Cryptocurrencies

[TwoCitiesCapital]

First BlackRock and now Fidelity. We'll see if they're successful where others have failed, but the big dogs joining the fights seems to suggest the tide may be turning. 

 

https://coingape.com/fidelity-investments-reportedly-filing-blackrock-type-spot-bitcoin-etf-acquire-grayscale/

 

Also, as an owner of GBTC with hefty exposure from steady trading/accumulation over the last 18 months, I'm here for a buy-out and the resumption of being able to exchange shares at NAV. 

Edited June 20, 2023 by TwoCitiesCapital

[james22]

I have to imagine a number of those who've held off to date might put ~5% into a BTC ETF once available.

 

I might myself.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

2 minutes ago, james22 said:

I have to imagine a number of those who've held off to date might put ~5% into a BTC ETF once available.

 

I might myself.

 

Even those who haven't held off might prefer the tax treatment in retirement accounts - as well as the commission-free nature of many brokers. 

 

I'm fairly certain it's here to stay and adoption will only continue. I don't have the technical aptitude to understand exactly how BlackRock and Fidelity's requests differ from all those that came before, but I have to imagine they're not just submitting the same stuff expecting the same outcome as everyone else. 

[changegonnacome]

On 6/20/2023 at 1:37 PM, TwoCitiesCapital said:

First BlackRock and now Fidelity. We'll see if they're successful where others have failed, but the big dogs joining the fights seems to suggest the tide may be turning. 

 

https://coingape.com/fidelity-investments-reportedly-filing-blackrock-type-spot-bitcoin-etf-acquire-grayscale/

 

Also, as an owner of GBTC with hefty exposure from steady trading/accumulation over the last 18 months, I'm here for a buy-out and the resumption of being able to exchange shares at NAV. 

 

Never gonna happen - the SEC is not approving any of these. I'd love to know why BlackRock & Fidelity bothered to file these requests....knowing these behemoths they probably spent a few million already doing the leg work and said screw it will just put in and see rather than just trashing the R&D spend completely - at least they'll have a rejection letter to show for the torched funds.

 

Like think about the complaint they just filed against Binance for a second in the context of these spot bitcoin ETF's..........the complaint effectively says that one of the world's largest BITCOIN (+altcoin) exchanges (Binance) is awash in wash trading......sure shitcoins.......but also BTC. No controls, no kyc, no nuthin. That 30% of the volume on there is nonsense.

 

So this same SEC is going to approve a spot ETF for the general public that trades an underlying instrument where the SEC knows that an outrageous amount of trading in that instrument is being done on exchanges riddled with wash trading without controls & where all the counterparties are obscured by total lack of KYC.

 

The SEC approving a spot ETF would be like locking your windows and leaving your front door open in terms of investor protection. It just ain't gonna happen.

Edited June 21, 2023 by changegonnacome

[rkbabang]

1 hour ago, changegonnacome said:

Never gonna happen - the SEC is not approving any of these. I'd love to know why BlackRock & Fidelity bothered to file these requests..

I’d bet it will happen. It hasn’t happened until now because Blackrock hasn’t wanted it until now. You ever hear of the term “regulatory capture”?  Blackrock controls the SEC, not the other way around.

 

look at Fidelity. They’ve been preparing for this for a long time. Hell, they’ve been mining Bitcoin for 6 years now. Don’t you think they’d have loved to offer a BTC ETF last year or two years ago? Of course, but they know how the game is played. They knew it wasn’t going to happen until Blackrock wanted it to. Now is that time.

Edited June 21, 2023 by rkbabang

[changegonnacome]

31 minutes ago, rkbabang said:

I’d bet it will happen. It hasn’t happened until now because Blackrock hasn’t wanted it until now. You ever hear of the term “regulatory capture”?  Blackrock controls the SEC, not the other way around.

 

I'm sorry your living in cloud cuckoo conspiracy land if you think Blackrock is getting this approved & I explained why above very clearly.......it would be completely inconsistent with the regulatory actions just undertaken against Binance.......end of story. Think about it for a second & just read the Binance compliant & then think about what entities are responsible for the majority BTC volume.

 

The vast majority of BTC volume trades offshore & questionable exchanges (Binance + others)........wash trading.....painting the tape.....tether turned into BTC & back again......unknown leverage...unknown counterparties....no disclosures....whale holders pushing the market around and nobody knows who they are or where they are cause of willful KYC failures........BlackRock might be the establishment......but the SEC is not about to open the wallets of American consumers via a spot ETF to allow seamless & tax advantaged access to what they've confirmed in recent SEC action to be an instrument operating in a highly flawed and manipulated market.

Edited June 22, 2023 by changegonnacome

[rkbabang]

38 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

I'm sorry your living in cloud cuckoo conspiracy land if you think Blackrock is getting this approved & I explained why above very clearly.......it would be completely inconsistent with the regulatory actions just undertaken against Binance.......end of story. Think about it for a second & just read the Binance compliant & then think about what entities are responsible for the majority BTC volume.

 

The vast majority of BTC volume trades offshore & questionable exchanges (Binance + others)........wash trading.....painting the tape.....tether turned into BTC & back again......unknown leverage...unknown counterparties....no disclosures....whale holders pushing the market around and nobody knows who they are or where they are cause of willful KYC failures........BlackRock might be the establishment......but the SEC is not about to open the wallets of American consumers via a spot ETF to allow seamless & tax advantaged access to what they've confirmed in recent SEC action to be an instrument operating in a highly flawed and manipulated market.

ok, no problem. I’ll stay here in cockoo land and you can come back later and say “well I guess you were right”.

[changegonnacome]

Apologies for my tone - came across a bit harsh there - lets see.........and happy to come back and say you were right!

 

I think the government can have minor inconsistencies in enforcement or approach......but its rarely completely diametrically opposed to itself on the big stuff & especially inside one agency.....I guess my forcefulness comes from the fact that to approve any of these spot ETF's it would require effectively an enforcement agency to have what I can only describe as a Jekyll and Hyde regulatory approach to the space. The SEC in the Binance case has put its card on the table in regards to BTC and exchanges....... & shown its cards re: tokens & regulatory clarity on the application of howey & securities law. The crypto folks have been asking for regulatory clarity.....they got it.....but the problem is it isn't the clarity they wanted.

[james22]

Frailty, thy name is SEC.

[rkbabang]

15 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

Apologies for my tone - came across a bit harsh there - lets see.........and happy to come back and say you were right!

 

I think the government can have minor inconsistencies in enforcement or approach......but its rarely completely diametrically opposed to itself on the big stuff & especially inside one agency.....I guess my forcefulness comes from the fact that to approve any of these spot ETF's it would require effectively an enforcement agency to have what I can only describe as a Jekyll and Hyde regulatory approach to the space. The SEC in the Binance case has put its card on the table in regards to BTC and exchanges....... & shown its cards re: tokens & regulatory clarity on the application of howey & securities law. The crypto folks have been asking for regulatory clarity.....they got it.....but the problem is it isn't the clarity they wanted.

No problem, I’ll be happy to admit you were correct if this isn’t approved in the next 12 months.   I think they have declared the shitcoins securities to further legitimize Bitcoin and maybe ETH, after all does it make sense that other actively managed projects that began with premined coins distributed to a select few and used as a currency are securities, but ETH isn’t?  They are already not being consistent. The SEC will give Blackrock what it wants and figure out a way to spin it to the masses.

[james22]

2 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

cloud cuckoo conspiracy land

 

 

[alxcii]

52 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

Apologies for my tone - came across a bit harsh there - lets see.........and happy to come back and say you were right!

 

I think the government can have minor inconsistencies in enforcement or approach......but its rarely completely diametrically opposed to itself on the big stuff & especially inside one agency.....I guess my forcefulness comes from the fact that to approve any of these spot ETF's it would require effectively an enforcement agency to have what I can only describe as a Jekyll and Hyde regulatory approach to the space. The SEC in the Binance case has put its card on the table in regards to BTC and exchanges....... & shown its cards re: tokens & regulatory clarity on the application of howey & securities law. The crypto folks have been asking for regulatory clarity.....they got it.....but the problem is it isn't the clarity they wanted.

 

- Gensler has stated several times that BTC is a commodity, they have not wobbled on this.

- The core argument that the SEC has used to deny spot ETFs is that there is insufficient data to determine whether there exists fraud and manipulation in the spot markets.

- This is not directly relevant to the case against Binance US which the SEC has charged with the sale of unregistered securities and misrepresenting trading controls.

- The SEC already caught some heat from the judges in the Grayscale lawsuit for not being able sufficiently explain why they approved the futures product which is influenced by spot

- The Blackrock filing is unequivocally different than others that came before it - to mitigate against market manipulation, Nasdaq will be brought in to enter into a surveillance-sharing agreement (see pg. 36 of the filing). This directly addresses the concerns Emily Parise made in the oral arguments in SEC v. Grayscale (..."exchange has a surveillance sharing agreement that gives it access to information like market trading activity, customer identification — the tools to investigate fraud and manipulation if it were to occur.")

- Blackrock is 575-1 in getting ETFs through the SEC - do you seriously think they made this submission on a whim, without any guidance from the SEC?

 

Can you quantify the probability that you think the SEC will approve? I don't think this is a done deal but I think you've severely miscalibrated the situation here.

Edited June 22, 2023 by alxcii

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, alxcii said:

- The core argument that the SEC has used to deny spot ETFs is that there is insufficient data to determine whether there exists fraud and manipulation in the spot markets.

 

@alxcii where have you been recently? Let me catch you up.

 

Insufficient data in the past was enough to deny spot ETF's........what the hell have we got now?........an abundance of data, an SEC complaint that includes charges of market manipulation as well as "non-existent trading controls" against the LARGEST mkt share spot exchange in the world...we've also got the dead body of one of the previous largest spot exchange floating around down in the Bahamas..... which imploded in a ponzi scheme where customers funds were co-mingled with an internal prop trading group with all types of fraud and manipulation and a bankruptcy from hell where the guy that did Enron says THIS is way worse than Enron.

 

To use your words - I think the SEC just went from "insufficient data" to an abundance of data & evidence to show the underlying spot market in BTC is horribly horribly flawed & manipulated.

 

Couple of other points:

(1) See exchange market share below.......now add up for me all the exchanges listed below and tell me which ones are "on-shore" and within the purview of the SEC and what % of volume it comes too - <15%.........which means that maybe 80% plus but lets be even kinder more than half of the crypto spot market is offshore......outside the eyes, ears or remit of the SEC. 

(2) Read this again & tell me about what the SEC thinks of the 62% exchange player in this space: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-101

 

 

 

1 hour ago, alxcii said:

- This is not directly relevant to the case against Binance US which the SEC has charged with the sale of unregistered securities and misrepresenting trading controls.

 

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-101

 

Are we reading the same case.......couple of quotes:

"non-existent trading controls"

"Sigma Chain engaged in manipulative trading that artificially inflated the platform’s trading volume."

 

The Binance case as laid out by SEC is not about shitcoins & sloppy trading controls...read quotes above.....it effectively articulates a case around a completely criminal enterprise that has "NON-EXISTANT" trading controls & is ENGAGED in manipulative trading activities.....it also goes on to talk about web of related parties where ownership and control is completely & purposely obscured for presumed nefarious reasons.

 

Short version is the SEC thinks Binance is basically a rats nest.

 

And all this might be a fart in outer space - if it weren't talking about the worlds LARGEST centralized spot crypto exchange.

 

1 hour ago, alxcii said:

he Blackrock filing is unequivocally different than others that came before it - to mitigate against market manipulation, Nasdaq will be brought in to enter into a surveillance-sharing agreement (see pg. 36 of the filing). This directly addresses the concerns Emily Parise made in the oral arguments in SEC v. Grayscale (..."exchange has a surveillance sharing agreement that gives it access to information like market trading activity, customer identification — the tools to investigate fraud and manipulation if it were to occur.")

 

How the hell can anyone from Nasdaq surveil & monitor various offshore entities like Binance........when 85% of the trading is off-shore....guess they could go to Binance HQ? Oh wait there isnt a HQ......guess they could hang out with the Kucoin guys in the Seychelles & ask nicely for some trading data to be put on a USB stick and NASDAQ could go through it back in NYC after their few days on the beach.

 

Nasdaq hasn't a hope in hell of monitoring anything - look what the SEC has just alleged - the largest crypto exchange has non-existant trading controls & is engaged in manipulation..........surveil what.....Nasdaq would be in-gesting nonsense data from Binance, OKK, Kucoin, Huobi....to the extent that they would even give it to them....it would literally be a shit in - shit out trade activity model. Nobody could stand over a megabyte of data.

 

1 hour ago, alxcii said:

- Blackrock is 575-1 in getting ETFs through the SEC - do you seriously think they made this submission on a whim, without any guidance from the SEC?

 

Agree defo not on a whim.

 

I know the way these companies work - this ETF project started 18-24 months ago, maybe more...internal working groups bla bla....seventeen layers of committees & papers & proposals....this was all before anybody knew who SBF was and Matt Damon told everyone that fortune favored the brave.......the world has changed & FTX has created a political constituency around tidying things up........but the Blackrock machine had invested x amount and they said scew it we've invested the $$$$$.....lets just put the proposal in and test the system its already a sunk cost........we'll get some innovation theatre value out of this attempt.

 

1 hour ago, alxcii said:

Can you quantify the probability that you think the SEC will approve?

 

0%

 

How could they? - the 62% player in the spot market has been charged with "non-existant trading controls" and also been accused of engaging in "market manipulation" & "inflating trading volume"

 

Then think about it could you ever, as the SEC, get to a place where you were comfortable the market was NOT being manipulated.....look at your largest regulatory counterparties in this endeavor......you have to go sit in an office across the table from:

 

> Binance - HQ - nowhere wherever Cz says he is

> Huebi - HQ - Seychelles

>Kucoin - HQ - Seychelles

>Bitfiniex - HK and/or BVI

 

Above is maybe what 70%+ of the spot mkt.....Like i said look at your regulatory counterparties......look at the lack of oversight.....think about the fidelity of whatever information they would send the SEC or Nasdaq....come on.

Edited June 22, 2023 by changegonnacome

[Castanza]

Idk what will happen, but I sure as shit know I'm not going to die on a hill defending the SEC as some incorruptible arbiter of financial truth and justice. They've failed in a lot of ways and have allowed a lot of shenanigan's to go on without any action over the course of their tenure....If they choose to target BTC or crypto or exchanges, it's not because they deem it invaluable (well maybe the shit coins). It's because they want their hand in the honeypot. Corruption at Binance or other exchanges is just a good Segway for the "professional criminal bankers" to get their way. This whole thing is just an appeal to authority but the "authority" isn't exactly clean either. But it plays well in the press.....the business of MONEY has and always will be deeply corrupt. 

 

Two examples:

SEC ignored Burry for years on the MBS stuff. They also Subpoenaed him for a GameStop tweet lmao 

SEC ignored thousands of complaints and pages of proof that Madoff was running a ponzi for 8 years

 

 

@rkbabang @TwoCitiesCapital Either of you use Coldcard? 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Castanza

[rkbabang]

1 hour ago, Castanza said:

Idk what will happen, but I sure as shit know I'm not going to die on a hill defending the SEC as some incorruptible arbiter of financial truth and justice. They've failed in a lot of ways and have allowed a lot of shenanigan's to go on without any action over the course of their tenure....If they choose to target BTC or crypto or exchanges, it's not because they deem it invaluable (well maybe the shit coins). It's because they want their hand in the honeypot. Corruption at Binance or other exchanges is just a good Segway for the "professional criminal bankers" to get their way. This whole thing is just an appeal to authority but the "authority" isn't exactly clean either. But it plays well in the press.....the business of MONEY has and always will be deeply corrupt. 

 

Two examples:

SEC ignored Burry for years on the MBS stuff. They also Subpoenaed him for a GameStop tweet lmao 

SEC ignored thousands of complaints and pages of proof that Madoff was running a ponzi for 8 years

 

 

@rkbabang @TwoCitiesCapital Either of you use Coldcard? 

 

 

Agree about the SEC.  One correction.  "The business of MONEY has and always will be deeply corrupt",   The intersection of the business of money and government will always be deeply corrupt.   

 

I've never used coldcard, but if I were to try a hardware wallet that would probably be my choice. 

[SharperDingaan]

The reality is that if you wish to curtail crypto-exchange activity, you need a viable alternative with a better value-add. That alternative is a crypto ETF, and related option market; both of which has been widely available ... for years.

 

Crypto ETFs are professionally managed, primarily invested in BTC/ETH, and hedged using CME options/futures. Joe six-pack can participate in 'crypto' at a fraction of the cost, can buy/sell at any time on the liquid exchange at minimal cost, and enjoys the same NASDAQ/NYSE market  protection as everyone else. Most would expect that Joe could also margin against the ETF, the same as most other ETFs. Orders of magnitude better than the current approach, and hard to argue against.

 

Create a liquid option market for the BTC-ETF; and retail has the ability to hedge changes in the value of its BTC-ETF. If you are already a major ETF provider; offering both a BTC-ETF and an options market on that BTC-ETF, is going to contribute to sizeable market share. Hence, both Blackrock & Fidelity.

 

Hard to see how this doesn't happen.

 

SD

 

  

Edited June 22, 2023 by SharperDingaan

[alxcii]

10 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

@alxcii where have you been recently? Let me catch you up.

 

Insufficient data in the past was enough to deny spot ETF's........what the hell have we got now?........an abundance of data, an SEC complaint that includes charges of market manipulation as well as "non-existent trading controls" against the LARGEST mkt share spot exchange in the world...we've also got the dead body of one of the previous largest spot exchange floating around down in the Bahamas..... which imploded in a ponzi scheme where customers funds were co-mingled with an internal prop trading group with all types of fraud and manipulation and a bankruptcy from hell where the guy that did Enron says THIS is way worse than Enron.

 

To use your words - I think the SEC just went from "insufficient data" to an abundance of data & evidence to show the underlying spot market in BTC is horribly horribly flawed & manipulated.

 

Couple of other points:

(1) See exchange market share below.......now add up for me all the exchanges listed below and tell me which ones are "on-shore" and within the purview of the SEC and what % of volume it comes too - <15%.........which means that maybe 80% plus but lets be even kinder more than half of the crypto spot market is offshore......outside the eyes, ears or remit of the SEC. 

(2) Read this again & tell me about what the SEC thinks of the 62% exchange player in this space: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-101

 

 

 

 

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-101

 

Are we reading the same case.......couple of quotes:

"non-existent trading controls"

"Sigma Chain engaged in manipulative trading that artificially inflated the platform’s trading volume."

 

The Binance case as laid out by SEC is not about shitcoins & sloppy trading controls...read quotes above.....it effectively articulates a case around a completely criminal enterprise that has "NON-EXISTANT" trading controls & is ENGAGED in manipulative trading activities.....it also goes on to talk about web of related parties where ownership and control is completely & purposely obscured for presumed nefarious reasons.

 

Short version is the SEC thinks Binance is basically a rats nest.

 

And all this might be a fart in outer space - if it weren't talking about the worlds LARGEST centralized spot crypto exchange.

 

 

How the hell can anyone from Nasdaq surveil & monitor various offshore entities like Binance........when 85% of the trading is off-shore....guess they could go to Binance HQ? Oh wait there isnt a HQ......guess they could hang out with the Kucoin guys in the Seychelles & ask nicely for some trading data to be put on a USB stick and NASDAQ could go through it back in NYC after their few days on the beach.

 

Nasdaq hasn't a hope in hell of monitoring anything - look what the SEC has just alleged - the largest crypto exchange has non-existant trading controls & is engaged in manipulation..........surveil what.....Nasdaq would be in-gesting nonsense data from Binance, OKK, Kucoin, Huobi....to the extent that they would even give it to them....it would literally be a shit in - shit out trade activity model. Nobody could stand over a megabyte of data.

 

 

Agree defo not on a whim.

 

I know the way these companies work - this ETF project started 18-24 months ago, maybe more...internal working groups bla bla....seventeen layers of committees & papers & proposals....this was all before anybody knew who SBF was and Matt Damon told everyone that fortune favored the brave.......the world has changed & FTX has created a political constituency around tidying things up........but the Blackrock machine had invested x amount and they said scew it we've invested the $$$$$.....lets just put the proposal in and test the system its already a sunk cost........we'll get some innovation theatre value out of this attempt.

 

 

0%

 

How could they? - the 62% player in the spot market has been charged with "non-existant trading controls" and also been accused of engaging in "market manipulation" & "inflating trading volume"

 

Then think about it could you ever, as the SEC, get to a place where you were comfortable the market was NOT being manipulated.....look at your largest regulatory counterparties in this endeavor......you have to go sit in an office across the table from:

 

> Binance - HQ - nowhere wherever Cz says he is

> Huebi - HQ - Seychelles

>Kucoin - HQ - Seychelles

>Bitfiniex - HK and/or BVI

 

Above is maybe what 70%+ of the spot mkt.....Like i said look at your regulatory counterparties......look at the lack of oversight.....think about the fidelity of whatever information they would send the SEC or Nasdaq....come on.

 

I see it different and am much more optimistic on this but thanks for your thoughts.

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, SharperDingaan said:

Create a liquid option market for the BTC-ETF; and retail has the equivalent of hedging via CME options/futures. If you are already a major ETF provider; offering both a BTC-ETF and an options market on that BTC-ETF, is going to contribute to sizeable market share. Hence, both Blackrock & Fidelity.

 

Hard to see how this doesn't happen.

Underlying spot BTC market volume dominated as it is by offshore exchanges is the barrier here.

 

You’ve got a chicken and egg problem for the SEC to ever approve a BTC ETF. End of story.

 

Right now the spot BTC market volume is dominated by a long list of extremely dodgy entities….the 800ilb gorilla @ 62% share (Binance) has just been charged by the SEC with about the most heinous crimes an exchange/FS entity can be accused of.

 

Until centralized BTC exchange market volume tilts in a 60 or 70% way to respectable entities in the US or EU…then the spot ETF is never happening. How could it? The spot market is dominated by nefarious actors completely outside the purview of any regulatory agency that the SEC respects. Tell me that in 2025 BTC centralized volume market share will hit 75% for Coinbase, Paxos, Gemini & Kraken then we can have a conversation about a spot ETF approval until then it’s a pipe dream.
 

The future Fidelity/Blackrock ETF rejection letter from the SEC will say as much and refer many many times back to the Binance complaint as proof that the spot market is deeply flawed. 
 

This ETF rejection is a cert and it’s not even close. 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

3 hours ago, Castanza said:

 

@rkbabang @TwoCitiesCapital Either of you use Coldcard? 

 

I use Ledger for my hardware wallet purposes. I've had no issues with them. Might change in the future as additional functionality/competitors are released, but at the time I bought it Ledger/Trezor were basically the only options anyone recommended. 

 

1 hour ago, SharperDingaan said:

The reality is that if you wish to curtail crypto-exchange activity, you need a viable alternative with a better value-add. That alternative is a crypto ETF, and related option market; both of which has been widely available ... for years.

 

Perhaps this is where the exchange from Citadel, Fidelity, and Schwab that was just announced fits in.

 

If Binance gets shut out of the US, much of it's volume will likely move to Coinbase, Kraken, and this new venture. I dunno how dated the 62% figures are, but supposedly Binance has lost 70-80% market share since the SEC filing so I imagine that migration is already occurring and Binance is no an insignificant portion of crypto volume. That would also explain the "flash pump" to 130k on Bitcoin that Binance had yesterday - no liquidity left available on the exchange. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by TwoCitiesCapital

[changegonnacome]

40 minutes ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

much of it's volume will likely move to Coinbase, Kraken, and this new venture. I dunno how dated the 62% figures are

Fake volume can’t move - cause it’s fake.

 

The offshore guys want a game to pick the pockets of American consumers via a future spot ETF….here’s the playbook - cool off , for now, on the fake BTC volume….allow respectable exchanges with proper KYC in EU/US to ‘own’ a greater & greater proportion of the underlying market 60 or 70%….wait for SEC ETF approval and then turn back on the market manipulation & wash-trading….just now with a really wonderful and deep pocketed ETF patesy at the table called the American capital markets.

 

49 minutes ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

exchange from Citadel, Fidelity, and Schwab

Good luck getting ‘market’ share of a largely fictitious market - I wish them luck honestly the world would be a better place if Binance/FTX/Huebi was displaced by Citadel, Fidelity & Schwab.

 

Whats becoming clearer and clearer with each collapse, bankruptcy, implosion in crytpo land…..is how small the space actually is once you pull out the fake volume, wash trading, prop trading & bananas leverage enabled by high yield fraud etc. It’s just way way way smaller than anybody I think has imagined. In shitcoin land for sure - it’s a bunch of fictitious volume and occasionally a real person shows up and their pocket gets picked.

 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

1 hour ago, changegonnacome said:

Fake volume can’t move - cause it’s fake.

 

The offshore guys want a game to pick the pockets of American consumers via a future spot ETF….here’s the playbook - cool off , for now, on the fake BTC volume….allow respectable exchanges with proper KYC in EU/US to ‘own’ a greater & greater proportion of the underlying market 60 or 70%….wait for SEC ETF approval and then turn back on the market manipulation & wash-trading….just now with a really wonderful and deep pocketed ETF patesy at the table called the American capital markets.

 

Good luck getting ‘market’ share of a largely fictitious market - I wish them luck honestly the world would be a better place if Binance/FTX/Huebi was displaced by Citadel, Fidelity & Schwab.

 

Whats becoming clearer and clearer with each collapse, bankruptcy, implosion in crytpo land…..is how small the space actually is once you pull out the fake volume, wash trading, prop trading & bananas leverage enabled by high yield fraud etc. It’s just way way way smaller than anybody I think has imagined. In shitcoin land for sure - it’s a bunch of fictitious volume and occasionally a real person shows up and their pocket gets picked.

 

 

It's funny that is what you take from the historical booms/busts. 

 

Because what I've taken is every bottom in BTC has been higher and every top has been higher and adoption has continued to explode despite price action. 

 

Sounds like a secular growth trend to me. Naysayers have had 14 years to be right and they're still waiting. 

 

Would also add, if you truly believe that the trade volume at Binance is nearly all fictitious, then we're already at the point where trading is dominated by western regulated exchanges - sounds like an ETF should be imminent, no? No reason we can't define the spot markets the ETF looks at for NAV/price to be those that remain. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by TwoCitiesCapital

[changegonnacome]

2 minutes ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

Sounds like a secular growth trend to me. Naysayers have had 14 years to be right and they're still waiting. 

 

Yeah lets see $69,000 feels quite far away right now......and hell of alot people have burned in this cycle....crypto.com & FTX superbowl commercials feel like a real high tide moment......not saying BTC is a scheme but the problem with schemes sometimes is you eventually run out of people that haven't been burned by them yet.

 

Totally reserve the idea & possibility I'm wrong - BTC as digital gold has some merit and it's a question of getting ever increasing adoption around that idea/believe.......I think that's possible but it feels unlikely.

 

If I was in this space - I for sure would be a BTC maxi.........everything else in its orbit (shitcoins/utility tokens etc.) tarnishes it with a bad name & ultimately slows/hinders BTC's adoption.

[Gregmal]

Before the “way off top” of $69k from todays $30k, we had a mere few years ago a $19k top and a $3k price. I agree the next high may be a while, but don’t think the arguments against Bitcoin that have repeatedly and wrongly been made now for a decade have any more merit today. It’s effectively the same stuff the short Tesla and perpetual doomers do. Market goes up 3%, it’s fuckin bullshit and built on idiots just speculating. Market then pulls back 1%…see, I’m vindicated, I knew it!

 

I also agree, Bitcoin on nothing. The rest are garbage. I do own Ripple preferred stock, but that’s a tad different than just speculating on the future of digital gold. 

[rkbabang]

 

25 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

the next high may be a while

 

The next high will be a year or more after the next halving, so yes it will be a few years away.

 

The 1st halving was in Nov 2012 and BTC hit its peak ($1200) 13 months later in Dec 2013.

The 2nd halving was July 2016 and BTC hit its peak ($19K) 17 months later in Dec 2017.

The 3rd halving was May 2020 and BTC hit its peak ($63K) 11 months later in April 2021,

then dropped and hit another peak ($68K) in Nov 2021 18 months after the halving.

The 4th halving will be around April or May 2024, look for the next peak sometime in 2025.

 

 

Edited June 22, 2023 by rkbabang

[SharperDingaan]

3 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

Until centralized BTC exchange market volume tilts in a 60 or 70% way to respectable entities in the US or EU…then the spot ETF is never happening. How could it? The spot market is dominated by nefarious actors completely outside the purview of any regulatory agency that the SEC respects. Tell me that in 2025 BTC centralized volume market share will hit 75% for Coinbase, Paxos, Gemini & Kraken then we can have a conversation about a spot ETF approval until then it’s a pipe dream.

 

I hear you; but keep in mind  ....

 

Create a BTC-ETF and it's professional portfolio managers/traders buying/selling the BTC, not retail who know squat; those professionals are also managing volatility via options/futures. No different to only 'accredited investors' being allowed to trade high-risk instruments; the investor has the skills/ability/experience to manage the risk.

 

In todays climate, most would expect that allowing a Nasdaq/NYSE traded BTC-ETF also means restricting which exchanges can be used to buy/sell the underlying BTC; those exchanges potentially also being treated as DSIB equivalents, both in NA and Western Europe. DSIB protection, and market forces driving most BTC trading onto the restricted exchanges; making crypto itself much less of a systemic risk.

 

It  implies that CBDCs in both NA and Western Europe are ready to go (e-USD, e-EURO, etc.). Live time tracking of funds flow in/out of the banking systems, and into and out of the restricted/dominant crypto exchanges. Simultaneously share tracking data with e-CNY, and it becomes much harder to evade the law.

 

It also implies a changed regulatory point-of-view around BTC. BTC as an acceptable alternative to the diminished privacy of CBDC, 2nd/3rd world wealth destruction via rampant inflation, and sovereign capital controls. Obviously, not good for a Binance; most would expect that PBoC would prefer it also be gone.    

 

Lot of volatility for BTC, but most would expect it to be a net positive. Lot of volatility for the development community as well, but one has to think that for many - it doesn't go so well.

 

SD

   

Edited June 22, 2023 by SharperDingaan