Bitcoin ETFs Approved by The SEC

Lbargainhunter168 on 11/01/2024 - 11:48
Last edited 11/01/2024 - 11:50

It has finally happened after an alleged "hack" of the SEC's X (formerly Twitter) account jumping the gun yesterday, Bitcoin ETFs in the US has now arrived, potentially opening the flood gates for retail, institutional and pension funds to have exposure in Bitcoin without having to worry about the loss of private keys and interacting with the blockchain.

To me, this kinda defeats the purpose of Bitcoin, but it is an overall positive because it will increase adoption in this space, so that will outweigh any negatives.

Do you guys hold any Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies? I know they have a bad rap and has been dissed by this community, but reality and the market has proven those people wrong. It is a fact that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have outperformed many shares and property returns in even Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.

The SEC has now fully endorsed Bitcoin and its impossible for the US to ban Bitcoin. Does this change your view on Bitcoin, are you going to be buying some now?

I've started buying Bitcoin last year, I have an average volume weighted price of around $28500 per Bitcoin I hold and around $1900 per ETH. I have a handful of other alts, but BTC and ETH make up the majority of my portfolio.

Poll Options expired

  • 69
    I already hold Bitcoin
  • 7
    I will now look into buying Bitcoin
  • 140
    I will still not buy Bitcoin (its a scam)
Financial Cryptocurrency

Comments

      • netjock on 12/01/2024 - 11:15
        +3

        People lack intelligence when they don't invest in the asset you are holding and bid up the price because you see something they don't (because you are holding the bag unless someone comes to bail you out).

        • GrueHunter on 12/01/2024 - 19:32
          +1

          "Oh, it's not a cult. We just hate everybody who doesn't believe we've found the One Truth"

    • Drpepper666 on 19/01/2024 - 13:44

      It's a scam and that's not how averages work lol

  • netjock on 12/01/2024 - 11:13
    +1

    Courts forced SEC to approve it. Courts rule on matter of law not on moral grounds of consumer protection. Makes you wonder why SEC didn't approve before.

    • bargainhunter168 on 12/01/2024 - 14:18

      The courts ruled that SEC's latest denial of spot Bitcoin ETF was unlawful, the reasons they gave for denial was invalid. The courts actually didn't force the SEC to approve, they just said the reasons for their latest denial was BS and invalid according to law, so they asked them to reconsider.

      The SEC could have denied again if they had good enough lawful reasons. Makes me wonder why the SEC denied 20 times with BS reasons. There's no good lawful reason to deny, hence its approved.

      • netjock on 12/01/2024 - 16:02
        +1

        You like most people who talk their own book just likes to hear what they want to hear.

        What is lawful is not necessarily morally correct. Companies used to dump chemicals into the environment. It wasn't against the law then. But we found out it wasn't good and passed laws against it. SEC not approving it on consumer protection grounds not on basis of law only.

        If Celcius / Voyager followed the law there wouldn't be so many people who lost their investments.

        American constitution allowing people to have guns. It was written a few hundred years ago when there was no professional fully time military. Right to have arms under the laws but it is not with the times.

        Keep talking you might learn something.

        • mitchalbrown on 12/01/2024 - 17:01

          I think you miss the point when you mention Celsius and Voyager… these companies were exchanges/custodians and as such were essentially unregulated… They also operated with minimal transparency… The job of the SEC is to make sure the proper frameworks are in place to protect consumers from the kinds of fraud which took place there.

          Denying an ETF offered by some of wall streets biggest institutions - some of which are publically traded companies, didn't make any sense and was the whole reason the judge rulled against the SEC and forced them to "reconsider". The large institutions were at their wits end and were ready to end Gary Gensler's career.

          By approving the spot bitcoin ETF, which required these institutions to provide the full details of how they would custody the bitcoin and what consumer protections would be in place, it has made the asset far more accessible and safe as an investment. Now ma and pa investors can benefit without having to use shady exchanges that they've never heard of… they can buy through blackrock or JP Morgan.

          I'm not gonna speak of it's underlying value… I think it's value changes from person to person and to some people, self custody is the most important thing but for others… they just want to be able to invest safely and are happy to give up total control of it for the sake of that safety.

          • netjock on 16/01/2024 - 10:07

            @mitchalbrown:

            I think you miss the point

            I think you missed the point. See below SEC regulated forms that collapsed or had to be sold for $1 / bailed out.

            Lehman Brothers
            Bear Sterns
            Merrill Lynch
            AIG
            Bernie Madoff

            No point putting in all the safeguards if the underlying market is dodgy.

            If you need another reminder look at silver thursday

            • mitchalbrown on 18/01/2024 - 10:32

              @netjock: This seems like a red herring… though i did enjoy the Silver Thursday story, I hadn't heard about that before.

              Anyway… Can you explain how the underlying market is dodgy? maybe i misunderstood the term "spot ETF" but i understood this to be an ETF where the institution must hold the underlying asset (not futures contracts or fractional reserves).

              I think in your GFC example above, the companies went under and all their assets were sold off/redistributed to the market, before their debts were absorbed by government/other banks. the underlying assets that they held (stocks and bonds that belonged in peoples portfolios) would have been distributed back into he market, albeit at a lower price, but the good stocks would have recovered along with the market and returned to all time highs if investors could remain solvent and ride out the storm.

              I would imagine the same thing would happen with BlackRock… if they caused a massive financial crisis or even if they just brought only themselves down… that bitcoin doesn't just disappear… it gets sold back into the market in the hopes of paying back some of Blackrocks debts and yes, bitcoin may go down in price due to the increased supply available to the market, but once absorbed, the price would recover and continue on it's merry way.

              so i can see your comparison but, through a completely different lense. Blackrock might get sold for $1 and people who bought into the Bitcoin ETF might get burned by this… but this is soo much more a criticism of the existing financial system than it is of bitcoin and further highlight the need for decentralised systems where all parameters and actions are available in open source code to be reviewed, and where decisions are made by all investors/participants… not just the few greedy guys at the top.

              • netjock on 18/01/2024 - 18:11

                @mitchalbrown: History doesn't repeat but often rhymes.

                Silver Thursday is just one example. People have tried to corner the gold markets. Currency markets (George Soros the man who broke the Bank of England).

                Remember Gordon Brown that said he eliminated booms and busts.

                Talk your own book until things go pear shaped. We know how it is all going to go but exactly when it does nobody knows. The reason why the first bitcoin ETFs were based off the futures market is because nobody knows exactly who these market participants are. House built on shaky foundations don't last.

                I'll probably get in to make some profits along the way but don't think this is a forever thing. Gold is the same deal. The same amount of gold a few hundreds of years ago that can buy you a suit is the same amount now. Means it has kept up with inflation. Not beaten it.

                Ever heard of anyone who retired rich buying inflation protected bonds?

                Everything thinks they know the experts but even the experts get it wrong. So is it down to luck or skill that you get rich when even the experts don't?

  • GrueHunter on 12/01/2024 - 19:30
    +1

    The SEC has now fully endorsed Bitcoin and its impossible for the US to ban Bitcoin

    "Regulators regulated a thing! They'll never make a different regulatory decision! Also, remember how the reason my magic money is magic is because it's unregulated? Well how good is it now that it's regulated! Now it's twice as magic, and I'm going to just pretend like I thought regulation was always a good thing!"

    • netjock on 16/01/2024 - 10:08

      How many companies collapse because they are ASIC regulated. People seem to think if they pay $400 for ACN with ASIC they are endorsed by the corporate regulator version of instagram influencers

  • buffalo bill on 12/01/2024 - 22:15

    Just a question, what happens when the p2pk keys are cracked? This is expected within a few years and will effect roughly 25% of wallets (the early wallets). I wouldn't want to be holding on that day.

    • Mistredo on 12/01/2024 - 22:38

      A few years? That's very optimistic. Good quantum computers are like cold fusion, just a few more years!

      • buffalo bill on 12/01/2024 - 23:18

        Many research labs in operation. Cracking of these early addresses will become evident at some point. Crypto community has never really addressed this flaw or so many others like numerous 51% attacks on coins with centralised cloud processing.

        I hold some too but will be a reckoning coming to most first and current gen crypto.

      • bargainhunter168 on 13/01/2024 - 00:53
        +1

        Bitcoin will update to be quantum resistant when these computers exist

        • netjock on 16/01/2024 - 10:09

          Did the update department tell you that?

          Or you talk to CEO at Bitcoin

          Maybe bitcoin helpdesk can help

          • bargainhunter168 on 16/01/2024 - 11:50

            @netjock: That's the point, its decentralised, there's no CEO's head to bash in, I mean to extort, I mean have a nice chat about challenging the dominance of fiat currency and to cut it out.

            • netjock on 17/01/2024 - 11:45

              @bargainhunter168: Who is doing the "updating"

              • bargainhunter168 on 17/01/2024 - 16:04

                @netjock: Anyone can take part. Anyone can submit a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) and it gets voted by various participants in the Bitcoin network and it is approved by consensus.

                That's the TLDR version, you can read more about it here, https://www.quora.com/How-is-bitcoin-updated.

                • netjock on 17/01/2024 - 23:45

                  @bargainhunter168: And by consensus participants are going to give the missing bitcoin that guy lost on a hard drive that is now in a UK landfill his coins back?

                  • mitchalbrown on 18/01/2024 - 10:06

                    @netjock: No, they would have to wind the blockchain back to the transaction before that guy transferred the bitcoin to that wallet… that is the power of decentralisation… all network participants would have to agree to that, thus invalidating any transaction that took place after that.

                    There is a certain responsibility to being your own bank… with great power comes great responsibility.

    • bargainhunter168 on 13/01/2024 - 00:52

      The age of a wallet has nothing to do with how easy it is to crack the private key.

      Satoshi's wallet has yet to be cracked, he/she is a billionaire at the moment.

      • buffalo bill on 13/01/2024 - 11:37

        https://www.fortune.com/crypto/2023/11/17/early-bitcoin-wall…

        https://unchained.com/blog/bitcoin-address-types-compared/

        If you're going to hold Bitcoin you should at least read up on why older wallet addresses are vulnerable.

        If BTC marketcap is massive, it may not even matter at that point but something to be aware of.

        • bargainhunter168 on 14/01/2024 - 10:41

          If that's true, then why hasn't any of Satoshi's wallet has been cracked? He/she or group of people owns thousands of Bitcoin making them multi hundred millionaires if not Billionaires.

          The fact those wallets hasn't been cracked is a testament to the security of the Bitcoin network. You can be afraid of some black swan even and never invest in Bitcoin, and you will never reap the benefits.

          I'm doing much much better than my peers including those who invested pretty early on in property due to Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

          • buffalo bill on 14/01/2024 - 16:37

            @bargainhunter168: Anyone who has interest in draining the wealth out of BTC is not going to crack Satoshi's wallet first.

            I bought in 2016 and have made a lot of realised gains from crypto, but I won't blindly lead others into it without explaining what it is and isn't. Bitcoin could already have been forked to make it more secure, but it hasn't happened so probably won't right up until the point it is evident. Rest assured many whales will have their money out by that point.

      • Poor Ass on 19/02/2024 - 00:08

        The genesis continues to grow but no withdrawals

    • bargainhunter168 on 14/01/2024 - 10:46

      Bitcoin will most likely implement an update way before then. The Bitcoin network is not static, it can be updated, so it will do just that. Same goes for the quantum computer threat (non exist today to pose any threat).

      Your hypothetical is a black swan event which is a risk in any asset class. What if a comet crashed into Earth tomorrow that is pure gold? (It might burn up in the atmosphere). What if we discover a pure gold comet and we have the means to mine it, wouldn't the gold price tank? What if we discovered huge deposits of gold on the moon? All these scenarios are black swan events for gold, does that mean no one should buy it or it has no value now?

  • Mistredo on 12/01/2024 - 22:39

    What irony! The "future of finances" gets traded on stock exchange, and it is celebrated by crypto owners.

    • mitchalbrown on 13/01/2024 - 09:15

      you misunderstand… the stock exchange will be traded on blockchain/crypto… 24/7 markets with tokenized shares, instant liquidity, decentralised trading… thats the future of finance. blockchain is infrastructure/software at it's core.

  • Bunnyburger on 13/01/2024 - 08:18

    Quick! We gotta say bad things about batcoin!

  • Dack Smith on 13/01/2024 - 12:01
    -3

    Bitcoin and cryptocurrency is set to replace most currencies in the world,

    It is anonymous and safe, and has made people instant millionaires.

    Instead of lotto and shares, cryptocurrency has created more wealthy people

      • mitchalbrown on 14/01/2024 - 19:18

        yeah it's really frustrating to see people bash it for not being anonymous or private but also bash it for funding criminal enterprises and terrorism… it's transparency is one of it's strengths… if that is the case you should be able to show us all the terrorist and criminal transactions.

        • buffalo bill on 15/01/2024 - 08:57

          Chainalysis and others working for agencies regularily do this and can identify over 90% of individuals in some situations.

          Whether those people are within jurisdiction is another matter.

          I think agencies being able to link wallets to individuals, coins blacklisted and made "dirty", governments being able to take hot wallets etc. is so far from what Satoshi envisioned.

          People hanging onto this idea that BTC is still a revolution is laughable. Perhaps it was, but that was over a decade ago and those remaining in the space are the shills and heavily invested latecomers.

          • mitchalbrown on 17/01/2024 - 07:55
            +1

            @buffalo bill: If you are not doing anything illegal with it, there's absolutely no reason why your wallet would come up in a search… I think the idea would be you catch a terrorist, attain their wallet address and look through the chain to see what wallets have interacted with it and sent funding, then go and identify those wallets and persons… not get every wallet in existence and look through every transaction and try and find illegal transactions.
            In this situation… transparency is perfectly fine.

            We should be free to transact and suffer the consequences if we are doing it illegally… not beg our corporate overlords to give us access to our money so we can spend it.

            • netjock on 17/01/2024 - 23:50

              @mitchalbrown:

              not beg our corporate overlords

              You mean you haven't got like 20 acres with a cabin, solar, lake stocked with fish and all the farm animals you need to survive without modern monetary system?

              Isn't it ironic that bitcoin was meant to untether people from corporate overlords but now likes of BlackRock, CME and SEC are regulating the avenues for adoption by investors?

              • mitchalbrown on 18/01/2024 - 10:12

                @netjock: they are creating additional avenues… as long as they don't outlaw self custody, all avenues are welcome.

                I agree with you that the ETF almost defeats the purpose as you are giving up your soverign custody of the assets whose power is its decentralisation and self custody but if investors want to speculate on the value of these attributes, but, do not want to bear the burden of self custody then they should have safe, regulated avenues to do this… the regulation is on the people offering the service of buying and holding the bitcoin… not on the bitcoin itself. For this reason, all the people claiming that "bitcoin was created to be unregulated only to now become regulated" are incorrect.

  • orangecarpet-22 on 07/02/2024 - 10:23
    +2

    Started reading the comments and it's clear people get caught up in the weeds.

    It's simple. It's a fixed supply, scarce, immutable asset - the first and only commodity where supply doesn't respond to demand. People measure its value in USD, which is in easy supply and created out of thin air.

    What do you think will happen?

    1% allocation might be prudent.

    That's it. Don't get caught up in bullshit and blockchain/crypto grift.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join