affinity in ‘physically’ acquiring the underlying asset. What do you think guys?
I don't think that part is true, because the whole idea behind Bakkt is that institutional investors can get exposure to bitcoin
without having to actually own it. That's the entire point of futures. People who trade oil futures don't want to actually own a million barrels of oil--they just want to speculate on the price without taking delivery of it. Same thing with bitcoin. Those Bakkt traders could certainly buy bitcoin and hold it in a wallet or on an exchange like Coinbase if they so chose. That isn't what Bakkt offers them.
I'm not sure that 3151
BTC was actually purchased, either. Futures and options might just as well be bets that bitcoin will decrease in value, almost like selling it short. I wouldn't assume that the trading volume there represents bitcoin buying in any way, shape, or form unless that's what's explicitly stated.
I'm also not sure about this:
Futures Give New Mechanism to BTC Price Discovery
...which means that Bakkt trading helps to determine the price we see when we click on preev and the price that gets reported in the press (I'm assuming). I've kind of wondered about this, and it isn't really clear how much Bakkt has been influencing the bitcoin price that gets reported. Seems like it should have an effect, but what that effect is remains a mystery to me. If anyone can give an explanation, I'd greatly appreciate it. That article certainly doesn't help. It's all just a bunch of TA gobbledygook to me.
The recent Bakkt activity, however, does not reveal the intentions of traders. Some contracts may never take physical delivery but sell and move onto the next contract.
The above quote ought to show what I meant about Bakkt traders not wanting to own bitcoin, though.
