The SEC (USA) Approves Petition to Review Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF Rejection

[mynhpark]

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) intends to review its decision to reject the Winklevoss Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) listed on the Bats BZX exchange, in March. Less than two weeks after the decision was handed down, Bats petitioned for a review – a move that the agency has now greenlit. The SEC said two days ago that it had approved the review, opening the door to further comment between now and 15th May. In its 25-page petition for a review, Bats Exchange states that the decision by the delegated authority “is clearly erroneous”. The exchange claims that the standard applied in their disapproval decision “is inconsistent with prior approval orders” and is not even required by the Securities Exchange Act.

Do you think the SEC could change its mind about disapproving the Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF?

[helloeverybody]

From what ive read elsewhere its a pretty common occurrence to review declined petitions but i dont really think there is much chance of it going through. It may give a nice bump in price meantime but i dont have my hopes high for actual approval .

[olubams]

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) intends to review its decision to reject the Winklevoss Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) listed on the Bats BZX exchange, in March. Less than two weeks after the decision was handed down, Bats petitioned for a review – a move that the agency has now greenlit. The SEC said two days ago that it had approved the review, opening the door to further comment between now and 15th May. In its 25-page petition for a review, Bats Exchange states that the decision by the delegated authority “is clearly erroneous”. The exchange claims that the standard applied in their disapproval decision “is inconsistent with prior approval orders” and is not even required by the Securities Exchange Act.

Do you think the SEC could change its mind about disapproving the Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF?

From the way it is, I don't see any new thing coming out of that discussion. Its just a way to cause another confusion and uproar in the crypto-world now that bitcoin is gradually defying all odds to increase at a stable rate. At the end of the discussion, the rejection will still stand then we see the price come crashing all over again.

[Nagadota]

From what ive read elsewhere its a pretty common occurrence to review declined petitions but i dont really think there is much chance of it going through. It may give a nice bump in price meantime but i dont have my hopes high for actual approval .

They've had plenty of time for pointlessly considering their stance before they made their decision.

There's really no point "reviewing" their position.  It's not going to change.

[fudster]

We're all going to be disappointed still. It may really help the price of btc if its accepted but definitely not going to be successful still.
They just review this out of formality.

[DoublerHunter]

This review for the bitcoin etf rejection will be a chance for bitcoin to get pump to a higher price and recover its loss from the past rejection of the SEC. If this petition will be a good one and its result will be another voting session for bitcoin to be accepted in ETF then it will eventually have a pumping scenario and it will be a very huge gain for bitcoin.

[btbrae]

The SEC is a bunch of old men who sit around a table making decisions like the Godfather. They get paid well, they go home and eat steak with family and smoke a pipe. They don't know what a Bitcoin is, and they don't care.

An ETF sounded good 3 years ago, but the idea is a bit stale now. Something like Iconomi will work better than an ETF. Give it time and nobody will care for an ETF.

[housebtc]

I don't know how influencial these guys are and who is lobbying for them, they have a chance looking at the crazy money in the space it is possible for them to have gain inside allies to help them overturn the previous decision

[Xester]

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) intends to review its decision to reject the Winklevoss Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) listed on the Bats BZX exchange, in March. Less than two weeks after the decision was handed down, Bats petitioned for a review – a move that the agency has now greenlit. The SEC said two days ago that it had approved the review, opening the door to further comment between now and 15th May. In its 25-page petition for a review, Bats Exchange states that the decision by the delegated authority “is clearly erroneous”. The exchange claims that the standard applied in their disapproval decision “is inconsistent with prior approval orders” and is not even required by the Securities Exchange Act.

Do you think the SEC could change its mind about disapproving the Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF?

It is very unclear if the SEC will approve the bitcoin ETF as petitioned by the Winklevoss since the disapproval made was already done twice to both ETF. At this time there is a thin or slim chance that the Winklevoss Bitcoin ETC will be approved. If it will be  approved then we will be expecting a tremendous adoption and increase in bitcoins value but if it will be disapproved then we will rely on bitcoins natural growth.

[iamTom123]

In my personal opinion, it is only ministerial for the part of SEC to approve for a review. In the end, they will vote with the same decision of not allowing the so-called EFT for Bitcoin as proposed by the Winklevoss brothers. I also agree that maybe it is not yet the right time for such a project to come into fruition. Let's give more years for the Bitcoin to really mature and get settled down some more and by then we can have this EFT implemented.

[the rise]

I think all results will be the same, because SEC decisions are based on premature and uncontrolled bitcoin systems, so the issue of bitcoin unlimited seems to have affected us a lot in the last few months because they are able to provide what bitcoin cores can't afford: Centered and held by monopoly just like fiat. But back again to the community of users who don't want that to happen, I don't agree with roger verr at all, but I also want bitcoin accepted by the SEC (no solution yet).