Winklevoss COIN -- Will it even matter? And how much?

[Wilhelm]

One day mining will become a very, very hard problem. At that point you will realize what you had iff you sell now.
Currently mining equipment has grown faster than expected. That's all.
In the long run Bitcoin will succeed.


Will the ETF even matter?
The ETF will still matter because traders LOVE volatility.

And how much
This much  --- -- c====8

[toknormal]

Pretty sad to see many bitcoiners pegging their hopes on the success of btc to some trust that may not even get approved, instead of the revolutionary digital payment protocol developed by Satoshi. The price isn't the only thing to hit a new low it seems.

Are you kidding !!?

For me the Winklevoss ETF is **THE** biggest thing ever to happen to Bitcoin.

I don't give a sh*t about all the b.s. nonsense people have been posting on here about liquidity and what an ETF is or isn't or how diverse it should or shouldn't be. Going from NO Wall Street exposure to SOME Wall Street exposure will be huge. End Of. Specially when you consider the massive amount of infrastructure work thats been done this year. I don't know how anyone with half a brain could possibly think otherwise.

Look - it's simple. With Winklevoss, Bitcoin goes from being a technology to a brand. It goes into a shop window on the high street when right now it's a bunch of cogwheels in a garage. Mom and Pop (or their day to day broker-world equivalents) can pick it up while their stocking up on Lockheed Martin, Proctor & Gamble, Microsoft, Wallmart & Disney.

As a stock it's not in that league yet, but what matters is that it will be on the shelf.

As for remarks surrounding liquidity - just look at the Gold ETF. GLD is a withering shadow of it's former self - rot setting into every corner through over leverage suspected to be anywhere from 30 to 100 to 1 over the metal. A high liquidity ETF is all very well when you're prepared to print endless paper without even caring if there's anything left to back it or not. Remember, the whole concept itself is only 20 years old. The Gold ETF is less than a decade, so there's plenty room for innovation.

If they get approval around Christmas or early next year the timing will be perfect. Canada, Australia. the Far East and even the UK are all in the process of major Bitcoin infrastructure mobilisation in both private and regulatory sectors. Forget about the US - they're headed for 3rd world status anyway.

Make no mistake - this will be a major milestone for Bitcoin whatever kind of start it has.

[johnyj]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

[MrBig]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

[abercrombie]

Winklevoss' reception yesterday at Money 2020 in Las Vegas...

[MrBig]

Winklevoss' reception yesterday at Money 2020 in Las Vegas...

Did you cherry-pick those comments or were they all bad? 

[brg444]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

 

explain

[MrBig]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

 

explain

Do you want greater distribution of btc, or less people holding more coins? A few people already own most of the btc, so if his claim is true, the distribution of btc is getting more lopsided than it already is.

[Ibian]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

 

explain

Do you want greater distribution of btc, or less people holding more coins? A few people already own most of the btc, so if his claim is true, the distribution of btc is getting more lopsided than it already is.

I want less. If the majority of the coins are locked away in someones digital vault then the price  will be higher than if everyone had a more or less even share.

There will never be a communistic distribution of money in a free market. Someone will always have more, be better than others at making money. And that's how it should be. All according to plan most likely.

[brg444]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

 

explain

Do you want greater distribution of btc, or less people holding more coins? A few people already own most of the btc, so if his claim is true, the distribution of btc is getting more lopsided than it already is.

I want less. If the majority of the coins are locked away in someones digital vault then the price  will be higher than if everyone had a more or less even share.

There will never be a communistic distribution of money in a free market. Someone will always have more, be better than others at making money. And that's how it should be. All according to plan most likely.

+1 but dont expect him to understand this

[MrBig]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

 

explain

Do you want greater distribution of btc, or less people holding more coins? A few people already own most of the btc, so if his claim is true, the distribution of btc is getting more lopsided than it already is.

I want less. If the majority of the coins are locked away in someones digital vault then the price  will be higher than if everyone had a more or less even share.

There will never be a communistic distribution of money in a free market. Someone will always have more, be better than others at making money. And that's how it should be. All according to plan most likely.

Greater distribution of btc to a bigger userbase is what I was referring to. Something that is mostly locked away in a few people's vaults is not money. Money is used to exchange goods and services. BTC is not money. I'd describe it as money-like virtual commodity.

[ravenjt]

As for remarks surrounding liquidity - just look at the Gold ETF. GLD is a withering shadow of it's former self - rot setting into every corner through over leverage suspected to be anywhere from 30 to 100 to 1 over the metal. A high liquidity ETF is all very well when you're prepared to print endless paper without even caring if there's anything left to back it or not. Remember, the whole concept itself is only 20 years old. The Gold ETF is less than a decade, so there's plenty room for innovation.

I actually agree with you that if the Winklevoss ETF was approved, it would be a huge thing. I just don't think it will be approved.

Let's look at your example. The typical daily trading volume of gold on the London Metal Exchange (which is one of a number of exchanges) is USD 14 billion per day
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_bullion_market

The typical volume of trading of bitcoin is about USD 9 million per day.

Notice any difference?

[biggus dickus]

As for remarks surrounding liquidity - just look at the Gold ETF. GLD is a withering shadow of it's former self - rot setting into every corner through over leverage suspected to be anywhere from 30 to 100 to 1 over the metal. A high liquidity ETF is all very well when you're prepared to print endless paper without even caring if there's anything left to back it or not. Remember, the whole concept itself is only 20 years old. The Gold ETF is less than a decade, so there's plenty room for innovation.

I actually agree with you that if the Winklevoss ETF was approved, it would be a huge thing. I just don't think it will be approved.

Let's look at your example. The typical daily trading volume of gold on the London Metal Exchange (which is one of a number of exchanges) is USD 14 billion per day
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_bullion_market

The typical volume of trading of bitcoin is about USD 9 million per day.

Notice any difference?

I bet two years ago the typical volume of trading of bitcoin was far less than USD one million per day. It could go far higher than it is now.

[Ibian]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

 

explain

Do you want greater distribution of btc, or less people holding more coins? A few people already own most of the btc, so if his claim is true, the distribution of btc is getting more lopsided than it already is.

I want less. If the majority of the coins are locked away in someones digital vault then the price  will be higher than if everyone had a more or less even share.

There will never be a communistic distribution of money in a free market. Someone will always have more, be better than others at making money. And that's how it should be. All according to plan most likely.

Greater distribution of btc to a bigger userbase is what I was referring to. Something that is mostly locked away in a few people's vaults is not money. Money is used to exchange goods and services. BTC is not money. I'd describe it as money-like virtual commodity.

Bitcoin is exactly what it is. It does what it does. Increased scarcity will make the price go up. And it can be used as payment. All at the same time, regardless of the offense it causes to your sensibilities.

Forget what you want and look at what is.

[MrBig]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

 

explain

Do you want greater distribution of btc, or less people holding more coins? A few people already own most of the btc, so if his claim is true, the distribution of btc is getting more lopsided than it already is.

I want less. If the majority of the coins are locked away in someones digital vault then the price  will be higher than if everyone had a more or less even share.

There will never be a communistic distribution of money in a free market. Someone will always have more, be better than others at making money. And that's how it should be. All according to plan most likely.

Greater distribution of btc to a bigger userbase is what I was referring to. Something that is mostly locked away in a few people's vaults is not money. Money is used to exchange goods and services. BTC is not money. I'd describe it as money-like virtual commodity.

Bitcoin is exactly what it is. It does what it does. Increased scarcity will make the price go up. And it can be used as payment. All at the same time, regardless of the offense it causes to your sensibilities.

Forget what you want and look at what is.

I am looking at what it is. It is a volatile virtual commodity that derives it's price from mostly greedy speculators in markets that are highly prone to manipulation.

[brg444]

Greater distribution of btc to a bigger userbase is what I was referring to. Something that is mostly locked away in a few people's vaults is not money. Money is used to exchange goods and services. BTC is not money. I'd describe it as money-like virtual commodity.

Nop. this is the flaw in your argument. Bitcoin is certainly money, the best and most technologically advanced form actually.

[fewcoins]

It's funny because all of us on wall street know this ETF is actually not being released in its current form. Threads like this based on rumors are hilarious!!!

[Paashaas]

It's funny because all of us on wall street know this ETF is actually not being released in its current form. Threads like this based on rumors are hilarious!!!

Fallling, you spam to much BS FUD to make youre self a Wallstreet banker, this is hilariously how retarted you are, how dumb can you be.

[Ibian]

Just check the top 100 chart, big guys are constantly increase their holding, regardless of price

That's not a good thing if it's true.

 

explain

Do you want greater distribution of btc, or less people holding more coins? A few people already own most of the btc, so if his claim is true, the distribution of btc is getting more lopsided than it already is.

I want less. If the majority of the coins are locked away in someones digital vault then the price  will be higher than if everyone had a more or less even share.

There will never be a communistic distribution of money in a free market. Someone will always have more, be better than others at making money. And that's how it should be. All according to plan most likely.

Greater distribution of btc to a bigger userbase is what I was referring to. Something that is mostly locked away in a few people's vaults is not money. Money is used to exchange goods and services. BTC is not money. I'd describe it as money-like virtual commodity.

Bitcoin is exactly what it is. It does what it does. Increased scarcity will make the price go up. And it can be used as payment. All at the same time, regardless of the offense it causes to your sensibilities.

Forget what you want and look at what is.

I am looking at what it is. It is a volatile virtual commodity that derives it's price from mostly greedy speculators in markets that are highly prone to manipulation.

Exactly!

[pereira4]

another cryptocurreny? Its like all the other famous ppl coins tbh
Just like Maxcoin

I was thinking the same thing, but I don't think this coin is about an alt currency named Winklecoin or something, it's about the ETF.