****coin is up, and still it's just an underground fake currency used largely in the commission of crimes.

The bigger fool theory is strong with this one.

tysker said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

tysker said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

tysker said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

tysker said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

The players involved in the ETFs, the Blackrocks, Fidelity's, and 12 others will need to purchase and custody it in some way. The demand will skyrocket and of course you can't make more Bitcoin so the price will go up.

---

The price of BTC increases with adoption not consolidation into the hands of a couple dozen financial institutions.

---

Why wouldn't both be the case?

---

Because there is a limited amount of BTC. If its being held as collateral for ETFs and other financial products by banks and brokers, there will be less demand by individual holders. How do expect adoption to increase as more BTC consolidate in the hands of institutions and governments?

---

You know that you can use fractions of a Bitcoin, right? We will price good and services in sats. Adoption can still take place when 1 BTC = $1 million

What's going to happen when more nation states adopt BTC as currency. Less available supply.

When central banks start to hold BTC. Less supply available.

All will drive the price up.

---

If it's infinitely divisible then how is it any different than the current USD.

---

You are dense. So much so that it has to be an act.

---

Typical response to BTC critics... you have something bad to say about bitcoin...? Well, you just don't understand how it works you dense old boomer!

Widespread bitcoin use will behave no differently than the US dollar, particularly in how the US dollar currently operates (no gold standard, somewhat infinite printing".

BTC being scarce and thus "valuable" is a farce. It does have some aspects that help with monetary inflation but it has no impact on pricing inflation. It can be infinitely divided no matter what someone tries to tell you about "satoshis" or koopa troopers or similar.

It has a purpose, but much of that purpose is to conduct illegal transactions to be hidden from the government with an open source, theoretically untraceable / anonymous ledger.

I still predict it will go the way of bearer bonds and the dodo bird.

---

Did you read his replies? It's the same crap over and over. He's dense.

I don't care if your for Bitcoin or against it the fact the both retail and institutions are now buying it will make the price climb. He doesn't seem to get it, or acts like he doesn't.

I can't tell by your response that you have believed the mainstream narrative about Bitcoin (you're parroting Elizabeth Warren).

I don't care if either of you ever own a single sat. Doesn't matter to me.

---

weird it ate my original post...
I'm curious to know how and why the creation of an ETF would make the price of BTC increase unless there is a use of staking, farming, or other derivative product like swaps, options, forwards, etc. (and the use of swaps, options, futures essentially require additional staking and farming fwiw)

---

We are talking about the approval of 12 major spot bitcoin ETFs. Spot etfs have to hold bitcoin. We aren't talking about derivatives or any of the other s*** you keep mentioning.

https://www.investopedia.com/spot-bitcoin-etfs-8358373#:~:text=Spot%20bitcoin%20ETFs%20directly%20hold,have%20direct%20ownership%20of%20bitcoins.

tysker said:

---

Quote:

---

Bitcoin *can* only be infinitely divisible, and only via consensus of miners, users, and nodes. Additional layers might have different rules for different purposes.

---

You mean supply limited by the largest holders of BTC which will be banks and governments.

---

Bitcoin is becoming more centralized as time goes on. Many Bitcoin proponents ignore this.

The primary reason people buy Bitcoin is to sell it at a higher price in the future. It's not a currency until there is a market for goods priced in Bitcoin. Goods priced in USD with Bitcoin conversion doesn't make Bitcoin a currency.

Sid Farkas said:

---

****coin is up, and still it's just an underground fake currency used largely in the commission of crimes.

The bigger fool theory is strong with this one.

---

Hello G-Man

MR Gadsden said:

---

tysker said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

tysker said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

tysker said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

tysker said:

---

MR Gadsden said:

---

The players involved in the ETFs, the Blackrocks, Fidelity's, and 12 others will need to purchase and custody it in some way. The demand will skyrocket and of course you can't make more Bitcoin so the price will go up.

---

The price of BTC increases with adoption not consolidation into the hands of a couple dozen financial institutions.

---

Why wouldn't both be the case?

---

Because there is a limited amount of BTC. If its being held as collateral for ETFs and other financial products by banks and brokers, there will be less demand by individual holders. How do expect adoption to increase as more BTC consolidate in the hands of institutions and governments?

---

You know that you can use fractions of a Bitcoin, right? We will price good and services in sats. Adoption can still take place when 1 BTC = $1 million

What's going to happen when more nation states adopt BTC as currency. Less available supply.

When central banks start to hold BTC. Less supply available.

All will drive the price up.

---

If it's infinitely divisible then how is it any different than the current USD.

---

You are dense. So much so that it has to be an act.

---

Typical response to BTC critics... you have something bad to say about bitcoin...? Well, you just don't understand how it works you dense old boomer!

Widespread bitcoin use will behave no differently than the US dollar, particularly in how the US dollar currently operates (no gold standard, somewhat infinite printing".

BTC being scarce and thus "valuable" is a farce. It does have some aspects that help with monetary inflation but it has no impact on pricing inflation. It can be infinitely divided no matter what someone tries to tell you about "satoshis" or koopa troopers or similar.

It has a purpose, but much of that purpose is to conduct illegal transactions to be hidden from the government with an open source, theoretically untraceable / anonymous ledger.

I still predict it will go the way of bearer bonds and the dodo bird.

---

Did you read his replies? It's the same crap over and over. He's dense.

I don't care if your for Bitcoin or against it the fact the both retail and institutions are now buying it will make the price climb. He doesn't seem to get it, or acts like he doesn't.

I can't tell by your response that you have believed the mainstream narrative about Bitcoin (you're parroting Elizabeth Warren).

I don't care if either of you ever own a single sat. Doesn't matter to me.

---

weird it ate my original post...
I'm curious to know how and why the creation of an ETF would make the price of BTC increase unless there is a use of staking, farming, or other derivative product like swaps, options, forwards, etc. (and the use of swaps, options, futures essentially require additional staking and farming fwiw)

---

We are talking about the approval of 12 major spot bitcoin ETFs. Spot etfs have to hold bitcoin. We aren't talking about derivatives or any of the other s*** you keep mentioning.

https://www.investopedia.com/spot-bitcoin-etfs-8358373#:~:text=Spot%20bitcoin%20ETFs%20directly%20hold,have%20direct%20ownership%20of%20bitcoins.

---

my man, spot ETF = ****coin. NYKNYC
Spot markets require hedgers and speculators, both of which will want the ability to short the underlying. But you cannot authentically short BTC. So banks basically have to create a swap or option products to offset their collateral needs. This costs time and money, which is ultimately paid for by the investor. IMO, if you want long exposure to BTC, just buy BTC; there's no lon term value in owning it through another vehicle

i agree, and that's a great plan for individuals who are comfortable holding their own keys. i have no interest in owning the ETF, but it will be good for people who want exposure but aren't interested in self-custody. or who want exposure in a retirement account or IRA for example where purchasing BTC is not possible yet.

it will also be good for institutions like sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, endowments etc. who must play by certain rules, such as only investing in publicly traded assets held by a custodian. they definitely can't just buy and hold their own keys, but they could hold an ETF. so it finally gives huge pools of regulated money a way to benefit from the price action of BTC. these institutions also happen to be the biggest clients for companies like blackrock.

all 12 companies that will have bitcoin spot ETFs are good for bitcoin holders (whether they buy the ETF or not) because their incentives are aligned. bitcoiners want to see BTC continue to gain adoptoin as a store of value. the ETF custodians want to make money by growing the fees collected on their AUM. the more BTC they hold in their ETF, they more they'll collect in fees. and the more BTC they purchase to support the ETF, the more the price rises as the demand increases while the supply is fixed and not affected by demand in any way.

in this way, their greed works in bitcoin holders' favor. they're going to have armies of sales people educating and advocating for BTC in order to draw money into their spot ETF. and they're going to be aggressive about it because the upside for BTC is enormous, meaning the upside for their AUM by driving dollar inflows is also enormous. bitcoin is a black hole of incentives for everyone who participates

bitcion futures already exist and have since 2017 (in addition to futures ETFs which have been around since 2021). spot ETFs are a whole different ballgame.

using AUM as a metric for how these products make money for banks/brokers is emblematic of a fundamental misunderstanding on modern markets function

Everything that is not BTC is a ****coin. I'm surprised that you, of all posters, would be advocating for the public to be involved with ****coins, but so be it. Dont believe BTC futures are a ****coin? Explain how a "Exchange for Related Positions" is anything more than a paper IOU (which again is antithetical to the point of being counterproductive, to the purpose of BTC)

https://www.cmegroup.com/articles/faqs/frequently-asked-questions-options-on-cryptocurrency-futures.html#delivery

Quote:

---

14. How can traders take physical delivery of bitcoin or ether?

Market participants desiring physical bitcoin or ether delivery may enter into an Exchange for Related Positions (EFRPs) transaction a privately negotiated trade between two counterparties allowing them to simultaneously exchange a spot and futures position. For spot position holders, an EFRP can be used to swap a long spot position with futures exposure that can be rolled forward. EFRP transactions are governed by Exchange Rule 538.

---

eta: the fact there are plans for 12(!) spot ETFs when there are already plenty of flourishing spot exchanges and a futures market should be telling to investors. again IMO

tysker said:

---

If it's infinitely divisible then how is it any different than the current USD.

---

Printer go brr.

bmks270 said:

---

Goods priced in USD with Bitcoin conversion doesn't make Bitcoin a currency.

---

I literally sent APMEX bitcoins two weeks ago and got silver in the mail a week later. Zero dollars exchanged hands. Sounds like currency to me.

How much is the silver worth?

XpressAg09 said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Goods priced in USD with Bitcoin conversion doesn't make Bitcoin a currency.

---

I literally sent APMEX bitcoins two weeks ago and got silver in the mail a week later. Zero dollars exchanged hands. Sounds like currency to me.

---

That's money, not currency. You may not have used USD in the transaction but did one or more of the intermediaries who facilitated it? What currency does AMPEX use to pay its employees? In what country and in what currency does AMPEX pay its taxes?

tysker said:

---

using AUM as a metric for how these products make money for banks/brokers is emblematic of a fundamental misunderstanding on modern markets function

Everything that is not BTC is a ****coin. I'm surprised that you, of all posters, would be advocating for the public to be involved with ****coins, but so be it. Dont believe BTC futures are a ****coin? Explain how a "Exchange for Related Positions" is anything more than a paper IOU (which again is antithetical to the point of being counterproductive, to the purpose of BTC)

https://www.cmegroup.com/articles/faqs/frequently-asked-questions-options-on-cryptocurrency-futures.html#delivery

Quote:

---

14. How can traders take physical delivery of bitcoin or ether?

Market participants desiring physical bitcoin or ether delivery may enter into an Exchange for Related Positions (EFRPs) transaction a privately negotiated trade between two counterparties allowing them to simultaneously exchange a spot and futures position. For spot position holders, an EFRP can be used to swap a long spot position with futures exposure that can be rolled forward. EFRP transactions are governed by Exchange Rule 538.

---

eta: the fat there are plans for 12(!) spot ETFs when there is already plenty of flourishing spot exchanges and a futures market should be telling to investors. again IMO

---

i did not advocate for anyone to buy the spot ETF and frankly i could not possibly care less what "the public" does with their money. you asked how a spot ETF would cause the price to increase, i explained.

the link you provided about futures is not relevant at all, the only reason i mentioned that they already exist is because you keep bringing them up like they're something new when that's not the case. i don't care how those operate or who is buying them or why. my post was about how spot ETFs will affect bitcoin's price.

if someone asked me for my advice as it relates to the spot ETF, what i would tell them is that you should buy bitcoin and self-custody it instead. i thought i made that pretty clear by saying i agreed with you on that point and that i was not interested in the ETF, but i guess i needed to spell that out. additionally, i would tell them that if you intend to buy bitcoin and self-custody it, you better hurry up and get it done before what i explained above starts happening and the price increase makes accumulation a lot more challenging. you've had 15 years to front run the institutions and i suspect that time is very rapidly drawing to a close.

there are plans for 12 spot ETFs because 12 different asset managers have clients demanding exposure to BTC who can't currently buy it directly for reasons i explained above. IMO

MR Gadsden said:

---

Did you read his replies? It's the same crap over and over. He's dense.

I don't care if your for Bitcoin or against it the fact the both retail and institutions are now buying it will make the price climb. He doesn't seem to get it, or acts like he doesn't.

I can't tell by your response that you have believed the mainstream narrative about Bitcoin (you're parroting Elizabeth Warren).

I don't care if either of you ever own a single sat. Doesn't matter to me.

---

For someone who does not care what I do or think, you sure spent some time telling me about your feelings.

No idea what Pocahontas has to do with bitcoin. But one thing I will point out is that bitcoin continuing to increase in value is sort of the antithesis of what bitcoin was supposed to be about.

XpressAg09 said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Goods priced in USD with Bitcoin conversion doesn't make Bitcoin a currency.

---

I literally sent APMEX bitcoins two weeks ago and got silver in the mail a week later. Zero dollars exchanged hands. Sounds like currency to me.

---

I can buy airline tickets with frequent flier miles and hotel rooms with Hilton rewards. It's all Monopoly money based on what it would cost in USD.

bmks270 said:

---

XpressAg09 said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Goods priced in USD with Bitcoin conversion doesn't make Bitcoin a currency.

---

I literally sent APMEX bitcoins two weeks ago and got silver in the mail a week later. Zero dollars exchanged hands. Sounds like currency to me.

---

I can buy airline tickets with frequent flier miles and hotel rooms with Hilton rewards. It's all Monopoly money based on what it would cost in USD.

---

There has been some talk (really for years since SWA led the way) that rewards programs who denominate the value of the award redemption to a monetary rate could see the redeemers facing a tax liability. But I digress.

If bitcoin and the like are difficult for governments to trace and tax, then they will be made illegal and constrained / banned.

Some olds can remember when it was illegal to possess gold bouillon in the US.

you stated

Quote:

---

all 12 companies that will have bitcoin spot ETFs are good for bitcoin holders (whether they buy the ETF or not) because their incentives are aligned.

---

which suggests what is good for BTC holders is also good for the ETF custodian/sponsors. I would continue to argue that banks/brokers, much like the ETFs custodians/sponsors, don't care one way or the other about BTC holders; they (which include firms like mine) care more about the flow than the outcome. BTC is not like USD, EUR, or other currencies that you can leverage. BTC is NYKNYC which makes it a cash-and-carry asset.

These ETFs and other derivative instruments are trying to plug a hole that isn't needed while also adding more risk inefficiencies to BTC project. I dont know how that is could be considered in alignment with the best interest of BTC holders. The fact you say the link discussing the physical delivery of obstinately bookkeeping contracts BTC to contract holders is irrelevant again, shows how many haven't thought how this process works in the real world.

Plus you're only seeing this from the long side (BTC holders). What about the short side and people that want to, or need to, bet against BTC? Certain institutions often need to be net short BTC from time to time to offset their exposures. Can the 12 so called asset managers be in alignment with long BTC holders if the institution is better off with a drop in price? (hint: the answer is no, which is why banks/brokers are agnostic to price)

1975 wasn't that long ago.

ok. personally i think it is ludicrous to suggest that these investment banks are going to be agnostic about their AUM and not work actively to grow it. but i guess we can agree to disagree. will be interesting to re-visit this one in a few years either way.

as it is, BTC is up a little over 150% since the OP. i will continue enjoying the path to irrelevance.

tysker said:

---

That's money, not currency.

---

Boy howdy, the mental gymnastics…

bmks270 said:

---

I can buy airline tickets with frequent flier miles and hotel rooms with Hilton rewards. It's all Monopoly money based on what it would cost in USD.

---

So, what you're saying is, you CAN use imaginary points and 1's and 0's to transact because you've found a willing participant to engage in trade with you.

You're halfway there. Now just assume that some people with trade you things for Bitcoins.

XpressAg09 said:

---

tysker said:

---

That's money, not currency.

---

Boy howdy, the mental gymnastics…

---

So BTC is a currency and is also the same as banknotes, notes, and paper money?
I dont think you think your argument means what you think it means

I have nearly 1 BTC

time to sell?

tysker said:

---

XpressAg09 said:

---

tysker said:

---

That's money, not currency.

---

Boy howdy, the mental gymnastics…

---

So BTC is a currency and is also the same as banknotes, notes, and paper money?
I dont think you think your argument means what you think it means

---

Depends on what part of the elephant the blind man is describing....

Bitcoin is Bitcoin, it can act with the same characteristics as a money, a currency, a store of value, a communication network, and even:

Quote:

---

Today on LinkedIn, Jason P. Lowery published an open letter (see below images) to the Defense Innovation Board regarding the national strategic importance of #Bitcoin.

Here's the TLDR by AI extracting the text from the images of the letter below and summarizing it:

Maj Jason Lowery's paper to the Defense Innovation Board highlights the strategic importance of Bitcoin in national defense and cybersecurity. He argues that Bitcoin's underlying technology, a reusable proof-of-work protocol, extends beyond financial applications to secure all forms of data against cyber threats. This approach shifts cybersecurity from relying on encoded logic, which is inherently vulnerable to hacking, to using physical power, making cyberattacks prohibitively expensive to execute.

Lowery proposes the concept of a "macrochip," a large, resource-intensive computer, integrated into the internet infrastructure. This macrochip would use the global electric power grid to impose physical constraints in cyberspace, deterring cyber threats. He suggests Bitcoin is the first operational example of such a technology, misconceived as merely a monetary system.

Concluding, Lowery stresses that Bitcoin and similar technologies could revolutionize cybersecurity and national defense. He urges the Department of Defense to explore the strategic implications of proof-of-work protocols for national security, as they hold potential for a significant shift in the global balance of power.

---

Source tweet:

Today on LinkedIn, Jason P. Lowery published an open letter (see below images) to the Defense Innovation Board regarding the national strategic importance of #Bitcoin.

Here's the TLDR by AI extracting the text from the images of the letter below and summarizing it:

Maj Jason… pic.twitter.com/Niirco2lS0

— Neil Jacobs (@NeilJacobs) December 3, 2023

If you've been following some of the latest innovations, BitVM is a representation of what JPLowery is talking about. https://bitvm.org/

Anyways, you are constantly pigeonholing bitcoin into some random definition that it isn't, when it does far more than what the definition consists.

Your accolades and experience of the past has no inference or relevance as to the future. Bitcoin doesn't need to fit your industry, your industry will fit to bitcoin, with or without your administrative errors. Your lack of adaptation will surely lead to adverse events as your purchasing power dissolves and your inheritors blaspheme your name.

Your Algorithmic Epiphany will be quite painful, but necessary.

Quote:

---

"All of nocoiners problems stem from their inability to understand that monetization of a digital asset doesnt happen in a straight line."

---

Quote:

---

Bitcoin is Bitcoin, it can act with the same characteristics as a money, a currency, a store of value, a communication network

---

I'm not arguing that..Please don't move the goalposts on yourself. BTC is a trustless, frictionless transfer payment system. Nothing more, nothing less. Thus BTC cannot also be a banknote, note, or paper money.

I'd say you have to trust that someone else will want a bitcoin when you'd like to have something.

Good thread below on the latest.

Two things very very telling to me with regards to the spot Bitcoin ETF products.

1. In-Kind Redemption of Bitcoin. Most retail investors purchasing the ETF will not be eligible to redeem ETF shares for Bitcoin in-kind. In-kind redemption is even still up in the air for institutions, too. There will absolutely be paper Bitcoin, rehypothecation, leverage, and lending.

2. No ETF is utilizing Bitcoin's native properties. This is very telling. Unlike Bitcoin, the Bitcoin ETFs will not be trustless and permissionless.

BlackRock and almost all other filers of the new ETFs propose Coinbase as their custodian. No thank you.

If you want to hold BTC in your retirement account(s), this is not the way, respectfully.

The big thing everyone is buzzing about is whether SEC will allow in-kind creations. Rumor has it only cash creates will be allowed in first grouping. Many issuers ready for both (if BlackRock wins over SEC many will do in kind as well. If not they’ll do cash just to get out).

— Eric Balchunas (@EricBalchunas) December 4, 2023

Money is a quality of an item. If the thing in question is a good store of value, unit of account, is divisible, etc. then it is good money. If it's mediocre at those things, then it's mediocre money, and if it sucks at those things then it's sucky money.

Bitcoin is a HORRIBLE store of value, therefore, it is not good money.

fka ftc said:

---

If bitcoin and the like are difficult for governments to trace and tax, then they will be made illegal and constrained / banned.

Some olds can remember when it was illegal to possess gold bouillon in the US.

---

China tried to ban Bitcoin. China failed to ban Bitcoin. Think about that for a moment. This alone should attract F16 to BTC.

Note: Bitcoin is not particularly difficult to trace. Especially not for governments. All transactions are public after all.

TexasRebel said:

---

I'd say you have to trust that someone else will want a bitcoin when you'd like to have something.

---

The same as any fiat currency and many collectibles. Someone just paid $7.2mm for a Babe Ruth rookie card. It has no intrinsic use or value like gold or silver. If you want to monetize it, you have to find someone else will want it.

I still struggle with crypto but I do the same with art, baseball cars and number of other collectibles.

I have 100 BTC. Is it time to sell?

Depends on the art.

But even with that expensive banana, you'd at least have a rotten banana at the end if nobody else wanted to buy it.

TexasRebel said:

---

Depends on the art.

But even with that expensive banana, you'd at least have a rotten banana at the end if nobody else wanted to buy it.

---

That is one expensive banana. What art has intrinsic value other than covering up a hole in the wall? Even a Rembrandt requires someone else to value it if you own it.

I will say the fact that crypto for now seems to allow people to move money anonymously between countries and to use it as a medium of exchange for criminal activity seems to give it some intrinsic value. Not that makes it right, just saying that is the best argument I have heard for it having some level of intrinsic value.

bmks270 said:

---

And Bitcoin has run out of new adopters. When crypto has Super Bowl adds running then crypto and Bitcoin has achieved its maximum reach. Demand generated by finding new adopters has reached its end.

---

Along with many first page takes on this thread, above opinion did not age well as institutions continue to adopt and aquire.

https://www.lookintobitcoin.com/charts/addresses-greater-than-0-1-btc/

Retired FBI Agent said:

---

1. In-Kind Redemption of Bitcoin. Most retail investors purchasing the ETF will not be eligible to redeem ETF shares for Bitcoin in-kind. In-kind redemption is even still up in the air for institutions, too. There will absolutely be paper Bitcoin, rehypothecation, leverage, and lending.

2. No ETF is utilizing Bitcoin's native properties. This is very telling. Unlike Bitcoin, the Bitcoin ETFs will not be trustless and permissionless.

---

The above cannot be overstated enough. These ETFs are not convertible to BTC but instead "track" the price, less slippage. They are closed-loop vehicles.

Just wait until they create leveraged BTC ETFs