Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SEC Rejects Rule Change for Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund [pdf]

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 357 posts

Re: SEC Rejects Rule Change for Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund [pdf]

#251

Post by megous »

thescriptkiddie wrote: post #174
Analemma_ wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. Any "currency" that can plummet in value by 25% because of a minor SEC ruling is not ready to be a store of value.

Generally speaking, it's a bad idea to use currency as a store of value. The unwavering stability of the almighty US Dollar is a massive historical outlier. For most of history the wealthy didn't keep Scrooge McDuckian piles of cash around, they converted their cash into hard goods and investments like loans, which won't evaporate if hyperinflation occurs. Even today, the smart thing to do is to store most of your va…

Except it's not stable at all. If you hold USD long term, because of the inflation target of the FED, you'll be able to buy less and less. USD lost a massive amount of value in the previous century alone, despite the massive advances in every field of human activity.

https://www.measuringworth.com/uscompare/relativevalue.php

Re: SEC Rejects Rule Change for Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund [pdf]

#253

Post by saganus »

joering2 wrote: post #107
kgwgk wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are regulated markets for gold.

Even worse than that. You are not allowed to re-melt your piece of gold if that item has a serial number on it. Basically most smiths run an official registry. Even though a gold bullion is yours, most countries will forbid you from melting it into something else and destroying serial number in process, just like even if you own your house you cannot set it on fire. There are penalties including jail time. Its irrele…

Really? Wow.

Do you have some links for this? I did not know that and I'm not sure why would you get jail time for that.

I mean, what is the rationale? Is it about somehow preventing transfer from a legal market to an unregulated one?

I get that you can't mint your own gold coins or bars, but why not melt them? I'm very intrigued by this.

Re: SEC Rejects Rule Change for Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund [pdf]

#255

Post by nradov »

joering2 wrote: post #107
kgwgk wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are regulated markets for gold.

Even worse than that. You are not allowed to re-melt your piece of gold if that item has a serial number on it. Basically most smiths run an official registry. Even though a gold bullion is yours, most countries will forbid you from melting it into something else and destroying serial number in process, just like even if you own your house you cannot set it on fire. There are penalties including jail time. Its irrele…

Bullshit

Re: SEC Rejects Rule Change for Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund [pdf]

#257

Post by nradov »

jtlien1 wrote: post #207

Something useful like bitcoin etf gets rejected. But look at some of the stocks that are allowed to trade... Magnegas for example has been an ongoing fraud for 17 years. Fake delivery of machines to Kazahkstan. It would be easy to prove this a fraud but the SEC does not care.

Magnegas trades OTC which is completely different.

Re: SEC Rejects Rule Change for Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund [pdf]

#258

Post by gburt »

peterhadlaw wrote: post #188
hughes wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you mark the exact moment the ruling was made public? Could this image contain evidence of trading w/ insider knowledge of the SEC ruling?

This is an incredibly interesting observation. I wonder if this has shown in other non-BTC graphs as well

Yes. Evidence of early releases of this sort of information shows up in market data regularly.

Re: SEC Rejects Rule Change for Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund [pdf]

#260

Post by jbmorgado »

subverter wrote: post #49

Coin Center executive director Jerry Brito: > The Winklevoss ETF proposal was rejected because the SEC found that the significant markets for Bitcoin tend to be unregulated overseas markets that are potentially subject to price manipulation. But this creates a chicken and egg problem. How do we develop well-capitalized and regulated markets in the U.S. and Europe if financial innovators aren’t allowed to bring produc…

It's easy. If your product practical application was actually more important than it's speculation aspect then price manipulation would be greatly reduced.

As bitcoin exists right now that's not the case of course. Bitcoin is now a mostly speculative asset since the amount of transactions you can do is extremely small compared to the market value of bitcoin at the moment.

Post reply on HN