Cryptocurrencies

[james22]

Create a BTC ETF and the next high will be later that day.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

3 hours ago, rkbabang said:

 

 

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.

 

 

+1 I expected to see 100+k this last cycle, but obviously didn't make it. Hard to say where we might top out, but I think 150k, give or take, would be well within historical limits. Only question is does adoption accelerate if an ETF is approved which could push us beyond that. 

 

We'll see in 2025. 

[SharperDingaan]

43 minutes ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

+1 I expected to see 100+k this last cycle, but obviously didn't make it. Hard to say where we might top out, but I think 150k, give or take, would be well within historical limits. Only question is does adoption accelerate if an ETF is approved which could push us beyond that. 

 

We'll see in 2025. 

 

+1   BTC-EFT adoption will accelerate very rapidly if Blackrock/Fidelity are allowed to offer them, every other provider will have to rapidly match, and the cumulative impact will be to rapidly make BTC 'legitimate' in the eyes of the older generations. The Securities Act of 1933, also turns 100 in 10 years; most would find it highly likely that this is part of a widespread modernization 

 

SD

[changegonnacome]

41 minutes ago, SharperDingaan said:

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.

 

Yeah of course I'm sure BTC-ETF would trade on the backend on only a Citadel or Coinbase exchange....but really that isn't the problem......all the price action & signal in the market is being driven by offshore entities.......who cares if your exchange is respectable if offshore entities are (1) sufficiently large & (2) 'painting the tape' or in this case 'painting the ledger'.

 

Your ETF trading exchange venue can be pristine but the spot market itself is scuzzy = no SEC approval.

 

44 minutes ago, SharperDingaan said:

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.

 

You've got alot of faith in the competency of central banks & regulators + internasional bi-lateral & multi-lateral cooperation.....to think that is all gonna come together.

[wachtwoord]

On 6/22/2023 at 3:48 AM, 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.

 

I dont know if it will be accepted but let me point out the main flaw in yiur reasoning above: Binaince has nothing to do with Bitcoin (just like FTX didnt) as it's an Altcoin shithole.

 

Altcoin ETFs have no chance of being approved no. Bitcoin is a class of its own. Again, I dont know whether they'll accept it as that mostly politics (although Blackrock must believe they can do this for some reason) but it certainly wouldnt be inconsistent with going after Binance.

[wachtwoord]

22 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

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.

 

Considering all the wash trading at the other exchanges I would argue the situation is likely already like this todat in 2023.

[SharperDingaan]

13 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

You've got a lot of faith in the competency of central banks & regulators + international bi-lateral & multi-lateral cooperation.....to think that is all gonna come together.

 

Nah, I just have faith in the Securities Act of 2023 being modernized within the next 10 years, ahead of its 100 year anniversary. Modernized to regulate real time trade/confirmation/settlement, widespread CBDC, re-plumbed financial services, crypto-ETFs, crypto exchanges brought into the DSIB/GSIB order, changing reserve currencies, etc., etc.

 

This is the age where mankind is going to Mars, the bottom of the ocean, etc. - and all-of-it with the benefit of incredible technology. Modernizing a critical, and global, near 100 year old Securities Act is just another part of that. It just scares the sh1te out of people, because it is disruption without a guaranteed outcome; no different to everyday life!

 

SD

[rkbabang]

9 minutes ago, SharperDingaan said:

This is the age where mankind is going to Mars, the bottom of the ocean, etc. - and all-of-it with the benefit of incredible technology. Modernizing a critical, and global, near 100 year old Securities Act is just another part of that. It just scares the sh1te out of people, because it is disruption without a guaranteed outcome; no different to everyday life!

 

Did you have to mention that today?    Yes, there will be some accidents along the way and some people will be hurt.  But progress requires that.   

Edited June 23, 2023 by rkbabang

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, wachtwoord said:

I dont know if it will be accepted but let me point out the main flaw in yiur reasoning above: Binaince has nothing to do with Bitcoin (just like FTX didnt) as it's an Altcoin shithole.

 

Wrong. Here's the last 24hrs of Bitcoin trading volume by centralized exchange:

 

Source: https://coinranking.com/coin/Qwsogvtv82FCd+bitcoin-btc/exchanges

 

Binance is the 800ilb gorilla in spot Bitcoin trading volume as well as altcoins/shitcoins.

 

1 hour ago, wachtwoord said:

but it certainly wouldnt be inconsistent with going after Binance.

 

As per above - approving BTC-ETF would be totally inconsistent with charges against Binance....

 

1 hour ago, wachtwoord said:

Considering all the wash trading at the other exchanges I would argue the situation is likely already like this todat in 2023.

 

Very possible.....and thats exactly why the SEC will not approve the BTC-ETF.....this is a spot market where nobody, even crypto fans believe the 'tape' has any sort of fidelity to it. 

 

I mean why would they - the guys at Tether in bed with CZ can create effectively fake money out of thin air at any moment they want & go into BTC and do anything they want with the price....so not only do you have wash trading problem in the spot market due to lack of controls.......you've got a market, offshore, that is primarily externally funded via USDT......so even real questions marks around the validity of perceived "real" dollars in the market itself....when the dominating BTC settling currency today arent even dollars at all but rather fake dollar (USDT's) & where the fake dollar folks can't seem to show anyone where the real dollars are.....and nobody in the commercial paper market (where these dollars are supposedly parked) has ever heard of tether.

 

You see the problem - like I said - the SEC approving a BTC-ETF would be the SEC stating the BTC spot market is robust with sufficient investor protections......I think via your comments & what I've outlined above......its IMPOSSIBLE for the SEC to approve the spot market as robust and by extension then approve the BTC-ETF

Edited June 23, 2023 by changegonnacome

[alxcii]

34 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Wrong. Here's the last 24hrs of Bitcoin trading volume by centralized exchange:

 

Source: https://coinranking.com/coin/Qwsogvtv82FCd+bitcoin-btc/exchanges

 

Binance is the 800ilb gorilla in spot Bitcoin trading volume as well as altcoins/shitcoins.

 

 

As per above - approving BTC-ETF would be totally inconsistent with charges against Binance....

 

 

Very possible.....and thats exactly why the SEC will not approve the BTC-ETF.....this is a spot market where nobody, even crypto fans believe the 'tape' has any sort of fidelity to it. 

 

I mean why would they - the guys at Tether in bed with CZ can create effectively fake money out of thin air at any moment they want & go into BTC and do anything they want with the price....so not only do you have wash trading problem in the spot market due to lack of controls.......you've got a market, offshore, that is primarily externally funded via USDT......so even real questions marks around the validity of perceived "real" dollars in the market itself....when the dominating BTC settling currency today arent even dollars at all but rather fake dollar (USDT's) & where the fake dollar folks can't seem to show anyone where the real dollars are.....and nobody in the commercial paper market (where these dollars are supposedly parked) has ever heard of tether.

 

You see the problem - like I said - the SEC approving a BTC-ETF would be the SEC stating the BTC spot market is robust with sufficient investor protections......I think via your comments & what I've outlined above......its IMPOSSIBLE for the SEC to approve the spot market as robust and by extension then approve the BTC-ETF

 

Can you please help us understand why offshore exchanges matter when Blackrock intends to use the CME Bitcoin Reference Rate? Binance isn't a constituent exchange. 

 

https://docs.cfbenchmarks.com/CME CF Constituent Exchanges.pdf

 

If you think even these exchanges are unreliable, can you explain why the SEC continues to allow BTC futures being traded with CME BRR as underlying? 

[Castanza]

2 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

 

Nah, I just have faith in the Securities Act of 2023 being modernized within the next 10 years, ahead of its 100 year anniversary. Modernized to regulate real time trade/confirmation/settlement, widespread CBDC, re-plumbed financial services, crypto-ETFs, crypto exchanges brought into the DSIB/GSIB order, changing reserve currencies, etc., etc.

 

This is the age where mankind is going to Mars, the bottom of the ocean, etc. - and all-of-it with the benefit of incredible technology. Modernizing a critical, and global, near 100 year old Securities Act is just another part of that. It just scares the sh1te out of people, because it is disruption without a guaranteed outcome; no different to everyday life!

 

SD

 

I'm not sure people are ready to admit that things could look very different in the financial world 20,30 or 40 years from now. A lot of people seem to think that Buffett's world of Rolodex's and finding undervalued companies in the Congressional Library are still in vogue. 

 

AI is coming, and getting more efficient. The world is continuing to globalize. Multiple western powers are deep into CBDC and controlling the money supply. The topic of getting rid of cash has been main stream in the US for over a decade. The powers at be want more control and oversight. World Economic Forum says "You will own nothing." UK said their digital currency will help prevent certain people from purchasing certain things (eg. alcoholic certain times of the day etc.). 

 

Well naturally cracking down on exchanges will be part of that process. That doesn't mean the underlying asset class wont have value. It certainly will. Plenty of big institutions and governments out there buying some as well. I've been a skeptic in the past, and I am certainly not some BTC max bull; but the world is changing faster than what people want to admit. Just like owning bonds, or paying off debt, I think owning some BTC simply makes sense. 

 

Progress is tied to changing of the guard from a generational standpoint. When I look at Congress and the world leaders I see a lot of people in their late 70's +. The most radical ones who want big changes are young....well put two and two together....

[changegonnacome]

50 minutes ago, alxcii said:

Can you please help us understand why offshore exchanges matter when Blackrock intends to use the CME Bitcoin Reference Rate? Binance isn't a constituent exchange. 

 

What are markets/exchanges......they are venue via which demand/supply for 'x' interact & transact.....in creating a market you also create the by-product of market exchanges.......signal.....because your dealing with 'real' people it turns out signal is really really important.....ever hear of monkey see, monkey do.......well price/volume are the most important 'signals' in markets......you can't have a trustworthy market, one with fidelity if both the price and volume being recorded across the market/exchanges can not be trusted....say when 60%+ of mkt volume is happening on exchanges offshore with no KYC/controls.

 

CME may be trustworthy, Coinbase/Kraken/Gemini too.....but as I've shown Binance is the 800ilb gorilla in BTC trading volume then add KuCoin/Heubi........the price & volume signal on Binance therefore cross-contaminates the whole market due to its size.

 

Put simply the CME reference rate is corrupted by the presense of Binance/KuCoin/Heubi - it is a deeply flawed spot market & as such to allow a spot ETF to trade on NYSE/Nasdaq would give crooks on Binance unfettered access to the deepest & most liquid capital market in the world. Trust me the day the SEC approves a BTC-ETF is like the best day of your life if your connected to the Binance crime family.

 

The classic wash trade game is to create upward price momentum wave using fake volume/price.....creating lots of signal......humans buy stocks when they are going up.....they chase price up......you start a fake upward wave in Bitcoin on Binance and it attracts REAL volume/money via suckers.......the Binance price/volume infects/corrupts the Coinbase price....cause signal feeds into price. You can play this game up and down....attracting naive buyers & sellers into a 'rigged' market........see BTC volatility isnt a bug, its a feature.

 

50 minutes ago, alxcii said:

If you think even these exchanges are unreliable, can you explain why the SEC continues to allow BTC futures being traded with CME BRR as underlying? 

 

(1) the SEC doesn't allow BTC futures with CME BRR - thats the CFTC, not the SEC....so wrong regulatory agency out the gates

(2) why the CFTC allows BTC futures with CME BRR I can only guess is two fold...number one...this is a derivates exchange product its end users predominately are not mom & pop retail....to trade futures your considered to be or certainly have to attest to be sophictated financial market participant (the subtext is you therefore probably realize the 'tape' in BTC is complete bullshit)

(2) but lets even pretend the SEC did somehow approve or allow the futures to trade.....it kind of wouldn't matter for the purpose of our discussion on the BTC-ETF......the US capital markets isn't a monolith....it has layers...those layers are there to protect retail.......there are differing disclosure & effectively safety/risk/experience requirements....derivates/futures/OTC/accredited investor etc. Too many 'layers' to go into.

 

The MOST important takeaway is that the highest protection & the highest standards are reserved for where you think this BTC-ETF is going to trade......Nasdaq or NYSE.....because this is the market where my grandma and your grandma operates in.....its the deepest pool of capital in the world.

 

A BTC-ETF approval would effectively be like voluntarily building a money pipeline between scam artists overseas (China/Seychelles/BVI) & the wallet of Joe Sixpack & his Grandma/Grandpa in the United Sates......like I said the day that ever happens there will be the mother of all parties in the offices of Binance.....its like the best thing that could ever happen to you as a fraudster....to get that conduit opened up. CZ & Co. would literally cry tears of joy.

Edited June 23, 2023 by changegonnacome

[gfp]

I have an extremely basic question on BTC and BTC-linked products like CME BTC futures and ETFs based on a basket of futures.

 

Doesn't the existence of BTC-linked derivatives undermine the inelasticity argument of Bitcoin that the supply is extremely limited?  Don't these BTC-price-linked derivative contracts function like eurodollars in that they are completely elastic and can expand and contract the supply of BTC-denominated "money" outside the control of the US government (in the case of a eurodollar, or in BTC's case, the rules of the thing) ?

Edited June 23, 2023 by gfp

[alxcii]

36 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

What are markets/exchanges......they are venue via which demand/supply for 'x' interact & transact.....in creating a market you also create the by-product of market exchanges.......signal.....because your dealing with 'real' people it turns out signal is really really important.....ever hear of monkey see, monkey do.......well price/volume are the most important 'signals' in markets......you can't have a trustworthy market, one with fidelity if both the price and volume being recorded across the market/exchanges can not be trusted....say when 60%+ of mkt volume is happening on exchanges offshore with no KYC/controls.

 

CME may be trustworthy, Coinbase/Kraken/Gemini too.....but as I've shown Binance is the 800ilb gorilla in BTC trading volume then add KuCoin/Heubi........the price & volume signal on Binance therefore cross-contaminates the whole market due to its size.

 

Put simply the CME reference rate is corrupted by the presense of Binance/KuCoin/Heubi - it is a deeply flawed spot market & as such to allow a spot ETF to trade on NYSE/Nasdaq would give crooks on Binance unfettered access to the deepest & most liquid capital market in the world. Trust me the day the SEC approves a BTC-ETF is like the best day of your life if your connected to the Binance crime family.

 

The classic wash trade game is to create upward price momentum wave using fake volume/price.....creating lots of signal......humans buy stocks when they are going up.....they chase price up......you start a fake upward wave in Bitcoin on Binance and it attracts REAL volume/money via suckers.......the Binance price/volume infects/corrupts the Coinbase price....cause signal feeds into price. You can play this game up and down....attracting naive buyers & sellers into a 'rigged' market........see BTC volatility isnt a bug, its a feature.

 

 

(1) the SEC doesn't allow BTC futures with CME BRR - thats the CFTC, not the SEC....so wrong regulatory agency out the gates

(2) why the CFTC allows BTC futures with CME BRR I can only guess is two fold...number one...this is a derivates exchange product its end users predominately are not mom & pop retail....to trade futures your considered to be or certainly have to attest to be sophictated financial market participant (the subtext is you therefore probably realize the 'tape' in BTC is complete bullshit)

(2) but lets even pretend the SEC did somehow approve or allow the futures to trade.....it kind of wouldn't matter for the purpose of our discussion on the BTC-ETF......the US capital markets isn't a monolith....it has layers...those layers are there to protect retail.......there are differing disclosure & effectively safety/risk/experience requirements....derivates/futures/OTC/accredited investor etc. Too many 'layers' to go into.

 

The MOST important takeaway is that the highest protection & the highest standards are reserved for where you think this BTC-ETF is going to trade......Nasdaq or NYSE.....because this is the market where my grandma and your grandma operates in.....its the deepest pool of capital in the world.

 

A BTC-ETF approval would effectively be like voluntarily building a money pipeline between scam artists overseas (China/Seychelles/BVI) & the wallet of Joe Sixpack & his Grandma/Grandpa in the United Sates......like I said the day that ever happens there will be the mother of all parties in the offices of Binance.....its like the best thing that could ever happen to you as a fraudster....to get that conduit opened up. CZ & Co. would literally cry tears of joy.

 

Thanks - given that the SEC just greenlighted leveraged BTC futures I think there is a shifting tide. They will let grandma trade 2x futures but not spot? 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

2 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Wrong. Here's the last 24hrs of Bitcoin trading volume by centralized exchange:

 

Source: https://coinranking.com/coin/Qwsogvtv82FCd+bitcoin-btc/exchanges

 

Binance is the 800ilb gorilla in spot Bitcoin trading volume as well as altcoins/shitcoins.

 

 

Based on these figures, Coinbase Pro and Kraken are ~20-25% of the volume with the Cayman Islands and Seychelles taking the rest (of the top 10). If we're assuming that most of the trade volume on Binance is fake, we should be excluding it from the calcs on % of total volume. 

 

As far as Binance being the 800 lb gorilla, I dunno if it "matters". Liquidity on Binance was so low BTC spiked to 130k a day or two ago. That spike wasn't reflected on other spot exchanges NOR did it seems to impact futures markets and contracts. I don't see how Binance is such a systemic problem if they're not being used in the reference basket for spot prices and trading aberrations like spikes to 130k aren't impacting other exchanges. 

 

Secondly, you said that the SEC didn't approve BTC futures but the CFTC did, in part, because of the sophisticated investors who trade derivatives. But the SEC DID approve the Futures based ETF without having similar reservations about spot-price manipulation which impacts the futures reference price. If it's sophisticated investors trading the actual futures, who did the SEC approve the ETF for?

 

They also just approved a 2x leveraged BTC futures ETF: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/06/23/leveraged-bitcoin-futures-etf-to-start-trading-tuesday-sponsor-says/

 

Who do you suppose that was approved for? 

 

The concept that spot prices are too manipulated to have a spot ETF, but to not trade leveraged and double leveraged derivative products that have the same spot reference is insane. 

 

 

Edited June 23, 2023 by TwoCitiesCapital

[changegonnacome]

6 minutes ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

Binance is fake, we should be excluding it from the calcs on % of total volume. 

 

 

Doesnt matter - like i said - markets are about signal.......and the BTC-ETF approval is dependent on the SEC coming to the conclusion that the underlying spot market for BTC has fidelity that the 'tape' can be believed. That it is an accurate representation of the price and volume of BTC being transacted by unrelated third parties happening in trading venues with adequate/robust kyc controls. The price/volume on the screen for BTC....is being written by wash-traders on Binance/Heibu/KuCoin....lets even pretend that they were only 20% of the market.....even that is too much in a free & fair market....and does not reach the level required, as I said, to open the door to the wallets of Joe Sixpack on NYSE/Nasdaq

 

This is why the Binance SEC compliant is completely inconsistent with your dream for a BTC ETF approval.

Edited June 23, 2023 by changegonnacome

[TwoCitiesCapital]

2 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Doesnt matter - like i said - markets are about signal.......and the BTC-ETF approval is dependent on the SEC coming to the conclusion that the underlying spot market for BTC has fidelity that the 'tape' can be believed. That it is accurate representation what the price and volume being transacted by unrelated third parties.. It clearly doesn't. The price/volume on the screen for BTC....is being written by wash-traders on Binance/Heibu/KuCoin.

 

That's just simply not true. Otherwise we'd have all seen the spike to 130k...

 

And Huobi isn't even top 10 per your own list. KuCoin is barely there (and not terribly familiar with why KuCoin is considered problematic TBH)

Edited June 23, 2023 by TwoCitiesCapital

[changegonnacome]

31 minutes ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

That's just simply not true. Otherwise we'd have all seen the spike to 130k...

 

 

I'm afriad it is........outrageous spikes on exchanges of course are ignored......this is not how you run a washtrade scam........a washtrade market manipulation scam is done by 'walking' the price up. Moron's doing washtrade scams - spike the price......you walk it up.....you make it believable....small trades......with the price edged up by 0.25% a time......this type of signal gets incorporated into Coinbase volume/pricing in BTC etc.

 

This is HOW Binance but more correctly the market manipulators on Binance (operating with their blessing) play football with the price & perpetuate fraud. This is why the SEC will never approve a BTC-ETF - it would be like opening up my grandma's wallet for CZ & friends to take what they want.

 

Edited June 23, 2023 by changegonnacome

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

Secondly, you said that the SEC didn't approve BTC futures but the CFTC did, in part, because of the sophisticated investors who trade derivatives. But the SEC DID approve the Futures based ETF without having similar reservations about spot-price manipulation which impacts the futures reference price. If it's sophisticated investors trading the actual futures, who did the SEC approve the ETF for?

 

They also just approved a 2x leveraged BTC futures ETF: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/06/23/leveraged-bitcoin-futures-etf-to-start-trading-tuesday-sponsor-says/

 

Who do you suppose that was approved for? 

 

The concept that spot prices are too manipulated to have a spot ETF, but to not trade leveraged and double leveraged derivative products that have the same spot reference is insane. 

 

Again back to my concept of layers in the US capital markets.....its not one markets, its many markets.......where grandma is sitting in the most protected layer at the centre

 

To buy  these ETF futures - 

 

 

Again the problem with your BTC-ETF approval dream - is that you need to believe that the SEC is going to allow a deeply deeply deeply flawed spot market, riddled with wash trading and a lack of controls, a direct line into the most sacrosanct part of the US capital markets.....which is a standard ETF wrapper that would trade in the same permission pool as say SPY, QQQ, SPX, VTI, VOO......not happening and not a chance thats gonna happen. I'm sorry - not until the market structure for BTC completely changes perhaps that happens if/when Binance et al go the way of FTX & 90%+ of volume starts trading on-shore (EU/USA)...until then park the BTC ETF dream.

Edited June 23, 2023 by changegonnacome

[SharperDingaan]

3 hours ago, rkbabang said:

 

Did you have to mention that today?    Yes, there will be some accidents along the way and some people will be hurt.  But progress requires that.   

 

Lot of the folks who have done this dive are members of the Explorers Club. Almost universally, they would be onboard, so long as the context was one of moving mankind forward. If you die doing what you love (exploration/seeing the unique) and the end is quick (implosion), it is not the worst way to go. Their deaths just should not be vain.

 

SD  

[wachtwoord]

6 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Wrong. Here's the last 24hrs of Bitcoin trading volume by centralized exchange:

 

Source: https://coinranking.com/coin/Qwsogvtv82FCd+bitcoin-btc/exchanges

 

 

 

You yourself said that's fake trading

 

I'm agreeing with you on that one. Stay consistent in your analysis though. It's not quantum mechanics where its in a super position of wash trading and not wash trading

[changegonnacome]

Just now, wachtwoord said:

Stay consistent in your analysis though.

 

My analysis is really concerned with what the SEC is concerned with - look at the market in its totality......and ask what proportion of the volume in that market can be attributed to entities where one can have faith in the volume/price displayed having occurred between unrelated parties trading on an arms length basis on the exchange. The BTC market because of Binance + others large participation in it completely fails this test and so the SEC will never allow access to the most inner sanctum of the US capital markets which is lets call them grandma & grandpa ETF's.

[wachtwoord]

1 minute ago, changegonnacome said:

 

My analysis is really concerned with what the SEC is concerned with - look at the market in its totality......and ask what proportion of the volume in that market can be attributed to entities where one can have faith in the volume/price displayed having occurred between unrelated parties trading on an arms length basis on the exchange. The BTC market because of Binance + others large participation in it completely fails this test and so the SEC will never allow access to the most inner sanctum of the US capital markets which is lets call them grandma & grandpa ETF's.

Cool, so if someone starts an offshore gold trading platform which is full of wash trading at 10x the current daily volume (making it 90% of the market) you think the gold ETFs get removed?

 

Very silly idea.

[changegonnacome]

2 hours ago, wachtwoord said:

Cool, so if someone starts an offshore gold trading platform which is full of wash trading at 10x the current daily volume (making it 90% of the market) you think the gold ETFs get removed?

 

Very silly idea.

 

Thats a very silly straw man argument. Let me help.

 

The gold market is a mature market with predominately sophisticated counterparties dominating the market itself with robust regulatory players & a market structure designed to reduce the possibility of manipulation (it still happens, nothing is perfect)....but you've people running the exchanges & separate brokers running KYC & then separate custodians....all regulated top to bottom with the vast majority of volume occurring in robust jurisdictions.......now lets take your straw man argument........if a gold exchange got established in Azerbaijan & with brokers and custodians that nobody ever heard off and they collectively began printing high volume & high price trades from their little gold exchange.......those trades would have ZERO credibility & would not move spot markets cause like I said you've got sophisticated participants in market and they can spot bullshit a mile away and your imaginary gold trading platform would be like a fart in outer space........or to use my language above there would be no SIGNAL in the wash-trading & the market for gold would remain fair & transparent and an accurate representation of bilateral transactions between unrelated third parties. 

 

BTC is an immature market predominately populated with unsophisticated retail investors. Then to confound this problem is that institutional counterparties in the market are in some sense unsophisticated and not up to snuff either- which is to say they have no ability to self-police or create a robust market....because they are setup wrong.....there is no separation between exchanges, brokers, prop trading groups & custodians...Binance is all these things at once , Coinbase is all these thing at the same time........in fact the SEC compliant against Binance & Coinbase expressly points out how this market structure alone is atypical and is effectively a barrier to a market that could be considered fair, transparent & robust because the opportunity for fraud when you have those functions under the same roof (the equivalent of the New York Stock Exchange,  Schwab, BlackRock, Bridgewater, DTCC & BNY Mellon) the opportunity for financial fraud is almost limitless........so you know the market structure with all these function nested inside a few entities makes the market a toxic mess.....but now as seen in the SEC compliant against Binance + the FTX debacle is that the SEC has moved from a suspicion of fraud (due to the unsophisticated market participants and poor market structure) to a realization and a confirmation that it is indeed rife with fraud & that fraud is being carried out by the No.1 player.

 

The most boring thing in the world really as a financial service regulator must be explaining to crypto people how the world got to the current construction of exchanges, brokers, clearing houses/custodians & asset managers all beautfully separated and regulated. Dont you crypto peeps get it - the world played this movie before in the 1920's in black & white and now you guys are doing it in color. & 4K.....the tech might be shiny new with crypto......but the financial frauds underpinning it are the same....front running your clients, stealing the assets of your clients, co-mingling client assets, prop trading against your clients, wash trading to manipulate the market, painting the tape, promising outrageous things in security offerings, not disclosing related parties, insider trading, high yield fraud, ponzi economics obscured, pyramid schemes, chain letters & MLM schemes .......and there's nothing inherent in the technology of security tokens or commodity tokens like BTC that changes whats as old as the sun and thats the various ways financial fraudsters defraud the public. The BTC market is so far away from being robust its not even funny.....its literally a fraud Disney world the way its currently constructed and the SEC knows it and they are not letting a BTC-ETF within 3000 miles of a US listed spot ETF. Like your literally living in never never land if you believe that & I'm afraid your social media filter needs to be tweaked cause you've let too many crypto promoters into your news feed.

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by changegonnacome

[wachtwoord]

8 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Thats a very silly straw man argument. Let me help.

 

The gold market is a mature market with predominately sophisticated counterparties dominating the market itself with robust regulatory players & a market structure designed to reduce the possibility of manipulation (it still happens, nothing is perfect)....but you've people running the exchanges & separate brokers running KYC & then separate custodians....all regulated top to bottom with the vast majority of volume occurring in robust jurisdictions.......now lets take your straw man argument........if a gold exchange got established in Azerbaijan & with brokers and custodians that nobody ever heard off and they collectively began printing high volume & high price trades from their little gold exchange.......those trades would have ZERO credibility & would not move spot markets cause like I said you've got sophisticated participants in market and they can spot bullshit a mile away and your imaginary gold trading platform would be like a fart in outer space........or to use my language above there would be no SIGNAL in the wash-trading & the market for gold would remain fair & transparent and an accurate representation of bilateral transactions between unrelated third parties. 

 

And Binance and the other cowboy exchanges are exactly like that Azerbajani gold exchange in the example: just ignore it it affects nothing.

 

Other have already told you about the recent price spike that happened on Binance and nowhere else. Only consider the serious exchanges for price discovery. 

 

Edit:

 

And btw I was talking about Bitcoin exclusively. Not what they call "crypto" now, that's just altcoin crap. Nothing to do with one another.

Edited June 24, 2023 by wachtwoord