Why an ETF is a Bad Idea for Bitcoin
Those who use Bitcoin as a currency should be happy with the decision as removing such a large number of Bitcoin from circulation will make it even less stable.
Winklevoss ETF has come and gone, it was not approved. At the incident of the announcement of non-approval, Bitcoin price collapsed from $1,350 to $980 within a very short time. Several hours later, Bitcoin price has been seen to be on a steady recovery and trades at $1,230 at the time of writing.
Jeremy Epstein, CEO at Never Stop Marketing, says:
“This is a pothole in the road, to be sure. The decentralized asset world has to slow down and adjust, but the momentum that Bitcoin and altcoins have is past the tipping point.”
Expectations were high in certain quarters before the SEC announcement, different schools of thought filtered through the Bitcoin ecosystem and expert analysis offered predictions of possible market reactions, depending on the outcome of the event.
ETF denial not a surprise
Epstein tells Cointelegraph that he was optimistic towards the ETF approval. However, as for the reasons that most things from the government in the last 15 years haven’t always been what they seem, he had his doubts.
He describes the scenario as part of Schopenhauer’s “violent opposition” on the way to “inevitable.” However, Epstein is of the opinion that in the long term, the market forces are in favor of Bitcoin, so the market will get over this pothole and pick up steam.
Michael Vogel, CEO of Netcoins, tells Cointelegraph that prior to the announcement, he had mixed feelings on how important the ETF could be towards the growth of Bitcoin.
“I was fairly ambivalent about the Bitcoin ETF announcement; it isn't crucial (or relevant) to Bitcoin's success for there to be a publicly traded ETF, although it certainly is an interesting idea.”
Bitcoin is powered by diversified global use cases
According to Vogel, the ruling did not come to him as a surprise either because Bitcoin and Blockchain represent a fairly subversive technology and we're still in an era where banks and governments are publicly embracing "the Blockchain" but aren't yet comfortable with the idea of Bitcoin even though they are arguably one and the same.
Citing the diversified global use cases, Vogel does not see the SEC decision having a long-term effect on the market. However, he commends the efforts and innovations of the Winklevoss brothers while showing expectation towards what their next move will be.
“I think the Winklevoss brothers are terrific ambassadors for Bitcoin and I can't wait to see what their next move is. An ETF would certainly help wall street traders safely dip their toes into the world Bitcoin and continue to encourage new adopters.”
ETF was a bad idea
Simon Dixon, CEO and co-founder BnkToTheFuture, in his view rather thinks that an ETF is a very bad way to hold Bitcoin. Dixon says that an ETF would introduce counterparty risk into Bitcoin - one of the only zero counterparty risk assets. He perceives the phenomenon as an example where traditional regulations decrease consumer protections as a result of trying to shoehorn Bitcoin into a traditional investment vehicle.
According to him, those holding Bitcoin as a store of value were excited about the ETF as it would have been a race for instructional money to purchase cheap Bitcoins that would have been removed from circulation as a result of the ETF.
Dixon explains that the ETF would have made Bitcoin an even more scarce asset and would likely drive the price much higher. Therefore, those who use Bitcoin as a currency should be happy with the decision as removing such a large number of Bitcoin from circulation will make it even less stable and subject to being controlled and manipulated by instructional money.
However, Dixon notes that if the SEC decision means no ETF will be approved then it means that investors will have to use Bitcoin the way it was intended without counterparty risk, which in the long run is very good news for Bitcoin, but he still thinks that in the end, an ETF will slip through, saying that they a version of one already exists outside of the US.