I don't know nothing about nothing but the reasons the SEC gave for turning the down the Winkevii are still there, still unaddressed and always will be as far as I can tell.
http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/sec-rejects-winklevoss-bitcoin-etf "The rejection hinged on the commission’s belief that the proposed fund and its listing on an exchange required more safeguards and more regulatory oversight. Bitcoin is traded on unregulated markets, which prevents the SEC from entering into “surveillance sharing” agreements that, among other things, help stomp out market manipulation, said Spencer Bogart, managing director and head of research at Blockchain Capital.
The implication here, he says, is that because the disapproval centered on the bitcoin market structure itself—and not on any specific detail of the ETF design—prospects for other bitcoin ETFs to come to market just grew dimmer."
It's a bit chicken and egg, no? Is the SEC is waiting for Bitcoin markets to miraculously come under global regulation, while regulated market players patiently wait for the SEC to approve something they can offer on their exchanges?
I think targeting accredited investors first and offering custody and insurance solutions as Cboe is attempting is as good a way as any to start this ball rolling. It's retail investors I imagine the SEC is most concerned with, people mortgaging their grandma's house, etc. Who cares if accredited investors lose a few million? Pure speculation vs lifetime savings. Start there.
The SEC's job is to protect US investors. They can't be the global police but they can try and make the US a safer place to invest first rather than last. As regulated markets continue to spring up in the US and other countries, volumes will shift away from unregulated markets and the manipulators will have fewer places to turn.
The SEC can't protect US investors if they don't approve regulated products in the first place, though. People will still invest, regulated or not.
So which will be first, the chicken or the egg?