Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 10037. (Read 26723650 times)

I don't see what would be the point to burn bridges.  If you have an account, and now you no longer want an account, is that what you were doing?  In my book, it's usually preferable to attempt to keep your options open.

Bitcoin was built as a tool that would provide respite from fiat, but it is also being used as a speculative asset for trading. Institutions like CME, CBOE, Grayscale, etc have developed products based on Bitcoin’s price movements for investors who do not want to risk it.

Bitcoin CME Futures has been gaining a lot of traction and is being used as a tool to help traders understand the correlation between Bitcoin spot prices and futures markets.

Like any other future settled in kind, which is uncommon for most futures. This would lead to actual btc changing hands. I thinks it matters and does make a definite difference.

Ah! You speak from a regulatory standpoint? I was looking more at the possible effects on the btc market.

Yes, but it's like any other future.
No difference.

So the difference might be or in the liquidity of the underlying or in an unfair bias of the regulators (see above message about CXBTF)

All right, then edit my previous response: maybe not "hold as much physical btc", but "be ready to buy, and actually buy if necessary, as much physical btc as necessary, at whatever price it takes (market buy)", which is nearly the same thing even if collateral is posted as fiat (which I doubt anyway).

Does this sound right?

Not necessary the case.
The future can be settled in bitcoin.
Daily margining can be done with cash.
In case of Bakkt futures are only 1 day forward, so marining or variation not a problem.
Not sure about Erisx, couldn't find product specifications.
Not so bearish on EFT or other BTC-related Derivatives then.

“We’re seeing the convergence of investor demand for digital assets alongside regulatory certainty, which we believe is being driven by the advent of more infrastructure to support access and trust in this market. ”

Indeed if settling in bitcoin, it is necessary that both parts hold as much physical bitcoin as necessary. Otherwise, with sufficient volatility, insolvency will ensue. That's one of the reasons I think in-kind ETFs and derivatives are medium term bullish AF.

Indeed if settling in bitcoin, it is necessary that both parts hold as much physical bitcoin as necessary. Otherwise, with sufficient volatility, insolvency will ensue. That's one of the reasons I think in-kind ETFs and derivatives are medium term bullish AF.

So these are not just futures but it will allow them to settle in physical bitcoin?
This would mean it is no longer just a bet on the price of bitcoin but it is actually a buy and sell of it.
https://www.coindesk.com/td-ameritrade-backed-erisx-gets-green-light-to-settle-futures-in-bitcoin

Some have a difficult time trying to grasp the concept of what they are trying to do.
Until now a physical settlement has not been allowed because the cftc was not convinced any wall street firm could hold on to bitcoin safely within these so called custodial services.  Hence this is another move forward on the development of the bitcoin infrastructure and ecosystem.

Being 75% Confident Bitcoin Price is $100,000 by End of 2021 equals being 100% Confident Bitcoin Price is $75,000 by End of 2021?
Serious question.
Asking for a friend.

Anthony “Pomp” Pompliano — co-founder of crypto asset management firm Morgan Creek Digital Assets — predicts bitcoin (BTC) will hit $100,000 by the end of 2021.

No, I am not wrong.  Debt based fiat requires infinite growth to not collapse.  Without growth, interest rates would need to be set to zero, which is what we already have...and what Japan has had for a long time.  Interest rates are actually negative vs inflation.  Regardless, it's impossible for borrowing to not have a carrying cost.  Trying to nigger rig no carrying costs is just a temporary can kicking ploy that creates epic levels of malinvestment, which then implodes the system in a much bigger crash than having just left interest rates at their normal levels.

You then run into another problem.  The monetary unit literally is debt.  Interest generating loans and the currency itself (which also generates interest) are erroneously classified as assets and used as collateral when debt is always a liability and never collateral.  The prolonged 0% interest rate is guaranteed to create a malinvestment bubble which will bust and create massive deflation and collapse the system when it does from all crosslinked loans going bad because the banks cannot handle any form of deflation.

But back to the carrying cost aspect.  Fiat dollars are considered assets because if you have enough of them, they can (at some times) generate a lot of interest for you.  If interest rates are zero because growth is impossible due to peak working age demographic in every nation that matters, and peak energy use - because energy is what powers the economy and the world doesn't have infinite energy to give - then fiat is no longer an asset and then turns into a liability.  Once fiat is a liability, the world is guaranteed to go back to physical metals regardless in almost every aspect.

You mean: ‘the world is guaranteed to move towards perfect money (e.g., Bitcoin)’.