Bitcoins - about to hit $5,000 per coin today!

[gib]

Grayscale filed for a new BTC fund which will have lower fees. It could also allow GBTC holders to have access to it via a dividend.

This could potentially slow down their outflows even more, although VanEck just removed all their fees on their ETF for 12 months so who knows.

Either way doesn't take a $GeNiUS.ai to work out that the fight for customers is very real and is only gonna get spicier!

Smart move - they keep the lazy money that just stays in GBTC. And they capture as much of the money that moves from GBTC into cheaper funds. And their new func may even attract fresh money, not just GBTC outflows. Very positive for Bitcoin. Eventually outflows form GBTC stop, and provided overall EFT demand continues, BTC BOOMS!

[gib]

I'm leaning towards delay if not rejection.. Something along the lines of the SEC hinting on a reason why they intend to reject it, Blackrock and a few others withdraw their applications, but later down the line they reapply as the potential reason for rejection is no longer applicable.

In my view an ETH ETF would essentially be a perversion of core US securities laws. So, I can't see it happening any time soon at all.

[Flexacon]

Futures already exists so they can't put the toothpaste back in tube even if they wanted to. Also the CFTC already lists ETH as a commodity.

The talk around delay seems to be around Eth futures not being *highly* correlated with spot market rather than US securities law.

[gib]

Futures already exists so they can't put the toothpaste back in tube even if they wanted to. Also the CFTC already lists ETH as a commodity.

The talk around delay seems to be around Eth futures not being *highly* correlated with spot market rather than US securities law.

Exactly right on the latter point. This is certainly one of the objections, among numerous, which could be made. But there are also many reasons apart from that to deny ETH, or at least very much delay any approval.

[Flexacon]

Exactly right on the latter point. This is certainly one of the objections, among numerous, which could be made. But there are also many reasons apart from that to deny ETH, or at least very much delay any approval.

The SEC released a bunch of cryptos lawyers from their department. They aren't looking for any more "see you in court" which is exactly what happen if the tried to delay/reject the ETF for any other reason.

Even delaying it because futures aren't highly correlated with spot could see them in court, but it would also be an admission that they intend to eventually approve ETFs. Those pushing for them may decide to just wait things out.

A delayed spot ETH ETF say late 2024 early 2025 is potentially better for everyone. For the BTC ETFs the delay means focus remains on them and by late 2024 they should have reached escape velocity.

Everyone then knows the playbook for the ETH ETF and if it's still in bull market it will be more rocket fuel.

[gib]

Article on the topic FYI:

https://www.dlnews.com/articles/snapshot/three-reasons-why-sec-might-not-greenlight-ethereum-etfs/

[obsidian]

Futures already exists so they can't put the toothpaste back in tube even if they wanted to. Also the CFTC already lists ETH as a commodity.

The talk around delay seems to be around Eth futures not being *highly* correlated with spot market rather than US securities law.

The ETH futures correlation looks almost identical to BTC. What am I missing?



Lawyers and ETF "experts" are saying the SEC will reject the ETH ETF on the basis of correlations.

Did anyone do the math?

The actual math by Coinbase:

Hourly: 99.3 vs 99.1
5 Min: 96.2 vs 96.4
1 Min: 84.7 vs. 85.8

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GIVZgzUXMAAeBfi?format=jpg&name=medium

[obsidian]

Peter Schiff is insufferable! WOW!

[obsidian]

Article on the topic FYI:

https://www.dlnews.com/articles/snapshot/three-reasons-why-sec-might-not-greenlight-ethereum-etfs/

Who gives a fuck what Elizabeth Warren thinks. Fuck that bitch!

[obsidian]

In my view an ETH ETF would essentially be a perversion of core US securities laws. So, I can't see it happening any time soon at all.

How so? You're expecting a profit off your BTC holdings and yet you are not doing any work yourself confirming transactions through mining - correct? Aren't you expecting a profit based on the work of others? If you say you holding BTC secures the network well the same logic can be applied to Ethereum. I am staking Ethereum and exposed to slashing if the validators are not configured correctly. And a solo staker is actually putting sweat and technical work into the project. Hardware has to be acquired and configured. Updates are necessary.

Michael Saylor's company owns almost 200,000 BTC. Does he personally mine BTC to help approve transactions on the network. If all he is doing is holding the asset then how can someone not make the argument he is profiting on the work of others?

The whole argument that ETH is a security is BS, and you know it. The ship has sailed. It's too late now for the SEC to do anything about it. Their job is not to hurt investors. Them trying to declare ETH a security would hurt investors. Look at what happened with XRP. They fucked the XRP holders, and even now it is still trying to recover after Ripple won the lawsuit.

[gib]

How so? You're expecting a profit off your BTC holdings and yet you are not doing any work yourself confirming transactions through mining - correct? Aren't you expecting a profit based on the work of others? If you say you holding BTC secures the network well the same logic can be applied to Ethereum. I am staking Ethereum and exposed to slashing if the validators are not configured correctly. And a solo staker is actually putting sweat and technical work into the project. Hardware has to be acquired and configured. Updates are necessary.

Michael Saylor's company owns almost 200,000 BTC. Does he personally mine BTC to help approve transactions on the network. If all he is doing is holding the asset then how can someone not make the argument he is profiting on the work of others?

The whole argument that ETH is a security is BS, and you know it. The ship has sailed. It's too late now for the SEC to do anything about it. Their job is not to hurt investors. Them trying to declare ETH a security would hurt investors. Look at what happened with XRP. They fucked the XRP holders, and even now it is still trying to recover after Ripple won the lawsuit.

It it looks like a duck, it is probably a duck. ETH is a security. It meets all the basic definitions of a security. The SEC did not fuck XRP holders. Rather Ripples did, but illegally issuing tokens. And "investors" did likewise, by not understanding what they were buying and the legal risks involved.

Now, does that mean that the SEC might approve? It's always possible (although that could lead to numerous lawsuits, contesting the SEC's incorrect application of the law). If they approve ETH, it really opens almost any unregistered security to be put into an ETF wrapper, which would of course be insane.

Time will tell. Also, even if they do approve, I am not sure how much demand there would be. It might well be a real disappointment. If I was GBTC, I would lie low on pushing ETH, continue to thrive on BTC, and not put more resources into fighting a battle which may cause me harm and legal costs, and which is an any case ethically corrupt.

[gib]

Good article on this topic here:

https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/03/09/what-happens-if-ethereum-is-a-security/

[gib]

We will also see numerous people, including myself, filing very detailed and well reasoned amicus briefs on this topic to relevant courts and governing bodies. So, it will not be straightforward for ETH for sure, as there will be significant political, legal, and academic opposition.

[Amerian Muscle]

I ended up selling the gold and just received the money.

[gib]

Good, now get it into BTC ASAP.

My advice is to get it all in at once. But if you want to DCA in over each day over the next month or so, this may smooth out any volatility (if that is a concern to you).

[Amerian Muscle]

Good, now get it into BTC ASAP.

My advice is to get it all in at once. But if you want to DCA in over each day over the next month or so, this may smooth out any volatility (if that is a concern to you).

OK so you dont expect a significant pullback any day soon

[gib]

OK so you dont expect a significant pullback any day soon

I am very confident in the long term trend. Could we see 5%, 10% dips along the way? Yes - but we can't time these, and we do know the long term trend. So overall, yes I anticipate long term upside, and so would buy now.

[Amerian Muscle]

I am very confident in the long term trend. Could we see 5%, 10% dips along the way? Yes - but we can't time these, and we do know the long term trend. So overall, yes I anticipate long term upside, and so would buy now.

ok, it really sucks so much i am so late but i am going to buy 2 btc today, better late than never

[Flexacon]

The ETH futures correlation looks almost identical to BTC. What am I missing?

The SEC probably just finds numbers that suits their narrative. Price data from more exchange, different time periods etc.

If they delay or reject, the reason for it will show their hand.

There is also still a reasonable chance that Larry Fink says FU give me my ETF

[Flexacon]

We will also see numerous people, including myself, filing very detailed and well reasoned amicus briefs on this topic to relevant courts and governing bodies. So, it will not be straightforward for ETH for sure, as there will be significant political, legal, and academic opposition.

This kinda thing has already started, but it goes both ways. Some like the State of Montana, backed by 7 other states filed an amicus brief regarding the SECs overreach in crypto

On February 29, the state of Montana, supported by seven other states, filed an amicus brief arguing that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lacks authority to regulate crypto assets.

https://www.regulatoryoversight.com/2024/03/8-state-ags-argue-that-secs-crypto-enforcement-action-is-unlawful/

[gib]

Yes, for sure - opinions being filed on both sides.

[SouJerz]

I ended up selling the gold and just received the money.

BTC smart idea, like gib said you could DCA as there will more than likely be 5-10% swings up and down.

[SouJerz]

If Ether ETF is denied by SEC do you see it being approved further in the year or in 2025?

[Mayday]

I'm leaning towards delay if not rejection.. Something along the lines of the SEC hinting on a reason why they intend to reject it, Blackrock and a few others withdraw their applications, but later down the line they reapply as the potential reason for rejection is no longer applicable.

Cheers for the info on the ETFs.

See how May goes. I have Mar-Jul as an event window for S&P which will take crypto with it so I’d prefer an ETH ETF delay to August.

If they are backed into a corner and have to approve, the timing will have some meaning. Like with BTC prior to the halving made sense.

[obsidian]

It it looks like a duck, it is probably a duck. ETH is a security. It meets all the basic definitions of a security. The SEC did not fuck XRP holders. Rather Ripples did, but illegally issuing tokens. And "investors" did likewise, by not understanding what they were buying and the legal risks involved.

Now, does that mean that the SEC might approve? It's always possible (although that could lead to numerous lawsuits, contesting the SEC's incorrect application of the law). If they approve ETH, it really opens almost any unregistered security to be put into an ETF wrapper, which would of course be insane.

Time will tell. Also, even if they do approve, I am not sure how much demand there would be. It might well be a real disappointment. If I was GBTC, I would lie low on pushing ETH, continue to thrive on BTC, and not put more resources into fighting a battle which may cause me harm and legal costs, and which is an any case ethically corrupt.

It's not a security. Gensler himself claimed so in the past, along with Jay Clayton.

Ripple did not fuck holders. The SEC did when they claimed XRP was a security in their lawsuit. This prompted exchanges to delist XRP. Ultimately Ripple won the lawsuit and XRP was not deemed a security. You're claiming it is when the courts decided otherwise. You're talking out of your ass because your position is in BTC like Michael Saylor and you are trying to pump your own bags. Nothing wrong with that, just telling it how it is.

You did not answer my question. Are you mining Bitcoin or developing it? Can you agree that you are expecting to profit off the work of others?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/newsflash-sec-chief-confirms-analysis-134656111.html#:~:text=Securities%20and%20Exchange%20Commission%20Chairman%20Jay%20Clayton%20has,were%20initially%20sold%20through%20an%20illegal%20securities%20offering.

Newsflash: SEC Chief Confirms Analysis That Ethereum isn’t a Security

Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Jay Clayton has formally confirmed existing staff analysis that Ethereum and other similar decentralized cryptocurrency assets are not securities, even if they were initially sold through an illegal securities offering.

SEC Chairman Agrees with Analysis That Says Ethereum, Similar Crypto Assets are Not Securities

Clayton made this revelation in a letter sent to US House Rep. Ted Budd, who had requested that the SEC provide clarity on whether SEC Director of the Division of Corporate Finance William Hinman spoke for the agency when he said that Ethereum was not a security or was merely voicing his own opinion.

While Clayton did not reference Ethereum or any other cryptocurrency by name, he confirmed that he agrees with Hinman’s analysis of what crypto assets fall under the securities classification.

In a key section he writes:

“Your letter also asks whether I agree with certain statements concerning digital tokens in Director Hinman’s June 2018 speech. I agree that the analysis of whether a digital asset is offered or sold as a security is not static and does not strictly inhere to the instrument. A digital asset may be offered and sold initially as a security because it meets the definition of an investment contract, but that designation may change over time if the digital asset later is offered and sold in such a way that it will no longer meet that definition. I agree with Director Hinman’s explanation of how a digital asset transaction may no longer represent an investment contract if, for example, purchasers would no longer reasonably expect a person or group to carry out the essential managerial or entrepreneurial efforts. Under those circumstances, the digital asset may not represent an investment contract under the Howey framework.”