Exactly what regulation is forcing Blackrock (or any other institution for that matter) to actually back the etf units being created as a result of the demand inflow for ETFs imminently? How do we prove that the demand to date is owned 1:1 in BTC by Blackrock and other institutions? Is there a time requirement for the demand to be reflected? Every quarter after an audit of holdings perhaps? (Genuine question ... I don't think there is one, but I haven't taken a deep enough dive into the paperwork yet).
I believed this is something everyone overlooked. I thought that the ETF would be denied on the grounds that demand/holdings backing etf demand were not transparent, and yet here we are once again, just like 08'....investment vehicles that are built on opaque foundations. I'm sure this is going to end terribly for Bitcoin ETF buyers, and remind the Bitcoin ecosystem why Bitcoin was created in the first place.
I'm not saying it will cause permanent detriment but this is sure a new ball game that I am sure will bring new volatility that will confuse the crypto world over the next 1-3 years.
In my opinion, we should never trust the institutions. It's part of the reasons Bitcoin exists after all, right? If one thinks that institutionally backed spot ETFs will send imminently send Bitcoin to the moon, one may want to rethink the rationale behind that thought...
Institutional investment companies can provide a BTC address with their holdings for transparency. Just like Bitwise did. The fact the most aren't doing it is very suspicious. Maybe they're afraid their schemes and/or tactics will be visible to the public? They could be manipulating the market under our noses.
That's right, and I thought that the SEC would at least be smart enough to be able to have deduced this for themselves as well, prompting an ETF denial while more regulation enforced transparency. Either the SEC is privately lobbied/corrupt, or they're just plain ignorant. I wouldn't be surprised if both were true, however let's just say they're uninformed and ignorant.
I think that it's almost a certainty that these large firms are manipulating the market by soaking up demand for BTC and dumping what they accumulated in 2023 - which probably outweighs what is coming into the ETF. ETF buyers buy high, institutions sell on spot markets, ETF buyers sell after getting rekt, institutions rebuy...speculative but seems like the play at course.
Exactly what regulation is forcing Blackrock (or any other institution for that matter) to actually back the etf units being created as a result of the demand inflow for ETFs imminently? How do we prove that the demand to date is owned 1:1 in BTC by Blackrock and other institutions? Is there a time requirement for the demand to be reflected? Every quarter after an audit of holdings perhaps? (Genuine question ... I don't think there is one, but I haven't taken a deep enough dive into the paperwork yet).
I believed this is something everyone overlooked. I thought that the ETF would be denied on the grounds that demand/holdings backing etf demand were not transparent, and yet here we are once again, just like 08'....investment vehicles that are built on opaque foundations. I'm sure this is going to end terribly for Bitcoin ETF buyers, and remind the Bitcoin ecosystem why Bitcoin was created in the first place.
I'm not saying it will cause permanent detriment but this is sure a new ball game that I am sure will bring new volatility that will confuse the crypto world over the next 1-3 years.
In my opinion, we should never trust the institutions. It's part of the reasons Bitcoin exists after all, right? If one thinks that institutionally backed spot ETFs will send imminently send Bitcoin to the moon, one may want to rethink the rationale behind that thought...
With BlackRock beginning to accumulate a large portion of BTC's supply, we should expect the worse. It's likely BTC will become centralized in the future. People are blind enough to believe spot ETFs are a good thing just because it promises to boost market prices in the long run. But what they don't realize is that this move gives more power to the government. The future of Bitcoin is uncertain, so we can only hope for the best.
BlackRock and other institutions will need to do some serious damage to the BTC price to be able to shake out enough holders to start to control it in an economic sense. If they want to control the ledger, they'll need to start taking a bite into mining (if they aren't already through subsidiaries of their massive umbrellas)