SEC Rejects 9 Bitcoin ETF Applications Whats Next Target of bitcoin? - 23 Aug18

[figmentofmyass]

And I'm sure as the investors getting smarter nowadays, they won't even bother by another ETF rejection.

I certainly hope so, but I'm afraid that common sense doesn't really apply to most of the traders here. It was clear a long time already that ETFs wouldn't be accepted by the SEC, but the market still reacts to it.

i thought we'd be inundated by delays and denials for months to come, so i'm glad the SEC went ahead and rejected 9 ETF applications in one fell swoop. like a bandaid---right off!

seems like we still have one more deadline looming though, and it's the one most people have a hard-on for: the vaneck/solidX decision on september 30th.... get ready for disappointment one more time!

Just before the SEC postponed its Vaneck ETF decision people were talking about how the first gold backed ETF pumped its price significantly, and they blatantly assume that the exact same thing will happen to Bitcoin, which is crazy.

that's because they don't look at the context. gold had already formed a multi-year base and broken out into a bull market when the ETF was approved. it was bound to explode anyway.

Even with an approval you don't know whether or not there is any significant demand for it.

bingo---been saying that for a while. the existence of an ETF doesn't create demand for BTC.

[buwaytress]

I certainly hope so, but I'm afraid that common sense doesn't really apply to most of the traders here. It was clear a long time already that ETFs wouldn't be accepted by the SEC, but the market still reacts to it.

i thought we'd be inundated by delays and denials for months to come, so i'm glad the SEC went ahead and rejected 9 ETF applications in one fell swoop. like a bandaid---right off!

seems like we still have one more deadline looming though, and it's the one most people have a hard-on for: the vaneck/solidX decision on september 30th.... get ready for disappointment one more time!

Yeah me too. Everyone saw the Bioshares decision but to have all those others thumped down was good (although now they've stayed the decision on 5 boo!). I'd really prefer all these ETFs just get knocked down now, have Bitcoin take all that selling pressure now and get all the pointless Wall Strret hopes and dreams priced out before end of the year.

And yes. I hope the September disappointment for VanEck is a decision as well. If any of the reasons given were legitimate, then there's no way the Bitcoin market can change in time for SEC to change its mind. Seriously, don't want the news of delays to take up any more feed space till 2019.

[exstasie]

As far as price targets go, I know old DanV was looking for a flat correction back to the July highs in the $8,000s. He's been right so far this time.

That would be the ultimate troll: to double-top at $8,500 and then fall back into a bear market. That's basically what happened in the $11,000s earlier in the year, too.

Shorter term, Peter Brandt was looking for $7,270 but I'm not sure if that's changed after that little selloff a couple days ago.

[wuvdoll]

Just a stupid question : why bitcoin-etf should be USA based and why not it could be issued from some other country ?

I just wonder why all people are trying to get approval only from USA and why not try in Japan kind of bitcoin legalized countries ? If Winklevoss brothers try to trade bitcoin-ETF in Japan, it will not get enough volume ? ETF thing is only country based ? It cannot be traded online to have more traders world wide ?

When bitcoin ETF in some small country like Latvia or Hong Kong where it will be easier to convince the government to get approval even the expected volume will be lesser, it could set example for USA to approve the future ETF application as bitcoin-ETF thing will experience the real life scenario which is still lagging and SEC is still taking its decision on imaginary future problems.

[buwaytress]

Just a stupid question : why bitcoin-etf should be USA based and why not it could be issued from some other country ?

I just wonder why all people are trying to get approval only from USA and why not try in Japan kind of bitcoin legalized countries ? If Winklevoss brothers try to trade bitcoin-ETF in Japan, it will not get enough volume ? ETF thing is only country based ? It cannot be traded online to have more traders world wide ?

When bitcoin ETF in some small country like Latvia or Hong Kong where it will be easier to convince the government to get approval even the expected volume will be lesser, it could set example for USA to approve the future ETF application as bitcoin-ETF thing will experience the real life scenario which is still lagging and SEC is still taking its decision on imaginary future problems.

Not really a stupid question, but I think the simple answer is directness. You've got these players who want access to an existing market, a big market, and a mature market. So the US fits all these criteria

ETFs by definition means they're based on stock exchanges. They work like stocks, so in terms of tax, they're much "cheaper" than possibly buying Bitcoin itself (and due to liquidity, easily bought and sold in massive amounts, compared to buying actual Bitcoin in the US which is tricky for a lot of big money people). So these Bitcoin ETF guys probably know there's a lot of eager accredited investors who don't yet have a way (in their mind anyway) to get into speculating on Bitcoin, so ETFs are the perfect entry point for them. Big money!

The US was the first to introduce it, Europe later into the game and the rest of the world only after the turn of the century. Essentially it's the most mature, the only country to have it in place for more than 20 years. So they have the most money waiting to enter. I think that's all it is.

And yeah ETFs only available in the country of origin, where the stock market is. These ETFs, I think, will track the index in the Chicago markets (doesn't get any bigger than that).

[talkbitcoin]

(and due to liquidity, easily bought and sold in massive amounts, compared to buying actual Bitcoin in the US which is tricky for a lot of big money people).

how can ETF be more liquid than the actual bitcoin market?
i don't quite understand how ETF works but reading the resources they say there is only 5 shares in an ETF and each share will represent 25BTC. so the total amount of it is 125BTC only!
125BTC is the volume of 1 hour on bitstamp and during wilder moves it is the volume of 5 minutes! for example today total volume  was 1400BTC so far.

even if i am misunderstanding the limit (25BTC) and if it is higher, it doesn't make much of a difference. ETF is still limited to a fixed cap while the real market is only limited by the number of people trading there which can be a lot bigger.

[1Referee]

And yeah ETFs only available in the country of origin, where the stock market is. These ETFs, I think, will track the index in the Chicago markets (doesn't get any bigger than that).

Nowadays with how the market is saturated with third party broker firms, even investors from Japan and China could buy into these ETF's without any problems.

On another note, which seems to be something that people completely ignore, is the fact that institutions can already buy into a coin backed fund through Coinbase's index fund.

Current fund composition;

Bitcoin 73.07%
Ethereum 18.11%
BCash 5.86%
Litecoin 2.13%
Ethereum Classic 0.83%

Minimum investment amount is $250,000 which is steep but probably set as a regulative main rule. Custody is taken care of, so nothing prevents large investors from the US to flow in.

[exstasie]

(and due to liquidity, easily bought and sold in massive amounts, compared to buying actual Bitcoin in the US which is tricky for a lot of big money people).

how can ETF be more liquid than the actual bitcoin market?

even if i am misunderstanding the limit (25BTC) and if it is higher, it doesn't make much of a difference. ETF is still limited to a fixed cap while the real market is only limited by the number of people trading there which can be a lot bigger.

In theory, a commodity-backed ETF could have a supply larger than the combined liquidity of the spot market. But we all know that's not going to happen.

I think you're right. A Bitcoin ETF can only have limited liquidity due to the low and fixed supply. Futures markets can have significantly more liquidity than ETFs for that reason. They are either cash-settled, or there is delivery on the net difference in contracts. So there is never delivery on the entire depth of the market (or anything close to it). Take the gold futures market, for instance.