Winklevoss ETF update, what does this mean? - page 8.

CryptoTrout

hero member

Activity: 706

Merit: 500

https://twitter.com/CryptoTrout

Quote from: mymenace on January 01, 2015, 04:24:39 PM

Quote from: CryptoTrout on January 01, 2015, 03:22:10 PM

Quote from: franky1 on January 01, 2015, 12:37:12 PM

Quote from: CryptoTrout on January 01, 2015, 12:19:41 PM

If I remember correctly the original plan was to have a share worth 1/5th of a bitcoin, but with that many shares they must be trying to make a share worth x millibits instead. Smart move IMO. Single Bitcoins costing several hundred dollars is a huge psychological barrier for a lot of tech inept investors.

its still a 5th of a bitcoin, they are releasing 1million shares..

i too remembered reading 1 million shares but OPs article says 20.1 million shares

not sure if this helps

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312514058712/d562329ds1a.htm

ahh yes, that does help

The article is titled poorly, it says 20.1 million shares referring to the outdated evaluation of 1million shares @ $20.1 million last February.

mymenace

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1061

Smile

Quote from: CryptoTrout on January 01, 2015, 03:22:10 PM

Quote from: franky1 on January 01, 2015, 12:37:12 PM

Quote from: CryptoTrout on January 01, 2015, 12:19:41 PM

If I remember correctly the original plan was to have a share worth 1/5th of a bitcoin, but with that many shares they must be trying to make a share worth x millibits instead. Smart move IMO. Single Bitcoins costing several hundred dollars is a huge psychological barrier for a lot of tech inept investors.

its still a 5th of a bitcoin, they are releasing 1million shares..

i too remembered reading 1 million shares but OPs article says 20.1 million shares

not sure if this helps

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312514058712/d562329ds1a.htm

CryptoTrout

hero member

Activity: 706

Merit: 500

https://twitter.com/CryptoTrout

Quote from: franky1 on January 01, 2015, 12:37:12 PM

Quote from: CryptoTrout on January 01, 2015, 12:19:41 PM

If I remember correctly the original plan was to have a share worth 1/5th of a bitcoin, but with that many shares they must be trying to make a share worth x millibits instead. Smart move IMO. Single Bitcoins costing several hundred dollars is a huge psychological barrier for a lot of tech inept investors.

its still a 5th of a bitcoin, they are releasing 1million shares..

i too remembered reading 1 million shares but OPs article says 20.1 million shares

coa032

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

Quote from: leopard2 on January 01, 2015, 02:35:35 PM

Quote from: coa032 on January 01, 2015, 12:34:03 PM

Is this good or bad? Cheesy

It is good because they don't sell bitcoins, they sell shares. Basically this means they are offering shares to other investors. In other words, BTC are exchanged for fiat indirectly, when investors buy these shares.

In fact this is done all the time when funds that invest into real estate, gold et cetera, pull in money by selling shares to the public.

Hopefully this happens more often so that BTC becomes more mainstream.

Yeah, that seems good. Thanks for explanation.

leopard2

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1014

Quote from: coa032 on January 01, 2015, 12:34:03 PM

Is this good or bad? Cheesy

It is good because they don't sell bitcoins, they sell shares. Basically this means they are offering shares to other investors. In other words, BTC are exchanged for fiat indirectly, when investors buy these shares.

In fact this is done all the time when funds that invest into real estate, gold et cetera, pull in money by selling shares to the public.

Hopefully this happens more often so that BTC becomes more mainstream.

KenJackson

full member

Activity: 127

Merit: 100

Quote from: Vessko on January 01, 2015, 05:19:34 AM

Quote from: charlieSeen on January 01, 2015, 12:39:12 AM

... investors in COIN are going to be effectively be investing in bitcoin as they will own a trust that owns bitcoin.

Exactly. They will have to own the corresponding amount of BTC, or the ETF will fail to track the BTC price (minus expenses). The gold bugs keep harping that "GLD doesn't own any gold" but the fact that GLD has done such an admirable job of tracking the gold price is a proof that it indeed does own the gold it claims to own.

Proof? Oh? The fact that GLD tracks gold doesn't prove it has any gold. It only proves the manipulators are paying attention and staying active.

But the comparison of COIN to GLD is interesting. If GLD can sell off the physical gold, as many believe they've done, what would keep COIN from secretly selling off some bitcoin from the fund? I don't know enough about the blockchain to know if clever deception can always be caught.

Quote from: Vessko on January 01, 2015, 05:19:34 AM

However, it should increase the liquidity and might stabilize the price (i.e., reduce the volatility) a bit.

Liquidity? Interesting. The FED's wrongful manipulation by "injecting liquidity" by printing up fresh dollars is one of the problems bitcoin might partially solve. It seems almost dirty to talk about injecting liquidity in bitcoin.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: CryptoTrout on January 01, 2015, 12:19:41 PM

If I remember correctly the original plan was to have a share worth 1/5th of a bitcoin, but with that many shares they must be trying to make a share worth x millibits instead. Smart move IMO. Single Bitcoins costing several hundred dollars is a huge psychological barrier for a lot of tech inept investors.

its still a 5th of a bitcoin, they are releasing 1million shares..

if you do the maths, its the 200,000bitcoin that the winklevoss have on multiple times publicised that they have bought in 2012-2013. so i see nothing wrong.
these bitcoin/shares are cut down into 20 blocks of 10,000btc=50,000 shares which they call 'baskets'

other whales are free to purchase 10,000btc from wherever they like and then secure those into the winklevoss trust, to then increase the number of shares available for sell publicly

coa032

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

Is this good or bad? Cheesy

CryptoTrout

hero member

Activity: 706

Merit: 500

https://twitter.com/CryptoTrout

If I remember correctly the original plan was to have a share worth 1/5th of a bitcoin, but with that many shares they must be trying to make a share worth x millibits instead. Smart move IMO. Single Bitcoins costing several hundred dollars is a huge psychological barrier for a lot of tech inept investors.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: Meuh6879 on January 01, 2015, 10:02:03 AM

Quote from: charlieSeen on January 01, 2015, 12:39:12 AM

This is correct, however investors in COIN are going to be effectively be investing in bitcoin as they will own a trust that owns bitcoin. Additionally the trust (and trustees) should be (IMO) considered to be trustworthy and it is possible to exchange shares in the trust for actual bitcoin (and vice versa)

aha ...

... so, in real world, you can exchange ETF gold bond for physical gold ? Cheesy

At the same price ... ? (trap)

Roll Eyes

how it works is that any WHALE investor can grab 10k of bitcoins and put them into the winklevoss trust as a basket. this basket then represents 50,000 shares (obviously a 0.2btc value per share).

the public can then buy those shares in any amount they want, small or large. and obviously sell shares on again.

anyone with 50,000 shares can ask to transfer the shares back to bitcoin and take that basket out of the trust.

what no on can do is own just 5 shares and request 1 bitcoin to be taken out of the basket. it has to be the 50,000 shares to be able to take a basket out of the trust

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: gog1 on January 01, 2015, 05:26:18 AM

I don't think this is news at all. Seems just some guy rehash some old story.

On the NASDAQ link, status is -> "Filed (7/1/2013)"; under the financials & filings tab, last filing is from Jul 1 of 2014.

they refiled on the 30th of december 2014..
http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/ipos/filing.ashx?filingid=9924446

but still unsure when their nasdaq shares will actually be open to the public as thats the only question on people minds

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 4895

Quote from: johnyj on January 01, 2015, 05:43:32 AM

What if twins' coins were hacked? This is the single biggest risk that needs to be addressed Grin

I would hope that the SEC would require that they've acquired some sort of insurance against losses in order to get approval. Anyone that considers investing in their ETF certainly should verify whether or not they are insured against such theft when determining their risk exposure.

Meuh6879

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1012

Quote from: charlieSeen on January 01, 2015, 12:39:12 AM

This is correct, however investors in COIN are going to be effectively be investing in bitcoin as they will own a trust that owns bitcoin. Additionally the trust (and trustees) should be (IMO) considered to be trustworthy and it is possible to exchange shares in the trust for actual bitcoin (and vice versa)

aha ...

... so, in real world, you can exchange ETF gold bond for physical gold ? Cheesy

At the same price ... ? (trap)

Roll Eyes

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

What if twins' coins were hacked? This is the single biggest risk that needs to be addressed Grin

gog1

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

I don't think this is news at all. Seems just some guy rehash some old story.

On the NASDAQ link, status is -> "Filed (7/1/2013)"; under the financials & filings tab, last filing is from Jul 1 of 2014.

Vessko

full member

Activity: 139

Merit: 100

Quote from: charlieSeen on January 01, 2015, 12:39:12 AM

This is correct, however investors in COIN are going to be effectively be investing in bitcoin as they will own a trust that owns bitcoin. Additionally the trust (and trustees) should be (IMO) considered to be trustworthy and it is possible to exchange shares in the trust for actual bitcoin (and vice versa)

Exactly. They will have to own the corresponding amount of BTC, or the ETF will fail to track the BTC price (minus expenses). The gold bugs keep harping that "GLD doesn't own any gold" but the fact that GLD has done such an admirable job of tracking the gold price is a proof that it indeed does own the gold it claims to own.

They can also make COIN even more transparent by publishing the public keys of their BTC accounts, so that anyone can verify on the blockchain that they indeed own the BTC they claim to own. (GLD publishes the registration numbers of the gold bars it owns, for instance, but this would be even better).

Will it make the price of BTC go up? Unlikely. However, it should increase the liquidity and might stabilize the price (i.e., reduce the volatility) a bit.

Gio344

member

Activity: 94

Merit: 10

Well if its the NASDAQ thats about 100x bigger than any current bitcoin exchange out there

saddampbuh

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1014

if paypal announcement didn't help the price im not sure this will

bitkilo

legendary

Activity: 1638

Merit: 1010

https://www.bitcoin.com/

Quote from: flipme on December 31, 2014, 10:33:47 AM

Any price range given?
They gonna dump their own Bitcoin on the ETF now in a short lived buying frenzy to fill the fund.
Thats what it means to me. No market reaction, yet.

IPO: http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/ipos/company/winklevoss-bitcoin-trust-909930-72927

I really dont think there back up plan is dump all the BTC they own on their very own EFT.
What btc would be left to sell shares in?

BitcoinEXpress

legendary

Activity: 1210

Merit: 1024

Wished I had a BTC for every time "something" was going to push Bitcoin to the moon LOL

I'll wait and see before I buy into it.

~BCX~

Topic: Winklevoss ETF update, what does this mean? - page 8. (Read 9515 times)