I think it will be more volatile as an increase in investor and investor's money will mean more price movement for Bitcoin. And isn't the whales doing that already? If the business investors will enter late into the scene it will mean that they will be buying up the price of Bitcoin. Some of the people have even said that they have already entered and they are the ones who have pushed the price down because of the bad statements they are doing. Well I don't have any proof of it but there is a possibility that they have done it.
It is not good news in the market to believe bad news to investors. It will reduce the credibility of new entrants or prepare for investment. Need a healthy playground here to be able to survive long. Hopefully the future will not make the mistakes that they have caused. 
Topic: Is institutional capital good or bad for Bitcoin? - page 6. (Read 1292 times)
Believe it has two good and bad effects. They believe in investing in their institutions. Their profits can be again and again. Now bitcoin can be lostes.
I think that institutional capital would probably be good for Bitcoin unti the moment in which it would eventually start to be bad. Initially, the prices would soar very much. But on the long term, as the institutions will control more and more bitcoins, the tide may turn.
I believe that financial institutions and funds need large markets. The capitalization of bitcoin is 145,000,000,000. This is a small market for such players, but they will soon be in it. And then the market will become even more interesting. There will be no more such voluntariness as now on the market.
I think bitcoin will remain an asset for manipulation and profit.
I think bitcoin will remain an asset for manipulation and profit.
I would much rather attract millions of casual investor with the odd $1000 investment, than some Wall Street cowboy with $10 000 000. These guys are jumping between different commodities at the drop of a Dime and this is causing more problems with volatility.
We now have Fiat whales, competing with Bitcoin whales and this is causing wild fluctuations in the price. ^grrrrrr^
I believe that financial institutions and funds need large markets. The capitalization of bitcoin is 145,000,000,000. This is a small market for such players, but they will soon be in it. And then the market will become even more interesting. There will be no more such voluntariness as now on the market.
I think bitcoin will remain an asset for manipulation and profit.
I think bitcoin will remain an asset for manipulation and profit.
We were much better without any institution, since the future contracts exist we are only falling!
Do you have any news or article with from someone trustworthy? I would like to see that.
From what I saw, by the day that futures came in, they are not the ones responsible for this. New year and chinese new year played a much bigger role in the fall than futures. Futures may have brought a lot of eyes of inexperienced people to bitcoin but that's a good thing to do, unfortunetley they are the ones who panic sell in the slightestes dayprice variation.
member
Activity: 283
Merit: 23
TEU - bitcoin for shipping ICO: 15/Mar - 12/Apr
It is bad of course. Institutional money is what bitcoin is trying to replace. Having banks buy bitcoin is like giving your riches to the enemy.
They will buy Bitcoins not for profit, but to destroy it since it is a threat.
They will buy Bitcoins not for profit, but to destroy it since it is a threat.
I see this thing in two side, on the first side if they buying now then the price will incredibly surge for really huge price, not saying back at the price of december but at least it will near it or may be of it is a big firm then it will surge more than $20,000. Second side, this is really bad for traders because when they are going to sell it, I believe they will dump it and this will disadvantage traders as well unless traders have really good moment to sell it before it get dumped. So actually it does not really matter whether firm is going to invest or not as long as we can get enough time to buy and sell then it will okay
I recently read an article that Blockchain's first major use case is as the stock market 2.0 and with the way things are going it looks like Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are emerging into a new asset class, cryptoassets. Technology stocks always had a significant impact on the market, and being a new asset class, Bitcoin is still in its early phases, a few perceive it as a hedge against traditional markets, but for the rest, it's still a speculative asset, but as its value evolves as a commodity, it would have more impact on traditional markets.
If you look at things from commodity perspective, Bitcoin as being a mainstream financial investment, then institutional money is good, it's not just about futures, but recently Robinhood announced plans to enable Bitcoin trading, NASDAQ futures plan, similarly if some major firms allow Bitcoin trading, it would give Bitcoin much more credibility and legitimacy as an investment/commodity. I think institutional money might decrease volatility and give more stability and liquidity, but yeah, the downside is the possibility of manipulation along with somewhat a barrier for small investors to get into the market, and even though a disrupting technology, commodity adoption might have more speculation than technology/fundamentals. This is where IMO the currency aspect is necessary.
If you look at things from commodity perspective, Bitcoin as being a mainstream financial investment, then institutional money is good, it's not just about futures, but recently Robinhood announced plans to enable Bitcoin trading, NASDAQ futures plan, similarly if some major firms allow Bitcoin trading, it would give Bitcoin much more credibility and legitimacy as an investment/commodity. I think institutional money might decrease volatility and give more stability and liquidity, but yeah, the downside is the possibility of manipulation along with somewhat a barrier for small investors to get into the market, and even though a disrupting technology, commodity adoption might have more speculation than technology/fundamentals. This is where IMO the currency aspect is necessary.
I like what you are saying. So it is not just about the manipulation, but more than that, it is about the credibility and legitimacy as an investment/commodity on global stock markets. In your opinion, what would be more beneficial to Bitcoin? Bitcoin Futures or Bitcoin ETF's?
Being such a small fish in the pond, would institutional money suffocate Bitcoin or would it strengthen it's growth. I see a situation where big Wall Street traders will only replace the old Bitcoin whales.
The CME Bitcoin futures are cash-settled, no physical delivery, betting on Bitcoin's price movements, it might or mightn't create an actual demand for Bitcoin. But in case of an ETF, traders don't have to buy the asset, but are buying ETF shares while the underlying asset is held by a trust and traders can redeem their shares for the underlying asset, there is actual demand. So definitely ETF's would be more beneficial than cash-settled futures. The US Senate hearing, although optimistic wasn't much forthcoming about approving a Bitcoin ETF anytime soon.
Cash-settled futures market and Bitcoin market, different markets, but yeah manipulation/shorting is quite possible, institutional investors will directly invest into Bitcoin, unlimited supply of fiat and ideologically driven Bitcoin holders, that's something we have to see. I think it's too early to evaluate the effect of futures market on an unregulated Bitcoin market.
Currently, Bitcoin has not be fully utilize and a lot need to be done with bitcoin and blockchain technology. The most things that I think the blockchain's enthusiasts should do is to be able to convince governments and financials leaders about the benefits of this technology. From my country I discovered that bitcoin is been attacked because the leaders did not know anything about bitcoin but see it as ponzi. I think institutionalized capital is going to affect the development of bitcoin.
I think it will be more volatile as an increase in investor and investor's money will mean more price movement for Bitcoin. And isn't the whales doing that already? If the business investors will enter late into the scene it will mean that they will be buying up the price of Bitcoin. Some of the people have even said that they have already entered and they are the ones who have pushed the price down because of the bad statements they are doing. Well I don't have any proof of it but there is a possibility that they have done it.
I recently read an article that Blockchain's first major use case is as the stock market 2.0 and with the way things are going it looks like Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are emerging into a new asset class, cryptoassets. Technology stocks always had a significant impact on the market, and being a new asset class, Bitcoin is still in its early phases, a few perceive it as a hedge against traditional markets, but for the rest, it's still a speculative asset, but as its value evolves as a commodity, it would have more impact on traditional markets.
If you look at things from commodity perspective, Bitcoin as being a mainstream financial investment, then institutional money is good, it's not just about futures, but recently Robinhood announced plans to enable Bitcoin trading, NASDAQ futures plan, similarly if some major firms allow Bitcoin trading, it would give Bitcoin much more credibility and legitimacy as an investment/commodity. I think institutional money might decrease volatility and give more stability and liquidity, but yeah, the downside is the possibility of manipulation along with somewhat a barrier for small investors to get into the market, and even though a disrupting technology, commodity adoption might have more speculation than technology/fundamentals. This is where IMO the currency aspect is necessary.
If you look at things from commodity perspective, Bitcoin as being a mainstream financial investment, then institutional money is good, it's not just about futures, but recently Robinhood announced plans to enable Bitcoin trading, NASDAQ futures plan, similarly if some major firms allow Bitcoin trading, it would give Bitcoin much more credibility and legitimacy as an investment/commodity. I think institutional money might decrease volatility and give more stability and liquidity, but yeah, the downside is the possibility of manipulation along with somewhat a barrier for small investors to get into the market, and even though a disrupting technology, commodity adoption might have more speculation than technology/fundamentals. This is where IMO the currency aspect is necessary.
I like what you are saying. So it is not just about the manipulation, but more than that, it is about the credibility and legitimacy as an investment/commodity on global stock markets. In your opinion, what would be more beneficial to Bitcoin? Bitcoin Futures or Bitcoin ETF's?
Being such a small fish in the pond, would institutional money suffocate Bitcoin or would it strengthen it's growth. I see a situation where big Wall Street traders will only replace the old Bitcoin whales.
Institution capital brought us to good speculation of income in bitcoin.Investments increase and its because of their big contribution in the market to flactuates the value for rising up.Its good thing to know that they encourage bitcoin now worldwide.
Institutional Capital can bring goodness at the same time will ruin the people. It is good to see that the price is volatile and our investments gradually increase but if we look at the manipulation of others specially the whales, we will notice how it really bad and it will bring us bankruptcy if they will make a conspiracy to bring down the price of a certain altcoin.
I recently read an article that Blockchain's first major use case is as the stock market 2.0 and with the way things are going it looks like Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are emerging into a new asset class, cryptoassets. Technology stocks always had a significant impact on the market, and being a new asset class, Bitcoin is still in its early phases, a few perceive it as a hedge against traditional markets, but for the rest, it's still a speculative asset, but as its value evolves as a commodity, it would have more impact on traditional markets.
If you look at things from commodity perspective, Bitcoin as being a mainstream financial investment, then institutional money is good, it's not just about futures, but recently Robinhood announced plans to enable Bitcoin trading, NASDAQ futures plan, similarly if some major firms allow Bitcoin trading, it would give Bitcoin much more credibility and legitimacy as an investment/commodity. I think institutional money might decrease volatility and give more stability and liquidity, but yeah, the downside is the possibility of manipulation along with somewhat a barrier for small investors to get into the market, and even though a disrupting technology, commodity adoption might have more speculation than technology/fundamentals. This is where IMO the currency aspect is necessary.
If you look at things from commodity perspective, Bitcoin as being a mainstream financial investment, then institutional money is good, it's not just about futures, but recently Robinhood announced plans to enable Bitcoin trading, NASDAQ futures plan, similarly if some major firms allow Bitcoin trading, it would give Bitcoin much more credibility and legitimacy as an investment/commodity. I think institutional money might decrease volatility and give more stability and liquidity, but yeah, the downside is the possibility of manipulation along with somewhat a barrier for small investors to get into the market, and even though a disrupting technology, commodity adoption might have more speculation than technology/fundamentals. This is where IMO the currency aspect is necessary.
For me, large institutions are not totally bad to invest in bitcoin or any other coins, as long as they have enough capital to invest. In fact, that certain institution can contribute to the total development of bitcoin business because they invest, in bitcoin business if nothing people will access or invest it is totally useless, so why some people said that large institutions are bad in bitcoin business, and some also said that some large institutions manipulated the price, for me, how can large institutions manipulate the price, they are only a member and fan of accessing and investing bitcoin, and without direct power to control the price, investors are no power to control the price. The only person can control the price is only the management.
The debate is still on-going if large investments from institutional firms, would be good or bad for Bitcoin in the long run. Some are saying it will bring more volatility and others are just happy that the price will probably go to the Moon.
There are also conspiracy theories doing the rounds that these institutions will use their financial powers to destroy Bitcoin.
Some are even saying that the small fish will be eaten by the big sharks. Let's consider the impact of this and how this will change the Bitcoin scene.
Will Bitcoin go 100% commodity & store of value or will it still be used as a currency?
I think that institutional capital is good for bitcoin as it would add more credibility to bitcoin.It is also said that if institutional capital enters bitcoin market,it would also reduce the volatility of bitcoin price as such firms would not be reacting like newbies getting panic and selling bitcoins thereby destabilizing the market. There are also conspiracy theories doing the rounds that these institutions will use their financial powers to destroy Bitcoin.
Some are even saying that the small fish will be eaten by the big sharks. Let's consider the impact of this and how this will change the Bitcoin scene.
Will Bitcoin go 100% commodity & store of value or will it still be used as a currency?
Institutional capital is the only way for the Crypto market to sustain its own inflated prices and absorb its irrational valuations.
excluding government, at this point there are no other sources of capital aside from institutional money capable of supporting such disproportional pricing behavior.
Crypto will eventually face two options: clean its act for institutional and professional money, or implode.
excluding government, at this point there are no other sources of capital aside from institutional money capable of supporting such disproportional pricing behavior.
Crypto will eventually face two options: clean its act for institutional and professional money, or implode.
Institutional money is one of the causes of speculation that is evident, almost as much as the sale of Wall Street futures. And it is precisely because of this volatility that this has caused that the governments of the world have insisted on wanting to control everything.
I believe that although the participation of these large companies favors the trustworthiness of small and independent investors besides causing more pressure for governments to be approved, it also causes greater price speculation and these volatile increases become the worst enemy of any virtual currency.
Jump to: