BTC - Is the SEC really concerned about market manipulation?steemCreated with Sketch.

in bitcoin •  8 months ago 

The reason we don't have a Bitcoin ETF is due to the SEC's fears about market manipulation

At least, that is what we are told.

We have been told that the SEC is concerned with who is setting the prices and how accurate those prices are regarding the real supply and demand picture.

Fair enough, but it's not the whole story.

It can't be.

The SEC has approved dozens of ETFs for other commodities that are known to be highly manipulated.

Not sure what I am talking about?

Think oil, uranium, and tungsten just off the top of my head.

Prices of oil are openly manipulated by OPEC, though possibly less now than say a few years ago.

Then with uranium, there are basically only two companies that set the uranium prices globally, no issues there right?

And don't even get me started on tungsten, where roughly 90% of the world's tungsten comes from China.

Oh and btw, diamonds are said to be getting their own ETF in the near future as well, which the diamond pricing market is one of the most subjective and least transparent in the world.

These are just a couple examples of commodities off the top of my head that are highly manipulated yet still got themselves an ETF.

Um... what gives?

That is a great question.

Other manipulated commodity markets got an ETF, why is it so hard for bitcoin?

Perhaps it has to due to those applying?

Nope, can't be that either.

We have ETF applications by some of the largest and most well known financial companies/institutions within the ETF space and still no dice.

Think names like Bitwise, NYC Arca, Direxion, VanEck, and CBOE.

All companies that have extensive knowledge and vast history with ETF products.

Yet the SEC still drags their feet.

So, why is Bitcoin such a different animal than all these other assets and why is the SEC so against approving an ETF?

I honestly don't have a good answer or a good reason at this point.

I'd love to hear one though.

Let me know what you think the reason is in the comment section below.

Stay informed my friends.

Image Source:


Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

They will always be scared of bitcoin... Every financial system our world has now.. Except crypto

I would think it doesn't represent any kind of systemic risk to the economy or financial system. Perhaps some bank profits, but not much else. Not sure why they are so reluctant to approve one.

They will approve it when they have found the perfect control switch to manipulate the Bitcoin markets. The same like when they introduced future markets and we had the price plunge.

Posted using Partiko Android

I believe it was mostly the people involved with the futures launch (and their friends) that ran the price up and then shorted it at the highest possible prices.

The SEC approved WeWork, a fundamentally flawed business that was plain to see. They are blatantly about gatekeeping in the investment world under the guise of "protecting investors".

It's really the only thing that makes sense as it relates to bitcoin. They don't like it for any number of reasons, and therefore won't approve it.

I do believe their concerns about market manipulation is a mask for a deeper concern. Unlike regular commodities, like oil or minerals, which act as supplements to the economy; cryptocurrencies aim to subvert, and change the financial system altogether.

Trying to upend traditional financial instruments, that have controlled humanity's economy for the past couple of centuries, won't be an easy task, and there will be people keen to try and stop it.

I think the SEC knows full well, that the impact or cryptocurrencies are more capable and far-reaching, than singular markets such as fossil fuels or precious metals. It will put into question, the viability of the US Dollar, the single greatest asset of the US economy.

That said, the cryptocurrency industry is relatively new-born, compared to other instruments such as oil, diamonds, or tungsten, that are at least or around 100 years old. Needless to say, I do think regulators will take their time to make a firm decision...

Yep, that seems like a big part of it. Just the concern of market manipulation doesn't really make sense in a vacuum.

I hear the SEC is taking a second look into Bitwise's ETF application. So, perhaps the SEC has reneged themselves on that principle?

Do you have a link?

I saw it first on CoinTelegraph. Apparently they're going to review their rejection, but no solid reasoning was given as of yet.