Bitcoin Forum

Larry Fink is the CEO of Black Rock.

In 2017, he said. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink calls bitcoin an ‘index of money laundering’ (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/13/blackrock-ceo-larry-fink-calls-bitcoin-an-index-of-money-laundering.html)

In 2023, on June, BlackRock filed for a Bitcoin Spot ETF (https://www.investopedia.com/blackrock-files-for-a-spot-bitcoin-etf-7547609).

In 2024, he said.
BlackRock’s Larry Fink says bitcoin ETFs are just the first step in the technological revolution of finance (https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/12/blackrocks-larry-fink-says-bitcoin-etfs-are-just-the-first-step-in-the-technological-revolution-of-finance.html)
Bitcoin is an asset class that protects you (https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/blackrock-ceo-larry-fink-says-bitcoin-is-an-asset-class-that-protects-you).

When Jamie Dimon has enough brave to do the same?

Bitcoin Spot ETFs approved, Bitcoin is not fraud. Where is Jamie Dimon? (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5481197.0).

It seems to take more time for Jamie Dimon to do so because he more regularly and aggressively talked about Bitcoin in the past. It's hard for him to change his statement publicly as it is like his public admit on his wrong thinking.

Same for Peter Schiff.

This is often the case when a new technology is introduced. Especially when it happens in the financial sector where a lot of money, influence, and power are involved, it is understandable for those who primarily benefit from the status quo to resist.

These people's criticisms are born out of being disrupted or even threatened. But once they will adjust to it, that they and the existence of their money-making machines are not necessarily threatened, they could embrace it. Once they realize that they could even make more wealth from it, they might join. Finally, if they realize that it is after all inevitable, they've got no choice but to adopt it.

be careful of the fools game of sudden admiration...

ive used the analogy before.. (comparing bitcoin economy to wheat farm economy)
monsantoGMO  said natural wheat is ripe for disease..
monsanto got involved in wheat commodities

their creation of GMO wheat is not about suddenly adoring natural family farmed wheat. they just want to control the wheat commodity and have lobbied the EPA to make organic wheat be pressured into higher standards. where old fashioned farmed natural wheat is obliterated by industrial farming of GMO crops that then sue if GMO gets mixed with natural by family farms

now back to reality
his support of a bitcoin ETF is not the same as supporting real bitcoin transactions on the bitcoin network

i guarantee  you guys like dimon and fink will both claim their locked custody coins are the clean harvest which people can invest in. whilst then claiming circulating coins on the network are the plague ridden crop no one should touch

they dont think of themselves as bitcoin users. they want to control the upper echelons of international markets. and see the natural form be treated as the enemy/competition taking customers away from their investments.

In the end they will be led to a situation that cannot be refuted with their own arguments. Maybe as someone who has resigned himself to what is happening now requires a change in belief. Not because they were forced to but they admitted that what they had done in the past had expired while Bitcoin was still holding up more than they thought.

Actually I don't really follow what Jamie Dimon often says, his bullshi* isn't very useful. Maybe Jamie wants to be the rare person who continues to defend his argument even though in his heart he admits it.

People change according to their circumstances, and that's true in this case as well. Lary Fink claimed that Bitcoin is used for money laundering in past and now he's into it. It means that back then he wasn't sure that Bitcoin could be a profitable asset for his fund but now he understands that Bitcoin is not only profitable for his fund but in fact a game changer in the world of technological revolution.

Many ignorant people still consider Bitcoin as a scam but with the passage of time they will understand that whatever they were thinking about Bitcoin was totally wrong and they will regret for their ignorance. In starting many people considered Bitcoin as another Ponzi scheme now they all have huge holdings of Bitcoin. That's why they say that people change their minds when they understand the truth.

I think that the game of individual protagonism is necessary in some countries, among them like no other in the United States, it is the symmetrical game that they like to have, it is an individualism that entails a lot of pure establishment classic.
On the other hand, their interests are expressed according to the return that the asset offers, not because bitcoin "affects" them to a change in mentalities.

Nice post.  Even if it is not exactly what they are doing they certainly are looking to fuck people over as they are all believers of the haves and the have nots.

I did not admire Larry Fink because he changed his mind.

What he did changed is because of Bitcoin adoption now is bigger than in 2017 and he saw 2023 is a good time to start to push BlackRock steps in this market after Grayscale won against SEC. in a lawsuit.

He did it because he knew BlackRock will get lot of income and profit by having a Bitcoin Spot ETF for their business. It's all he saw and what he did is for BlackRock.

This topic, is to bring a point of thinking like if in future, at a day we see people like Jamie Dimon, Peter Schiff changed their words, it will be a day of Bitcoin massive adoption. No admiration on those people at any level.

Even their way of adoption is questionable. They are now supporters of Bitcoin but in a unique way. Unique in the sense that they are not actually trying to push for Bitcoin's adoption as what Bitcoin truly is. They're pushing for Bitcoin's adoption as something else. Although they are not the ones who started it all. They're riding on it without necessarily believing in Bitcoin's essence. They don't share Bitcoin's most fundamental advocacy and spirit.

Larry Fink for example doesn't believe in Bitcoin as a currency. He doesn't support it either. So why is he joining the community? It's because he can make money out of it. It's because he sees it as a new and rising technology that he can play with, that people can speculate on.

they are still not supporters of bitcoin

analogy
much like monsanto is not supporters of organic wheat
yes they trade in GMO wheat but are not in the business of real organic wheat.
they still think organic wheat has risk of pestilence

they see organic wheat as the inferior competition, not the underlying seed they have in their seed house

they will not want citizens trading organic seeds and growing their own or harvesting local market wheat. they will want to control the whole wheat market via people investing in their monsanto GMO variety and commodity shares

expect them to still scream out that they dont endorse bitcoin but want people to invest in the "exposure" to its price, which they will control via their whale trading of the spot market and lobbying SEC to tighten up access and utility of spot markets to be tougher than just buying shares on their platform

They are bunch of clowns looking for ways to buy bitcoin cheaper.

It's not cheap, but it's free. On the other hand, they don't bring organic supporters to bitcoin as buying bitcoin in this case isn't the intention of investors (individuals), but this company is capable of having negative impacts, say if one day a wallet hacking drama occurs.

These large companies like Black Rock and Fidelity have their hands on every business and economic sector. Digital currencies is one area that they haven't expanded too. Once the Grayscale won the case against the SEC, it gave them a 'legitimate' reason to get into the market to make some money. They now have a platform to control market dynamics to shift things to their favour at any time.
Its not that they changed, you will see these people wherever there is money.

Why do we care what these profit hunters think? They will say anything, as long as it brings in profit for their pockets.  ::)

Jamie "Demon" has been throwing stones at Bitcoin for many years, but JPMorgan Chase got fined for $920 million for trading violations.

They paid almost $900 million to a company that was controlled by a former Nigerian minister that was involved in money-laundering.

People could change the perception they have about a particular product. I am sure there are things you never believed in a few years ago that you find worthy currently. Also, these people are businessmen who focus on profit maximization, therefore they will be motivated to invest in any sector they think will give them high returns. The Bitcoin space is big enough to accommodate everyone interested and they are free to join.

Some of them might have started investing in Bitcoin secretly like we saw in the case of Warren Buffett where a bank that he is the major shareholder invested heavily in crypto. The Oracle of Omaha claimed that he would never buy Bitcoin even if the price drops to $25 but it was revealed that Nubank in making so much profit from cryptocurency Investments.

I expect these ETF operators to invest so much in cyber security to protect their wallets but nothing is impossible. A hack or any other negative occurrence will propel people to seek alternatives and self-custody is the only solution. I don't pray for such a hack because it will have adverse consequences on the market. Many people might lose their funds which will affect families negatively. However such negative occurrences are some of the ways of bringing organic Bitcoin awareness.

This is his career now. They are the anti bitcoin guy.
They only acknowledge the downside of Bitcoin and never the upside.
I'm not going to lie. I love it when Peter Schiff tries to organize cheap sats for the boys. The more excited he is, the closer we are
But for someone who always uses Bitcoin, I find it odd that they are obsessed with Bitcoin and giving it this much attention. Unless they are holding a bag secretly. Good strategy

Too deep into the tinfoil hat territory. It's highly likely that — you know, Larry Fink and BlackRock might just want to make bank through management fees — you know, like how they've always made money? I don't think it's that complicated.

If Larry Fink says that Bitcoin is used for money laundering and BlackRock buys Bitcoin, this will certainly affect his survival as CEO. The good side is that the news in the newspapers changes as the owners’ investments change, so whenever their investments in Bitcoin are, you will hear more positive news and vice versa.

Therefore, I expect tomorrow to say different things, such as that the real Bitcoin is the one that exists in a trusted third party, and that the Bitcoin onchain is the one that is used for money laundering.

In 2017 he didn't know how to profit off Bitcoin so he criticized it so that investors would avoid it and instead buy his product. That changed when he found a way to make money with Bitcoin in a safe way - instead of buying it, he sells a service for investing in it. Like they say - during gold rush, sell shovels.

Maybe other haters like Jamie Dimon will find ways to participate in this ecosystem, maybe they won't - why does it matter? You shouldn't depend on their opinion.

It's easy to see his reasons even at tip of iceberg. We don't need to be genius to understand his motivation to change his tone when he got a big news that Grayscale won over SEC. and the court nearly forced SEC. to change from denial to approvals for Bitcoin Spot ETF applications based on the existence of law and regulations.

Larry Fink and BlackRock have their business so that they do anything that can help they gain profit. It's clearly that Bitcoin and Bitcoin Spot ETF, then derivative products will help them gaining massive profit.

Like Cathie Wood said, Bitcoin Spot ETFs are unique products because there is no other Spot ETF with limited supply and even deflationary like Bitcoin Spot ETFs.

It's hard to believe in words of mouth from businessmen.

His bank, JP Morgan already joined but just not too deep in cryptocurrency market. I believe they will not ignore this big opportunity for their business. The hardest part was done by Grayscale and BlackRock.

I call them supporters in a sense because rather than criticizing Bitcoin, attempting to nip its development or progress, lobbying for its blacklisting or for very strict regulations, etc, they instead promoted it and created financial products out of it. Rather than calling it a currency of or for hackers, criminals, launderers, drug lords, etc, they even provided a different access for some people to gain exposure to it. It was in this sense that I call them supporters. But of course they're indeed not supporters of what Bitcoin is fundamentally meant for.

when i see people shout "deposit/lock into LN, a sub-product bridge to bitcoin"
when i see people shout "deposit/lock into ETF, a trade-fi exposure product to bitcoin"

it must be corrected that LN and ETF are not bitcoin because bitcoin never leaves the bitcoin network and these other platforms are transacting in a totally different unit pegged to bitcoin. much the same as WBTC rBTC [insert other wrapped/pegged tokens] which are not bitcoin

the only smallest positive claim is that ETF sponsors have agreements that a custodian will lock up a portion of bitcoin circulation so they can trade their other platform units(shares). and have been willing to spend millions on legal stuff, applications to be able to do it. so it gives a perception that the trade-fi have long term plans for bitcoin custody. thus legitimises bitcoin as something that will stay around for awhile

It shows how technology and beliefs change. New and misunderstood, Bitcoin was viewed with mistrust in 2017. Perception changes drastically in 2024. This shift isnt just about Bitcoin; it shows our growing familiarity with digital assets.

I understand Jamie Dimon's caution. We naturally fight what we once opposed; it requires a change in thought and identity. Changing one's public stance, especially for a figure as prominent as Dimon, is no small feat. Not only admitting a change of heart, but managing intricate emotional and professional dynamics.

Considering Peter Schiff, it's fascinating but understandable. His doubt is profound, and it doesnt change suddenly. Keeping an open mind is crucial. The financial world changes, therefore adaptability is vital. Given time and distance, views, like markets, can change unexpectedly.

Imagine you've been saying something's bad for a long time, like Dimon and Schiff with Bitcoin. If they suddenly change their tune, it's like admitting they were wrong all along. People don't always like doing that, especially in the public eye. It's a bit of a pride thing, you know? So, it might take them a while to come around, if they ever do.

While I don't trust those very rich profit-oriented guys, it is inspiring to see people change their mind, especially when they are pretty old and have done well with their former priorities and beliefs. The CEO of BlackRock made a good financial decision that will bring profit to the company. It's probably based on the interests of their customers and on Bitcoin's really great performance in the long run.
Clearly, BlackRock isn't the only one, as several funds got their ETFs granted. But some people are just unwilling to change with the times, especially if they view Bitcoin as a threat to their businesses.

People are always hostile towards new technology & new innovation. It has been this way since time began. All the way back to the first cars, the telephone, television, the internet. People in power especially are always reluctant to be early adopters. They wait until something is somewhat proven before they give it their backing. Blackrock being pro Bitcoin is huge & we will see adoption accelerate now. Exciting years ahead for those of us who were brave to be pioneers.

It's all just a matter of interests and money. He may see that Bitcoin is a digital asset that, although much criticized, is still growing and its adoption is increasing even now, so instead of rejecting it, why not use it as an opportunity to bring in more money?
You know that there is a saying that is commonly used by opportunists "If you can't beat them, join them" that is being used by BlackRock right now. In fact BlackRock doesn't need to buy Bitcoin to be able to profit from the words "Bitcoin", they only need to issue 21 million shares of Bitcoin ETF and claim that it is equivalent to an investment in Bitcoin, they can make millions of dollars in profit from that alone. That's pretty crazy isn't it?

This is not a matter of right or wrong, but this is a classic FUD attack.
Jamie Dimon doesn't want to see any of us succeed.
He wants to keep his little monopoly and the price go down so he can load his bags.
But I like how he always mentions anti-money laundering as a use case for Bitcoin. That high-powered CEOs don't know the value of Bitcoin. lol
For a moment, this made me feel better  :)

The BlackRock CEO was not the only one who once said negative things about Bitcoin due to a lack of proper understanding of its genuine purpose. I have once said negative things about Bitcoin either when I don't have an understanding about it. What is important is taking the words back publicly which is what Larry Fink did.

With that being said, we only talk about the Bitcoin spot ETF but don't know the fact that the Winklevoss brothers (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312513279830/d562329ds1.htm) were the first to file for the spot ETF in 2013.

Do you really think that Lary thinks positively about Bitcoin today because he learned something over the past years, or did Lary, like many others, just "change his mind" because he saw an opportunity for profit? There is no courage in what that you mention, it is about people who have extremely thick skin and accordingly can adapt to any moment in a way to say what suits them at that moment.

Jamie Dimon is the same man as Lary, he has changed his opinions about Bitcoin so many times that it is hard to keep track. If it will make you so happy, here is one of his statements from the past.

It's crazy how inconsistent he is. I can't wait for him to backtrack on the 'pet rock' comment he made at Davos in a few months, but I'm enjoying how mad he is that they keep asking him about Bitcoin.

Their original statements and opinions on Bitcoin haven't changed. They have just learned how to go with the flow and not piss in the wind. What they are doing now is profiting from a brand-new way of making money of investors, and not by trying to increase adoption of BTC. They couldn't care if BTC adoption skyrocketed or plummeted to the ground if it made them richer. That's why I wouldn't pay too much attention on their statements. 

not only larry fink, michael saylor who is the ceo of microstrategy who currently holds hundreds of thousands of bitcoins used to reject bitcoin and say that bitcoin is not trustworthy, but now you can see how they are investing heavily in it.

so this is not about how they reject bitcoin, but how they as business people want to profit from bitcoin. they are just capitalists who understand that with bitcoin they can get bigger profits and increase their company's assets, and that's all.

and because of that i was never interested in the bitcoin etf product they offered. even though some people say that it can improve bitcoin's image in wider society, these capitalists have never once offered real bitcoin to their customers. instead what they offer is a bitcoin etf which they can manipulate at any time and they claim that it is much safer than having to invest in bitcoin.

The media is always looking for a story, and they know that there are people who will always say something bad about Bitcoin. It's a bit funny and even tragicomic that they ask the same questions to people like Dimon, Buffett or Peter Schiff, given that we all know what they think about Bitcoin. However, it is even more strange to me that after all that has been said, a huge percentage of people still have a huge fascination with their opinions, as if the future of Bitcoin depends on what they say.

---

There is that famous tweet from 2013 where Saylor literally says that the days of Bitcoin are numbered, but it seems to me that the reason for such a statement was the fact that he lost significant funds when Mt.Gox was hacked. We can say that he has completely "converted", but that does not mean that in 10 years he will not change his mind again.

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/01/18/39Yuv.jpeg

That is the correct way to view the change on some of their stances, they only care about making money and they will use any tool they have at their disposal to achieve that goal of theirs, back then when they made those statements, bitcoin was too small to accommodate them and they thought this will always remain the case, now that things have changed they have no problems in trying to use bitcoin for their benefit, but their overall opinion about this market should have not changed at all.

Basically Fink realized the bitcoin market is now big enough for a big player like Blackrock to make a decent amount of money off ETF fees. Very much doubt he is any kind of bitcoiner. He's the CEO of a financial firm, he wants to make money and grow the business, end of story. Finance guys want to make money. They probably don't generally care what the investment is, the care about the money it makes them.

If he was actually a supporter he would perhaps be mentioning buying a bunch of bitcoin for himself. I am sure he owns zero sats.

That's how the business world works, you go where the wind takes you or where you think it's favorable to you and your interests, Larry Fink is a businessman at heart and it's no surprise that he's going to be a turncoat when it comes to bitcoin because bitcoin's proven already that there's a new age for the financial institutions and what better way to survive than to adapt to the changes, that's the only thing that will happen here, at the end of the day, if favoring bitcoin generates him more profit then that's where he would go, I would do the same thing in a heartbeat if I was him too. Don't believe anything that he says though as if they're the gospel or the word of the Lord, Larry being a turncoat means that he's going to be changing his stance quickly as soon as something negative happens in the bitcoin market.

If he was a supporter and bitcoiner, he would guide people to buying bitcoin without a trusted middleman who erns commission fees every time someone makes a deal. Nevertheless, These businessmen might be owning some bitcoin and crypto in general on the side, no matter what they say. The volatility and regular price movements allow them to enter and exit the market frequently and perhaps even anonymously.   

IIRC, he has said something good about Bitcoin and that also caused him to do so because his company launched their own coin. I remember his story several years ago when he talked nonsense about Bitcoin but that can be the sign that he's into it. He doesn't have to change because I think he's already in and just trying to play the emotions of the people that follows him.

His kid is into Bitcoin and I think who's harder to change the heart of is Warren Buffett. He's the typical and traditional investor that don't understand Bitcoin yet or he does but just don't like the attributes of it as an asset.