Bitcoin Q&A: Why I'm against ETFs

what about an etf like vaneck where they actually hold btc?

ETF="paper bitcoin" Price Manipulation like Silver and Gold

The silver lining is that after the inevitable gox tier loss of funds, institutional investors won't go near Bitcoin again.

When you see BTC maximalists like Tone Vays and Jimmy Song begging for more regulations by governments and begging for wallstreet to come in – man, all your alarm bells should be ringing. Is this really still the BTC Satoshi was thinking about?
For me BTC was always about "against government regulations" and "against bankers and wallstreet".
And why are these new BTC maximalists suddenly even against a guy like Andreas?
Hmm…perhaps these new BTC maximalists are working for the other side ….. Contra-revolutionary.

Has any body came up with the concept of a "Proudhon" mutualist coin?

Bravo!

hi talking about the etf's your comments re these etf's funds having a big say in the future of bitcoin, these etf's may or may not hold real bitcoin in these funds even if there holding A million bitcoin why would they have anymore say than say one person holding say 10 bitcoin ? would they be running one million bitcoin nodes??? so they can have the one million votes? by running the node software of choice? to support their line of thinking ?? am i missing something here?

Hi Andreas, I think you are completely right. All these attempt to fight the intrinsic bearer nature of digital assets are detrimental to the ecosystem health. I think the problem is that cryptos not only remove the need for 3rd parties but make them incompatible with the system. In today's world which is predicated on specialization this creates lots of problems for users that are not independently able to deal with the tech. I think a "solution" to the situation must be embracing the bearer nature of digital assets not fight it (ETF are essentially fighting it: it's doing the new thing in the old way) and a "solution" must be crypto in nature.

At least for the short term to middle term, wouldnt ETF's simply make bitcoin more legitimate amongst the" not so completely" believers?

Another major potential issue is the monumental security risk posed by such a large aggregation of bitcoins in a centralized fund. Ever heard of mt gox? If you think people are skeptical of trusting the Bitcoin protocol as it stands right now imagine how much worse it'll be after a funds gets hacked leaving retail and institutional investors alike burned with no recourse for recovering their funds

this is contradictory to what Bitcoin represents, this will be the end of a digital cryptocurrency as Satoshi imagined

again, we only need mass adoption, more lightning network, user-friendly applications,…

(greed is the elephant in the room)

imagine that a bitcoin fund loses the private key ?

The question is how much are the fund willing to pay for bitcoin they're going to need to hold? This is incentive for the HODLers to keep HOLDing.

Thanks Andreas!

Regardless of the potential of cryptocurrency be sure to do your own due diligence on different crypto assets, so you arrive at your own investment decision.

i totally agree with you. bitcoin not need an ETF. i always wonder on that. i don't think we should be pushing for btc to the stock market. totally centralized it all. my take sincerely jr of exciting world cryptos

ETF is like sell your freedom, is like walk in circle, like turn on the light's only the backyard

we were told that without whales nothing matters!!

Great video

If ETFs are truly as bad as you think they are, then they are attacks. And Bitcoin would not be Bitcoin without attacks. Bitcoin requires attacks, or Bitcoin would not be Bitcoin.

In retrospect, an ETF was always going to happen. If the ETF screws up Bitcoin, then it will mean an open, borderless, decentralized, consensus-based crypto currency cannot exist.

As always, there will be post-ETF developments that are unforeseen. Just because you think ETFs are bad for Bitcoin, it doesn't mean they will actually be bad for Bitcoin. In retrospect, the contentious Bcash fork, which most considered to be a bad thing, has also been good for Bitcoin.

Bring on the ETFs. It's merely nature taking its course.

Isn't BTC proof of work? Why do they have more voting power then? I thought the miners have the voting power, not the holders?

Why so few views!?

Crypto is a fraud inflated with fake money (tether), i won't be touching crypto until tether collapses

key perspective to frame this is this: it’s not that few people fail to consider it – majority (realistically at this point in time) are short term speculators greed NOT long term hodlers. so it’s not in their best interest and subsequently purview. which means it’s actually not a lack of consideration but deliberate. misalignment of vision, consequently motivation and intentions ultimately.

ETFs are like a leech attached to the Bitcoin body…

Nailed it…as always.

the main reason why people hate Bitcoin is the same reason why people hated Internet back at mid 90s. You cannot like something you don't understand. That keeps many people out of it. I believe that ETF will attract people since no crypto mumbo jumbo (wallets, keys , security…) is in play to confuse them. ETF is a good short term thing…its a training tool for adoption I like it as I dislike it

It looks like we are going in the exact opposite direction that Satoshi intended us to go… begging for institutional acceptance, and giving power to the same old few instead to give power back to the people.

If ETFs need institutional custodian services, then the September decision of the SEC should be negative. There are simply to few, if at all looking at the offerings, on the market at the moment. We're still waiting and talking with the normal such providers and they are not technically ready. Not only that, but the risk is still too high for them and the insurance companies to insure the assets for the custodians and depositories to feel comfortable. Indeed – the service would come to scale and speed, but not ATM. Therefore should that hint me that permission of ETFs is still further ahead than September?

if the ETF is not just holding bitcoin, but also trading them for fiat; it would stabilize volatility, which would be a good thing

but I have no idea if the ETF is indeed going to trade bitcoins or if it's just holding them

we dont need ETF
WE ARE THE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS
FUCK WALL STREET LET THEM ROT

i am just so happy to have found this channel. thank you and pls never stop 🙂

Well spoken as always aantonop!

Hi andreas if etf buyer sell his etf is fund managers also sell that part of bitcoin?

Of course an ETF may cause an enormous interest and legitimize bitcoin to many who otherwise wouldn’t have bothered learning all its technical aspects. Later these ETF share owners will learn that they don’t need nor want a middleman to hold their bitcoin. Maybe this is the first step in the general public’s education.