2021-08-26 Nasdaq - BTC Futures ETF Likely To Be Approved In October

[acquafredda]

Bloomberg Analyst Eric Balchunas believes that the SEC is likely to approve a Bitcoin futures ETF soon, and it could be launched as soon as October.

What Happened: In a series of tweets, Eric has said that the recent Ethereum exchange-traded funds (ETFs) withdrawals by VanEck and ProShares are a good sign for Bitcoin futures ETFs and it could be approved soon by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Eric was referring to a statement made by ETF analyst James Seyffart.

In another tweet, Eric has said, "We think Ether withdrawal shows SEC has a nose in this and is in regular contact with issuers which should mean any kinks ironed out so that they can launch 75 days after filing. Further, ProFunds' Bitcoin MF was launched 77 days after filing. These are virtually same thing."

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bitcoin-futures-etf-likely-approved-012332692.html

According to Bloomberg's two experts, Eric Balchunas and James Seyffart, the sudden withdrawals of proposals for Ether futures ETFs from VanEck and ProShares could be a sign of the SEC's impending green light for Bitcoin ETFs.
Analysts, in their note, spoke of a "good sign for a potential Bitcoin futures ETF" in relation to the SEC allowing these applications to remain active.
Beyond the novelty represented by the time horizon, (green light in October against the previous indiscretion that referred to a more generic "end of the year"), Bloomberg's article contains a second interesting cue: the SEC could authorize not just one Bitcoin ETF but more than one! This choice, according to Eric Balchunas and James Seyffart, would be necessary to avoid giving an unfair competitive advantage to only one ETF with exposure to Bitcoin.

[Betwrong]

In the end of the article there's a link to another one, which is about Bitcoin ETFs that have been rejected by the SEC:



Reading through the long list of the rejected ETFs what comes to mind is that every time an ETF was proposed we were reading something like this in the news:

Industry experts believe that of all the entities that have filed a Bitcoin ETF application, Grayscale Investments (OTCMKTS: GBTC) has the best chance of having its application approved.

I think the following can be used as a template for ending an article about another ETF filing:

"Industry experts believe that of all the entities that have filed a Bitcoin ETF application, [insert the name of the new entity] has the best chance of having its application approved."

[DooMAD]

I think the following can be used as a template for ending an article about another ETF filing:

"Industry experts believe that of all the entities that have filed a Bitcoin ETF application, [insert the name of the new entity] has the best chance of having its application approved."

Indeed.  Must have read about a dozen articles worded this way by now.  I get the impression the SEC still have too many concerns about crypto in general that they wouldn't want to add more fuel to the fire by approving any sort of ETF.  It'll probably be another few years yet.

[acquafredda]

The only thing I could add is that I believe that this time the SEC will approve many pending ETFs in bulk. More than concerns on the investment vehicle itself, it is really a matter of not creating an unfair advantage to some players over others.
Beacuse of this I believe that in Q4 2021 we will likely witness the very first US-based bitcoin ETFs.

[stompix]

If you pick any month of the year and throw in all the dates from 2017 you will find a piece of news about every single one of them. October? No problem!

2017: The Securities and Exchange Commission has set an Oct. 13 deadline for approving a bitcoin-based exchange
2018:
New SEC Commissioner Briefed on Bitcoin ETF in October Meeting
2020:
SEC considers green light for crypto ETFs

My bad, couldn't find one about October 2019 because the main news for that month is that some ETFs got rejected.

So, what has changed in the last year that would make a difference? Nothing!

[Lucius]

This is old news that I commented on more than a week ago - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5354251.msg57748357#msg57748357

The only new thing in the old story is why the two companies withdrew their application for the ETH ETF just two days after it was submitted. The only logical explanation is that someone advised them to do so, and we can guess who it is.

[cafucafucafu]

Look, all of this ETF garbage really doesn't matter at the end of the day.

We've seen unprecedented growth over the past decade without any sort of real ETF progress.

If you think about it, logically what does a little ETF have to do with the fundamental service that bitcoin offers? Absolutely nothing. ETFs will only be used as a speculative tool anyway.

[DooMAD]

Look, all of this ETF garbage really doesn't matter at the end of the day.

We've seen unprecedented growth over the past decade without any sort of real ETF progress.

If you think about it, logically what does a little ETF have to do with the fundamental service that bitcoin offers? Absolutely nothing. ETFs will only be used as a speculative tool anyway.

Sometimes I think the only reason people try to hype it up is because speculators are always attempting to instigate another bull-run.  As though more institutional money being gambled on the sidelines is somehow beneficial.  You're right.  That's not beneficial to Bitcoin at all.  It's only helpful for speculators seeking to acquire more fiat when the next price spike occurs.