Bitcoin - The road to a SIX DIGIT price valuation

[Wind_FURY]

To all those who read my opinions in different topics, you know that I'm cynical towards BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF because of the vague wording used about hard forks in their registration statement.

I want to get that out first before making the "shower thought" for the topic.

From an investment perspective, OK, I'm curious if anyone knows, when was the first modern ETF for Gold issued? Wikipedia says it was during 2003.

The first gold ETF launched was Gold Bullion Securities, which listed 28 March 2003 on the Australian Securities Exchange, by ETF Securities and its major shareholder, Graham Tuckwell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_exchange-traded_product

Zoom out Gold's chart to the maximum and look starting at 2003. Merely my two sats, but believe it will be the same for Bitcoin. It will have one of its greatest price trajectory we have ever seen during the next real bull cycle. Perhaps the same as 2015 - 2017, perhaps more?

I know franky1 doesn't believe it, we have debated about it before. Although he made a good point, he didn't consider the Cabal's long term, and possibly unlimited, printing of fiat.

 

On the road to $500,000.

[1714269726]

1714269726

[1714269726]

1714269726

[1714269726]

1714269726

[Tytanowy Janusz]

To tell you the truth, I personally am more skeptical that this ETF will give as much to Bitcoin as it did to gold. Gold is hard to buy, hard to sell, each transaction carries the risk of fraud (fake gold), requires a physical transfer to the mint/store and has a huge spread. Gold ETF solved all these problems and made it possible for you to buy physical gold in 2 clicks from home. The same cannot be said for bitcoin, because bitcoin is like gold with build in ETF. It's easy to buy, easy to sell, divisible to cents. And it's not like the ETF will open doors to big institutions either. Microstrategy didn't need an ETF to buy nearly 1% of all bitcoins.

[Wind_FURY]

To tell you the truth, I personally am more skeptical that this ETF will give as much to Bitcoin as it did to gold. Gold is hard to buy, hard to sell, each transaction carries the risk of fraud (fake gold), requires a physical transfer to the mint/store and has a huge spread. Gold ETF solved all these problems and made it possible for you to buy physical gold in 2 clicks from home. The same cannot be said for bitcoin, because bitcoin is like gold with build in ETF. It's easy to buy, easy to sell, divisible to cents. And it's not like the ETF will open doors to big institutions either. Microstrategy didn't need an ETF to buy nearly 1% of all bitcoins.

I respect your opinion and you have a point, but I can't entirely agree. Bitcoin is a blackhole for fiat currencies. If the Cabal behind the Central Banks print more, Bitcoin will absorb more and add to its market value. It's currently right there happening in front of us, and the ETFs will make the trajectory to six digits steeper and faster. Plus wait for QE when there's more liquidity available in the system. It might be "Oh My God It's Christmas" during March of 2025.

[Oshosondy]

Zoom out Gold's chart to the maximum and look starting at 2003. Merely my two sats, but believe it will be the same for Bitcoin. It will have one of its greatest price trajectory we have ever seen during the next real bull cycle. Perhaps the same as 2015 - 2017, perhaps more?

Many people have been thinking when bitcoin price will increase with massive bull market, but people have been expecting 2024/2025, which would be after halving. Either before bitcoin halving, or before 2025, there would have been what is called spot bitcoin ETF and it is one of the reasons bitcoin price will increase. I agree with you, bitcoin price price will increase. Anyone that can hold bitcoin now should hold it. Holding bitcoin now is not a mistake at all.

[bitbollo]

To tell you the truth, I personally am more skeptical that this ETF will give as much to Bitcoin as it did to gold. Gold is hard to buy, hard to sell, each transaction carries the risk of fraud (fake gold), requires a physical transfer to the mint/store and has a huge spread. Gold ETF solved all these problems and made it possible for you to buy physical gold in 2 clicks from home. The same cannot be said for bitcoin, because bitcoin is like gold with build in ETF. It's easy to buy, easy to sell, divisible to cents. And it's not like the ETF will open doors to big institutions either. Microstrategy didn't need an ETF to buy nearly 1% of all bitcoins.

buying and holding bitcoins requires a specific knowledge that an "average joe" has difficulty to understand. For what I have seen, even a person with more experience or informatic culture must spend some time before being able to mastering this argument.

Gold is just...  a "shining rock".
You take it in the form of a coin/bar/stone and you are done with the purchase storage part.

With bitcoin, if you think about it, it's not the same thing. And above all, there are now a few places (very often with insane high spreads) that allow you to buy it "live" in an easy way.
any other financial product you can buy/store it easily.
with bitcoin this is currently not real!

[Tytanowy Janusz]

I respect your opinion and you have a point, but I can't entirely agree. Bitcoin is a blackhole for fiat currencies. If the Cabal behind the Central Banks print more, Bitcoin will absorb more and add to its market value. It's currently right there happening in front of us, and the ETFs will make the trajectory to six digits steeper and faster. Plus wait for QE when there's more liquidity available in the system. It might be "Oh My God It's Christmas" during March of 2025.

So in your opinion the main driving force of btc pump to 6 digit will be QE and ETF will only facilitate the migration of capital. Am I right? I can definitely agree with that.

buying and holding bitcoins requires a specific knowledge that an "average joe" has difficulty to understand. For what I have seen, even a person with more experience or informatic culture must spend some time before being able to mastering this argument.

The "average joe" you are talking about, if he can't buy and store bitcoin because it's too hard for him, he probably doesn't know the difference between spot ETF and CFD either. So he is already in bitcoin using plus500 or any other regular broker. Exante for instance (fully regulated broker that I use to invest in stocks/bonds) have 150 krypto CFD trading pairs. On BTC/USD trading pair there is currenty 1$ spread

[Lucius]

To all those who read my opinions in different topics, you know that I'm cynical towards BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF because of the vague wording used about hard forks in their registration statement.

I found it and read it, and I have to admit that what is written there does not look good at all, because the fact that it is written there may mean that they (BlackRock) actually have the idea to make a fork in the future, and to use their influence and money, of course, to create its centralized version of BTC.

I have written in several posts that I think that all these big companies only care about profit and that they don't care what will happen to Bitcoin in the long term. Of course, for some it is not too important in the event that before that those companies create a massive bull run and inflate the price of BTC so that everyone becomes rich - although when I say everyone, it will certainly not be possible, because someone's gain is always someone's loss.

[Wind_FURY]

I respect your opinion and you have a point, but I can't entirely agree. Bitcoin is a blackhole for fiat currencies. If the Cabal behind the Central Banks print more, Bitcoin will absorb more and add to its market value. It's currently right there happening in front of us, and the ETFs will make the trajectory to six digits steeper and faster. Plus wait for QE when there's more liquidity available in the system. It might be "Oh My God It's Christmas" during March of 2025.

So in your opinion the main driving force of btc pump to 6 digit will be QE and ETF will only facilitate the migration of capital. Am I right? I can definitely agree with that.

Plus the fact that there's only a limited supply of 21,000,000 Bitcoins in total, making it a scarce asset that's attractive as a long term hedge against inflation.

To all those who read my opinions in different topics, you know that I'm cynical towards BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF because of the vague wording used about hard forks in their registration statement.

I found it and read it, and I have to admit that what is written there does not look good at all, because the fact that it is written there may mean that they (BlackRock) actually have the idea to make a fork in the future, and to use their influence and money, of course, to create its centralized version of BTC.

There could also be another hash war and if BlackRock and its cartel of ETF issuers have the same proposal in each of their registration statement, they may have some impact of their own on what's to be considered "The Bitcoin". Because they could follow one fork and threaten to dump the other side of the fork. What if the other side they plan to dump is Bitcoin, BTC?

[Who is John Galt?]

To tell you the truth, I personally am more skeptical that this ETF will give as much to Bitcoin as it did to gold. Gold is hard to buy, hard to sell, each transaction carries the risk of fraud (fake gold), requires a physical transfer to the mint/store and has a huge spread. Gold ETF solved all these problems and made it possible for you to buy physical gold in 2 clicks from home. The same cannot be said for bitcoin, because bitcoin is like gold with build in ETF. It's easy to buy, easy to sell, divisible to cents. And it's not like the ETF will open doors to big institutions either. Microstrategy didn't need an ETF to buy nearly 1% of all bitcoins.

Your words sound reasonable, but bitcoin also has its own characteristics. And it can be more convenient and easier for conservative investors to invest through a centralized system in a decentralized asset. To anyone with even the slightest understanding of what bitcoin is, this may sound absurd, but large conservative investors do not necessarily have a deep understanding of the nature of bitcoin, they may well be satisfied with the recommendations of analysts and guarantees of centralized funds.

[mk4]

The same cannot be said for bitcoin, because bitcoin is like gold with build in ETF. It's easy to buy, easy to sell, divisible to cents. And it's not like the ETF will open doors to big institutions either. Microstrategy didn't need an ETF to buy nearly 1% of all bitcoins.

With a spot ETF, the boomers wouldn't need to learn how to secure their non-custodial wallets or exchange accounts, and they'll have direct access using their brokers and retirement accounts right off the bat.

[tygeade]

buying and holding bitcoins requires a specific knowledge that an "average joe" has difficulty to understand. For what I have seen, even a person with more experience or informatic culture must spend some time before being able to mastering this argument.

The "average joe" you are talking about, if he can't buy and store bitcoin because it's too hard for him, he probably doesn't know the difference between spot ETF and CFD either. So he is already in bitcoin using plus500 or any other regular broker. Exante for instance (fully regulated broker that I use to invest in stocks/bonds) have 150 krypto CFD trading pairs. On BTC/USD trading pair there is currenty 1$ spread

Most people do not invest, you need to remember that when you are investing, most people either don't or can't invest. I have seen a lot of people around me who never invested ever, they just live paycheck to paycheck either because they are idiots who spend any extra money they get, or they are just not doing a good job and not making enough money at all.

This is why I keep insisting on living at a level where it would make a profit when the time comes. I hope that people could end up with a good return, and they would invest their profits into something that makes them even more money, but billions around the world do not invest at all, and have no savings. Only some people do, and when you have like 500 million to 1 billion people investing that looks a lot, but we have 8 billion people, you need to remember that.

[aoluain]

To tell you the truth, I personally am more skeptical that this ETF will give as much to Bitcoin as it did to gold. Gold is hard to buy, hard to sell, each transaction carries the risk of fraud (fake gold), requires a physical transfer to the mint/store and has a huge spread. Gold ETF solved all these problems and made it possible for you to buy physical gold in 2 clicks from home. The same cannot be said for bitcoin, because bitcoin is like gold with build in ETF. It's easy to buy, easy to sell, divisible to cents. And it's not like the ETF will open doors to big institutions either. Microstrategy didn't need an ETF to buy nearly 1% of all bitcoins.

Microstrategy is a completely different situation, at the helm there is someone who is 101%
clued in on Bitcoin and everything surrounding it.

People who are going to use an ETF dont want to know about wallets, storing seeds,
buying and transferring Bitcoin, they want to make a call or press a button or send an
email and its done, they get a certificate to say they "own bitcoin" - thats not good enough
for us but for those institutional investors who dont physically own the Gold in
their portfolio it will be normal

[Lucius]

There could also be another hash war and if BlackRock and its cartel of ETF issuers have the same proposal in each of their registration statement, they may have some impact of their own on what's to be considered "The Bitcoin". Because they could follow one fork and threaten to dump the other side of the fork. What if the other side they plan to dump is Bitcoin, BTC?

I understand people who think that the spot BTC ETF should have a positive effect on the price, but apparently there are very few who think at all about the far-reaching consequences when it comes to such big predators as BR or Fidelity. I have never read the requirements for the BTC ETFs in detail, but it would be interesting to find out if any other company had a similar text in its conditions, or is this something that BR did first?

There is an old post on Reddit written by admin @theymos 4-5 years ago on the subject of BTC ETF, I have quoted it several times on the forum, and somehow it seems to me that it could be the closest to the truth.

Agreed, an ETF will almost certainly turn into a disaster at some point. The coins will be stolen, forks will be handled controversially, there will be issues with fungibility (eg. someone will "trace stolen coins" to the ETF's stash), the world will freak out when a bunch of retirees lose their life savings after doing the equivalent of buying BTC at $20k, etc. etc. It'll also get the sort of people who love regulation more into BTC, which is never good.

But investors want it, so it'll probably happen eventually. In particular, I totally condemn trying to get regulators to interfere in the free market more than they already do by blocking any ETF. (When the SEC was last looking into this, I had actually written a long document that I was going to send to them in order to comment on many technical issues with their proposed Bitcoin ETF regulation, but I decided not to send it because I don't want to have even the slightest hand in regulations.)

An ETF probably will increase the price a lot (until the ETF suffers its near-inevitable catastrophe), which has some pros and cons.

Note that an ETF can't affect Bitcoin itself, just the ETF investors and the market. There is no voting of any sort in Bitcoin, so it's not as if holding a lot of BTC gives you any power over Bitcoin, for example. I do agree with Andreas that the creation of a "corpo-Bitcoin" seems probable, perhaps after the ETF loses a ton of BTC and wants to undo it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5153962.0

[buwaytress]

Struggling to come up with anything new to say about ETFs, but the first response to your OP covers the main meat. Institutions aren't sitting around waiting to get into Bitcoin, they already did. OTC has always been enough to sate institutional appetites, and even without ETFs, there are numerous ways to bet on Bitcoin without owning any (that satisfies what institutionals want anyway).

They wanted to bet on price, not own any. ETFs may have been the easiest route but the emergence of CME CBoE etc proved that the demand wasn't as the door-pounding ravenous hunger that we were told to expect.

Why should this be any different?

[Wind_FURY]

Struggling to come up with anything new to say about ETFs, but the first response to your OP covers the main meat. Institutions aren't sitting around waiting to get into Bitcoin, they already did. OTC has always been enough to sate institutional appetites, and even without ETFs, there are numerous ways to bet on Bitcoin without owning any (that satisfies what institutionals want anyway).

They wanted to bet on price, not own any. ETFs may have been the easiest route but the emergence of CME CBoE etc proved that the demand wasn't as the door-pounding ravenous hunger that we were told to expect.

Why should this be any different?

Point taken, I'm just making a simple comparison with Gold when it first had an ETF during 2003 and how it might probably end the same way with Bitcoin. If you didn't do it yet, do max zoom out on Gold's chart and look at the price movement starting in the year 2003.

 

I admit that I might be wrong, but with just 21,000,000 Bitcoins in existence partnered with an increasing money supply, it's hard not to see SIX DIGITS.

[Falconer]

I admit that I might be wrong, but with just 21,000,000 Bitcoins in existence partnered with an increasing money supply, it's hard not to see SIX DIGITS.

It was the main point that allowed the price of bitcoin to increase many times what it was before. ATH higher than $200k can be expected, but in the end it really depends on how the money flows into the market. If large investors start to find safe ways to buy bitcoins then obviously the high demand for the coin will increase its value automatically. We are on the road to reach a new ATH, but we don't know when that will happen and how high the realization will be.

I'm optimistic about the price of bitcoin in the long term, but it probably won't be that easy to reach $500k. It would take a lot of support and large amounts of money to drive bitcoin's price higher than $200k, but the most realistic thing right now is to set up a stronger portfolio to expect future returns.

[CarnagexD]

To all those who read my opinions in different topics, you know that I'm cynical towards BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF because of the vague wording used about hard forks in their registration statement.

I want to get that out first before making the "shower thought" for the topic.

From an investment perspective, OK, I'm curious if anyone knows, when was the first modern ETF for Gold issued? Wikipedia says it was during 2003.

The first gold ETF launched was Gold Bullion Securities, which listed 28 March 2003 on the Australian Securities Exchange, by ETF Securities and its major shareholder, Graham Tuckwell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_exchange-traded_product

Zoom out Gold's chart to the maximum and look starting at 2003. Merely my two sats, but believe it will be the same for Bitcoin. It will have one of its greatest price trajectory we have ever seen during the next real bull cycle. Perhaps the same as 2015 - 2017, perhaps more?

I know franky1 doesn't believe it, we have debated about it before. Although he made a good point, he didn't consider the Cabal's long term, and possibly unlimited, printing of fiat.

 

On the road to $500,000.

I don't think $500,000 would be realistic to get right away. But technically speaking 6 digits is probable around $100,000. That said also with BTC halving, seasonal tendency, and also market correlation with the USD going lower, BTC is truly likely to go higher along with other risk assets until proven that it is reverting back to lower prices.

[Oilacris]

^ 500k? It isnt realistic. Here's one;

Robert Kiyosaki Warns US Dollar 'Will Die' Citing BRICS Nations' Plan to Launch Gold-Backed Currency

Robert Kiyosaki predicts Bitcoin price rally to $120,000 amidst rising inflation in the US

These approach and price predictions is realistic comparing into those people who had been expecting 6 digit prices but on the higher side or something that its already that unrealistic
for us to believe on. Yes, it might be that possible but it wont really be that happening on a short time. This is why its better to be having that realistic approach
rather than on anticipating on something which it is close to impossible.

[hatshepsut93]

There is an old post on Reddit written by admin @theymos 4-5 years ago on the subject of BTC ETF, I have quoted it several times on the forum, and somehow it seems to me that it could be the closest to the truth.

Agreed, an ETF will almost certainly turn into a disaster at some point. The coins will be stolen, forks will be handled controversially, there will be issues with fungibility (eg. someone will "trace stolen coins" to the ETF's stash), the world will freak out when a bunch of retirees lose their life savings after doing the equivalent of buying BTC at $20k, etc. etc. It'll also get the sort of people who love regulation more into BTC, which is never good.

It's possible to never get hacked if the security is well-implemented. As I understand, ETF doesn't need hot wallets, because it's not supporting withdrawal of coins. Fungibility is not a problem for existing Bitcoin entities like crypto exchanges. They don't get shut down or fined because of stolen or dirty coins. ETF will have KYC, so they will cooperate with law enforcement if the trail of suspicious transactions will lead to them.

Obviously, Bitcoin ETF would need to be regulated to be allowed to operate, but I don't think it equals to Bitcoin becoming more regulated. You can still trade BTC on DEXs, Bitcoin ATMs, in-person meeting, etc.

[thecodebear]

Well, six digits is happening this market cycle without US ETFs. Last cycle high was $69k, I'd expect this cycle to hit ~$150k.

Also I do not get why people think an ETF will suddenly happen just because Blackrock filed for one. Gensler, the head of the SEC, hates bitcoin and crypto and thinks it shouldn't exist, he is suing the exchanges, his one goal is to cause chaos and uncertainty in the market and to try to push the industry out of the country he already essentially pre-rejected the ETF applications by saying there wasn't enough info or whatever, and just yesterday (just in case there was anyone still thinking an ETF was in some way possible) he basically said Coinbase can not be used as an SSA for these ETF applications which is just further proof that Blackrock and Fidelity ETFs which were gonna use Coinbase will not be accepted.

There is zero chance an ETF gets approved while Gensler is in charge, and his term lasts until 2026, so no ETF is happening this market cycle. I could see an ETF happening next market cycle though in like 2027 or 2028 assuming the SEC leadership is unbiased towards Bitcoin/Crypto at that point. So if that happens the positive price effects on an ETF would be seen during the 2028/2029 bull market.



This market cycle ~$150k and definitely no ETF.


Next market cycle, maybe an ETF.
I expect both the news of an ETF getting approved, as well as the actual start of the ETF buying, will both have strong positive effects on the Bitcoin price when it finally does happen in like probably ~5 years. I would expect 5-10 billion dollars to flood into Bitcoin ETFs within a few months or them starting, meanings tens of thousands of Bitcoin being tied up in ETFs (remember, this won't happen until late this decade during next market cycle so if it happens around the current point in the market cycle but next market cycle the price maybe be like $100k-$150k when any of this starts happening). But the indirectly market effect - the market buying up Bitcoin on the news of an ETF - will likely be much bigger than the direct effect of ETF buying.

So let's say a Bitcoin ETF is approved in mid-2027 when the price of Bitcoin is $100k (having come out of the bear market recently like the current market), just the announcement I bet would start a buying spree and probably move the price up tens of thousands of dollars. Then the actual launch of ETFs, along with the indirectly market buying around the launch, might send the price up another $10k or something. In total, I could see the effect of a Bitcoin ETF next market cycle being like a 50% gain over the short term (say from $100k to $150k, or whatever prices it is at at that point). More generally it would probably make general public sentiment toward Bitcoin more positive so I'd say it might move my 2029 bull market prediction from like currently ~$300k up to ~$400k+ with an ETF, especially if we also get sensible US cryptocurrency market regulation next market cycle as well.