That's really not how it works. If a certain asset has increased liquidity through things like an ETF, increased stability is almost guaranteed. To what extent, is the question; maybe just to a minor degree, but it still helps.
When the guys from Wall Street get involved in all of this (more than is the case today), I'm sure some things will change, but not necessarily for the better. I found the post I was talking about, so even though it's just one man's opinion, I can say that I share his opinion. There is a saying that says "watch what you want because it could come true", and everyone just wants the highest possible price, no matter what may happen next.
Quote from: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/97xa5s/andreas_antonopolous_etfs_are_not_good_for/
theymos
4 yr. ago
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.
4 yr. ago
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.
