Topic: Institutional investors are buying Bitcoin's future... How do we stop this? (Read 338 times)

Right now I see that what is more worrying are speculators than investors who buy a lot of coins.  Because the price of BTC dropped there was also the involvement of speculators, and what saved yesterday's price were investors too.  OP may lack detail seeing every aspect.  Speculators who should be aware of their decisions that sometimes panic the market.

Maybe we should not worry because it is all speculation.  Whatever their plan, maybe they will not own it for a long time to the point that it is no longer in use.  They will still use that no matter what happens just by integrating their system or platform.  As far as I know, no one can control the market because even if they collect all the Bitcoin it will not stop circulating until it is all mined.

I'm actually all for both the advancement of bitcoin as an asset and as a currency as well. So institutions purchasing huge amounts of bitcoin both gladden me and at the same time scares me as well. But we can't really do much about it since bitcoin is available for everyone, and that includes the 1% of the society, what we could just hope for right now is that we catch up rather quickly so they can't control the market. And invite more small-time investors to outnumber their purchased assets, doesn't matter whether we run out of bitcoins or not.

I don't agree with your statements. So you are saying that the volatility was lower when the institutional investment was not there. It is simply not true. Back in 2015 and 2016, there were incidents in which the prices fluctuated by as much as 30% or 40% in a single day. Therefore I would argue that the institutions have lowered the volatility levels. BTW, why should long-term investors worry about price volatility? Temporary fluctuations should not impact them.

There's nothing anyone can do to possibly stop it. How does one stop money exactly? I feel your sentiment though. When the institutional investors join in and come flooding with cash,  the price might start to fluctuate violently. If those same investors where to pull out the same way in which they came pouring in, there would be a massive move on the markets every time. Look back at what happened the other day when the price had sharply fallen, I'm not an expert, but big money does mean bigger trouble in this instance.

Seriously--it's a free market, and I don't think any of us would want it any other way.  I'm pretty sure Satoshi would want bitcoin to be freely traded, with anyone being able to buy or sell as much as they want, including big corporations, government institutions, whatever.

So not only can't we stop these uber-deep pocketed companies from buying spitloads of bitcoin, I don't think we would want to even if we could.  There's plenty of bitcoin to go around, and I'd also point out that bitcoin (and a lot of long-time hodlers) have benefited greatly from all of this institutional buying.  I'm not hearing many complaints around here.

I am sure that those high rates of cryptocurrency rates that are on the market today were due to large investors, including institutional capital. I am more than sure that large investors will most of all support their asset, and not speculate with it in the cryptocurrency market. I am also confident that due to this, over time, Bitcoin prices will rise and be more stable, and volatility will decrease. It is then that we can hope for the recognition of Bitcoin by every government and the use of coins as a means of payment in human everyday life.

We can´t and we should not. There are many people that are not familiar with bitcoin yet they can participate from the ecosystem by using funds and such. I would not even consider doing that myself, since to all risks involved I would also be adding the agency risk (the change of the agent going down or robbing), but there are many who will join the ecosystem and that will benefit us all.

It is actually quite simple. If you want to stop the institutions buying up coins, then you can offer better rates and purchase the coins from the market. The available supply is quite limited, so in case you mop up all the available supply, then the institutional investors won't be able to execute their plans. So you can organize a few whales and place multiple orders across the exchanges. Institutions have a specific target price, so in case the prices go above that level, they are not going to buy coins.

And this is going to benefit investors like me as well. The exchange rates will rise and we will be able to book profits at higher levels. And the best part is that the institutional investors are not going to target more than 2-3 exchanges. For example, Tesla got all of their $1.5 billion worth of BTC from Coinbase. So the OP don't need to try too hard to cover all the small and medium sized exchanges.

I remember the movie I watched on Netflix last year titled "In the Shadow of the Moon", it was sci-fi, the scientist invented time travel, a woman from the future was given a mission that goes to the present time to prevent or destroy plans or obstructions that may give undue inconvenience to them in the future.  It looks like Bitcoin, if that is their intention then hopefully all its users, whether rich or not, will be free, equal, and still receive the benefit of using it without intending to destroy the system.

Off chain transactions and hoarding could inflate the supply of coins.

ETFs and exchanges could utilize a fractional reserve approach. In terms of them issuing ownership for a higher number of crypto assets than they hold.

Tether's approach to reserves is one we may be wise to demand from off chain ledgers.


It can't be prevented.

The only answer is to continue to research, learn, build, invent, innovate.

In the belief new inventions and innovations will continue to open doors. Present new options and opportunities to society. Which will elevate standard of living and pave the way to brighter tomorrows.

It depends on what you want to limit or stop, otherwise it is actually quite good that they are buying it. For example futures is a level, in the sense that if you want to stop futures you just have to stop the companies that provide that service, it is not really about bitcoin itself, nobody controls bitcoin, nobody controls your purchase or sale of bitcoin, it is only a few companies that has futures that they are stopping in which case that is a limited number of companies and I would be fine with it.

Of course we have to make sure that it is always the companies and exchanges and so forth that deal with crypto that gets regulations and government intervention and not the product itself, if bitcoin or any other crypto itself was ever investigated and banned in a nation that would be very bad, so we should always hope that government only focuses on the business' and not the coins.

People who have large capital, of course they can control it or can say the manipulation they want because tens of thousands of bitcoins are certain to be held by them to mess up the market.
So for me every institution has their future plans with bitcoin but do not know how to destroy it for the future if it intends to do so, but for me their internal objectives are very good where bitcoin in the short term can surpass other assets in the near future, and would it be a more serious problem if they bought it for the future?

I don't think there are many ways to stop it. But honestly, do really want to do it? In my opinion the futures market is nothing bad. Once commodities and currency are established as an attractive market it is just a matter of time before bankers start developing financial derivatives. So having a big future market just means that there are many people interested in buying bitcoins in the future. S
They want to profit of Bitcoin's without actually holding them.

One way to stop it would be to not sell your coins to them.

I do not think that it will become internal ledger like that, that is a very low possibility unless they offer some great situation, like maybe make bitcoin nearly free and instant to move around if you want to, instead of the current situation where you pay like crazy for transaction fees and still wait nearly an hour for it. That is why I do not think that there is any situation where crypto people would change all of the things we have right now and go move with the big companies would be really not an option for most of us.

The real big trouble I fear is the manipulation, they have sooooo much bitcoin that they could literally drop the price whenever they want by selling their coins, or they could just tweet and increase the prices as we have seen before. So, the real problem is not that they could make it internal since that looks not that possible whereas the real trouble is having manipulation by the rich.

This is alarming, is it a possibility that they knew about these and keep on doing so just to make sure the experiment fails? Or is there something written in code of Bitcoin Vore to overcome such kind of problems. Maybe the creator of BTC already knew these would come and maybe came up with a plan. Talking about theories here. Or would it change the course of your theories if the bitcoin price somehow goes to 1m usd?

I don't think this will have difference about their plans than what is bitcoin is now.
and i think you are just exaggerating the point here.


Then we must be thankful of this , we are always praying that adoption comes now that it's here we are taking it as a bad concept .
Why is this a threat to Bitcoin's future?
Sorry but i won't sustain stopping this , after all this is for the benefits of all users either running from Blockchain or to what they are planning, Look how Miners controlling the fees these days , what is the difference anyway?

That won't change anything here.

You may not use their service but there are millions that would use their service giving them profit and maybe put it in their investment in Bitcoin and execute their plan in the future. They are taking advantage of decentralization, I think in the end it will just fall into these people and we can't do anything but just be ready for what may happen.

The best that we can do is to educate people on how Bitcoin works and stop patronizing or getting services coming from institutions and only patronize institutions or companies that comply with Bitcoin's principle, if ever Paypal Crypto features comes to my country or they accept people coming from my region, I don't think I'm going to use their service.

It is funny to thing that you could stop people from buying bitcoin, that is the scary part. If there was a method where we could stop rich from buying a lot of bitcoins, how do we know that same method wouldn't be used to stop us from buying bitcoin as well? What if regulations hit us harder instead of rich people? That has been the case for regular stocks and other stuff for example.

You pay a lot more taxes for your salary than a rich guy who owns stocks that made tens of millions of dollars because his stocks went up, most of the time they pay zero until they sell, which means if my stock that worths 10 million dollars became 20 million dollars, I just made 10 million dollars and may have paid zero taxes, whereas someone who works 7.25 dollars an hour in texas during this storm without electricity and harsh working conditions just paid more taxes. I rather have no regulations in crypto like that, equality would be enough.

I agree.

I don't know why, it seems that the human tendency is to be unhappy. We have been waiting years for a price increase like this and lately I keep seeing posts like this: that if the Bitcoin is not distributed equally, that if the companies that are buying it are going to kill it...


If companies take Bitcoin out of the circulation, they reduce the offer even more, thus driving up the price. The miners may get fewer transaction fees but they get more profits from they mined Bitcoins. Remember that there will be Bitcoins to mine until 2140, we can only guess what will happen then. Bitcoin may not even exist.

You are too conspiratorial, it seems to me.

I did not know that could happen, I do not know.  What can be done like us small users to stop these big corporations?  There is nothing we can do no matter how much they buy, collect and handle.  I just thought it was a pure positive result towards the development of the community with the continued adoption of these institutional investors but it also has a negative effect if that happens.

I had never thought much of the negative impact of having institutions involved in crypto investment since they are using it as a hedge fund. However, what I am wondering is, how long do these institutions intend to do this, imagine big institutions being whales in crypto. Will they manipulate the market in the future, if more and more institutions or bigger names jumping into crypto and hoard, will there be limited supply circulating for small investors or retail investors.

In any questions, you should always keep in mind the worst case scenario in advance and assume that everything is possible  Bitcoin became famous and gained its current good weight largely due to the principles of self-organization and decentralization embedded in the structure. Having a large number of institutional investors in the game gives great hope that this order of things will continue, because competition is a great thing. And I personally do not believe that a "51% attack" is possible in the near future. Or I really want to believe 

Are you sure that the companies will only execute off-chain transactions? Why wouldn't they want to use Blockchain? Otherwise, what is the whole point of all this global Bitcoin adoption? They will only destroy the system
However, for that to happen, wouldn't all these companies together need to own 51% and above of available coins? Do you think that's a possibility in the nearest future?

I believe that on-net transactions will not be replaced by off-net transactions in registers. To do this, users must trust only numbers on the screen or on paper, while not making any transactions at all. This is simply not possible, In addition, it all depends on the user of the cryptocurrency, but we will not agree to this, and there are many of us😉. In addition, the fact that large capital acquires bitcoins for storage already has a positive effect on pricing, since a significant amount of bitcoin leaves the supply on the market. as a result of this process, the shortage of Bitcoin will lead to an increase in the price of the coin.

This seems a hugely exaggerated claim.  Firstly, whenever I have paid for something in Bitcoin it has been through Bitpay, and this 'internal ledger' thing you're talking about seems to be made up.  All I did was send Bitcoin to the address Bitpay gave me and Bitpay then has the option for the company of whether they want to keep the Bitcoin or convert it to its fiat value, providing stability for accepting Bitcoin payments.

Also, even in a scenario where what you're talking about became a reality, there wouldn't be a problem since most transactions are P2P or to and from exchanges rather than with merchants.  That would create demand for space on the network and thus transaction fees.

Right now, the transaction fees being paid make up approximately 1/6th of the block reward - even in the very unlikely scenario that the sum of transaction fees paid to miners decreases over time, there would still be some transaction fees and miners would not be 'mining for free'.  The amount of hashrate directed to the network would decrease and the difficulty adjustment within 2016 blocks would keep the reward appropriate.

It is true that many first heard of BTC only at the end of 2017 when the media made an amazing FOMO effect and news about BTC was everywhere. I remember witnessing for the first time that my national television covered the topic of BTC and cryptocurrencies in a daily political show - but also that few of the interlocutors present said anything meaningful on the subject - because honestly they had no idea what they are actually talking. Of course, they were all stunned by the price of something that only a year ago was worth as much as 20 times less.

I first heard of BTC sometime in late 2011, but it wasn’t until 2014 that I became seriously interested in the whole thing - although it took me a while to figure out what Bitcoin really is. Yet all this does not change the fact that BTC has existed all these years, that knowledge of it has been publicly available online, and that anyone has been able to invest throughout that time. I believe many knew, but did not believe, that Bitcoin would achieve this kind of success - we cannot blame anyone but ourselves for this.

---

I've already written what I think about the opportunities the average Joe had, and that we can't point the finger at companies and rich people who today do exactly what was predicted for years. Satoshi dealt the cards, but apart from the technical stuff, he didn’t close the BTC under the glass bell and set up an invitation system by which we could tell who could participate in the party and who couldn’t.

As for the fact that large investors will destroy the miners, I would not agree with that assumption - because they are not the ones who invented the Lightning Network, nor will they be able to manipulate BTC in a way that will create their ledger databases. Anyone who tries to manipulate the basics on which BTC works today will go through the same thing as everyone else who has tried to make their own version of BTC.

NONE.
There is no way for us to stop those rich people or institutional investor with what they are doing.

There is a famous quote that says "If you can't beat them, join them". What we can do right now is to just ride the waves, set a target sell price and wait after selling. Crypto market is a decentralized market where anybody can buy anything and there is no way for us to stop them. They are a group of rich people and they have a lot of money obviously. We Average Joes can't stop them from buying Bitcoin.

I know that these institutions are buying huge chunks of Bitcoin everyday and the chances of it being manipulated is going higher but there is nothing we can do with it but to be ready if in case the worst case scenario will happen.

#Lucius has got a point, but it is not about the average Joe not having the money to buy bitcoins, but rather large institutional organizations taking large amounts of coins out of circulation to make profits with it's own ledger or database. (They will charge fees for the service they render on their platform)

The fees that they will be charging , will not go towards miners fees... because this will happen within their software and not on the Blockchain. The miners get their payments from the fees paid when you do on-chain payments on the Blockchain. (Similar to what is happening with the Lightning network)

The miners will have to supplement their income by hosting Lightning Network hubs, but that will never be enough to cover their expenses.. because the Bitcoin difficulty is just too high. (It might go down..as miners are forced to exit the mining scene)  

Good points Lucius but you also have to remember a large portion of people who are
in Bitcoin now didnt know about it 5-6 years ago.

I'm a little worried also about the vast amounts of Bitcoin being bought up which may
never be in circulation again for 10 or 20 years and when Bitcoin is available for sale
they too may be snapped up and added to the long term hold.

These actions have a "positive" effect on Bitcoins price and as ordinary people liquidate
to FIAT to buy their Lambo's the whales will buy to hold.

isn't this what Paypal is doing like no coins are going to be withdrawn from them but they can make transactions to the merchants they have. there may be users going to be using their own platform and transactions are just in their internal ledger system but with the warnings, people will in due course realize the coins are not theirs to own and will not use their centralized system.

In my opinion, the world is objective.  

Currently, we see that bitcoin is not a common means of payment.  On this I absolutely agree with Nassim Taleb (the author of the concepts of the black swan and antifragility).  

At the same time, Bitcoin is in great demand as the world's reserve currency.  This is reality.  

If countries and large corporations use it in this capacity, they will bear the cost of maintaining the network.  

Bitcoin mining will be a strategic industry like a military-industrial complex.

At the same time, Bitcoin will be decentralized, as there are more than 200 countries and tens of thousands of large corporations in the world.

The answer is simple - we can’t stop anyone who has the money and intent to buy BTC to buy as much and when they want. Ordinary people have had the opportunity for more than 10 years to invest in Bitcoin at ridiculously low prices compared to these today. If for the first 5-6 years there was doubt whether the whole thing would come to life or fail, after that a lot of things became clearer - so I'll ask a counter-question - why didn't the average Joe ask this question you're asking now 5-6 years ago? Well, probably because most of them are not here because of technology, but only because of profit - and such people do not mind that big investors invest money in BTC.

I hope that some new solutions will be found so that miners remain interested, and at the same time that the fees are such that the average user does not give up on-chain transactions. The next 10 years may be crucial - even Satoshi once wrote something in the style that in 20 years there will be a lot of transactions, or none at all.

I'm afraid that there aren't any means to stop this if you don't own an exchange or you do not have the $$$ to move bitcoins for yourself towards another market wherein institutional investors are barred from participating. This is one of the boon of a free market, literally anyone can join and buy whatever amount they want and no one will restrict them into doing so. Whatever happens to the amount they bought is none of every one's business.


At that point, the world is already too deep of bitcoin that they will not really care much about the 'new' iteration of it that combats the corporations. It would take a new Satoshi Nakamoto in order to sway everyone's minds off of bitcoin that has succumbed to the power of the corporations.

I get the feeling that most of the people do not understand the gravity of this situation ...and what the difference is between "on-chain" and "off-chain" transactions.

Effectively, if you take bitcoins and you place it in cold storage and you only keep it there as proof that your own token is backed by it, then those bitcoins never move. The in-house ledger system and/or database that was developed will keep track of the tokens you created to represent the real bitcoins in your cold storage.

Now the benefit for those companies is this... The actual bitcoins never move, so it increase the security of those coins. (The negative side is this, their own tokens are centralized and thus more vulnerable)

Now, if those coins stay in cold storage and they just add more and more coins as people buy their own in-house token, then the supply of available bitcoins decline. Also, if the coins never move or if less coins move.... less miners fees are paid ..and we know the future of the Blockchain's success is in the reward for the people doing the mining.

A possible scenario would be that too little coins become available for people to buy and the public might then have to switch to a new Alt coin to f#$k with these large companies. (effectively killing Bitcoin)  

Your fallacy lies in the idea that transactions will move to centralized IOU systems. Any person who is into Bitcoin for the technology would never use such system, so they won't be taking Bitcoin's users, they will have brand new users, who would probably not use self-custody Bitcoin due to lack of knowledge. You are also forgetting about Lightning Network, which will also offer cheaper and faster transactions, but without giving up your control of the coins.

You cant do anything about it. Bitcoin is permissionless money. No one, even if he is a banker dont need a permission from you or me or anyone else if he can buy or use Bitcoin. It is that simple. At the end Bitcoin will be mostly in hands of the bankers. They simply print USD and EUR and CNY and buy BTC.

Is there a need to stop this? If institutions keep Bitcoin as a form of cold-storage and sell IOU's to customers as proof of their ownership, they cannot stop anybody from demanding the keys. As more and more people come into the fold, they'll either want keys or they will realize the fallacy of such products. For a significant portion of population, such products may well be acceptable as long as it gives them returns on their positions.

Yet, usage in this way will mean that the hundreds or probably thousands of early adopters and small businesses that have some way of earning and using bitcoin will also become powerful and significant. It would represent the shift of wealth generating asset to a new diversified class of people rather than just the old elites. While this may not be perfect, it sure is an improvement.

As far as the concern regarding BTC going into cold-storage and never needing on-chain transactions is concerned, that situation is not so horrifying as long as there is block reward until a few decades. Post that, I think enough people would come to be enlightened about having their own keys. As individuals, we can do our part by keeping our own keys.

I'm not sure that there's a way to stop this. It looks to be inevitable for institutional investors to be flocking in. I've even heard of the trading app 'Robinhood' (the one infamous for stopping the wallstreetbet traders from further buying doge and GME stocks) will soon adopt crypto as well. For sure more users will be able to buy crypto with the use of Robinhood as it will be easier but then this will be regulated by them. But honestly even with wide institutional adoption from payment merchants such as paypal, visa and mastercard, and bitcoin was used as a payment option, it wouldn't dominate the blockchain transactions. I doubt that a large percentage of the population would utilize this as only about 1% is said to own crypto. For now, institutional investors will be in favor for the crypto space as this exposes to more adoption. I think Litecoin has better chances of being adopted as a payment rather than BTC. People look at it more of as a store of value now.

I think there can be other sources of sustainable incentive/income for miners. One of my preferred alternatives would be to get things redesigned to make Bitcoin handle way more transaction per second, to be faster and vey efficient. It should be possible to develop fullnodes-sidechains that can even run on small mobile devices and  can be easily run by almost all Network participants. You can have the Bitcoin Network Chains/Nodes exist in this order/manner > *Super-Chains/Super-Nodes (collection of all chains),
*Big-Chain/Big-Node, 
* Medium-Chain/Medium-Node,  
*Small-Chain/Small-Node
Micro-Chain/Micro-Node
etc
This model would make my fee idea possible and sustainable. And it should be possible to upgrade Bitcoin to that without making big changes to the main Bitcoin Chain.

AFAIK, No entity affiliated with the government of the United Arab Emirates or the government of Dubai has purchased Bitcoin. Some authorities have accepted it as a payment method for licenses to facilitate businesses.


Do not be optimistic to this extent, governments will not hodling bitcoin but some companies may hedge against dollar fluctuations.
There are over 3 million unknown Bitcoins and a lot of coins were mined in the early days.

See practically this shouldn't create an issue. If you see the market cap of Bitcoin just surpassed Tencent gaming. Tesla with a whopping 1.5 Billion dollars could just acquire less than 0.2% of total bitcoin supply and the price has further increased due to that and any new company would get even lesser amount of bitcoins. This definitely meant that you can easily say companies won't even be able to touch the 10% mark because the price would explode exponentially. Therefore it's pretty much sure that a lot of bitcoin will still remain in circulation. Second thing is the fees. Now believe it or not fees is a game of demand and supply. Currrently the fees are as exorbitant as $20 for a few transactions and with lack of transactions this would ultimately become lower and then a lot of people will start transacting until it becomes high again. Fees are perfectly controlled by market forces themselves and miners generally end up in profits due this. I don't think we need to worry about them. Moreover rationally speaking no one would want to transact in a currency which can increase 20% in value the very next day.

I have little knowledge about how hoarding system or bitcoin mining works; but i think irrespective of where institutions keep their tokens whenever they issue it out as a payment system or confirm it for fiar, it definitely has to be on block because it would be sent out (and that forms a transaction).

Regarding buying the future; i think every trend in crypto currency market does not last a certain period, decentralization means no body can stop anyone from buying; the market itself will stop responding to the fomo caused by institutions, it would just take a while.

Is it a threat? i don't think so, i believe everyone will feel the bear and bulls of the crypto currency market; including the institutions.

We have seen recent news that some large Institutional investors are buying large amounts of coins. Now, if you are a speculator and trader, this will be good news to you, but if you are into Bitcoin for the technology and the goal for Bitcoin to be a alternative currency, then you should sit up and take notice.

Currently it is estimated that only 3% of the total available coins are being owned by large Institutional corporations, like PayPal, Credit Card companies and Tesla. This is quickly becoming a trend with large Dubai companies also buying large amounts of coins.

Why is this a threat to Bitcoin's future?

Answer: These companies are buying the bitcoins to be hoarded in cold storage. They are planning to allow people to use Bitcoin as a payment option, but the transactions will not be done on the Blockchain. They will have some kind of internal ledger system that will keep track of the coins being bought from their "hoard" and the coins being sold. (or converted to fiat)  - Payment processors does the same thing and this makes Bitcoin commerce legal within most countries, because it is not perceived as a currency, but rather a payment system. (Also fully controlled and regulated)

Now, this is where the crucial problem starts, because Bitcoin need on-chain transactions to generate income for the miners in the form of Miners fees. We know the Halving will ultimately reduce the Block reward to almost nothing and the miners fee will have to replace the Block reward as a method of payment for their processing power.

What happens if transactions on-chain are replaced with off-chain transactions in ledgers? It reduces the available supply of coins and it also does not generate income for the miners. We know miners are not going to mine for free, so the on-chain transactions will not be able to confirm and the whole experiment will fail. 

How can we stop that from happening? ...... Let's discuss, because this will be interesting to see how we will be countering this unintended attack.