I know the odds are against it but I can't help thinking maybe it might just pass. I mean, bitcoin is going to happen anyway and the SEC, the governments can't really control that and they must know it. But an ETF would give them the ability to control the big money that goes in and out of bitcoin even if they can't control bitcoin itself. An ETF would open up a huge regulatable gateway to bitcoin, of which the government can play gatekeepers to their heart's content! If the SEC sees it that way, I think it's in  Blockchain is the latest business buzzword, despite most business people not having a clue what it is. The ETF might get approved simply because someone important heard its got something to do with blockchain. We need a Blockchain ETF! And an HTTP ETF!! And an IOT ETF! ETF all the things! |
|
|
|
Why, oh why, must the shorts continually get burned?  |
|
|
|
Sure, sure. Just like the BitLicense, eh?  Just playing a little devil's advocate with ya. Well, I'll try setting up a bank in New York state, see how it goes and then I'll get back to you. Haha yeah I hear ya. The thing is, I believe that the State rarely ever does anything to protect the people. They pass legislation to a) protect themselves, and b) for their own good and for their own advantage. To rig the system so that only the wealthy elite end up with all the BitLicenses is criminal, and that N.Y. state gets high "entry fees" for each one is also criminal. It's extortion. |
|
|
|
|
Also, remember kids:
FOMO is not a good reason to buy bitcoin. In fact, it is not a good reason to buy anything in life.
You have to believe in what you are doing. Do the research.
|
|
|
|
You only need to know the "trend": Has the establishment / authorities, ever done anything to pump BTC? No. They have done exactly the opposite (hammering BTC with "negative news"). And BTC rises despite these.
I distinctly remember watching the price while US senators were making positive noises about BTC. It was reacting from sentence to sentence. What some seem to regard as BTC's persecution is just the application of laws that exist with everything else. An ETF rejection won't be a grand political statement. They simply won't think that it cuts it at present as a safe enough asset class. Sure, sure. Just like the BitLicense, eh? Just playing a little devil's advocate with ya. |
|
|
|
Except this time it's different.... because I actually have enough bitcoin to make me "well off" if we see another rise like that. So it's probably not gonna happen... I will never be free from the corporate world Actually, you don't want a parabolic pump-and-dump like last time. What you want is a steady rise to a 5X increase and subsequent floor.... that actually stays there permanently. I think that we'll see this within the next two years. |
|
|
|
i think china would have been the biggest factor in them saying no. now that's being brought to heel the chances are higher.
100% agree with this. In fact, it's interesting that China exchanges being reigned in magically happened 4 weeks prior to the ETF announcement, no? Seems like someone at the SEC might have made a few phone calls...  |
|
|
|
'I don't have any inside information, but my sense is that the majority of the things that the SEC is particularly concerned about revolve around bitcoin itself as opposed to anything specific about the Winklevoss filing.' that's your reason right there. it doesn't matter how great the application is if they have reservations about the underlying asset, and they would be sensible to do so. If they have reservations about an underlying asset that essentially hasn't changed in its function for 8 years now, then that means that they will never approve an ETF. Because Bitcoin isn't going to "change" significantly moving forward. That is, unless they change their reservations... I think any denial of a Bitcoin ETF would be nearly 100% politically-motivated. It would mean that they (Governments? World Powers?) simply don't want Bitcoin recognized as a legitimate long term financial instrument. But that would be fine by me, as I think ETFs over time become corrupt, eventually holding back the underlying assets as opposed to supporting them. If they want to keep corporate and individual mutual/hedge/wealth funds and 401k s intact, they better wise up and approve the ETFs. Otherwise people will drop those long term, and just directly invest in assets like Bitcoin directly. |
|
|
|
Are we at $800 yet? LOL
Yeah tomorrow, when China has inspection or bans bitcoin again. Lol. |
|
|
|
Don't get too excited another "inspection" is incoming.
Haha, yeah that comment nearly sent coffee shooting out of my nose. A follow-up to the follow-up to the follow-up "inspection"? |
|
|
|
If a court liquidates OKccoin before the end of its withdrawal freeze the Bitcoins on the exchange could get locked up indefinitely, until a receiver shares them out. That would help maintain the supply/demand imbalance on other exchanges. There's not enough coins to satisfy demand as it is.Not to mention, I have a sinking suspicion (as others have noted too) that some of the Chinese exchanges could be insolvent, might have been for a long time now. They've probably gotten away with naked shorting for a while now. If the PBoC ever starts to audit them, they might be in trouble. |
|
|
|
Samson Mow leaving BTCC: https://twitter.com/Excellion/status/832240183579856896Reason:"To move back to Canada to be with my family" Translation: "Because of the PBOC oversight bullshit I can't take my salary in BTC and easily repatriate it back to my family in Canada anymore, so I'm just going to pack up and move back permanently." #lolofcoursekiddingbutnotkidding |
|
|
|
because there are lots of institutional investors who are - by law - only allowed to invest in exchange traded assets. On top of this especially those investors happen to be very big investors with billions to invest. They cannot buy physical gold but they can buy gold etf. same with bitcoin: they cannot buy bitcoins directly - it is against the law.
Not to mention, any inflows of fiat directly into Bitcoin ETFs will go only to buying and selling of bitcoin (e.g. that investment/trade money would not be allowed to flow into BTC/altcoin pair trades). So in theory, Bitcoin marketcap would pull away from other altcoins. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin will drain toward the countries that value them the most, and drain away from the countries that value them the least.
It would be a shame for China to be shortsighted on this, and only care about mining bitcoin. Because one day that dominance will also drain away from them as well.
|
|
|
|
Notice that without any China FUD to work with, the whale dumping into his own walls has no effect. Oh dear, wat will dey do without China??  |
|
|
|
So somebody at Stamp wants exactly $999.9999 (or er, exactly $1K) for like days.
Right guyz? Right??
For what reason, nobody seems to know.
Nope, not manipulated. Nope not at all.
Nope.
oh gosh!!!! The only manipulation there is happens to be your ongoing attempts to manipulate facts to your lame-ass numerology theory.  What, no rambling, incoherent, circular, wall-o-text this time JJG? I mean it's not like you don't have the time, sitting in your mom's basement and all... |
|
|
|
|
So somebody at Stamp wants exactly $999.9999 (or er, exactly $1K) for like days.
Right guyz? Right??
For what reason, nobody seems to know.
Nope, not manipulated. Nope not at all.
Nope.
|
|
|
|
Three years ago, Bitcoin stabilizing around the $1K mark seemed like a dream. Now look at it. Where could we be three years from now?? Onward and upward to $5K!  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
