approved already.

If the SEC really had big issues with it and wanted to reject it they'd have done it already, instead of wasting time and resources prolonging the inevitable. I think the truth is that they've not yet decided. Hopefully they come down on the positive side but I think all the price turmoil lately might be contributing to the uncertainty.

Quote from: TheAndy500 on December 07, 2018, 03:27:48 PM

I'm starting to believe that they are doing it on purpose to manipulate the price. Maybe someone of a high rank already knows that the decision will be positive and wants to buy more cheap bitcoins?!? I do not think that their bureaucracy is so huge that it would pass this decision forever!

Maybe they've been advised by friends in power to delay a little and offered some sort of underhand payment for doing so. We can never be certain, but if that is the case then the decision would be yes whenever they do make that decision.

Quote from: TheAndy500 on December 07, 2018, 03:27:48 PM

I don't think they give a shit about crypto and probably wish it had never darkened their door. It's taking up large amounts of their time and they at least know it's a total waste. The main man is now overtly stating that it's not going to happen with markets this shitty and every previous decision has made the same point.

Quote from: TheAndy500 on December 07, 2018, 03:27:48 PM

Based on what Clayton and the other commissioners (besides Hester M. Peirce) have said, I doubt a positive decision is coming. Nothing about the market and exchange infrastructure has changed since they rejected the Winklevoss ETF. If the market was prone to fraudulent and manipulative practices then, it still is now. Speaking of which, the DOJ and CFTC are in the middle of an investigation into Bitfinex and Tether for market manipulation.....

Quote from: cindygirl on December 07, 2018, 03:11:53 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on December 07, 2018, 01:39:45 AM

What are your predictions, will the ETF be approved or rejected? I know my answer, but I reckon you would not like it. If the SEC really wanted to approve it, it would have been approved already.

I have a strong feeling that they would not approve it but my real question is that why and what is their main reason why they have to prolong this. If they have a problem with ETF why just they don't tell it already so that there is no waiting game. I don't think so if they would really come down on the positive side of approving it.

Quote from: gentlemand on December 07, 2018, 01:42:25 AM

100% rejected. It won't happen for years.

I wouldn't be so sure about that, but it'll at least be interesting once February comes and they have to make a decision one way or another. Part of me thinks you're right, but this is the US government we're talking about and they're not globally famous for being consistent, fair, or even smart.

Not to stray off-topic, but OP can you please not insert those completely unnecessary pictures into your posts? This is a discussion forum and you're not writing articles for news sites when you post here. The picture above adds absolutely nothing to your post and there's always the risk that idiots will reply to the OP and quote the whole thing, including the picture. Just stop doing that, please.

Quote from: talkbitcoin on December 07, 2018, 10:15:11 AM

sadly, i've noticed there are still people hopeful about SEC approval. the narrative changed from "there are so many ETF applications, which one is gonna get approved?" to "vaneck/solidx was the only one that matters anyway because it's physically backed!"

i don't think traders are "buying the rumor" anymore, but they might have used this as an excuse to sell.

Quote from: The Pharmacist on December 08, 2018, 09:51:44 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on December 07, 2018, 01:42:25 AM

100% rejected. It won't happen for years.

Come to think of it, I'm pretty eager to hear their final decision in February because of the timing. How a market reacts to news can tell a lot about sentiment (i.e. whether you're still in a bear market or not). My thinking has been this leg down is a final capitulation bottom, similar to January 2015, so I'm looking for a bottom between now and early Q1 next year.

I'm definitely expecting rejection though, just going by the chairman's stated position and the Winklevoss decision (which heavily focused on market manipulation). There was just an article last month about how the DOJ has joined the CFTC in investigating Bitfinex and Tether for market manipulation. As long as that's ongoing (or perhaps as long as they're still standing), there will be no approval. I also don't think Bitfinex and Tether are the only actors they're concerned about.

Quote

I honestly think that there is a relatively low chance that any bitcoin related ETFs would be able to be approved in the near future. There is a slight chance, but it's slim to none. Otherwise the SEC would not have rejected all the previous applications and kept postponing their decisions.

I'll pretty much continue to accumulate during this bear market without regard for this news, because I don't think that even if ETFs do get approved, there will be any longer term impacts that is able to be established into the market. People say that they are buying in anticipation of an approval, but I'm not expecting that.

Even if it does get approved, all there will be is a short term spike in prices due to the hype generated. There is nothing more than that - ETFs do not help actual bitcoin users that conduct on-chain transactions one single bit.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on December 07, 2018, 01:39:45 AM

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/sec-again-delays-decision-on-vaneck-solidx-bitcoin-etf

I am not too sure if this is a bad thing or not. I know prices got affected by this but in reality maybe they couldn't find a reason to reject it and wanted to postpone it to take a look at it again to find any mistakes or problems with it ? I mean think about it don't you think if they had a cause to reject it they would postpone it, if they were going to reject it and had a reason to do so they would just reject it right away without taking extra time for it.

Since, they postponed it that has to mean they couldn't find a reason to reject it and trying to look for it. Not that SEC wants to reject it but it is clear that rejecting something is easy but accepting it takes time since it could mean bad things if they accept something bad hence they need to be really careful. That is why I think this delay is great for us and shows promise of getting accepted.

Quote from: rickadone on December 09, 2018, 03:14:40 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on December 07, 2018, 01:39:45 AM

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/sec-again-delays-decision-on-vaneck-solidx-bitcoin-etf

Yeah I agree, while I'm not expecting it to get approved in February, the fact that they've delayed it half a year now suggests they really don't know what to do and think acceptance is a possibility. I think they are waiting for BAKKT to open as having a Wall St regulated exchange seems to be what they are looking for in terms of eventually accepting an ETF. But I think it'll take a while longer until they finally decide to accept it. But I could see it happening in 2019.

Quote from: DeathAngel on December 09, 2018, 03:57:06 PM

There ain’t going to be a Bitcoin ETF any time soon. The market doesn’t give a shit any more. The recent dumping is because of the BCH fork fight & all the shit that’s going on with those assholes selling bitcoin to prop up their shitcoin’s.

Bitcoin doesn’t need an ETF & we’re unlikely to get one approved for at least a couple of years imo.

However, @rickadone has made a good argument on why the delay is more towards the approval of an ETF than a rejection. If the SEC wanted to reject it, would it take them this long to analyze the situation? I reckon, no.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on December 10, 2018, 01:09:14 AM

There's no reason for them to speed it up. They have plenty more on their plate with hammering ICOs alone so they may as well take their time. They may also intend to learn a little more too. They've made repeated requests for opinions on the matter, not that it attracted much more than psychos and brain dead moon kids.

And once again this guy is on the money - https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1072216015801585664

It's not looking promising, not that anyone should've expected anything else.

Quote from: Siren on December 09, 2018, 09:29:09 AM

I am thinking that how many cryptonians are still waiting for this ETF decisions?

Because for me i would rather say WTF than that ETF that always keeping the delays in giving decisions,and sometime i come to the idea that this will never really happen,and we are just being lured to believe but reality will never come.hope i am wrong but thats how i look in this area

We do not have to disappoint because in the coming month we will see ICE exchange starting the Bitcoin futures which will give a more stability to the market and this is what the SEC needed to approve the ETF. So it is inevitable for the SEC to approve ETF.

Quote from: bitbunnny on December 07, 2018, 09:45:54 AM

I don't know why so many delays for this decision.
On the other hand I don't think that because of that we have such situation on the market and panic selling, this is not connected.
People are expecting too much of ETF thinking this would bring some extraordinary effects but I don't think that something revolutionary will happen. And market is definetely not reacting to ETF connected news anymore.

Maybe they feel very important in crypto community why they keep on delaying. It is as if everyone is looking forward on that decision though. ;D Crypto life will go on without them. I guess.

Another delay by the SEC. However, Tom Lee's prediction of an all time high of $25k might become true on the day before the approval of the SEC's deadline day, October 18. I speculate that it might be the last of the delays.

https://i.ibb.co/tJYTfR9/image.jpg
Tom Lee in the eyes of everyone after all time high of $25k

The SEC has again delayed its decision on whether to allow a proposed rule change that would enable the VanEck SolidX Bitcoin Trust exchange-traded fund (ETF) to issue and list its shares.

According to a filing published on Thursday by the SEC, the public has 21 days from when the order is published in the Federal Register to submit comments on the ETF, and rebuttals to those comments are due 35 days after such publication.

As highlighted by attorney Jake Chervinsky in a recent tweet, the SEC has a new deadline of August 19, but investors should fully expect there to be another delay pushing things to the final deadline of October 18.

Source https://sludgefeed.com/bitcoin-remains-steady-after-sec-delays-etf-decision/

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 21, 2019, 03:47:12 AM

They keep on delaying it and won't be surprised if by the final deadline, they will declare another delay and extension.

Are we still considering it as something big? well it's kind of big if it will be approved but we're too tired of it. I'd guess that we're focusing now with the bull run with or without these ETF approvals.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 21, 2019, 03:47:12 AM

Another delay by the SEC. However, Tom Lee's prediction of an all time high of $25k might become true on the day before the approval of the SEC's deadline day, October 18.

No ETF will be approved by the SEC in 2019 and very likely not even in 2020. We aren't even sure if Bakkt will manage to pull off a launch with how hesitant the CFTC is, and that with how the CFTC has been pretty loose with its approvals in the past, so don't hope for things that you can't exercise control over.

If anything, the odds of an ETF have turned against us more than ever before with plenty of volume manipulation, Bitfinex & Tether, etc.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 21, 2019, 03:47:12 AM

I speculate that it might be the last of the delays.

Unless the proposal gets withdrawn and refilled.

Quote from: batang_bitcoin on May 21, 2019, 10:59:25 AM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 21, 2019, 03:47:12 AM

Agreed. The market did not react negatively when the announcement of the delay was made. This might be the beginning of the disbelief on the U.S. goverment's influence over the cryptospace. I also hope that Bitfinex will win versus the New York attorney general's office to show everyone that they cannot do anything to us with all their power hehehe.

Quote from: Wind_FURY on May 21, 2019, 11:22:35 AM

Shower thought. It's the institutional investors/whalecumulators that's controlling the SEC to keep delaying the approval because they want as much coin supply in their custody before 6 digit FOMO, then approve ETF, then let the plebs hold only the ETFs, and the private keys are always under whalecumulator control.

I think it is more that the SEC simply won't approve an ETF until Wall St has built up some bitcoin infrastructure, since that is what the SEC considers "regulated'. In the end it means the same thing as what you're saying, ETF probably won't be approved until institutional investors have accumulated a decent amount of coins using the infrastructure they've built for themselves. This is starting now (Fidelity, BAKKT) but I think the SEC will wait for more to be built up before it considers the market regulated enough.

I'd put the likelihood of an ETF approval this year at a very low chance. A year from now though there should be a young but budding bitcoin industry operating on Wall St so I'd put the likelihood of ETF in 2020 at like 40%. I doubt SEC will first approve an ETF during a bear market or near the late bull mania phase, and since the bull market will probably peak and then start to crash in 2021, I think 2021 might actually not be too likely if an ETF hasn't already happened. So if it doesn't happen in 2020 or perhaps early 2021 if the bull run hasn't gotten too crazy by then, I think we'll be waiting until 2022 or 2023 at which time they will definitely approve an ETF. But who knows!

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 22, 2019, 03:22:19 AM

It was expected that they will delay it once again, there was a time when the market would rally when the ETF decision was fast approaching and then die down on hearing that they rejected the proposal, now the market is tired of it and we very well know that the decision will not be coming this time too even though there were talks that they would accept them this time, no one wanted to trust on that news alone and the market has grown outside of those news. :)

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 22, 2019, 03:22:19 AM

Quote from: batang_bitcoin on May 21, 2019, 10:59:25 AM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 21, 2019, 03:47:12 AM

This is not a centralized system that every decision they make will have effect over the market, the only way they can have any effect over the market indirectly is through news, so whatever comes from them verbally either creates FUD news or Cause FOMO and this is just simply based on the mentality of people.

Inreal life, I don’t think any decision they make will practically have any much effect on the cryptocurrency market. There are so many things that have happened greater than SEC and still didn’t have any negative effect on BTC. This crypto market strictly depends on the number of adoption and adoption is more than what SEC can even facilitate.

Quote from: ene1980 on May 22, 2019, 06:05:23 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 22, 2019, 03:22:19 AM

In that case, I reckon the regulators might finally approve it on October because the intended effect of the rejection on the market is not working anymore hehehe.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on June 03, 2019, 02:40:26 AM

Quote from: ene1980 on May 22, 2019, 06:05:23 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 22, 2019, 03:22:19 AM

In that case, I reckon the regulators might finally approve it on October because the intended effect of the rejection on the market is not working anymore hehehe.

I don't think so, could be this October or another year to come. We are nowhere to see ETF's approval, we can't say that they are not working on it but they don't have concrete evidence that proves the real existence of crypto and the doubts of many still holding for their decision. They need support from the community but it is too sad that some of them say "NO".

The SEC approval is still only one step, it takes many months after the approved proposal once ETF will go live. All of ETFs will be rejected and maybe Vaneck one, thanks to the smart trick will succeed next year or 2020. However the impact of Vaneck ETF will by very limited, or you think that average Joe has equivalent of 25btc to buy a share of the ETF? Why minimum is 25 btc? Because Vaneck used this trick to persuade SEC that they won't have to be worried about average Joe as he will never be able to invest in this ETF because of the huge minimum order. At the end, Vaneck's arguments in the propasal are very similar despite to a play with words. No companies which sent proposals are capable to provide hundreds thousands of bitcoins as insurance and "persuade" the SEC.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on June 03, 2019, 02:40:26 AM

In that case, I reckon the regulators might finally approve it on October because the intended effect of the rejection on the market is not working anymore hehehe.

The SEC has clearly stated its concerns. I'm sure they don't feel any pressure when it comes to approving or rejecting this ETF. It's just another task on their list they have to check off.

I am 99% sure that the SEC will reject it, but there is a chance that the proposal will be withdrawn by CBOE so that they afterwards can submit an improved version of it. It's still a waste of time in my book.

The fundamentals of the market as a whole haven't changed at all, where all the Tether fud isn't doing the CBOE a favor either. What if we crash back to $3000 again? Think the SEC will ignore that?

Look at the price, we went up a lot without all the ETF nonsense. We clearly don't need these tools to pump.

Quote from: Distinctin on June 03, 2019, 01:38:56 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on June 03, 2019, 02:40:26 AM

Quote from: ene1980 on May 22, 2019, 06:05:23 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on May 22, 2019, 03:22:19 AM

In that case, I reckon the regulators might finally approve it on October because the intended effect of the rejection on the market is not working anymore hehehe.

I don't think so, I don't believe in the existence of ETF because this information has begun to appear for a long time but until now, we still only see the delay of the SEC, more precisely, the ETF to this point is just a tool to change market trends, it does not bring too much meaning to users or support crypto and bitcoin. What the ETF offers is just a panic and hope in vain, instead of continuing to think and analyze ETF, we should work on market trends, it will bring more benefits.

Quote from: cepot9 on June 04, 2019, 03:52:54 PM

they are just always bullshit, and actually we don't really need ETF anymore if they don't do it right away. because I believe this market will continue to grow as in previous years without ETF.

We are not thinking that ETF doesn't have a place in crypto, yet it have some importance and we want to know if it is effective to the run the market free from scamming activities. But we are too tired and not believing to be approved by SEC.
Maybe you are right, we don't need it anymore if that ETF will only make a disatrous changes to the system. And it seems to favorable to us to have this kind of market without ETF.

Quote from: cepot9 on June 04, 2019, 03:52:54 PM

they are just always bullshit, and actually we don't really need ETF anymore if they don't do it right away. because I believe this market will continue to grow as in previous years without ETF.

ETF or no ETF I strongly believe that bitcoin is going to grow in some months to come. This ETF approvals application has affected bitcoin more than we think and if we really want to make progress in cryptocurrencies development then we have to keep this ETF issues aside and focus of bitcoin and Cryptocurrency to be adopted by the society and not approval by some government agencies.

Quote from: ethereumhunter on June 06, 2019, 05:31:05 PM

I am not surprised if SEC delays ETF again because that is happening in many times. Bitcoin doesn't need ETF, and the price will increase after all, even if they delay the decision. There is a time for people to buy more bitcoin while the price is low, and the price will get high. I think many people still waiting for the SEC decision, but I don't know if they still waiting or not because SEC still delays until now.

I think that we caught wind of what SEC has been trying to do. We have seen too many delays so far and we know that delays do not mean anything anymore. That is why the last time it was delayed the price didn't even care and now we are going up without SEC as well. Which means if it gets delayed again then price will not fall down and if it gets accepted somehow the price will continue to go up, meaning there is absolutely no scenario where bitcoin gets down.

Maybe if it gets rejected eventually but I feel like if they were going to reject it they would have done it long ago, they are just looking to approve it but want to make sure it won't create too much issues so they are looking into every bit of details to make sure they won't be held viable if something bad happens before they actually accept it.

Quote from: jademaxsuy on June 08, 2019, 12:03:06 AM

There are now trading exchanges basing on US now operates following the ETF rules and regulations.

The few compliant exchanges within the US aren't enough to satisfy the SEC. Asia is what the SEC is concerned about, because that's where most of the unregulated exchanges come from, and they are a significant contributing factor to the demand that steers Bitcoin.

I would say that when US based legacy institutions start offering Bitcoin trading, that the odds of an approval will actually increase significantly. Now the odds are either stagnant or falling back down due to volume manipulation and all the drama that's happening over at Tether and Bitfinex. We're not booking any progress yet, and that has to change.

Quote from: ukloon on June 09, 2019, 04:59:37 PM

These SEC nabs are just going to keep delaying the decision until they themselves have accumulated enough bitcoin and their crony buddies too. After that they will simply give the green signal and watch their investments fly

Looks legit, I've recently read an article that says they 'may soon approve' bitcoin ETF. I forgot the article's link but I can't be sure if that's for real or just another hype maker so that people will FOMO. Bitcoin ETF doesn't really matter anymore, forget about it so if it gets approved, fine and if not, still doesn't matter. It has been a long time since these proposals has been sent although the first ones were declined but I think they will actually soon consider it.

Quote from: ukloon on June 09, 2019, 04:59:37 PM

Haha, nice conspiracy, but I don't know man. It really looks like they hated crypto so I don't think that they will invest on bitcoin before they finally given the go signal to accept the proposal. But then again, I'm no longer 'hype' about the decision though, they kept on delaying on so we might as well call it a day with them and expect no approval.

Quote from: bitbunnny on June 10, 2019, 10:08:30 AM

So many conspiracy theories about SEC and to be honest I don't like that. People expected too much from ETF thinking that will rise the price and solve some issues.
Personally I don't think that ETF would have some significant positive influence and having in mind all this situation around it I stopped counting on it long time ago, don't bothering anymore.

If the approval will come, good for crypto but if not, that would not change the potential of crypto.

Approval is a better news, it will help the price a bit as this makes people think approval will drive big investors in the market, but the question is how long we shall wait... right thing to do now, is just accept whatever happens, crypto will not end without ETF.

Quote from: bitbunnny on June 10, 2019, 10:08:30 AM

Bitcoin can make further progress even without it.

But that progress would not be as big if with ETF approved, imagine the money flowing from big investors, it will certainly create demand in the market.

Quote from: bitbunnny on June 10, 2019, 10:08:30 AM

So many conspiracy theories about SEC and to be honest I don't like that. People expected too much from ETF thinking that will rise the price and solve some issues.
Personally I don't think that ETF would have some significant positive influence and having in mind all this situation around it I stopped counting on it long time ago, don't bothering anymore. Bitcoin can make further progress even without it.

I personally think that you're wrong. 8)

https://i.redd.it/fbva5s7bcqa11.jpg

While the plebs are talking/arguing, the whalecumulators are buying as much of the supply they can, and put every one of them under their custody.

The one thing around which the majority agrees is that BTC ETF will cause significant price increase, and some very often referred to gold as an example. But for me personally this is not a good example, gold is something completely different, and the only thing gold and BTC have in common is that they can both be store of value.

However recently I read what theymos is write about ETF, and I realized that few people actually wonder what will be a long lasting consequence of ETF. But perhaps it's best to read what our admin thinks about all this and some other important things.

Quote from: theymos https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/97xa5s/andreas_antonopolous_etfs_are_not_good_for/

Quote from: healingpainter

Andreas Antonopolous: ETF's are NOT good for bitcoin as the centralized custodian can decide what to do with the bitcoin they're holding.

Agreed, an ETF will almost certainly turn into a disaster at some point. The coins will be stolen, forks will be handled controversially, there will be issues with fungibility (eg. someone will "trace stolen coins" to the ETF's stash), the world will freak out when a bunch of retirees lose their life savings after doing the equivalent of buying BTC at $20k, etc. etc. It'll also get the sort of people who love regulation more into BTC, which is never good.

But investors want it, so it'll probably happen eventually. In particular, I totally condemn trying to get regulators to interfere in the free market more than they already do by blocking any ETF. (When the SEC was last looking into this, I had actually written a long document that I was going to send to them in order to comment on many technical issues with their proposed Bitcoin ETF regulation, but I decided not to send it because I don't want to have even the slightest hand in regulations.)

An ETF probably will increase the price a lot (until the ETF suffers its near-inevitable catastrophe), which has some pros and cons.

Note that an ETF can't affect Bitcoin itself, just the ETF investors and the market. There is no voting of any sort in Bitcoin, so it's not as if holding a lot of BTC gives you any power over Bitcoin, for example. I do agree with Andreas that the creation of a "corpo-Bitcoin" seems probable, perhaps after the ETF loses a ton of BTC and wants to undo it.

Thanks to bitmover who post this and some other good post from theymos reddit account : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5153962.0

Quote from: bitbunnny on June 10, 2019, 10:08:30 AM

Yes, so much about those conspiracy theories about the non-approval. Well the expectations has pass already, I mean when we heard all about it the first time, our eyes grow bigger and everyone was excited because we compare it the Gold ETF's. However, the excitement turns into nightmare for majority of us and now no one wanted to have a ETF's. Short term yes, it has the potential to bring in more investors specially coming from Wall Street. But as seen in Gold, the hype also died down after the ETF and it took year before it finally have some semblace of a rally. We don't want that to happen to Bitcoin in the long run.

Quote from: Lucius on June 14, 2019, 01:18:03 PM

However recently I read what theymos is write about ETF, and I realized that few people actually wonder what will be a long lasting consequence of ETF.

ETF will make Bitcoin available to traditional investors. ETF is a fund, which is owned by an institutional investor, and will be "backed up" by real bitcoins.

This may lead to a fractional banking of bitcoin reserves of that fund. Which, in the long run, may cause a serious crisis, and a pseudo bitcoin inflation.

However those consequences do not really impact those who didn´t invest in the ETF, but actually own the BTC. By owing the bitcoin I am owing their private keys. We can protect ourselves from this, and even be benefited by this banking and financial mess.

Quote from: Lucius on June 14, 2019, 01:18:03 PM

Quote from: theymos https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/97xa5s/andreas_antonopolous_etfs_are_not_good_for/

Quote from: healingpainter

Andreas Antonopolous: ETF's are NOT good for bitcoin as the centralized custodian can decide what to do with the bitcoin they're holding.

Plus with enough Bitcoin supply under custodian control, they can censor transactions, disallow transactions, and freeze users' coins. I believe we can then say that Bitcoin has failed.

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 15, 2019, 09:45:42 AM

Plus with enough Bitcoin supply under custodian control, they can censor transactions, disallow transactions, and freeze users' coins. I believe we can then say that Bitcoin has failed.

that could only work if bitcoin was a proof of stake shitcoin that was designed to give you power when you own a big "stake" in the coin (hold a large number of that coin in your wallet) or running a full node was impossible (like how it is with ethereum). but bitcoin is proof of work and you currently need to invest billions to have enough hashrate to start making a difference and "disallow" transactions and that is only if other miners stop mining!

Quote from: bitmover on June 14, 2019, 02:24:29 PM

ETF will make Bitcoin available to traditional investors. ETF is a fund, which is owned by an institutional investor, and will be "backed up" by real bitcoins.

It will be "backed by real bitcoins" only in case it is about physically-backed bitcoin ETF, and to my knowledge only VanEck SolidX Bitcoin Trust offered such solution, all others are just futures-backed bitcoin ETFs. Discussions exist which option is better, but the majority seems to be supporting more futures-backed ETF, just because of security which can be a big problem in case of physically-backed ETF.

I agree that small players can profit from game that will be played in ETFs by big institutional players, so now we have no choice but to wait and see what SEC will say about this in the years to come.

Quote from: Lucius on June 14, 2019, 01:18:03 PM

Quote from: theymos https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/97xa5s/andreas_antonopolous_etfs_are_not_good_for/

Quote from: healingpainter

Andreas Antonopolous: ETF's are NOT good for bitcoin as the centralized custodian can decide what to do with the bitcoin they're holding.

Thanks to bitmover who post this and some other good post from theymos reddit account : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5153962.0

There's nothing new that we haven't seen before in previous Goxings, in relation to what theymos said. Noobs gonna noob, they will lose coins. What can one do? There's just going to be more coins in the prize pot, a bigger ETF sized booty. The price will go up extremely high and a correction will eventually happen when ETFgox happens, and then so the new cycle towards a new ATH begins because ETF doesn't raise the total supply. BTFD.

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 15, 2019, 09:45:42 AM

Plus with enough Bitcoin supply under custodian control, they can censor transactions, disallow transactions, and freeze users' coins. I believe we can then say that Bitcoin has failed.

How has Bitcoin exactly failed in this case? If a custodian has so much user funds under control, and it starts censoring transactions, then people themselves have failed because they didn't understand that you don't own any coins when you don't own the private keys. It's super simple.

Xapo has billions in client funds locked up. The clients will have to beg Xapo to release the funds but may be presented with a no or some other lame excuse. Did Bitcoin fail? Nope. You can't blame Bitcoin for people's own stupidity. You always have the option to say no to a custodian, but if you decide to use them anyway, then you will have to face the potential consequences of that.

Quote from: Pursuer on June 15, 2019, 09:57:22 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 15, 2019, 09:45:42 AM

Plus with enough Bitcoin supply under custodian control, they can censor transactions, disallow transactions, and freeze users' coins. I believe we can then say that Bitcoin has failed.

No, imagine if Coinbase, Blockchain.info, Xapo, and exchanges already have more than 50% of Bitcoin in circulation under their custody. If they band together, and start censoring transactions, then Bitcoin as a permissionless, censorship-resistant cryptocurrency would start to fail.

Another delay. I reckon everyone does not care anymore and knows that bitcoin can Tom Lee itself to $25k without an ETF hehehe.

In any case, mark the dates mentioned in the article and expect another delay.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) delayed making a decision on three bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) proposals Monday.

The ETFs, proposed earlier this year by asset managers Bitwise Asset Management, VanEck/SolidX and Wilshire Phoenix, and filed with exchanges NYSE Arca and Cboe BZX, are all seeking to become the first such investment vehicle based on bitcoin.

The filings were published in the Federal Register in February and June, kicking off the legally-mandated 240-day clock on a final decision.

Final decisions on the Bitwise and VanEck/SolidX proposals are expected by Oct. 13 and Oct. 18, respectively.

The next decision on the Wilshire Phoenix proposal is scheduled to occur by Sept. 29.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/sec-delays-decisions-on-3-bitcoin-etf-proposals-until-autumn

Quote from: pooya87 on August 13, 2019, 04:43:35 AM

why does SEC even bother dedicating any time for these proposals anyways. they are going to reject all of them in the end, they have been doing it for a couple of years now without any exceptions. they just waste the time of their staff, these companies submitting ETFs and everyone else's time!

The so called 'we are doing our job" paradigm. But we all know that they are not going to approved any ETF for that matter and just giving everyone some sense of false hope here. I'm only in the majority here that no matter what, approval will not come so we better accept that fact.

Quote from: btc_angela on August 13, 2019, 04:55:19 AM

I'm not surprised by delay, on the contrary the hype has died down so personally I'm not bothered by this news. We need to move on and not just wait for this so called approval, we have seen bitcoin making a good run without this news so we are all good by now.

Correct, there is no hype already, people who touted that this could bring a positive effect on the market doesn't think it that way anymore as the price breaks the five digit barrier and we could reach all time high soon without this so called ETF's.

Quote from: pooya87 on August 13, 2019, 04:43:35 AM

Why do you think they dedicating any time on any crypto related ETF? It's just a formality for them, and such proposals were rejected at the very moment of their submission. 240 days for something that can be done in 24 days is just ridiculous, proposal is same in Day 1 and in Day 240.

I would not agree that companies who submitting ETFs to SEC wasting their time, they need to make constant pressure on SEC to show that there is a lot of interest in something like Bitcoin ETF. Most experts say that we should see first crypto ETF in few years, so it can be 1 or 5 years from now.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on August 13, 2019, 01:56:07 AM

There was a time when the market would become active when the hearing date was nearing but now no one really cares whether they accept ETF or not as the SEC is dragging this for a very long time and everyone will loose interest if that happens and that is what we are seeing here, the final decision on the Bitwise is expected by October 13 and SolidX is expected by October 18.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on August 13, 2019, 01:56:07 AM

@bbc.reporter I could not help but notice you’re smitten by Tom Lee lol, but coming to Sec I had forgotten about their decision as each time there’s either a delay or a rejection. Another set of dates and again Sec will delay the application why doesn’t it simply puts up a notice, stating they’ll not be approving Bitcoin ETFs kindly do not submit any applications regarding it. I don’t expect the market to be effected by this decision, but what do you’ll think will prices remain neutral or will it tank?.

Quote from: Juggy777 on August 13, 2019, 01:27:57 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on August 13, 2019, 01:56:07 AM

-snip-

No one knows if it would tank or shoot up but these ETF's news doesn't really bother anymore.They can delay as much as they like and also they wont really give out that final verdict that they wont ever approve any of them.We don't know the actual reason behind but it doesn't matter too much.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on August 13, 2019, 01:56:07 AM

It seems SEC are really analyzing stuffs. Analyzing how they can fully take advantage of these ETF. I think until they realized how to fully take advantage of these ETF's they will keep on delaying these stuff. I wouldn't keep my hopes on those dates, I am still expecting another delay when the due date comes.

Quote from: Lucius on August 13, 2019, 10:12:48 AM

Quote from: pooya87 on August 13, 2019, 04:43:35 AM

well at the very least that is a lot of clerical work for accepting, documenting, reviewing and rejecting each and every proposal they receive.
as for the pressure, you might be right but it doesn't seem to affect US SEC whatsoever. this pressure has been on them for a couple of years now and that is while other countries already have approved some bitcoin ETFs. there seems to be something else in play here which makes SEC reject them. they need to find and fix that issue first.

Quote from: pooya87 on August 14, 2019, 05:34:43 AM

there seems to be something else in play here which makes SEC reject them. they need to find and fix that issue first.

I think we all know that the SEC can not independently make such a decision, they are waiting approval from some higher instance, and we all see what is the attitude of the most powerful people in the American political scene toward cryptocurrency. Some say Libra is good thing for BTC, but it shows just the opposite, they put all coins in one basket and they will deal with them in the same way.

I doubt that any fix can be made from companies that submit requests, they cannot eliminate volatility or force crypto exchanges to operate even more transparently, so it all comes down to politics in the end.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on December 07, 2018, 01:39:45 AM

well, no suprised they delayed ETF again, but why dont they just reject but keep delaying?? Personally, I dont want an approved ETF, an approved ETF will agaist all value of BTC

I think it is not a formality, if you know how SEC works they are literally looking for each and every single detail in these deals and there is always a chance they would accept the offer and let them do an ETF, the problem is since it is a bitcoin related thing and not fiat related they are looking for reasons harder to decline these chance and considering these companies are new places and not huge enough places that could bribe their way into it they usually get declined.

That is why if one day a place like JP Morgan for example decides that they want to actually come up with an ETF that would be presented to SEC it will be accepted in first ever hearing, it would be accepted by first day but they would have to wait until the official day to sign it basically, so its not about SEC being against btc but more about SEC wanting a piece of the pie.

Quote from: davinchi on August 14, 2019, 12:00:50 PM

That is why if one day a place like JP Morgan for example decides that they want to actually come up with an ETF that would be presented to SEC it will be accepted in first ever hearing, it would be accepted by first day but they would have to wait until the official day to sign it basically, so its not about SEC being against btc but more about SEC wanting a piece of the pie.

Piece of what pie? Their job is to keep markets orderly. They have the power to approve market products provided they can ensure they operate in a manner they can oversee and enforce.

Nothing has happened since the idea of the first Bitcoin ETF emerged to point to that being any more achievable.

I still don't believe we'll see an ETF for many more years, if ever. And if one ever did emerge it'll have been long since surpassed by products that routed around the necessity of SEC approval.

What I dont quite get is why one countries ETF regulations are the start and end of this proposal. There are major markets all over the world in lots of different currencies, sure USA might be the largest but theres surely other routes. Seems strange it should come down to a few peoples opinion on BTC when its all about decentralisation why would this be a chokepoint for development and why is that ok. Surely its not compatible if so constricted, not really.

I get money matters and this alot of money potentially flowing in but I think dont see its important at all to the spirit of BTC and its long game. Its just speculation.

Quote from: Oilacris on August 13, 2019, 01:41:06 PM

Quote from: Juggy777 on August 13, 2019, 01:27:57 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on August 13, 2019, 01:56:07 AM

-snip-

The ETF news is still affecting bitcoin and you can see that from the current price movement. Bitcoin has lost over $2000 since last Friday till now and it is still going down! I have not seen and end to how this ETF decision will keep affect traders emotions. Maybe it is a plan to keep bitcoin prices in check.

Quote from: STT on August 14, 2019, 12:58:39 PM

The US is the financial capital of the world. If you look at the largest ETF markets in the world, you have the US with $5 trillion being the absolute number one, while the second largest ETF market with a strong Bitcoin representation (Japan) comes in at a measly $300-$400 million. I think the numbers do speak for themselves.

Investors care only about the numbers and how willing institutions in a certain country are to allocate a certain percentage of their portfolio to speculative assets. Nothing beats the US in that regard.

The big money that moves the market doesn't care about decentralization, only we do as perma bulls. For them it's just a very lucrative financial adventure.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on August 13, 2019, 01:56:07 AM

I believe the SEC is hoping to see what the position of US politicians is, since so far it seems to me that they are between yes and no or there is nothing concrete whether they want to legalize or not bitcoin, so the SEC is left without too many arguments to accept an ETF. Then the SEC will wait and see how the government will position itself and assess whether it will be less problematic for them if they accept an ETF bitcoin. this became a "political" game.

and about tom lee he's now very cautious in his predictions:

Quote from: https://cointelegraph.com/news/fundstrat-co-founder-tom-lee-us-fed-rate-cuts-are-helping-bitcoin

“We don’t have a target for Bitcoin, but the prior high was $20,000. I think there’s a good possibility that Bitcoin reattains that high this year.”

Quote from: Lucius on August 14, 2019, 10:04:17 AM

Quote from: pooya87 on August 14, 2019, 05:34:43 AM

there seems to be something else in play here which makes SEC reject them. they need to find and fix that issue first.

I agree with you and the comments made by the most powerful humans being on earth last time(Trump) is a really warning to any governments agencies that may desired of having something to do with bitcoin or cryptocurrencies in general. SEC alone cannot take unilateral decision in approvals of ETF but the body most seek approval from other agencies and political authorities before doing that.

Quote from: pooya87 on August 13, 2019, 04:43:35 AM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on August 13, 2019, 01:56:07 AM

In any case, mark the dates mentioned in the article and expect another delay.

I don’t know about the United State system, but in my country, anything that has to do with government is like court case, you take a case to court and it takes 5 years for them to pass judgment and same as government, you take a proposal to them and it would take like everlasting for them to act on it also, if that is the case of US, what is the point wasting time to wait for them when they could be in this issue for the next 5 years after the system must have even found away round to get the effect of what their ETF approval would have gotten.

And then I doubt if the SEC would really approve this as we know that they have even once been against cryptocurrency, so there is no point thinking they would really be convinced about it and change their mind.

Honestly, as they have rejected so many until now,these decision of delaying do not bring me any hype neither, that is actually a good thing too.

Think about it, if we were expecting a lot and assuming it would be getting accepted and than it got delayed again or got rejected we would be let down and the price would fall, however considering nobody expects this to get accepted now there is no pressure and even if it gets rejected than the price would be not affected however if it somehow gets accepted (Doubtful) than it would affect the price greatly and it would go up.

So, there is no downturn here, there is nothing that could affect the price badly, its either gonna be zero affect or it will be positive affect which is why I think its awesome. I personally love the situation right now because of it.

Quote from: TheAndy500 on August 30, 2019, 10:33:33 AM

Everyone wants the SEC to approve the ETF because it can cause a big price increase. However, in my opinion, in the long run, it can be bad to Bitcoin. So for me, they can delay it forever.

It wouldn't hurt bitcoin price, it wouldn't be bad for bitcoin, it would be just good for one company or two and may help us a bit more in the volume side but there is nothing else that would affect bitcoin. Don't get me wrong when I say it wouldn't be bad for bitcoin I do not mean it will be good for bitcoin, I am just saying it wouldn't be bad, it would basically be non factor in bitcoin price, maybe with volume it could provide a bit more stability but I doubt it will have that much volume so basically it has no affects on bitcoin at all.

I hope they would accept and let it be, I am not gonna argue that having it is worse than not having it, I would rather see how it works now then see it 15 years from now, let us get it working and we will improve along the way.

The skeptical me is thinking that a bitcoin ETF offered to ordinary investors is what the American government do not want. The government has always been a hurdle for ordinary people to prosper by blocking them from entering into more unfamiliar investments.

Is this what the SEC was planning from the beginning? Approve a bitcoin ETF limited only for the rich?

VanEck and SolidX bypass SEC by offering Bitcoin ETFs to accredited investors

Two investment companies whose Bitcoin ETF proposals have been delayed by the SEC have found a way around the tight regulations. In a joint statement, VanEck Securities Corp. and SolidX Management said they planned on launching a “limited version” of the BTC ETFs, only available to accredited investors.

After facing yet another delay on their joint Bitcoin exchange-traded-fund (ETF) proposal, asset management companies VanEck Securities Cop. and SolidX Management LLC found a way to bypass strict SEC regulations.

In a joint press release, the two companies announced that they plan on issuing a limited version of their originally planned Bitcoin ETF, only available to institutional investors.

According to The Wall Street Journal, VanEck and SolidX will sell shares in the VanEck SolidX Bitcoin Trust to qualified institutional buyers. In the statement, the companies said that the shares will be the first Bitcoin products for institutions that is cleared. It will act much like a traditional ETF, featuring the same creation-and-redemption process.

The companies were able to launch this unusual product thanks to an exemption in the law regulating securities in the U.S. The statement referenced Rule 144A of the 1933 Securities Act as the enabler of this offer. The rule specifically allows “privately placed securities” to be traded among “qualified institutional buyers” without having to register with the SEC.

Starting from Thursday, Sep. 5, the shares will be quoted on the OTC Link ATS, an alternative trading system directly regulated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Read in full https://cryptoslate.com/vaneck-solidx-bypass-sec-bitcoin-etf-accredited/

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 04, 2019, 02:38:05 AM

Two investment companies whose Bitcoin ETF proposals have been delayed by the SEC have found a way around the tight regulations. In a joint statement, VanEck Securities Corp. and SolidX Management said they planned on launching a “limited version” of the BTC ETFs, only available to accredited investors.

Interesting approach, if somewhat anti-climactic. My gut reaction was "this brings nothing new to the table" since even non-accredited investors can trade some of Grayscale's products (GBTC, ETHE, ETCG) through their brokerage accounts. But conceivably, a product like this could end up being picked up by asset managers and packaged in retirement funds down the line, which is pretty huge. And like Bakkt, this could be an avenue by which institutional investors affect the spot market, since the ETF would be open-ended.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 04, 2019, 02:38:05 AM

In this case it doesn't really matter since the big money happens to be in the institutional accounts. I think it's even better because it gives retailers the incentive to storm into spot exchanges and buy there. People should take care of their own coins.

This will balance things out nicely until this ETF gets approved in full, which might figure out pretty soon with how this is the moment of truth. No more further delays. We have had too many of them already.

I still don't think that this event is enough to prevent the price from making lower lows. If we see a big selloff tomorrow that's probably a sign that some institutions have bought in before the event took place to sell the news.

It is bringing something new to the table which is an example. This is an example for a full blown ETF and if it gets a lot of success and people are happy with it then those people who are able to use it and made money with it will brag about it to their friends (who are also rich people I assume but using other places) will ask for it from their own places and this will basically go like a wave affect where one stone creates many circles. That is why it is upmost importance that the people who will be able to use this limited version likes it and then makes money from it so that we can have the big version where everyone can join happens more quickly.

There is not enough pressure on SEC to accept it however if this turns out great then we can actually have a great pressure to SEC which will force their hand to accept.

I can already buy a BTC holding in my pension as Iam the manager of it, the price quote is a bit flaky when I looked this year and previous so I never bothered. I stuck it in gold because I thought that quite certain and solid, overall gold is not popular and I imagine BTC even less so but its a smaller market anyhow.
After all I have BTC anyhow but considering this years price rise I guess should have, still its not a pension type asset so I didnt but I dont doubt there are big company investors and speculators already in BTC. We'd not be idling around 10,000 without some of this bigger money, its why I think dollar index, larger market moves do have an effect on BTC because some of this money market involvement is leveraged.

Quote

No one knows if it would tank or shoot up but these ETF's news doesn't really bother anymore.

Greater accessibility and trading in the market would no doubt cause BTC to break any medium term trend that might be holding it back. We'd see a rise, its then debateable do we see actual greater participation and holdings of BTC but likely we would, just like Libra is going to have an effect on currency holdings should it proceed with a mixed currency basket. It'll alter balance some and if its a growth trend then its big news even more. If you introduce a million people or more to products they did not have on their menu previously, it'll make a splash in the market books for those products.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 04, 2019, 02:38:05 AM

--snip

I told people that we are the ones that will still use our bare hands to destroy the perfect system that satoshi has created for us to be free from these governments, most especially the poor people and then break that gene of the rich keeps getting richer and poor keeps getting poorer, but we still using our hand to personally invite government by crying loud for .

if government even approve bitcoin today, we may still not get that mass adoption, because every decision to use cryptocurrency lies on the heart of the user, and you cannot force them to do or undo what they want. I prefer that e continue to grow slowly the way we have bee growing than to be waiting for one sec to approve ETF.

Quote from: fullhdpixel on September 05, 2019, 04:24:04 PM

if government even approve bitcoin today, we may still not get that mass adoption, because every decision to use cryptocurrency lies on the heart of the user, and you cannot force them to do or undo what they want. I prefer that e continue to grow slowly the way we have bee growing than to be waiting for one sec to approve ETF.

No one can approve or reject Bitcoin. It hasn't ever needed any of that. This is what I like about Bitcoin. For the first time I can do things without asking for permission.

We'll get that that ETF one day, people just need to stop focusing on it. The longer it takes for these instruments to make it to the market, the longer you have to accumulate as many satoshis as possible at fair prices. Your fiat continues to lose purchasing power so it's not that you have all the time in the world to keep waiting.

As for the 'limited ETF', that's just a lame knock-off. The retailers should be allowed to buy into this ETF through their brokerage account, which isn't the case here. Institutions already play around with GBTC, which is similar to what Vaneck offers.

Quote from: 1Referee on September 05, 2019, 07:14:33 PM

As for the 'limited ETF', that's just a lame knock-off. The retailers should be allowed to buy into this ETF through their brokerage account, which isn't the case here. Institutions already play around with GBTC, which is similar to what Vaneck offers.

Pretty much, although I'm curious to see what fees they charge. Grayscale charges a whopping 2% annual fee to invest in GBTC. By comparison, the average ETF expense ratio is well under 0.5%. (https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/investment-products/etf/etfs-cost-comparison) At significantly lower costs, a Vaneck "ETF-like product" could be more attractive to institutions.

Still, it's essentially an OTC product just like GBTC, though they're trying to paint it as something more:

Quote

“Unlike an ETF it isn’t listed on a national exchange, rather it is quoted on the OTC Link ATS platform. This is a first-of-its-kind type of offering. Given it will trade over-the-counter via broker-to-broker transactions, we’ve been casually referring to it as a Broker Traded Fund, a BTF,” Lopez said.

I reckon bitcoin sportsbooks should begin offering odds on whether there will be an ETF approval or another delay hehehe. However, it might be another delay. The SEC chairman has raised concerns that might not be fixed within 10 years.

Still, concerns hang over the decision to approve such a product. During the interview, Clayton raised those concerns, noting the lack of a proper crypto custody provider and the threat of price manipulation on unregulated exchanges. That's despite a number of new custody providers coming online this year, including Fidelity's new custody business and San Francisco-based Anchorage, and efforts to expose wash trading on certain exchanges.

Clayton's comments come just a few weeks before the final deadline for two ETF proposal, Bitwise and VanEck/Soldix, are decided on. On October 13 and October 18, the SEC will decide whether to approve Bitwise's and VanEck's proposal, respectively.

Read in full https://www.theblockcrypto.com/linked/39008/sec-chair-clayton-theres-work-left-to-be-done-on-bitcoin-etf/

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 10, 2019, 03:57:00 AM

The issue with getting these ETFs approved is actually a catch 22. Basically they are correct that right now its easy to manipulate the price of BTC. Remember what happened that day when BTC crashed down to $6100 or so on Bitstamp? Basically it caused a huge price crash due to Bitstamp being one of the main exchanges which makes up the price index for the bitcoin futures (on bitmex). If I recall correctly someone had like 5K BTC to sell and he kept putting it as the best ask price and it lead to algos going crazy and selling on other exchanges.

For those that don't remember here is an article,
https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-price-flash-crash-5k-btc-dump-bitstamp/
It was back in May 2019.

For reasons like this is why the SEC doesn't want to approve an ETF. However if they approved one then BTC would have much more liquidity and a 5K sell order wouldn't cause this much mess as it did back in May 2019.

No, they do have a limited amount of delays in their arsenal left, some of them had their last delay for example which means they will be getting a result no matter what, it could be rejection (most likely) or they could get accepted but it will be the last one. If you read the article you will see that there is usually delays that got limited and not times which means they could delay it as much as they want but with time in between longer than usual instead of times they delay.

Let's say they can delay it only 3 times, they could just make it like 1 year apart from each other to postpone for over 3-4 years span and that would basically make sure ETF will not be hyped about at all, I honestly think one will be accepted eventually tho, not soon but eventually.

Quote from: figmentofmyass on September 10, 2019, 06:58:11 AM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 07, 2019, 02:00:38 AM

@figmentofmyass. How many delays has it been? They have to accept and do something.

they don't. they could drag their feet for many years, especially since the market is still dominated by unregulated offshore exchanges---bitmex, binance, bitfinex, huobi, okex etc.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 10, 2019, 03:57:00 AM

I reckon bitcoin sportsbooks should begin offering odds on whether there will be an ETF approval or another delay hehehe.

i'd bet against approval all day if i had the chance.

I do not see sec actually doing anything about that approval for now, because they have not completely gotten the support of the government completely and they still don’t know the stand of government, but now that US is trying to regulate the cryptocurrency market now through exchanges, which could be seen on the action of binance of recent and their announcement to launch a separate trading platform for the citizens of United states which I think the launching is expected this month, and for them to have done that, the US government must have demanded for it, which means that we are gradually getting their attention for cryptocurrency so with this, the sec could also consider approving the ETF, either this year or early next year.

Quote from: coinfinger on September 12, 2019, 02:03:39 PM

Apples and oranges. The SEC is probably breathing down Binance's neck and demanding they comply with US securities laws. That means not allowing US persons access to unregistered securities markets and also full KYC, hence the launch of a segregated US exchange.

That has nothing to do with the rule changes required for an ETF approval. SEC commissioners have said that won't happen until fundamental structural changes happen in the market. They want to see a majority of trading volumes move to regulated exchanges.

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

I speculate more withdrawals will follow.

Cboe BZX Exchange withdrew its VanEck/SolidX bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) proposal on Tuesday.

According to a filing dated Sept. 17, a proposed rule change to publicly list shares of the VanEck SolidX Bitcoin Trust was withdrawn on Sept. 13. A decision on the proposal had already been delayed a number of times, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) faced a final deadline of Oct. 18 to determine whether to approve or reject what could have been one of the first bitcoin ETFs in the country.

The news comes just weeks after VanEck and SolidX began offering shares of the Trust to qualified institutional buyers (entities with at least $100 million in assets owned or invested) under a Rule 144A exemption. In the nearly three weeks since first announcing the product, one “basket” of four bitcoin (worth around $40,000) was traded.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/vaneck-solidx-withdraw-bitcoin-etf-proposal-from-sec-review

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 18, 2019, 02:29:37 AM

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

Are you referring to the trust aka the "limited ETF"? If so, then that's definitely not their main target. It's actually a pretty redundant product because a similar product (GBTC) has already been publicly trading for years.

This is the second time this year that Vaneck has withdrawn their ETF proposal, and I'm pretty sure they'll follow that path until the SEC finally approves their ETF proposal. They will submit their new proposal before the end of the year so that they are granted a much longer term, which helps them to iron out some of the SEC's concerns. It was pretty much their only option moving forward.

Quote from: 1Referee on September 18, 2019, 12:35:15 PM

They will submit their new proposal before the end of the year so that they are granted a much longer term, which helps them to iron out some of the SEC's concerns. It was pretty much their only option moving forward.

https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1174342415630688256

This bloke is always worth a read regarding this. He reckons that withdrawing rather than waiting to be rejected reduces the chances of a precedent being set that the SEC can refer to in future. Seems a bit daffy to me as they're going to think what they think regardless of whether it was all written down nice and that but maybe that's how big boy stuff rolls.

Quote from: gentlemand on September 18, 2019, 04:04:43 PM

It makes sense if rejection is already guaranteed. With executive regulators, their interpretation of the law is malleable (within reasonable bounds) until they establish formal precedent. The commission could have much more favorable views down the road towards x and y issues, but if today's commission establishes precedent on those issues, their hands may be tied.

Quote from: gentlemand on September 18, 2019, 08:29:30 AM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 18, 2019, 02:29:37 AM

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

I'm curious to know what their attitude is to a 'real' ETF. Are they introducing this kludge and withdrawing the original application to let the kludge run and have it strengthen their position when they reapply?

There's so much more potential in a proper ETF that I can't believe they'd let the idea go completely.

They aren't letting it go, just withdrawing the current application before the SEC formally rejects it. They've had plenty of closed door discussions with commission staff and they know a real ETF is nowhere near approval. VanEck's launch of an OTC trust product is all but an open admission of that.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 18, 2019, 02:29:37 AM

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

If so, that's a complete failure then. It has only gotten 4BTC into it so far, and that after almost a whole week of being an available investment tool. If there was any latent institutional demand, they would have jumped in.

To add, no institution is going to invest $40k into something. It's just not worth their time. It probably means that these 4BTC belong to Vaneck itself, probably to kick things off.

At the end of the day, Coinbase's fund (which has been withdrawn rather quickly) has failed too due to a lack of demand. This should have been an indication that institutions are not interested.

Quote from: exstasie on September 18, 2019, 05:56:05 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on September 18, 2019, 08:29:30 AM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 18, 2019, 02:29:37 AM

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

They kinda figured out that they can already do a bit portion of it and they do not need it so they are withdrawing by the bunches. I mean they are not even getting attention on the current "only for big investors" or whatever system which means there is really no need to fight tooth and nail for something even bigger since it wouldn't make a big change.

First, they need to improve and increase the number at the current system and if that gets more attention than maybe one day they could actually pull off the whole version of it. They are basically making SECs job easier by withdrawing, that way SEC don't have to reject them :D. Just not even give them a date and postpone them until they withdraw, a great strategy for SEC and works perfectly so far.

Quote from: gentlemand on September 18, 2019, 08:29:30 AM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on September 18, 2019, 02:29:37 AM

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

The skeptcal me speculates yes, the SEC's rejections might have forced Vaneck and SolidX expose their original plans accidentally hehehe.

You will laugh, but VanEck has filed a new application with the SEC to launch a bitcoin-based ETF. A new application for the creation of a" strategic bitcoin ETF " was submitted in accordance with the provisions of the Investment Companies Act of 1940. Previous applications were made mainly on the basis of the provisions of the 30s.

The VanEck ETF will be based on bitcoin futures and other bitcoin funds, for example, ETFs that have already been listed in Canada. VanEck will not invest directly in bitcoin and other digital assets, according to the announcement by Bloomberg senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas.

Quote from: https://twitter.com/EricBalchunas/status/1425058761203458069

https://i.ibb.co/x32Qp3p/2021-08-11-124754.jpg (https://twitter.com/EricBalchunas/status/1425058761203458069)

Quote from: Daltonik on August 11, 2021, 07:51:30 AM

Quote from: https://twitter.com/EricBalchunas/status/1425058761203458069

https://i.ibb.co/x32Qp3p/2021-08-11-124754.jpg (https://twitter.com/EricBalchunas/status/1425058761203458069)

The SEC (one of their “guys” anyway) stated that they would be much more open to a Bitcoin price based on futures. This led to multiple ETF applications for funds based on futures. It seems they are much more likely to be approved given the recent comments and that’s why this is happening. I think once the SEC let’s these funds get their foot in the door, a true spot BTC ETF will become available shortly thereafter.

It is really sad to see SEC dragging their feet this much on this topic. I get that they want to do it properly but the reality is that we are talking about something that is inevitable, so them postponing it for years now is not really a solution. I mean if it was something that may never happen unless someone comes up with a brilliant plan, then I would understand them waiting for it to happen for this long.

However, a few years later in the future we are going to see ETF everywhere, and we will have plenty of nations doing it as well, so USA and SEC will have to come up with a reason for postponing this much and start accepting everything after a point.

Quote from: RealMalatesta on December 02, 2021, 09:59:09 PM

They don’t want to protect investors. It’s just an excuse, they don’t want average joe to start getting interested in buying bitcoin because they are scared as hell bitcoin is competition for the $.
Gensler even said similar yesterday.

Any way it doesn’t matter, they will have to bend their knee in the years to come or get left behind all other countries.

It seems to me like the SEC is doing their best to try and smooth out the peaks and valleys of the Bitcoin market. The move to introduce futures before a spot ETF appeared to me to be a move to try and put a cap on the 4-year bubble cycle. Now they appear to be trying to line up the spot ETF approvals with the mtgox funds hitting the market. I think they're trying to get that 200,000 BTC that will hit the market absorbed by ETF investors. While I'd always prefer a free market without manipulation, I can understand why those in control want to minimize any damage caused by potential volatility. I just hope the ETF hits first so we get a little bubble to play in. :)

Quote from: OgNasty on January 05, 2022, 07:21:31 PM

Yes, and with that, I don't think we will get any approval soon, since we are already in a bear market. For sure they know that they can influence the market with they approved the ETF, so with the current state of the market, much better if they are going to delay it for years. Again, there could be argument that we don't need ETF's right?

Quote from: OgNasty on January 05, 2022, 07:21:31 PM

Possibly, good hypothesis. I’m not sure if it’s just Gensler having his strings pulled by his masters. Big banks & corps are afraid of bitcoin, they don’t want their playground being altered by the new kids on the block. It really is ridiculous that we still don’t have a spot ETF. If America keep dragging their feet then people will just buy somewhere else. When bitcoin becomes more mainstream then the US either adapts or dies. Honeybadger will wait for no-one.

I'm pretty convinced at this point that the SEC is not going to approve a Bitcoin spot ETF until the mtgox coins are ready to hit the market. Maybe even then, waiting until the market damage has been done. Having 200,000+ Bitcoin worth over 7 billion dollars hanging over the market might be a deterrent for them with regards to protecting investor funds. I think they probably underestimate that there is likely 5x that much sitting on the sidelines waiting to get in if a spot ETF were to be approved, but maybe they want to see if the market will buckle under the weight of 200K BTC hitting the auction block before giving the all clear sign. That's the only thing that makes sense to me while trying to view the situation from their perspective. I don't think the SEC is evil. I think they're doing their best to try and protect people. I just don't think they really understand crypto as a whole as much as they think they do.

@OgNasty. Agreed. There are people behind the SEC and also those people who control the SEC who might not want this now, however, they might want it years from now when they have filled their wallets full of bitcoins already hehe.

In any case, this has not discouraged VanEck from creating other cryptoinvestment products for their clients of institutional investors. VanEck included Tron in the basket, however. Is this a serious investment product hehehe.

Just last week, the firm’s European arm marked the launch of a new Exchange Traded Note (ETN) on the Deutsche Borse Xetra and SIX Swiss Exchange that allows investors to invest in a selected basket of the largest cryptocurrencies with the greatest liquidity. The ETN currently tracks six of the largest crypto assets, including bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana.

As the firm continues its work to eventually make a U.S.-listed spot bitcoin ETF a reality, product innovation in Europe has continued at a torrid pace, with the firm now offering ETNs to European investors that provide exposure to the spot prices of:

Bitcoin
Ethereum
Polkadot
Solana
TRON
Avalanche, and
Polygon

Source https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220131005520/en/VanEck-Launches-Its-First-Multi-Token-Cryptocurrency-Fund

Bitcoin Forum

Economy => Speculation => Topic started by: bbc.reporter on December 07, 2018, 01:39:45 AM