GBTC Bitcoin Investment Trust Observer - page 43.

jl2012

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1111

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on April 29, 2015, 06:14:54 AM

Quote from: greenlion on April 29, 2015, 05:31:14 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on April 28, 2015, 10:12:31 PM

It would be useful to know what percentage of requests for ETFs are denied by the SEC. Their approval is not a mere formality, and COIN surely is not the only wannabe ETF with heavyweight attorneys. I gather that it is not a good sign that COIN has been sitting on SEC's desks for ~2 years, and already went through 5 amended re-filings.

I doubt that loading up in bitcoin would improve the image of any investment fund. Wall Street is not very fond of instruments that lose value every quarter for five consecutive quarters, and whose Captains of Industry cannot even explain why the price is now 220, much less why it should rise again in the future. "Because Wall Street will buy lots of it" is not a convincing argument to Wall Street, I suspect.

What What What What What evidence do you have What What

Like, for example, actually reading the 5th amended COIN filing?

Quote

What is the purpose of using the phrase "Captains of industry" other than as a pejorative to advance nothing but innuendo?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzmzQja7a2M

Stop spreading unfounded FUD.

You can see the early history of the GLD ETF here:
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001222333&type=&dateb=20050101&owner=include&count=100

The application was submitted on 2003-05-13, after 5 amendments, it was approved on 2004-11-17.

I'm not sure if COIN will be approved, but for something as innovative as bitcoin, I don't think it is significantly slower than GLD.

JorgeStolfi

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1003

Quote from: greenlion on April 29, 2015, 05:31:14 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on April 28, 2015, 10:12:31 PM

It would be useful to know what percentage of requests for ETFs are denied by the SEC. Their approval is not a mere formality, and COIN surely is not the only wannabe ETF with heavyweight attorneys. I gather that it is not a good sign that COIN has been sitting on SEC's desks for ~2 years, and already went through 5 amended re-filings.

I doubt that loading up in bitcoin would improve the image of any investment fund. Wall Street is not very fond of instruments that lose value every quarter for five consecutive quarters, and whose Captains of Industry cannot even explain why the price is now 220, much less why it should rise again in the future. "Because Wall Street will buy lots of it" is not a convincing argument to Wall Street, I suspect.

What What What What What evidence do you have What What

Like, for example, actually reading the 5th amended COIN filing?

Quote

What is the purpose of using the phrase "Captains of industry" other than as a pejorative to advance nothing but innuendo?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzmzQja7a2M

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: NUFCrichard on April 29, 2015, 05:29:29 AM

Quote from: minerpumpkin on April 28, 2015, 08:28:05 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 28, 2015, 08:09:25 PM

Updated(!)

Code:

Puma Capital, LLC		   100	38.00
Canaccord Genuity Inc		   100	37.50
Citadel Securities		   100	36.00
KCG Americas LLC		   100	35.55
Maxim Group LLC		   	 50000  35.00                   
Wedbush Securities Inc		   100	31.50
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co             100  25.00
Merriman Curhan Ford & Co	   100	20.00

Wow! So people outbid Maxim, already? Unfortunately 'only' with bids of 100 shares. Still, this is really impressive... I still can't really wrap my head around why they would pay this much of a premium. It can't solely be the convenience of buying using an ETF, can it? I mean, if they really wanted to get their hand on some BTCs, they surely would jump through the hoops of a regular BTC exchange.

They are only trying to buy 100 shares, yes, but the yare bidding quite a lot more than Maxim!
That market looks crazy to me, I haven't seen a market that out of line with the actual price for some time! Who knew everyone eanted to invest their pensions in Bitcoin

No, they were not and have not been outbid as the Maxim bid of $35 for 50k was never the highest one. Previously they were bidding $40 for 100 share, now they lowered the bid and increased quantity( possibly hiding behind the higher bids to be quickly removed - we will see )

Look at the free publicity it is getting them already Wink

Would not be surprised to see one of the silly high bids actually trade 100 shares, just for those bragging rights and the free press.

This change of their bid appears to be the only change in the orderbook in the last 24 hours ...

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 27, 2015, 08:26:57 PM

Updated.

Code:

Maxim Group LLC		   	   100  40.00
Puma Capital, LLC		   100	38.00
Canaccord Genuity Inc		   100	37.50
Citadel Securities		   100	36.00
KCG Americas LLC		   100	35.55                   
Wedbush Securities Inc		   100	31.50
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co             100  25.00
Merriman Curhan Ford & Co	   100	20.00

Bagatell

hero member

Activity: 722

Merit: 500

World's First Bitcoin Exchange Traded Note on Nasdaq Stockholm

http://www.bloomberg.com/research/markets/news/article.asp?docKey=600-201504290300HUGIN___EUPRX____HUG1916185-1

greenlion

hero member

Activity: 667

Merit: 500

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on April 28, 2015, 10:12:31 PM

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 28, 2015, 04:20:30 PM

Quote from: Patel on April 28, 2015, 02:36:23 PM

I don't think the SEC would approve a bitcoin etf

I'm almost sure they will as I don't think that heavyweight attorney that specializes in this kind of thing has no influence/colleagues in the SEC nor would she take on a knowingly failed case just for extra money because she has a reputation to upkeep. We're not talking defense attorneys here.

It would be useful to know what percentage of requests for ETFs are denied by the SEC. Their approval is not a mere formality, and COIN surely is not the only wannabe ETF with heavyweight attorneys. I gather that it is not a good sign that COIN has been sitting on SEC's desks for ~2 years, and already went through 5 amended re-filings.

Quote

Wall Street hedge funds have invested in lots of garbage like mortgage-backed securities, derivatives and other worthless junk so they need something like Bitcoin in their portfolio to provide an upside to their valuations as well as something more to sell to their clients who don't want direct exposure to Bitcoin itself.

I doubt that loading up in bitcoin would improve the image of any investment fund. Wall Street is not very fond of instruments that lose value every quarter for five consecutive quarters, and whose Captains of Industry cannot even explain why the price is now 220, much less why it should rise again in the future. "Because Wall Street will buy lots of it" is not a convincing argument to Wall Street, I suspect.

What other "wannabe ETF"'s have "heavy weight attorneys?

What evidence do you have that "COIN has been sitting on SEC's desks"? I.e. what factual basis do you have to characterize the SEC as just ignoring the filing?

What information/background do you have on the goals and operations of "any investment fund"? Please explain in your own words what an investment fund even does.

What information/background do you have to comment on what kinds of instruments that "Wall Street" might be interested in and why?

What evidence do you have that justifies asserting that nobody in Wall Street has any tools or methodology to begin to analyze bitcoin valuation?

What is the purpose of using the phrase "Captains of industry" other than as a pejorative to advance nothing but innuendo?

What basis do you have to poison the well by insinuating that FOMO is the front-line argument in favor of a possible future bitcoin appreciation?

What is the redeeming value in anything whatsoever in your post when the entire thing is toxic innuendo substantiated by absolutely nothing other than completely baseless conjecture?

NUFCrichard

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1003

Quote from: minerpumpkin on April 28, 2015, 08:28:05 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 28, 2015, 08:09:25 PM

Updated(!)

Code:

Puma Capital, LLC		   100	38.00
Canaccord Genuity Inc		   100	37.50
Citadel Securities		   100	36.00
KCG Americas LLC		   100	35.55
Maxim Group LLC		   	 50000  35.00                   
Wedbush Securities Inc		   100	31.50
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co             100  25.00
Merriman Curhan Ford & Co	   100	20.00

Wow! So people outbid Maxim, already? Unfortunately 'only' with bids of 100 shares. Still, this is really impressive... I still can't really wrap my head around why they would pay this much of a premium. It can't solely be the convenience of buying using an ETF, can it? I mean, if they really wanted to get their hand on some BTCs, they surely would jump through the hoops of a regular BTC exchange.

They are only trying to buy 100 shares, yes, but the yare bidding quite a lot more than Maxim!
That market looks crazy to me, I haven't seen a market that out of line with the actual price for some time! Who knew everyone eanted to invest their pensions in Bitcoin

Bitcoiner2015

full member

Activity: 120

Merit: 100

Are there not massive Arbing opportunities for people here who trade 2nd market and normal exchanges? 50% for a quick in and out trade!?

fonsie

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on April 28, 2015, 10:12:31 PM

It would be useful to know what percentage of requests for ETFs are denied by the SEC.

Why don't you suck on your thumb real hard, I'm sure you can come up with some numbers. Put those numbers on a pretty drawing and go tell people you see no economic sense in the SEC and ETF's. After you are done with that you can go to a candy shop and tell little children everything there is to know about dental hygiene, go to mc donalds with a sign that says it's bad for your health, go to the beach to talk about how bad the sun is for your skin, etc..

I'm sure you can come up with plenty more examples about things that lots of people like doing, except for you the grumpy old man that shouts behind closed doors to people walking on his lawn.

pleaseexplain

member

Activity: 73

Merit: 10

Quote

Adoption has been facing a huge headwind of unwinding a euphoria/willy spike.

The experiment is still (relatively) young and untrusted, but what better way to engender trust than to just keep ticking? For years, in the face of scams, thefts, hacks, the protocol kept working. Lesser ideas would not have stopped around $200 per magic internet token.

agree entirely - the system worked fine at 10c per bitcoin and at $1000 per bitcoin and will at any future price. it will take some time for people to accept that without regulated exchanges etc gox like effects/problems will always happen but it is not a 'bitcoin effect/problem".
Same goes with drug dealers using it. Who cares - many more drug deals are being done every day with fiat than with bitcoin.
The $20 fiat bill in their pocket can be spent on groceries or drugs. Nobody cares either way.

Once more recognisable/traditional systems sit around the transaction process from person A to B, bitcoin will take off.

Cconvert2G36

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on April 28, 2015, 10:12:31 PM

I doubt that loading up in bitcoin would improve the image of any investment fund. Wall Street is not very fond of instruments that lose value every quarter for five consecutive quarters, and whose Captains of Industry cannot even explain why the price is now 220, much less why it should rise again in the future. "Because Wall Street will buy lots of it" is not a convincing argument to Wall Street, I suspect.

There are firms that specialize in such things. Volatility has always been the enemy of consumer adoption. Liquidity tends to diminish volatility. Adoption has been facing a huge headwind of unwinding a euphoria/willy spike.

The experiment is still (relatively) young and untrusted, but what better way to engender trust than to just keep ticking? For years, in the face of scams, thefts, hacks, the protocol kept working. Lesser ideas would not have stopped around $200 per magic internet token.

JorgeStolfi

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1003

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 28, 2015, 04:20:30 PM

Quote from: Patel on April 28, 2015, 02:36:23 PM

I don't think the SEC would approve a bitcoin etf

I'm almost sure they will as I don't think that heavyweight attorney that specializes in this kind of thing has no influence/colleagues in the SEC nor would she take on a knowingly failed case just for extra money because she has a reputation to upkeep. We're not talking defense attorneys here.

It would be useful to know what percentage of requests for ETFs are denied by the SEC. Their approval is not a mere formality, and COIN surely is not the only wannabe ETF with heavyweight attorneys. I gather that it is not a good sign that COIN has been sitting on SEC's desks for ~2 years, and already went through 5 amended re-filings.

Quote

Wall Street hedge funds have invested in lots of garbage like mortgage-backed securities, derivatives and other worthless junk so they need something like Bitcoin in their portfolio to provide an upside to their valuations as well as something more to sell to their clients who don't want direct exposure to Bitcoin itself.

I doubt that loading up in bitcoin would improve the image of any investment fund. Wall Street is not very fond of instruments that lose value every quarter for five consecutive quarters, and whose Captains of Industry cannot even explain why the price is now 220, much less why it should rise again in the future. "Because Wall Street will buy lots of it" is not a convincing argument to Wall Street, I suspect.

Cconvert2G36

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 28, 2015, 09:27:46 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 28, 2015, 08:59:10 PM

There must exist a number of people who want exposure to bitcoin prices, but don't trust themselves to handle the purchase, storage, security, taxes. GBTC doesn't solve the middle two in absolute terms, but it gives someone for the customer to blame (not with direct financial recourse/insurance though of course, lawyerish things).

And that's what is so foreign to me, not being able to handle the product and then paying a major premium to get shares of it. I mean, it's so easy these days and Coinbase is your ticket to buy, hold and sell for way cheaper. I guess it's great that these folks need this kind of treatment and thus seek out said products.

I doubt they'd frequent a joint like this. Undecided

Chef Ramsay

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 28, 2015, 08:59:10 PM

There must exist a number of people who want exposure to bitcoin prices, but don't trust themselves to handle the purchase, storage, security, taxes. GBTC doesn't solve the middle two in absolute terms, but it gives someone for the customer to blame (not with direct financial recourse/insurance though of course, lawyerish things).

And that's what is so foreign to me, not being able to handle the product and then paying a major premium to get shares of it. I mean, it's so easy these days and Coinbase is your ticket to buy, hold and sell for way cheaper. I guess it's great that these folks need this kind of treatment and thus seek out said products.

Cconvert2G36

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Maxim was at $40 yesterday, but for 100 shares like the others. These are the market making brokers. Their job is to provide liquidity for the orders that come in from other traders/customers. They rake their income by implementing a spread. I would wager a portion/all of that block would will turn up as asks from Maxim.

The big question is how fast the premium comes down the minute the first shares hit. And how much the price on other exchanges might react.

There must exist a number of people who want exposure to bitcoin prices, but don't trust themselves to handle the purchase, storage, security, taxes. GBTC doesn't solve the middle two in absolute terms, but it gives someone for the customer to blame (not with direct financial recourse/insurance though of course, lawyerish things).

coinableS

legendary

Activity: 1442

Merit: 1186

Quote from: Alley on April 28, 2015, 08:41:46 PM

This is ~~probably~~ the only way to invest there clients 401k and IRA retirement money in bitcoin. I cant just withdraw money out ok my IRA and buy bitcoin. But i can choose where my money is invested without penalty. And that way is pre tax.

Yup, exactly this. Using retirement funds to buy bitcoin, you're only option right now is the BIT.

Alley

legendary

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

This is probably the only way to invest there clients 401k and IRA retirement money in bitcoin. I cant just withdraw money out ok my IRA and buy bitcoin. But i can choose where my money is invested without penalty. And that way is pre tax.

minerpumpkin

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

A pumpkin mines 27 hours a night

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 28, 2015, 08:09:25 PM

Updated(!)

Code:

Puma Capital, LLC		   100	38.00
Canaccord Genuity Inc		   100	37.50
Citadel Securities		   100	36.00
KCG Americas LLC		   100	35.55
Maxim Group LLC		   	 50000  35.00                   
Wedbush Securities Inc		   100	31.50
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co             100  25.00
Merriman Curhan Ford & Co	   100	20.00

Wow! So people outbid Maxim, already? Unfortunately 'only' with bids of 100 shares. Still, this is really impressive... I still can't really wrap my head around why they would pay this much of a premium. It can't solely be the convenience of buying using an ETF, can it? I mean, if they really wanted to get their hand on some BTCs, they surely would jump through the hoops of a regular BTC exchange.

Cconvert2G36

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Updated(!)

Code:

Puma Capital, LLC		   100	38.00
Canaccord Genuity Inc		   100	37.50
Citadel Securities		   100	36.00
KCG Americas LLC		   100	35.55
Maxim Group LLC		   	 50000  35.00                   
Wedbush Securities Inc		   100	31.50
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co             100  25.00
Merriman Curhan Ford & Co	   100	20.00

minerpumpkin

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

A pumpkin mines 27 hours a night

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 28, 2015, 04:20:30 PM

Quote from: Patel on April 28, 2015, 02:36:23 PM

Quote from: Alley on April 28, 2015, 01:44:32 PM

That's a bid for 1.75 million. Just think when the true ETF COIN comes online and a bid like that comes in. They will have to buy 5000 bitcoins right off the open market to cover the shares.

I don't think the SEC would approve a bitcoin etf

I'm almost sure they will as I don't think that heavyweight attorney that specializes in this kind of thing has no influence/colleagues in the SEC nor would she take on a knowingly failed case just for extra money because she has a reputation to upkeep. We're not talking defense attorneys here. Wall Street hedge funds have invested in lots of garbage like mortgage-backed securities, derivatives and other worthless junk so they need something like Bitcoin in their portfolio to provide an upside to their valuations as well as something more to sell to their clients who don't want direct exposure to Bitcoin itself.

Yup, I also think that the Coin ETF will go live at some point. Right now it's still too early to really anticipate and predict what's going to happen when it does, but it just could get really really interesting, like - big time. I also love Bitcoin, but I think it's also too early to praise it as the best thing since bread came sliced. Even though other financial products may be worse...

Patel

legendary

Activity: 1320

Merit: 1007

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on April 28, 2015, 04:45:32 PM

Quote from: Patel on April 28, 2015, 02:36:23 PM

Quote from: Alley on April 28, 2015, 01:44:32 PM

That's a bid for 1.75 million. Just think when the true ETF COIN comes online and a bid like that comes in. They will have to buy 5000 bitcoins right off the open market to cover the shares.

I don't think the SEC would approve a bitcoin etf

.... it's a done deal.

why do you say that?

Topic: GBTC Bitcoin Investment Trust Observer - page 43. (Read 262371 times)