SEC delays decision on ETF again, Vaneck, SolidX withdraw proposal

[guoyu78]

It is bringing something new to the table which is an example. This is an example for a full blown ETF and if it gets a lot of success and people are happy with it then those people who are able to use it and made money with it will brag about it to their friends (who are also rich people I assume but using other places) will ask for it from their own places and this will basically go like a wave affect where one stone creates many circles. That is why it is upmost importance that the people who will be able to use this limited version likes it and then makes money from it so that we can have the big version where everyone can join happens more quickly.

There is not enough pressure on SEC to accept it however if this turns out great then we can actually have a great pressure to SEC which will force their hand to accept.

[STT]

I can already buy a BTC holding in my pension as Iam the manager of it, the price quote is a bit flaky when I looked this year and previous so I never bothered.   I stuck it in gold because I thought that quite certain and solid, overall gold is not popular and I imagine BTC even less so but its a smaller market anyhow.  
   After all I have BTC anyhow but considering this years price rise I guess should have, still its not a pension type asset so I didnt but I dont doubt there are big company investors and speculators already in BTC.   We'd not be idling around 10,000 without some of this bigger money, its why I think dollar index, larger market moves do have an effect on BTC because some of this money market involvement is leveraged.

No one knows if it would tank or shoot up but these ETF's news doesn't really bother anymore.

  Greater accessibility and trading in the market would no doubt cause BTC to break any medium term trend that might be holding it back.   We'd see a rise, its then debateable do we see actual greater participation and holdings of BTC but likely we would, just like Libra is going to have an effect on currency holdings should it proceed with a mixed currency basket.   It'll alter balance some and if its a growth trend then its big news even more.   If you introduce a million people or more to products they did not have on their menu previously, it'll make a splash in the market books for those products.

[fullhdpixel]

--snip

I told people that we are the ones that will still use our bare hands to destroy the perfect system that satoshi has created for us to be free from these governments, most especially the poor people and then break that gene of the rich keeps getting richer and poor keeps getting poorer, but we still using our hand to personally invite government by crying loud for .

if government even approve bitcoin today, we may still not get that mass adoption, because every decision to use cryptocurrency lies on the heart of the user, and you cannot force them to do or undo what they want. I prefer that e continue to grow slowly the way we have bee growing than to be waiting for one sec to approve ETF.

[1Referee]

if government even approve bitcoin today, we may still not get that mass adoption, because every decision to use cryptocurrency lies on the heart of the user, and you cannot force them to do or undo what they want. I prefer that e continue to grow slowly the way we have bee growing than to be waiting for one sec to approve ETF.

No one can approve or reject Bitcoin. It hasn't ever needed any of that. This is what I like about Bitcoin. For the first time I can do things without asking for permission.

We'll get that that ETF one day, people just need to stop focusing on it. The longer it takes for these instruments to make it to the market, the longer you have to accumulate as many satoshis as possible at fair prices. Your fiat continues to lose purchasing power so it's not that you have all the time in the world to keep waiting.

As for the 'limited ETF', that's just a lame knock-off. The retailers should be allowed to buy into this ETF through their brokerage account, which isn't the case here. Institutions already play around with GBTC, which is similar to what Vaneck offers.

[exstasie]

As for the 'limited ETF', that's just a lame knock-off. The retailers should be allowed to buy into this ETF through their brokerage account, which isn't the case here. Institutions already play around with GBTC, which is similar to what Vaneck offers.

Pretty much, although I'm curious to see what fees they charge. Grayscale charges a whopping 2% annual fee to invest in GBTC. By comparison, the average ETF expense ratio is well under 0.5%. At significantly lower costs, a Vaneck "ETF-like product" could be more attractive to institutions.

Still, it's essentially an OTC product just like GBTC, though they're trying to paint it as something more:

“Unlike an ETF it isn’t listed on a national exchange, rather it is quoted on the OTC Link ATS platform. This is a first-of-its-kind type of offering. Given it will trade over-the-counter via broker-to-broker transactions, we’ve been casually referring to it as a Broker Traded Fund, a BTF,” Lopez said.

[bbc.reporter]

@1Referee. Agreed. However, the SEC has not given its approval for VanEck and SolidX to let investors invest in a bitcoin ETF yet. But they might have found an ambiguity in the rules that might allow them to sell bitcoin ETFs to institutional investors only.

[figmentofmyass]

But they might have found an ambiguity in the rules that might allow them to sell bitcoin ETFs to institutional investors only.

meh, it's basically an admission by vaneck that a real ETF won't be approved anytime soon. they're giving up. as far as securities go, the only route the SEC is leaving open is the OTC market. that means no mainstream appeal and limited retail access.

[bbc.reporter]

@figmentofmyass. How many delays has it been? They have to accept and do something.

This might be the new storyboard. Offer bitcoin ETFs to the rich first and let them dump on the poor by offering it to them 5 years later hehehe.

[bbc.reporter]

I reckon bitcoin sportsbooks should begin offering odds on whether there will be an ETF approval or another delay hehehe. However, it might be another delay. The SEC chairman has raised concerns that might not be fixed within 10 years.



Still, concerns hang over the decision to approve such a product. During the interview, Clayton raised those concerns, noting the lack of a proper crypto custody provider and the threat of price manipulation on unregulated exchanges. That's despite a number of new custody providers coming online this year, including Fidelity's new custody business and San Francisco-based Anchorage, and efforts to expose wash trading on certain exchanges.

Clayton's comments come just a few weeks before the final deadline for two ETF proposal, Bitwise and VanEck/Soldix, are decided on. On October 13 and October 18, the SEC will decide whether to approve Bitwise's and VanEck's proposal, respectively.

Read in full https://www.theblockcrypto.com/linked/39008/sec-chair-clayton-theres-work-left-to-be-done-on-bitcoin-etf/

[adaseb]

I reckon bitcoin sportsbooks should begin offering odds on whether there will be an ETF approval or another delay hehehe. However, it might be another delay. The SEC chairman has raised concerns that might not be fixed within 10 years.



Still, concerns hang over the decision to approve such a product. During the interview, Clayton raised those concerns, noting the lack of a proper crypto custody provider and the threat of price manipulation on unregulated exchanges. That's despite a number of new custody providers coming online this year, including Fidelity's new custody business and San Francisco-based Anchorage, and efforts to expose wash trading on certain exchanges.

Clayton's comments come just a few weeks before the final deadline for two ETF proposal, Bitwise and VanEck/Soldix, are decided on. On October 13 and October 18, the SEC will decide whether to approve Bitwise's and VanEck's proposal, respectively.

Read in full https://www.theblockcrypto.com/linked/39008/sec-chair-clayton-theres-work-left-to-be-done-on-bitcoin-etf/

The issue with getting these ETFs approved is actually a catch 22. Basically they are correct that right now its easy to manipulate the price of BTC. Remember what happened that day when BTC crashed down to $6100 or so on Bitstamp? Basically it caused a huge price crash due to Bitstamp being one of the main exchanges which makes up the price index for the bitcoin futures (on bitmex). If I recall correctly someone had like 5K BTC to sell and he kept putting it as the best ask price and it lead to algos going crazy and selling on other exchanges. 

For those that don't remember here is an article,
https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-price-flash-crash-5k-btc-dump-bitstamp/
It was back in May 2019.

For reasons like this is why the SEC doesn't want to approve an ETF. However if they approved one then BTC would have much more liquidity and a 5K sell order wouldn't cause this much mess as it did back in May 2019.

[figmentofmyass]

@figmentofmyass. How many delays has it been? They have to accept and do something.

they don't. they could drag their feet for many years, especially since the market is still dominated by unregulated offshore exchanges---bitmex, binance, bitfinex, huobi, okex etc.

I reckon bitcoin sportsbooks should begin offering odds on whether there will be an ETF approval or another delay hehehe.

i'd bet against approval all day if i had the chance.

[barbara44]

No, they do have a limited amount of delays in their arsenal left, some of them had their last delay for example which means they will be getting a result no matter what, it could be rejection (most likely) or they could get accepted but it will be the last one. If you read the article you will see that there is usually delays that got limited and not times which means they could delay it as much as they want but with time in between longer than usual instead of times they delay.

Let's say they can delay it only 3 times, they could just make it like 1 year apart from each other to postpone for over 3-4 years span and that would basically make sure ETF will not be hyped about at all, I honestly think one will be accepted eventually tho, not soon but eventually.

[coinfinger]

@figmentofmyass. How many delays has it been? They have to accept and do something.

they don't. they could drag their feet for many years, especially since the market is still dominated by unregulated offshore exchanges---bitmex, binance, bitfinex, huobi, okex etc.

I reckon bitcoin sportsbooks should begin offering odds on whether there will be an ETF approval or another delay hehehe.

i'd bet against approval all day if i had the chance.

I do not see sec actually doing anything about that approval for now, because they have not completely gotten the support of the government completely and they still don’t know the stand of government, but now that US is trying to regulate the cryptocurrency market now through exchanges, which could be seen on the action of binance of recent and their announcement to launch a separate trading platform for the citizens of United states which I think the launching is expected this month, and for them to have done that, the US government must have demanded for it, which means that we are gradually getting their attention for cryptocurrency so with this, the sec could also consider approving the ETF, either this year or early next year.

[exstasie]

I do not see sec actually doing anything about that approval for now, because they have not completely gotten the support of the government completely and they still don’t know the stand of government, but now that US is trying to regulate the cryptocurrency market now through exchanges, which could be seen on the action of binance of recent and their announcement to launch a separate trading platform for the citizens of United states which I think the launching is expected this month, and for them to have done that, the US government must have demanded for it, which means that we are gradually getting their attention for cryptocurrency so with this, the sec could also consider approving the ETF, either this year or early next year.

Apples and oranges. The SEC is probably breathing down Binance's neck and demanding they comply with US securities laws. That means not allowing US persons access to unregistered securities markets and also full KYC, hence the launch of a segregated US exchange.

That has nothing to do with the rule changes required for an ETF approval. SEC commissioners have said that won't happen until fundamental structural changes happen in the market. They want to see a majority of trading volumes move to regulated exchanges.

[bbc.reporter]

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

I speculate more withdrawals will follow.



Cboe BZX Exchange withdrew its VanEck/SolidX bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) proposal on Tuesday.

According to a filing dated Sept. 17, a proposed rule change to publicly list shares of the VanEck SolidX Bitcoin Trust was withdrawn on Sept. 13. A decision on the proposal had already been delayed a number of times, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) faced a final deadline of Oct. 18 to determine whether to approve or reject what could have been one of the first bitcoin ETFs in the country.

The news comes just weeks after VanEck and SolidX began offering shares of the Trust to qualified institutional buyers (entities with at least $100 million in assets owned or invested) under a Rule 144A exemption. In the nearly three weeks since first announcing the product, one “basket” of four bitcoin (worth around $40,000) was traded.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/vaneck-solidx-withdraw-bitcoin-etf-proposal-from-sec-review

[gentlemand]

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

I'm curious to know what their attitude is to a 'real' ETF. Are they introducing this kludge and withdrawing the original application to let the kludge run and have it strengthen their position when they reapply?

There's so much more potential in a proper ETF that I can't believe they'd let the idea go completely.

[1Referee]

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

Are you referring to the trust aka the "limited ETF"? If so, then that's definitely not their main target. It's actually a pretty redundant product because a similar product (GBTC) has already been publicly trading for years.

This is the second time this year that Vaneck has withdrawn their ETF proposal, and I'm pretty sure they'll follow that path until the SEC finally approves their ETF proposal. They will submit their new proposal before the end of the year so that they are granted a much longer term, which helps them to iron out some of the SEC's concerns. It was pretty much their only option moving forward.

[gentlemand]

They will submit their new proposal before the end of the year so that they are granted a much longer term, which helps them to iron out some of the SEC's concerns. It was pretty much their only option moving forward.

https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1174342415630688256

This bloke is always worth a read regarding this. He reckons that withdrawing rather than waiting to be rejected reduces the chances of a precedent being set that the SEC can refer to in future. Seems a bit daffy to me as they're going to think what they think regardless of whether it was all written down nice and that but maybe that's how big boy stuff rolls.

[exstasie]

https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1174342415630688256

This bloke is always worth a read regarding this. He reckons that withdrawing rather than waiting to be rejected reduces the chances of a precedent being set that the SEC can refer to in future. Seems a bit daffy to me as they're going to think what they think regardless of whether it was all written down nice and that but maybe that's how big boy stuff rolls.

It makes sense if rejection is already guaranteed. With executive regulators, their interpretation of the law is malleable (within reasonable bounds) until they establish formal precedent. The commission could have much more favorable views down the road towards x and y issues, but if today's commission establishes precedent on those issues, their hands may be tied.

News update. First of ETF proposals withdrawn.

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

I'm curious to know what their attitude is to a 'real' ETF. Are they introducing this kludge and withdrawing the original application to let the kludge run and have it strengthen their position when they reapply?

There's so much more potential in a proper ETF that I can't believe they'd let the idea go completely.

They aren't letting it go, just withdrawing the current application before the SEC formally rejects it. They've had plenty of closed door discussions with commission staff and they know a real ETF is nowhere near approval. VanEck's launch of an OTC trust product is all but an open admission of that.

[BitHodler]

It appears that any derivative based on bitcoin for institutional investors was the only investment vehicle needed by VanEck, SolidX hehe.

If so, that's a complete failure then. It has only gotten 4BTC into it so far, and that after almost a whole week of being an available investment tool. If there was any latent institutional demand, they would have jumped in.

To add, no institution is going to invest $40k into something. It's just not worth their time. It probably means that these 4BTC belong to Vaneck itself, probably to kick things off.

At the end of the day, Coinbase's fund (which has been withdrawn rather quickly) has failed too due to a lack of demand. This should have been an indication that institutions are not interested.